(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Minutes"

~CCUMENTS DEPARTMENT. 



m 



CLOSED 
STACKS 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



GOVERNMENT INFORMATION CENTER 
SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



REFERENCE BOOK 

Not to be taken from the Library 



2 2 1986 



H 



PflSisasfiii*. 



^223 



03476 



4036 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/1minutes1978sanf 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

NOV 2 7 1979 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



MINUTES 



JANUARY 3, 19 7 8 



DIANNE FEINSTEIN, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR.Z.L. GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 



San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



r-'Ti 8TM3WUDO0 



• 



DEPT. 

SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY. 

So- S'lS'i 
Call to Order: 1<P 3 2:30 PM 



Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

William E. McDonnell, VJilliam 
K. Coblentz. 

Absent: Commissioner Ruth S. Kadish. 

The Minutes of the Airports Commission meeting of December 20, 1977 
were approved. 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0001 Resolution approving the adden- 

dum to the Joint Exercise of 
Powers Agreement between City of 
Millbrae, City of Burlingame, and 
City and County of San Francisco 
for roadway improvements at the 
intersection common to Airport 
Road R-2, Millbrae Avenue and Old 
Bayshore Highway. 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, explained that under the 
original agreement these three cities were obligated to pay one-third 
of the total project cost of $95,000. Upon completion it was found that 
the total actual cost was $115,950.44. He said this resolution in- 
creases the maximum obligation of each of the three cities to one-third 
of the total actual cost. 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0002 Resolution authorizing profes- 

sional services agreement - John 
F. Brown Company, for a cost not 
to exceed $25,000, in connection 
with the issuance of Airport 
Revenue Bonds. 

No. 78-0003 Resolution authorizing profes- 

sional services agreement - 
Salomon Brothers and Stone and 
Youngberg, financial consultants, 
for a cost not to exceed $15,000 
in connection with the issuance 
of Airport Revenue Bonds. 

No. 78-0004 Resolution approving the profes- 

sional services agreement with 
Pacific Environmental Laboratory, 
San Francisco, for calendar year 
1978 to provide laboratory 
chemical analysis of industrial 
and sanitary waste water samples. 

Mr. Heath said these are all professional services agreements, the 
airport has past experience with these companies and they have all done 
good work in the past. 



78-1 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0005 Resolution approving Modification 

No. 24 to Professional Services 
Agreement with the San Francisco 
Airport Architects and requesting 
the Controller's certification of 
said modification in the total 
amount of $152,500.00. 

Mr. Heath explained the items covered are interior design elements for 
Contract 650C and 650D, updating the 1977 Modernization and Replacement 
Phase Program, and increase Additional Services Reimbursable General 
Account to handle the cost of future additional services that cannot be 
handled by the Airport staff. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the Additional Services items come to 
the Commission each time they are submitted. Mr. Robert G. Lee, Deputy 
Director and Chief Engineer, stated under Resolution No. 70-0044, the 
Director can authorize payment for amounts up to $5,000. Commissioner 
McDonnell then asked if whatever is spent out of the $100,000 would come 
back to the Commission for approval and was told that it would. He was 
told that these are for architectural consultation of less then $5,000 
and that the Director could approve it and bring it to the Commission 
for ratification. 



On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner Coblentz, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0006 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications and 
authorizing the Director of 
Airports to call for bids for 
Airport Contract No. 1151A, Re- 
location of Duty Free Shop 
Storage Area - Pier G. 

Mr. Heath said this is a bid call for the final plans and specs on a 
contract to relocate the Duty Free Shop storage area. He said this 
will eliminate holding arriving international flights on the airport 
apron and is a temporary measure until we can rebuild the Federal in- 
spection facilities. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the Airports Commission would pay for 
this and pick it up in rental credit and was told that the main charges 
would have to be borne by us since Duty Free Shop has a lease on the 
area. It was then pointed out that the income for that area was above 
the guarantee. 



78-2 



On notion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0007 Resolution awarding Contract No. 

1006, North Terminal Complex - 
Graphics, in the total amount 
of $375,452.00, to QRS Corpora- 
tion, 22 9 Harris Court, South 
San Francisco, CA 94080, as the 
lowest regular and responsible 
bidder. 

Mr. Heath said the original estimate was $600,000 and the low bidder 
was QRS Company. 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0008 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders 4 thru 7, authorizing an 
extension of contract completion 
time of 7 calendar days from 
November 12 to November 19, 1977, 
due to rain, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 4 to Airport 
Contract No. 977, in the total 
amount of $5,398.58. 

No. 78-0010 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 22 thru 24, and re- 
questing the Controller's certi- 
fication of Modification No. 12 
to Airport Contract 1000, in 
the total amount of $15,681.00. 

No. 78-0011 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 25 thru 27, and re- 
questing the Controller's certi- 
fication of Modification No. 13 
to Airport Contract 1000, in 
the total amount of $16,357.00. 

Mr. Heath said these are small change orders that have been approved by 
the Director and are brought to the Commission for ratification. 



78-3 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0009 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certification 
of Debit Modification No. 5 to 
Airport Contract No. 977, Expan- 
sion of Electrical Distribution 
System - Phase I, authorizing 
payment to the contractor in the 
total amount of $22,846.89. 

No. 78-0012 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order No. 1122-1 in accordance 
with Airports Commission Resolu- 
tion No. 70-0044 and requesting 
Controller's certification of 
Debit Modification No. 1 in the 
amount of $1,990.00. 

Mr. Heath said the first item was requested by Engineering consisting 
of items which were not anticipated during the design phase, and which 
will be reviewed at the end of the contract. The second item is a 
modification of the Industrial Waste Collection system and is a situa- 
tion that arose after the contract started. The original method of 
establishing electrical contact is ineffective so bronze silicon 
wedges must be installed in the pipes. 



On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner Coblentz, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0013 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 783, 
Replacement of Air Handling 
Units - South Terminal, as 
satisfactorily completed; ex- 
tending the completion date 
from July 18, 1977 to September 
7, 1977; and approving final 
payment in the amount of 
$8,876.83 in favor of the con- 
tractor, Columbia Mechanical 
Contractors, Inc. 969 Folsom 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94107. 

Mr. Heath said the only modification on this contract is an extension 
of time and that the contractors cannot extend the contract. 



78-4 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0014 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by United Airlines showing 
the replacement of the fire main 
loop serving the fire hydrants 
and sprinkler systems for Build- 
ings 10 and 74 at the Maintenance 
Operations Center to replace the 
existing fire main loop, which 
has deteriorated due to age. 

Mr. Heath said this is a tenant improvement by United Airlines at their 
Maintenance Operations Center, which will be paid for by United at its 
own and sole expense, and that this is not part of the Expansion Program, 

When Commissioner McDonnell asked if this involved the building under 
discussion in relation to the entrance road, he was told that it was not. 



Director's Report 

Mr. Heath stated that the material given to the Commission discussed 
items which have come to him over the last two weeks, that it should 
be made a matter of record, and that they are all self-explanatory. 
He said the most important of the materials was the City Attorney's 
opinion to the Planning Commission on the FAA Tower, as to whether 
additional environmental statements must be filed. The City Attorney's 
opinion is that this is neither necessary nor required since the previ- 
ous EIR included a full discussion of this matter. Copies of these 
communications are attached to these minutes and incorporated herein 
by reference. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the Planning Commission would contact 
the Director prior to any further action. The Director said that is 
his hope; however, there has been some difficulty in communication. 



There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:57 PM, 



Warren D. Hanson 
Acting Secretary 
Airports Commission 



78-5 



MORRIS BERNSTEIN 
PRESIDENT 

RUTH S KADISH 
VICE-PRESIDENT 

WILLIAM E. MCDONNELL 
WILLIAM K COBLENTZ 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
GEORGE R. MOSCONE. MAYOR 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94128 

(413) 7f l-OSOO 



December 19, 1977 
Subject: Misspelled Signs 




RICHARD R HEATH 

DIRECTOR Of AIRPORTS 



Mr. Alain Swietlicki 
Director, Undergraduate Studies 
Dept . of Romance Languages 
27 Arts & Science Building 
University of Missouri -Columbia 
Columbia, Missouri 65201 

Dear Mr. Swietlicki: 

Thank you for your letter of December 8, 1977, to the Director of 
Airports. We must apologize with great embarrassment that the Spanish 
Word for baggage, "equipaje", is indeed misspelled in several signs. 
We sure flunked our Spanish! 

It is interesting to note that these signs have been in existence for 
over eleven years in two separate terminal buildings, where they are 
visible to millions of passengers, and yet you are the first person 
to take the time and trouble to inform us of our mistake. 



We sincerely appreciate your interest in our Airport, 
expeditiously to have these signs corrected. 

Very truly yours , 



We will proceed 




ROBERT G. LEE 

Deputy Director & Chief Engineer 



JY/bo 




cc: 


R 


R. Heath 




M. 


F. Bagan 




R. 


G. Lee 




R. 


Wilson 




P/D File 




J. 


Yuen 



DEc >\; . 



/?! 



College of Arts and Science 

Department of Romance Languages 

IVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA 

27 Ads & Science Building 
Columbia Missouri 65201 
Telephone (314) 882-4874 



December 8, 1977 



R. R. Heath 

Director of Airports 

Airport Commission 

#400 San Francisco International Airport 

San Mateo County, California 94128 

Dear Sir: 

Recently, after a flight to San Francisco, while I 
was proceeding to the baggage claim area, I observed several 
signs in Spanish with a misspelled word. As a teacher of 
Spanish and as a member of the American Translators Association, 
I thought it important to bring such a glaring error to your 
attention. 

The offending word appears on the signs directing the 
passengers to the baggage area. "Retirada de equipaja" 
should read "Retirada de equipaje_." 

I feel sure you will wish to remedy the situation. 

Yours truly, 



/fob" sf*V*<rfv r s4r 

Alain Swietlicki 
Director, Undergraduate Studies 
in Spanish 



AS:slk 



RE&EIVED 

LJtC 13 ij/7 

R. G. Urr. 



DEC 12 19/7 



• n «qu«i opportunity institution 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

OFFICE MEMORANDUM 



Richard R. Heath 



DATE: December 19, 1977 



R. G. Lee 



Contract No. 1151 

International Holding Area-Rotunda A 

Schedule 



The schedule for the construction of the Holding Area is separated 
into two phases under two separate sequential contracts 1151A and 
1151B. 

In view of the need to expedite this project, the logistics of moving 
the Duty Free storage area prior to the start of work in the Holding 
Area, and the extent of mechanical design work involved in the Holding 
Area, we have established the following tentative schedule: 



Contract 1151A - Duty Free Storage Area - Pier G 



Bid Documents Complete 

Commission Approval to Bid 

Bid Period 

Commission Approval -Award of Contract 

Certification (Assume 3 weeks) 

Start Construction 

Complete Construction (45 days) 

Occupancy 



12/30/77 
1/3/78 
1/10/78 
2/7/78 
2/28/78 
3/6/78 
4/20/78 
4/21/78 



Contract 1151B - International Holding Area - Rotunda A 



Bid Documents Complete 

Commission Approval to Bid 

Bid Period 

Commission Approval -Award of Contract 

Certification (Assume 3 weeks) 

Start Construction 

Complete Construction (90 Days) 

Occupancy 



1/31/78 

2/7/78 

2/14/78 

3/21/78 

4/11/78 

4/17/78 

7/15/78 

7/16/78 



1/26/78 



- 3/10/78 



l- 



Richard R. Heath 



December 19, 1977 



The 90 day construction period is dependent upon the delivery of the 
air conditioning equipment. If there are delays in fabrication and 
delivery, the occupancy date could be affected. The holding room could 
possibly be used pending delivery of the equipment under emergency 
conditions . 

The specifications for the furniture will be prepared and a requisition 
placed with the City Purchaser's office by January 10, 1978. 




PB/ms 



MFBagan 

JPSinger 

MCallanan 

MAshe 

WRO'Brien 

BKong 

DJacobberger 

JYuen 

PBittenbender 

P/D File 



DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEYS 

JOHN J TAHENY.JR. 
HCMORRIS M.OOW 
DONALD J GARIBALDI 
JAMES J.STARK 
EDMUND A BACICALUPI 
RAYMOND E. AOOSTI 
MICHAEL C KILLELEA 
LEONARD L- BNAIOER 
JAMES B BRASIL 
DONALD K. NECI 
GEORGE E. KRUEGER 
WILLIAM C.TAYLOR 
EDWARD J. ROTHMAN 
JOHN J.DOHERTY 
WILLIAM A.BARRETT 
JOHN SULLIVAN KENNY 
RICHARD A. BOBIER 
A. BALFOUR CHINN. JR 



THOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 

CITY HALL 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94102 

(415 ) 558-3315 



KENNETH J HARRINGTON 
ROGER W. HACKLEY 
BURK E OELVENTHAL 
DAVID I KROOPNICK 
PHILIP J MOBCONE 
MARIE BURKE LIA 
EDW C. A.JOHNSON 
RENE AUOUSTE CHOUTEAU 
DANIEL E COLLINS III 
JAME6 H WOODS 
JUDITH L.TEICHMAN 
PHILIP 6 WARD 
B TIMOTHY MURPHY 
JOHN A. ETCHEVERS 
DIANNE K BARRY 
SANDY E GREEN. SR 
DAN MAGUIRE 
STEVEN A DIAZ 



GEORGE P. 



WILLIAM P. LYNCH JR 
KEVIN M ODONNELL 
JAMES L. LAZARUS 
MICHAEL C. COHEN 



LEES 



3LE> 



CRISTINE E GONDAK 
JULIE METERS BROCK 
RICK MURPHY 
VIRGINIA J. LUM 
KATHRTN A. PENNYPACKER 
ALICE > Y. BARKLEY 
TIMOTHY D.TIMMONS 



ROBERT R. LAUGHEAD 



PAUL B. HOLM 



December 13, 1977 



/. l-l Vl..L-> 

i -t c 1 j ,-„7 
R. E. UEE 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 

Deputy Director and Chief Engineer 
San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, CA 

Re: New Contract Agreement for San Francisco 
Airport Architects. (Your letter of 
December 8, 1977.) 

Dear Mr. Lee: 

This is in response to your letter of December 8. 

You ask: 

1. Can City modify Modification No. 22 to 

the San Francisco Airport Architects agreement, 
terminating their work at the completion of the 
schematic stage, although the full project has 
been assigned to them? 

2. Can City issue a new contract to San Francisco 
Airport Architects on the Boarding Area G and 
Connector project starting from the preliminary 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 2 December 13, 1977 

stage through work drawings and services during 
construction and negotiate a different fee for 
this work? 
In my opinion the answer to each question is yes, but I would 
suggest that, because of the terms of the Original Agreement 
and of Modification 22 (see below) , the questions be thus 
phrased: 

1. Is City bound to a 6% fee (6% of construction 
cost) with the Architects for ■the preliminary 
stage phase, the final stage phase, and the 
services during construction phase of the Boarding 
Area G and Connector project? 

2. Is City free to negotiate for a less-than-6% 
fee for those phases? 

In my opinion City is not bound to a 6% fee for those phases 
and is free to negotiate a less-than-6% fee therefor. 

Briefly this opinion is based on (a) paragraph 2 of 
Modification 22 which gives City the "option" of letting (or 
not letting) the Architects proceed with subsequent phases of 
the project, (b) paragraph 4 of Modification 22 which provides 
that neither the Architects nor the City is (are) required to 
perform beyond the schematic plans phase unless an amendment 
is made to provide for further compensation, and (c) Part I of 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



JMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 3 December 13, 1977 

the Original Agreement (of April 19, 1968) which gives City, 
in its reasonable discretion, the option of terminating the 
agreement subject to the obligation of paying the Architects 
for work already performed. 

Modification 22 pertains to the Boarding Area G and 
Connector project. The "Scope of Work" under the Original 
Agreement consisted of architectural-engineering services for 
the following seven projects: 

Project 1. Passenger arrival and departure 
Rotundas #9, #4, #6, #8 and #5; 
Project 2. Inner road structure between the 
terminal and automobile parking 
garage ; 
Project 3. South Terminal expansion with frontal 

gates; 
Project 4. North Terminal and associated Rotunda 

#2; 
Project 5. Parking structures northeast and 

southeast of Central Terminal with 
frontal gates; 
Project 6. Bayshore to passenger terminal service 

and entry roads with overpass or underpass 
Project 7. Site utilities. 
The Boarding Area G and Connector project is a new one — not 
one of those seven. 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS H. O'CONNOR 

CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 4 December 13, 1977 

Modification 22 refers collectively to the Original 
Agreement and the 21 previous modifications as "Agreements." 
Paragraph 5 of Modification 22 reads: 

"5. Except as expressly modified or amended 
and except to the extent inconsistent herewith, 
all terms, provisions and conditions contained in 
Agreements shall be fully effective and binding upon 
the parties hereto." 
Parts E, H and I of the Original Agreement provide: 
"E. COMPENSATION 

"1. As compensation for the performance of 
work as stipulated in Part B under this agreement, 
Airport Architects shall receive a fee of six 
percent (6%) based on construction cost of the 
Project (hereinbefore designated as Scope of Work) 
not to exceed Two Million Six Hundred and Eighty 
Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($2,680,200). Initial 
total Project budget cost estimate for the afore- 
mentioned Scope of Work is Forty-four Million Six 
Hundred and Seventy Thousand Dollars ($44,670,000). 
"2. Airport Architects shall be paid for reimburs- 
able expenses (paragraph D) and for additional 
services (paragraph C) in a total amount not to 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



IOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 5 December 13, 1977 

exceed Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000). . . . 

"3. Total compensation to the Airport Architects 

under terms of this agreement shall not exceed the 

sum of the totals stipulated in paragraphs 1 and 

2 above, or Two Million Eight Hundred and Eighty 

Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($2,880,200)." 

"H. CERTIFICATION BY CONTROLLER 

"1. Neither this agreement, nor any part thereof, 

t 
shall become effective until certification by the 

Controller of City as to the availability of funds 

as required by Section 86 of the Charter of City, 

and shall at all times be subject to the budgetary 

and fiscal provisions of said Charter. 

"2. The amount which may be expended under this 

agreement to perform all other services provided 

to be performed hereunder will be limited to said 

sum of Two Million Eight Hundred and Eighty Thousand 

Two Hundred Dollars ($2,880,200), and City shall not 

be liable for any sum in excess of said amount, 

except in the event this agreement may be modified in 

said particular by mutual agreement of City and 

Airport Architects and approved by Controller of City, 

Said compensation, as hereinabove set forth, shall 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



IOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 6 December 13, 1977 

constitute the full cost to City for all services 
to be performed hereunder, including but not limited 
to all engineering, architectural, drafting and 
clerical services, and all overhead, materials, 
drafting and incidental expense which may be incurred 
in the performance of this agreement." 
" I . TERMINATION 

"1. City shall have the option to terminate this 
agreement by notice to Airport Architects, in writing, 
Said option may be exercised in the reasonable 
discretion of City, and Airport Architects shall 
obtain no rights or claims against City by reason 
of such termination, except for work which has 
already been performed by Airport Architects and for 
which compensation is currently due and owing to 
it. Upon any such termination, full and complete 
payments of all compensation previously accrued in 
favor of Airport Architects arising out of this 
agreement shall ba paid by City." 

Paragraph 1 of Modification 22 reads: 

"1. The Scope of Work as set forth in Agreements 
is modified and amended by adding services for 
Schematic Plans, Preliminary Stage, Final Stage, 
and Services during Construction as defined in 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAH. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 7 December 13, 1977 

Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Part B of 

Original Agreement to the Work of Airport 

Architects for the Boarding Area G and 

Connector project as listed in Exhibit A 

attached hereto. Compensation shall be in 

accordance with Agreements, computed on the 

basis of six percent (6%) of the construction 

cost. " 

Paragraphs 1,2, 3 and 4 of Part B of the Original 

Agreement deal with, respectively, schematic plans (par. 1) , 

preliminary stage (par. 2), final stage (par. 3), and 

services during construction (par. 4;. 

Exhibit A to Modification 22 reads in material part: 

"THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROJECT FOR WHICH 
SCHEMATIC PLANS, PRELIMINARY STAGE, FINAL 
STAGE AND SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION ARE 
ADDED TO THE SCOPE OF WORK BY PARAGRAPH 1 OF 
MODIFICATION NO. 22. 

" BOARDING AREA G AND CONNECTOR 
Construction of (1) a two-level boarding area 
connector to North Terminal with security area 
and moving walks, and ramp to North Terminal 
basement (construction to replace Pier "b"), 
(2) portion of North Terminal at Boarding Area 
G comprising frontal gates, service road and 
basement (construction to replace portion of 
North Concourse) , (3) Northeast Court Frontal 
Gates with service road beneath connecting to 
Central and North Terminals (construction to 
replace balance of North Concourse), (4) North- 
east Court sidewalk and Canopy. All public areas 
in terminals to be fully furnished and tenant 
areas to be completed to standards of Tenant 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 8 December 13, 1977 

Improvement Guide. Approximately 114,000 
square feet. (Budget $10,550,000.)" 

Paragraph 3 of Modification 22 provides: 

"3. The budgeted compensation to Airport 

Architects under the terms of Agreements as 

modified by this Modification No. 22 is as 

follows : 

"(1) Prior budgeted fee for Basic 

Services on Scope of Work as modified 

through Modification No. 21 $10,309,541 

" (2) Current budgeted fee for Basic 

Services on Scope of Work as modified 

through Modification No. 22 $10,404,491 

"(3) Prior budgeted fee for Additional 

Services and Reimbursable Expenses 

through Modification No. 21 $2,388,961 

"(4) Increase in Modification No. 

22 for Additional Services and 

Reimbursable Expenses -0- 

"(5) Current budgeted fee for 

Additional Services and Reimbursable 

Expenses through Modification No. 22 $2,388,961 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 9 December 13, 1977 

"(6) Current budgeted total fee through 
Modification No. 22 $12,793,452 

" (7) Prior budgeted total fee through 
Modification No. 21 $12,698,502 

"(8) Increase in Budgeted Fee for 

Modification No. 22 $94,950" 

Paragraph 4 of Modification 22 states: 

"4. Paragraph 2 of Part H of Agreements is hereby 
amended to read as follows: •' 

'2. The amount which City is obligated to 
pay under this Agreement is limited to the 
sum of Twelve Million Seven Hundred Ninety 
Three Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Two Dollars 
($12,793,452) which limitation is set forth 
herein for purposes of certification. Accord- 
ingly, the obligation of Airport Architects to 
perform services and incur reimbursable expenses 
under this Agreement is limited to the perform- 
ance of services and the incurring of 
reimbursable expenses for which said $12,793,452 
will provide full compensation under Parts E, 
F, and G hereof. City shall not be obligated to 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



IOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 10 December 13, 1977 

certify any additional amount to compensate 
Airport Architects for services and reimbursable 
expenses under this Agreement and Airport 
Architects shall not be obligated to furnish 
any services or incur any reimbursable expenses 
beyond the limitation set forth in the immediately 
preceding sentence unless and until this 
Agreement is amended to provide for further 
compensation and an additional amount has been 
certified to fully compensate Airport Architects 
under Parts E, F, and G hereof for such further 
services and reimbursable expenses.*" 
Part E of the Original Agreement is substantially quoted 
above. Parts F and G pertain, respectively, to "Payments to 
the Airport Architects" (F) , and "Construction Costs" (G) . 
Part F provides so far as material: 

"Payments on account of the Airport Architects' 
basic services will be as follows. Payments of 
basic fee will be calculated upon estimated cost 
of construction until actual cost of construction 
is determined. Payments will be made monthly in 
porportion to services performed to increase the 
compensation for basic services to the following 
percentages of the basic fee at the completion of 
each phase of the work: 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 11 December 13, 1977 

Schematic Design Phase 15% 

Preliminary Design 35% 

Construction Documents 75% 
Phase 

Bidding or Negotiation 80% 
Phase 

Construction Phase 100%" 

The last sentence of Part F of the Original Agreement reads: 

"If a Project is suspended for more than 

six months or abandoned in- whdle or in part, 

the Airport Architects shall be paid their 

compensation for services performed prior to 

receipt of written notice from City of such 

suspension or abandonment, together with 

Reimbursable Expenses then due." 

Paragraph 2 of Modification 22 reads: 

"2. Funds in the amount of Ninety Four 

Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty Dollars 

($94,950), computed on the basis of 15% of 6% 

of budgeted construction costs of $10,660,000 

for the Schematic Plan work added in Paragraph 1 

hereof are hereby made available for the services 

of Airport Architects on said project. Airport 

Architects may proceed with the work of subsequent 

phases as appropriate, at option of City, after 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OHAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HAU. 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 12 December 13, 1977 

written notification of approval and 
acceptance of Schematic Plans work is given by 
City and after appropriate modification of 
Agreements for the provision of further funding 
for subsequent phases." 
By reason of paragraph 2 of Modification 22 City has the 
option ("at option of City") of allowing, or not allowing, 
the Architects to proceed with the subsequent phases 
(preliminary stage phase, final stage phase, services during 
construction phase) of the Boarding Area G and Connector 
project. 

By reason of paragraph 4 of Modification 22, (1) the 
Architects have no obligation to perform architectural- 
engineering services for those three phases of the project; 
(2) City has no obligation to certify funds therefor; (3) 
an amendment to Modification 22 will be necessary to impose 
such obligations; (4) if and when the parties wish to agree 
to such amendment, a lower-than-6% fee (or a higher-than-6% 
fee) can be made part of the amendment; (5) City can refuse 
to amend if the Architects decline to accept a less-than-6% 
fee; (6) the Architects can refuse to amend if City insists 
on a less-than-6% fee; (7) there is a binding contract for 
a 6% fee, and for services, only up to and through the 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



HOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



Mr. Robert G. Lee 13 December 13, 1977 

schematics plan phase of Modification 22, that is, for 

the services for which $12,793,452 is the agreed compensation, 

Yours very truly, 

THOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
City Attorney 





GEORGE EXBAGLIN 
Utilities General Counsel 



GEB : ke 



-IOMAS A. TOOMEY. JR. 



PUTY CITY ATTORNEYS 

JOHN J TAHENY. JR. 
HCMOHRIS M DOW 
OONALD J GARIBALDI 
JAMES J. STARK 
EDMUND A BACIGALUPI 
RAYMOND E. AGOSTI 
MICHAEL C. KILLELEA 
LEONARD L. SNAIDER 
JAMES B BRASIL 
DONALD K NEGI 
GEORGE E. KRUEGER 
WILLIAM C. TAYLOR 
EDWARD J. ROTHMAN 
JOHN J. DOHERTY 
WILLIAM A. BARRETT 
JOHN SULLIVAN KENNY 
RICHARD A. BOBIER 
A BALFOUR CHINN. JR. 



THOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 

CITY HALL 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94102 

(415) 558-3315 



GEORGE E BAGLI 



KENNETH J HARRINGTON 
ROGER W BUCKLEY 
BURK E DELVENTHAL 



EDW C. A JOHNSON 
RENE AUGUSTE CHOUTEAU 
DANIEL E COLLINS 111 
JAMES H. WOODS 
JUDITH L.TEICHMAN 
PHILIP S. W_«BD 
B TIMOTHY MURPHY 
JOHN A. ETCHEVER5 
DIANNE K BARRY 
SANDY E GREEN. SR 
DAN MAGUIRE 
STEVEN A DIAZ 

December 20, 1977 



GEORGE P AGNOST 



WILLIAM P LYNCH. JR 
KEVIN M O'DONNELL 
JAMES L LAZARUS 
MICHAEL C- COHEN 
DIANE L. HERMANN 
KATHLEEN A. FOLEY 
CRISTINE E. GONDAK 



THRYN A. PENNYPACKEF 
ICE S. Y BARKLEY 
<OTHT O. TIMMONS 



ROBERT R LAUGHEAD 



PAUL B HOL 



Mr. Rai Y. Okamoto 

Director of City Planning 

100 Larkin Street 

San Francisco, California 94102 



Subject 



Application of CEQA to 

the FAA Control Tower at SFIA 



Dear Mr. Okamoto: 

This is in response to your letter of November 7, 
1977, in which you request advice of this office, based upon 
an attached letter of October IS , 1977, that you received from 
San Francisco Tomorrow, concerning application of the California 
Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended (CEQA) to the 
prospective Federal Aviation Administration control tower at 
San Francisco International Airport. 



et seq 



CEQA is contained in Public Resources Code §§21000 
Section 21151 provides that: 



"All local agencies shall prepare, or cause to be 
prepared by contract, and certify the completion of an 
environmental impact report on any project they intend 
to carry out or approve which may have a significant 
effect on the environment. . ." 

The San Francisco International Airport Expansion 
Program dated December, 1972 is an integrated plan consisting 
of many single elements grouped into an over-all project or 
program. The FAA control tower is a specified element in the 
Expansion Program. For purposes of the environmental review 
requirements of CEQA the Expansion Program itself is the 
"project" within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 



2 i •'- 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



OMAS M O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



Mr. Rai Y. Okamoto 2 December 20, 1977 

21065(a) which states "Project means . . . (a) activities 
directly undertaken by any public agency" and the guidelines 
issued thereunder, Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 14, §15037 (a) which 
states "Project means the whole of an action , which has a 
potential for resulting in a physical change in the environ- 
ment ..." (Emphasis added) . See Friends of Mammoth v. Board 
of Supervisors , 8 C. 3d 247, 264-265; Environmental Defense 
Fund, Inc. v. Coastside County Water Dist. 27 C.A.3d 695, 
70 6-707; Edna Valley Assn. v. San Luis Obispo Etc. Coordinating 
Council , 67 C.A.3d 444, 447-448. 

In August 1973 the Department of City Planning pre- 
pared a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) , EE 73.88, on 
the Airport Expansion Program. Public hearings on the draft 
EIR were held in September and October 1973 in San Mateo County 
and San Francisco at which time comments to it were received 
and responded to. On October 18, 1973 the Planning Commission 
reviewed the draft EIR, found it to be adequate, accurate and 
objective and certified its completion as a final EIR. The 
Planning Commission further found the Airport Expansion Program 
will have a significant effect on the environment. Resolution 
No. 7091, copy enclosed. 

On November 7, 1973 the Airports Commission adopted 
the final EIR, as certified by the Planning Commission, approved 
the Expansion Program and resolved that it be carried out. 
Resolution Nos. 73-0234, 73-0235, copies enclosed. 

On December 26, 1973, the Board of Supervisors adopted 
the final EIR, incorporated the findings of Airports Commission 
Resolution No. 73-0235, and resolved that the Expansion Program 
be carried out. Resolution No. 856-73, copy enclosed. 

In January 1974 a petition for writ of mandamus was 
filed in Superior Court seeking to set aside the above mentioned 
resolutions adopting the final EIR and approving the Airport 
Expansion Program. The Court concluded the final EIR to be 
adequate, held the findings of the Airports Commission and 
Board of Supervisors to be supported by substantial evidence 
and entered judgment denying the petition. The judgment was 
upheld on appeal. San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and 
County of San Francisco , 48 C.A.3d 584, 598; petition for 
hearing by the Supreme Court denied July 23, 1975. 



HOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
CITY ATTORNEY 
CITY HALL 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



Mr. Rai Y. Okamoto 



December 20, 1977 



By virtue of the foregoing, it is clear the environ- 
mental impact report provisions of CEQA on the Airport Expansion 
Program have been met and are final. Since the FAA control 
tower is a specified element of the "project" which has been 
administratively reviewed and approved, tested by litigation 
and upheld, and since the tower has remained unchanged and 
unaltered in size-conception and location, I am of the opinion 
there is no legal requirement for further CEQA review. 

Of further significance for discussion herein is 
the fact that the FAA control tower is a federal facility and 
is so described in the final EIR (Appendices A-7) . An appro- 
priation of $2,100,000 is being provided by the United States 
Government to assist in financing construction of the tower. 
Once completed it will be under lease to the Government to 
September 30, 2007. See Airports Commission Resolution No. 
77-0144, May 17, 1977, and Board of Supervisors Resolution 
No. 549-77, July 5, 1977 (copies enclosed), approving Contract 
No. DOT FA76WE-3747 with the Federal Aviation Administration. 

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been 
prepared by FAA on the Airport Expansion Program pursuant to 
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) , 42 U.S.C. §4321 
et seq. (1970) and certified as final on April 18, 1977. The 
FAA control tower is also a described and discussed item in 
the EIS. 



You are so advised. 



Very truly yours, 



THOMAS M. O'CONNOR 
City Attorney 



K^i'ai^.^i^Ji'^ *£&£f&£ L ~~" *V^t- 



SAN FRANCISCO 
CITY PLACING COMMISSION 

RESOLUTION NO. 7091 

WHEREAS, The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended provides 
in Section 21151 of the Public Resources Code that "all local agencies shall prepare, 
or cause to be prepared by contract, and certify the completion of an environmental 
itr.pact report on any project they intend to carry out or approve which nay have a 
significant effect on the environment"; and 

WHEREAS, The proposed San Francisco International Airport Expansion Program 
dated December 1972, and a final Environmental Impact Report prepared by the Airports 
Commission, dated April 1973 and May 1973, copies of which are on file with the City 
Planning Commission, were referred to this Commission on May 21, 1973 by the 
5an Francisco Board of Supervisors for review and hearing pursuant to Chapter 31 of 
the San Francisco Administrative Code; and 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act 
Df 1970, as amended (CEQA), the Guidelines of the Secretary of Resources for the 
implementation of CEQA, and Chapter 31 of the San Francisco Administrative Code, a 
fraft environmental impact report (EIR) dated August 10, 1973, has been prepared by 
the Department of City Planning in connection with EE73.88: San Francisco Airport 
Expansion, a project to increase annual capacity of 15,000,000 to 31,000,000 
passengers, primarily involving enlargement and improvement of the terminal area, 
3n the property described as follows: 

San Francisco International Airport, 
San Mateo County; and 

WHEREAS, The Department on or about August 10, 1973 duly filed a notice of 
completion of the draft EIR with the Secretary of the California Resources Agency, 
gave other notice and requested comments as required by law, made the draft EIR 
available to the general public and satisfied other procedural requirements; and 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 31.27(b) of the San Francisco Administrative Code 
the City Planning Commission held duly advertised public hearings on said draft EIR 
an September 27, 1973 and October 11, 1973 at which opportunity was given for public 
Jarticipation and comments; and 

WHEREAS, In addition to the hearings held by this Commission, a public hearing 
-as also held by the San Mateo County Planning Commission on September 26, 1973 at 
Redwood City, at the conclusion of which hearing comments were forwarded to this 
Commission for inclusion in the final EIR; and 

WHEREAS, Comments and testimony received during the public hearing of 
October 11, 1973, and responses given orally thereto, are not deemed a significant 
idditicn to or revision of the draft EIR but are on file with the Department as part 
>f the record of the public hearings, as are all other comments and the testimony 
>£ the hearing of September 27, 1973; and 

WHEREAS, An addendum to the August 10, 1973 draft EIR. entitled Comments, 
'.evisions and Responses to Comments and dated October 11, 1973, made available to 
he public on October 11, 1973, and amended in a supplement made available to the 
ublic on October 18, 1973, was prepared by the Department based upon the draft 
IR, consultations and comments received during the review process, additional 
nfortr.ation that became available, and responses to the comments that raised signifi- 
ant points concerning effects on the environment; and 



. ' •"" -' • " • '■_•«■■•»,; ~--* '■'. ':•'. "*il V '.-. ' "T '■'':' '=7 -\ .'—'-' :• « ''"'-T- '-J'-\ V V —'' 



_ 2 - RESOUjnON HO. 709 1 



CITY riJWi'LNC COK^ISSIW - * - 

WKEKSA5, Furscant'to Section 31.26(a) of the San Francisco Adninist rat ive Code 
a final EIR dated October 18, 1973, has been prepared by the Department, consisting 
of the Draft EIR dated August 10, 1973, the Appendices dated August 10, 1973, and 
the Comments, Revisions and Responses to Comments dated October 11, 1973, as amended 
on October 18, 1973; and 

WHEHEAS, On October 18, 1973 the Commission reviewed the final EIR and found 
that the contents thereof, and the procedures through which it was prepared, publi- 
cized, and reviewed co-ply with the previsions of the California Environmental 
Quality Act, the Guidelines of the Secretary for Resources and Chapter 31 of the 
San Francisco Administrative Code; and 

WHEREAS, The final EIR indicates the major adverse environmental impacts will 
result from approximately doubling the passengers served by the airport from the 
current 15 million annually to 31 million annually by 1985; and 

WHEREAS, The adverse environmental effects include increased vehicular traffic 
congestion, and its concomitant air and noise pollution; fossil energy consumption; 
and increased liquid and solid waste generation; and 

WHEREAS, Subject expansion will increase the demand for fossil fuels in this 
area through increased heating requirements, additional electric power requirements, 
increased aviation fuel requirements, and increased motor vehicle fuel requirements 
as a result of vehicular traffic increases; and 

WHEREAS, The expanded airport usage will increase liquid wast generation and 
add substantially to current water pollution abatement requirements and will cause 
substantial additional solid waste; and 

WHEREAS, The adverse effects of vehicular traffic congestion together with the 
concomitant problems of increased noise, air pollution, and increased fuel consump- 
tion can be mitigated to some extent by airport policies and programs to substan- 
tially increase use of public mass transit; and 

WHEREAS, An expansion in water pollution abatement facilities is included as 
part of the project to minimize any detrimental effect on regional water quality; 
and 

WHEREAS, The expansion program includes a provision for updating current solid 
waste collection and compaction systems to minimize the volume of solid waste being 
disposed of off the airport site; and 

WHEREAS, The expansion is in conformance with the findings of the Regional 
Airport System Study recommendations adopted by the Metropolitan Transportation 
Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments; and 

WHEREAS, Subject expansion will permit the increased use of wide-bodied aircraft 
resulting in an absolute reduction of aircraft noise levels, and a proportionate 
reduction of aircraft fuel consumption per seat mile; 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the City Planning Commission does hereby find 
that the final EIR dated October 18, 1973, concerning EE73.88, Sao Francisco 
Airport Expansion, San Francisco International Airport, is adequate, accurate, and 
objective, and does hereby CERTIFY THE COMPLETION of said final EIR; 

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Commission in certifying the completion 
of said final EIR does hereby find that the project as proposed will have a signifi- 
cant effect on the environment. 



:•' 'i 



s&A&aii^ 






CITY PLANNING COKMISSION 



- 3 



RESOLUTION NO. 709 1 



I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was ADOPTED by the City 
Planning Commission at its regular meeting of October 18, 1973. 



%Mt0d^ 



Karie Zeller 
Acting Secretar) 



AYES: Co-.nissioners Farrell, Fleishhacker, Mellon, Newman, Porter 

NOES: None 

ABSTAINED: Commissioner Rueda 

ABSENT: Commissioner Ritchie 

PASSED: October 18, 1973 



•O 



••■ - ' SAT. . .;•*-* . *»-v. -v r *•. ' 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO 



73-0234 



WHEREAS, The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as 
amended provides in Section 2.IL51 of the Public Resources Code that, 
"All local agencies shall prepare, or cause to be prepared by contract, and 
certify the completion of an environmental impact report on any project 
they intend to carry out or approve which may have a significant effect on the 
environment"; and 

WHEREAS, Upon initial review, it was determined by the Airport 
Staff that the Airport Expansion Program might have a significant effect 
on the environment and thereafter a. draft Environmental Impact Report' 
(EIR) was prepared in accordance with sections 15054 and 15085 of the 
Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act 
of 1970 (Guidelines); and 



WHEREAS, This Commission ; its Resolution No. 73 -CO? 9 adopted 
February S, 1973, dir < :t at aft< fi Notice of Completion of 

the draft EIR wit . the Secretary j: the Resources Agency of California pur- 
suant to Section 15035(c) oi th< i s , .-all draft EIR be made available 
to all interested public agencies ar.o private organisations or individuals 



for review and submission of comment: 



date for a oublic he; 



Lrport.' C 



accordance w 



I March o, 1973, as the 
ussicn on the draft EIR in 



Secuon 1516 5 of the Guidelines; and 



WHEREAS, One or about February 7, 1973, a Notice of Completion 

of the draft ELR was fileo 1 *ith the Secretary of the Resources Agency of 
California ; ana 



WHEREAS, Pursuant to duly published notice a public hearing was 
held by the Airports Commission or. ' larch ; . 3 -"3 at City Hall in San 
Francisco; and 

WHEREAS, In addition to said public hearing by the Airports Corn- 
mission, public hearings were also held by the San Mateo County Airport 
Land Use Committee on the night of March 8, 1973 at the Burlingame City 
Hall and by the San Mateo Count) Planning Commission on March 28, 1973 
at Redwood City: and 

WHEREAS, as part of the consultation and evaluation process pre- 
scribed by the Guidelines, all comments received from public agencies, 
private organizations and individuals who renewed the draft ELR were 
evaluated and thereafter a final EIR was prepared in accordance with Sections 
15085(e) and 15146 of the Guidelines and was presented to this Commission 
for certification of completion and adoption; and 



ITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCC 

73-0234 

RESOLUTION NO. '. 



r i 



WHEREAS, By Resolution No. 73-0099 and Resolution No. 73-0112 
adopted on May 1, 1973 and May 15, 1973 respectively, this Commission 
certified completion of and adopted said final EIR and transmitted same to 
the Board of Supervisors; and 

WHEREAS, After receipt thereof, the Board of Supervisors on 
May 21, 1973 referred said final EIR to the City Planning Commission for 
review and hearing pursuant to Chapter 31 of the San Francisco Adminis- 
trative Code (a procedural ordinance which had just recently been adopted 
by the Board of Supervisors on April 9, 1973); and 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 31 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code, the Department of City Planning prepared 
a new draft EIR and filed a Notice of Completion thereof with the Secretary 
of the Resources Agency cf California on or about August 10, 1973; and 

WHEREAS, After duly published notice, the City Planning Commis- 
sion held public hearings on September 27, 1973 and October 11, 1973 at 
City Kail ir. San Francisco; and 

WHEREAS, In addition to said healings by the San Francisco Plan- 
ning Commission a public hearing was also held by the San Mateo County 
Planning Com.rdssion on September 26, 1973 at Redwood City; and 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 31.28(a) of the San Francisco Admin- 
istrative Code, a final EIR dated October 18, 1973 was prepared by the City 
Planning Department consisting of the Draft EIR dated August 10, 1973, the 
Appendices dated August 10, 1973, and the Comments, Revisions and Re- 
sponses to Comments dated October 11, 1973 and Addendum thereto; and 

WHEREAS, Cn October 18, 1973 the City Planning Commission, pur- 
suant to and in accordance with the provisions of Section 31. 28(e) of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code, adopted its Resolution No. 7091, finding 
that the final EIR is adequate, accurate and objective; certifying completion 
of said final EIR; and finding that the Airport Expansion Program will have 
a significant effect on the environment; and 

WHEREAS, A copy of said final EIR has been transmitted to the Airports 
Commission and to the Board of Supervisors for adoption; 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That this Commission, 
having reviewed the final EIR for the San Francisco International Airport 
Expansion Program, hereby adopts same, and recommends that the Board 
of Supervisors adopt said final EIR; and be it 

FURTHER RESOLVED, That Re solution Nos . 73 -0099 and 73 - 01 1 2 
be and are hereby rescinded. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resoluti on w as adopted by the Airports Commission 
at its meeting of ! flOY • * ' 



l\u.Liu£L ft. kuL!M_£$L 



SecretjT-v 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 



73-0235 



"WHEREAS, The San Francisco International Airport Expansion Pro- 
gram, dated December 1972, a copy of which is on file with the Secretary 
of this Commission, was presented to this Commission on March 6, 1973 
for review and consideration; and 

WHEREAS, The California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as 
amended, (CEQA) provides in Section 21061 of the Public Resources Code 
that 'An environmental impact report is an informational document which, 
when its preparation is required by this division, shall be considered by every 
public agency prior to its approval or disapproval of a project"; and ■ 

WHEREAS, CEQA further provides in Section 21151 of the Public Re- 
sources Code that "All local agencies shall prepare, or cause to be prepared 
by contract, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on 
any project they intend to carry out or approve which may have a significant 
effect on the environment"; and 

WHEREAS, In compliance with the aforesaid provisions of CEQA this 
Commission, by Resolution No. 73-0112 dated May 15, 1973, certified com- 
pletion of and adopted a final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for said San 
Francisco International Airport Expansion Program and transmitted same to 
the Board of Supervisors; and 

WHEREAS, After reviewing said final EIR and taking into consideration 
the environmental impacts of the proposed San Francisco International Airport 
Expansion Program, this Commission, by Resolution No. 73-0113 dated 
May 15, 1973, approved the San Francisco International Airport Expansion 
Program with significant revisions thereof deemed necessary and feasible for 
the purpose of further mitigating the adverse effects of the expansion program 
on the environment; and 

WHEREAS, After receipt thereof, the Board of Supervisors on May 21, 
1973 referred said final EIR to the City Planning Department and City Plan- 
ning Commission for reyiew and hearing pursuant to Chapter 31 of the San 
Francisco Administrative Code, a procedural ordinance which had just recently 
been enacted by the Board of Supervisors on April 9, 1973; and 

WHEREAS, Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 31 of the San Fran- 
cisco Administrative Code, the Department of City Planning prepared a new 
draft EIR for the revised San Francisco International Airport Expansion 
Program; and 

WHEREAS, After public hearings on September 27, 1973 and October 11, 
1973, and in accordance with Section 31 . 28(e) of the San Francisco Adminis- 
trative Code the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 7091 dated October 18 
1973, certified the completion of the final EIR and found that the revised San 
Francisco International Airport Expansion Program will have a significant 
effect on the environment; and 



WHEREAS, This Commission by Resolution No. had adopted 

said final ELR; and 

WHEREAS, Said San Francisco International Airport Expansion Pro- 
gram dated December 1972, has been presented to this Commission for review 
and consideration; and 

WHEREAS, This Commission has carefully considered all of the factors 
prescribed in Section 21100 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15143 of 
the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality 
Act of 1970, ae more particularly set forth in the aforesaid final EIR; and 

WHEREAS, This Commission is fully cognizant of the proposed Trans- 
portation Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area by the En vironmental 
Protection Agency which, among other things, requires all new parking facilities 
of 50 spaces or over to receive either a permit from the Administrato.r of 
the Environmental Protection Agency or to be in conformity with a management 
plan for the area, which plan reports on the effect of future parking facility 
construction or modification or enlargement of existing facilities upon air quality; 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That tins Commission, having 
considered the objectives sought to be achieved by, and the adverse environ- 
mental effects of, the proposed San Francisco International Airport Expansion 
Program, as hereinafter revised, and the alternatives to 6aid expansion pro- 
gram, listed below, finds that the overall social, economic and environmental 
benefits of the program as proposed outweigh the significant effects 
on the environment and that it is in the public interest that said San Francisco 
International Airport Expansion Program, a6 hereinafter revised, be approved 
and carried out; and be it 

FURTHER RESOLVED, That, based on the information contained in the 
final EIR, this Commission finds and determines 

1. The proposed San Francisco International Airport Expansion 
Program, dated December 1972, as hereinafter revised, 
will have the following significant adverse effects on the 
environment: 

(a) Ground Traf fic - There will be an increase in 
the volume of auto and truck traffic generated 
at San Francisco International Airport as the air 
passenger traffic grows from 15 million annual 
passengers to the projected 31 million annual 
passengers. This traffic will add to the con- 
gestion that will occur at certain points on the 
freeway 6ystem at peak hours regardless of the 
Expansion Program, and alternate routes or ad- 
justment in trip schedules will necessarily occur. 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCI 

73-023^ 



RESOLUTION NO. 



(a) Ground Traffic (Cont'd) 

With the completion of 1-380, the traffic on San Bruno 
Avenue will be less than one-third of the present 
traffic, while traffic on Millbrae Avenue in 1985 
will not be significantly affected by the Airport ex- 
pansion. These projected impacts are conservative 
in that they do not assume the extension of the Eay 
Area Rapid Transit (BART) system or additional 
mass transit facilities in 1985. Provisions for the 
BART extension to the Airport are included in the 
program. When and if the BART system is com- 
pleted through San Mateo County, or other modes 
of mass transit are increased', the impact of the 
Airport-generated traffic on the highway facilities 
would be decreased. 

(b) Resource Utilization - Construction of the proposed 
facilities is expected to consume approximately 
117, 000 tons of cement; 1, 077,000 tons of sand and 
gravel; 530, 000 tons of rock; and 43, 000 tons of 
construction steel. On an annual basis, this is a 
range of 3 to 18 percent of the annual consumption 

of these products in San Mateo and San Francisco 
Counties. As a secondary effect, construction ma- 
terials will be used to construct additional com- 
mercial facilities required as back-up for Airport 
Services. 

Upon reaching the designed capacity of the Airport 
in the 1985 time period, water consumption is ex- 
pected to increase from approximately 2 million 
gallons per day presently to 5 million gallons per 
day; natural gas consumption during winter months 
is expected to increase from 500,000 cubic feet 
per hour to 1 , 300, 000 cubic feet per hour; the 
electrical connected load is expected to increase 
from the present 18 million volt amperes (mva) 
to 90 mva; and daily operational fuel consumption 
for aircraft serving the Airport is expected to 
increase from 225,000 gallons per day to 250,000 
gallons per day. Additional fuel consumption 
arising out of the increase in automobile and truck 
use is estimated to by 21.85 million gallons per 
year. 



vehicle traffic generated by the Airport ex- 
pansion will be an increase in noise levels 
In the vicinity of the access roads and high- 
way*. 

(d) Grow th Induce ment - The Airport expansion 
is expected to create approximately 14, 000 
additional basic jobs by 1985, which as a 
secondary effect will create an additional 
17, 000 jobs. .About 50% of the new employees 
will live in San Mateo County. Census 
figures indicate that by 1985 approximately 
50, 000 more residents in San Mateo County 
will be entering than will be leaving the 
labor force. The new jobs created could, 
for the most part, be accommodated by the 
normal growth of the local labor market, 
hence the growth-inducing impact would not 
be significant. 

2. That the overall benefits of the proposed Airport Expan- 
sion program are as follows: 

(a) Pas sen g er Conven ience - It will create one of the 
most beautiful, convenient, compact and safe air- 
ports in the world, close to a major metropolitan 
area, where total transportation time would be 
minimized. The expanded terminals will facilitate 
the handling of a predicted 31, 000, 000 passengers 
per year by 1985 while improving the operational 
efficiency and safety of the Airport. 

(b) Noise - The expanded terminal facilities will allow 
more of the larger and quieter aircraft to operate 

at the Airport. The number of annual airline 
operations will be substantially the same as in 
1972 due to the capacity of the existing runway 
system. These factors, in addition to revised 
operating procedures, will reduce noise levels 
in 1985, after completion of the Expansion Pro- 
gram, below 1972 levels. Additional noise re- 
duction will be experienced in the communities of 
San Bruno, South San Francisco and Foster City 
due to the paving of Runway 28R extension and it6 
designation as the primary instrument landing 
system runway. 



(c) Water Pollution - There will be a significant in- 
crease in the volume of waste water generated at 
the Airport. The quality of effluent entering San 
Francisco Bay from the Airport will be improved 
before 1985 over the level existing prior to be- 
ginning the Expansion Program due to the con- 
struction of the sanitary and industrial waste 
treatment plants and the deep water outfall sewer 
line. 

(d) Air Po ll ution - The total air pollutant emissions 
from aircraft are expected to be less in 1985 than 
in 1972, due to limiting the number of aircraft 
operations and the conversions to newer, more 
efficient engines developed to reduce emissions. 
Although the number of automobiles to and from 
the Airport will increase, the emissions of pol- 
lutants from these vehicles will decrease. This 
decrease in automobile emission will be due to 
more stringent Federal and State standards on 
air pollution. In addition, when and if the BART 
System is completed through San Mateo County, 
with a station at the Airport, there will be a de- 
crease in the number of automobiles to and from 
the Airport with the resulting further reduction in 
the emission of pollutants. 

(e) Economics - During the 8-year period of the 
expansion work, there will be an average of approx- 
imately 670 construction workers employed in build- 
ing the facilities which are planned. The expan- 
sion will generate some 30,000 additional basic 

and secondary jobs as perrranert employment. 
The additional permanent employment is expected 
to increase the aggregate household annual in- 
come in San Mateo County by $264 million, the 
general sales tax by $4, 100, 000, the state in- 
come tax by $17, 100, 000, and the property tax 
by $17,500,000. 

3. That all reasonable and feasible alternatives aimed at miti- 
gating the adverse environmental impacts of the San Fran- 
cisco International Airport Expansion Program have been 
incorporated therein; and 

4. That the following alternatives, for the reasons stated in the 

final EIR, are not reasonable nor feasible at this time: 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCIS 

73-0235 



RESOLUTION NO. 



(a) Modify Expansion Program at San Francisco 
International Airport 

(1) Do nothing 

(2) Do nothing except those projects which 
are mandated by Federal or State 
Regulation 

(3) Revise design standards to conserve 
energy resources 

(b) Use other transportation systems 

(1) Use of tracked air cushion vehicles 

(2) Use of present rail facilities with 
facilities being upgraded 

(3) Develop a short take-off and landing 
(STOL) capability. 

(c) Alternatives considered in the Regional Airport 
Systems Study (RASS); and be it 

FURTHER RESOLVED, That this Commission hereby approves the 
San Francisco International Airport Expansion Program, dated December, 
1972, subject to the following revisions: 

(a) Delete Item A-9, 'Runway 1L Extension" 

(b) Defer Line Item L-5, "Seaplane Harbor Fill" 

(c) Defer Item L-6, '5eaplane Harbor Utilities and Roads" 

(d) Modify Item A-20, "Noise Monitoring Program" to 
read "Noise and Air Pollution Monitoring Program" 

(e) Modify Item L-23, 'Widen Frontage Roads to Four 
Lanes", increasing scope to provide for jointly 
sponsored improvements to intersections at frontage 
road with Millbrae and San Bruno Avenues; and be it 

FURTHER RESOLVED, That Resolution Nos. 73 -0100 and 73-01 13 
be and are hereby rescinded. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Airports Commission 
at its meeting of "NOY 7 -1973 ? 



RuWL h .1 




Secretary 



. 



i t 

1 n 

, = I 

s i s, 

- •* § 

I ' ' 



| 

« 8 

O *■ 
u • 

II 



w > 

• ^ o" 

•< • o 

• — e 

• w ■ 

est 

•a w 

C W 

a b u 

- L. 



* I 



.. E 



• o — • 



1 •? 2 

"82 

■ 

b a • 

e • x 

• x *» 

? ' e 

fa b O 

ft. o • 

: « i 

b • W 

.1: 

2 5 2 

1! 1 

5 5 



E i 

i - 

M 

: ! 

b O 

■ b 



e s 



5 2 

— • 

* • •» 

w w X 

b C W 

< b P 



o> b w 



§ 



e o 



§ t 

s s 

w 



I I 



e w 



e tj 
• • 

b 

i I 

J ? 



U 



*> x e 

b •» "S 

o - c 

p» > 5 



- E 

• V 

X a. 

■o A 

e 

• »- 
o 

« ■» 

e b 

! i 

s . 

1 i 

9 

M 

2 2 



- si 



«? < — 



B t 

ewe 

%• « 4# 

S 2 

I ! 






! 1 

e - 

5 j 



* J * 

o ** H 

K •- — 

5> o « 

J w 

8 1 



I 2 - g 

I ? g 



§ 



— — 



• -I 

2 e 






4 

7 I 



I 2 



ft 3 



• e • 

M 

5 2* 

3*2 



b ' ■ 

*> b 

3 » E 

• r * 

j 9 i 



O w * 

£■2 5 



b • 
• > 

e 

• B 



X c - 



e b art — 

■ ■ P* ■ 

? i % 5 

S * "• | 

I a 2 - 

1 • M *» 

' 2 e 



S 5 £ f 



e . - 

o w 



x « — 



2 ! s 



o 



o. 2 
8 I 

e> *> 



ss.sssssessiscas 




B r 



£ 2 

M K 

o S 

ot ft. 

| 5 



I s 






s s 



§ ; g 

£ 2 13 



E S 



£5 fe 



^ g 



5 2 



w * I 



g 2 



w = — 



~ 5 E t S "S 



fe t E 



£ S 



3 i 



g. 2 



- - c 



• b 

b e 
« & 



2 

b e 

J5 2 

» 

I 



— I • s 



W u 9 



a. — 
< U vl 

c x T 






*j c — ' • -- 



: ! a 



w C 1-1 — 



! - 

o c 

b m 

— a 



3 o-l w 



b U M 



W b W * 



— c — 



• — f» 

3 5 S o 
8 fr «? 2 



IT 



b «a 

• 

E £ 

S • 

E * 

• »- 

* ? 



2 ^ 

w e 



»« »» e 



■ e 

2 S 



S E 



— u 3 



- -. e 

•- 4. 

•4 x 

w X b 

b U • 

• -< — 
II » U 

• b • 

e • x 

*« x « 

• *. 

b II X 

« ae w 

X o -^ 

ti w 9 

I •= • 

3 v " 

« •< al 

£ i : 

■^ e 

^ Vi o 

< e 

s g- - 



U X <-l 

C v " r~ 



a 



I - - 



2 \ 



o- C 

»< o 

s j : 5 

r-l — — C 

►» c ° 

— » 6 ^ c 

x e a a 

• e « 

u M O •• 

« C » ■ 

O ■■ H b 

C M 

■O c - 

V ■ C ~> 

f — o > 

■ a. x C 



x u e 



3 | s 

« b 

* - i 

e "o • 

— b 

w • -. *i 

2 2 I 

• X b 



X B • 



H i 

U X o 

•) b 

5 » i 

e • • 






a a t a t a 



m z. 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

77-0144 



RESOLUTION NO. 



WHEREAS, City owns and operates San Francisco 
International Airport located in the County of San Kateo, 
State of California; and 

WHEREAS, the legislative history of the 
Department of Transportation Appropriation Act of Fiscal 
Year 1973 (HR 921081) indicated that it was the intent of 
Congress to utilize certain funds of that appropriation to 
finance the construction of a new airport traffic control 
tower at San Francisco International Airport; and 

WHEREAS, City needs expansion and improvement 
of facilities at said airport which requires construction 
of a new control tower in the Central Parking Complex; and 

WHEREAS, City is willing to relocate and com- 
plete the construction of said control tower and the United 
States Government is willing to provide $2,100,000 to assist 
the City to achieve this; and 

WHEREAS, proposed forms of a Construction 
Agreement and of a Space Lease, copies of which are on file 
with Commission's Secretary, have been presented to this 
Commission for its consideration and approval; be it 

RESOLVED, that the aforesaid form of proposed 
Construction Agreement with the United States Government, 
bearing Contract No. DOT FA76WE-3747, is hereby approved 
and the Director of Airports is authorized and directed to 
execute said agreement in the form herein aaproved; and, be 
it further 

RESOLVED, that in consideration of the provision 

(continued -) 







AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

77-0144 

RESOLUTION NO. 



of said $2,100,000 by the United States Government and 
of the obligations assumed by it in its operation of the 
control tower facilities in the premises hereinafter re- 
ferred to, this Commission hereby approves that certain 
space lease with the United States Government bearing 
Contract No. DOT FA76K T E-3702 , which provides, among 
other things, for the lease of 6,610 square feet of rent 
free space in the control tower to be constructed at San 
Francisco International Airport and of forty (40) parking 
spaces adjacent to said tower commencing upon the date of 
occupancy for one year; and renewable annually thereafter 
to September 30, 2007, at the option of the United States; 
and, be it further 

RESOLVED, that this Commission hereby authorizes 
the Secretary of the Commission to transmit to the Board 
of Supervisors a certified copy of this resolution (together 
with copies of this lease) , recommending consideration and 
approval by that Honorable Board of the foregoing lease to 
the United States Government. 



1 hereby certify that the foregoing resolution **.' adopted by the Airportt Commission 

, !-.'>.Y j 7 1:77 . 

a: in meeting of ■ 




Secretary 



- - £. 



it - O 



_. c ■- f ? 



-4 • 

4 £ 



e vi 



= I 



s ■— e 



— s -* 



8 i 



f I 

w 



3 

o — 



3 -. -. 



*■ a vi > 



_. -. a. 



r i - » 



— u 



M — O 



- 3 



— «. -3 



3 .= 



C «l ■« O 



. 5 i 



"22 



-t u v. O 



vi < 
U 

• - 



z. u C 



■ > e 

1 -c o - 



- i . 



s i 



.= — o 



ft 8 



< " • 






V K 






■- -1 - 




t 


c - 




& 


i- :- 





» 


• < - 


z 




a — 




E 




s 


3 


s t; u 







x < 




•J 


BCi 








3 





»■ ' = 




E 


-' - 


3 


c 


= C 2 




s 














< j; S 




» 








fc. c - 






« u c 





• 


^ s 




r 


u o 8- 


■ 










:* — c 




7- 








P§. 












z P = 


•J 













m 




X - * 






I- < - 




< 


u < 


a 




s x 


















z - 


< 




i; < 






z z 






u '4. — 


* 




U C 3 


< 






















< C = 






- e- 




c 


o t- 


X 




Z . _ 






S £ y 




TJ 


5* < 




• 


§.- £ 
























S P Js 




1 



- C — C *- Al O* 

*» c o w -. c 

e -« v. c -" f c 

c *• - « E = 

D e ■ u u — 

- e o v 

a > u v» « fi 

— < ■ c o a r» 
v o — o w» 
v — ii u • O p4 

« a a e <i 

h. - i C • C K 

— s e i. 4j fa 

- u. u «» a 
was > 

— L. t C VI 

« l « o o — 

© o u « B 

> - i. w >. 



- o — 






-< < 

il 

« e 

-« o 



wo — 



— <l o 



- c 

o 

•o -« 



» O »» 



t; -< < -. 



3 = « 

- | i 






b. -• v, 



i 5 



i c> « = 



o 



~ K 3 



S 2 E: R S S 



I- 



I II 
1 1" 










£$* 






V" 



c — o 



S ^ " 



O -« -< 



■ f» n ^ 







: = s k 



cnsaaRRRR 

■I 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

NOV 2 7 1979 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



MINUTES 



JANUARY 17, 19 78 



DIANNE FEINSTEIN, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR. Z.L GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



n 8TM3I ' 

YHV 



Call to Order: 2:40 PM 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish and William E. 
McDonnell . 

Absent: Commissioner William K. Coblentz 

The Minutes of the Airports Commission meeting of January 3, 1978, 
were approved. 



President Bernstein called for the Director's reports prior to commenc- 
ing the discussion of the Calendared items. 

The outstanding Airport policeman of the year, Officer Alexander 
Jackson, was presented. He was selected for his outstanding service 
and merit. Commission members joined in congratulations to him. 

It was also noted that Chief Paul Lawler was returning to duties of 
Captain with the San Francisco Police Department; the new Airport Police 
Chief, Tom Dempsey, was introduced to the Commission. Mr. Heath said 
Chief Charles Gaines, SFPD, assured him he could expect the same fine 
performance from Captain Dempsey as has been rendered by Captain Lawler. 



It was brought to the attention of the Commission that Mr. Al Kaiser, 
United Airlines Property Manager and President of the Airlines Policy 
Committee, would be retiring soon. After offering their congratulations 
and comments regarding the years of service and cooperation rendered by 
Mr. Kaiser, the Commission voted that a resolution be adopted and pre- 
sented to Mr. Kaiser. Mr. Kaiser stated his appreciation of the recog- 
nition he was receiving from the Commission. Resolution No. 78-0026 
was approved. 

Mr. Heath added that Mr. Julian Bardhoff of the Water Department was 
retiring. The Airports Commission added a congratulatory resolution 
on the occasion of his retirement in view of Mr. Bardhoff 's 17 years 
of service in behalf of the Airport. Resolution No. 78-0027 was approved 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0015 Resolution declaring the exist- 

ence of an emergency due to the 
failure of a 12,000 volt elec- 
trical cable at the North end of 
the airfield. 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, stated this is an emergency 
repair that took place last week. We were able to make repairs for 
approximately $3,000 and a formal resolution is required to ratify this 
action . 



78 - fi 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0016 Resolution authorizing profes- 

sional services agreement, Main 
Lafrentz & Company. 

Mr. Heath said this resolution approves an agreement with Main Lafrentz 
and Company, who will prepare a statement in connection with the issuance 
of Airport revenue bonds. He said in order to sell bonds a statement is 
needed of our financial condition for the first six months of the fiscal 
year. 

Commissioner Kadish expressed her gratitude that Mr. Heath had been 
successful in moving this appropriation through the Board of Supervisors. 

When Commissioner McDonnell ingulfed what firm did similar work on the 
1975 bond issue and was told Hood and Strong; he then asked if this firm 
was hired to produce projections for the Airport. He was told it was 
going to work only on bond documents. He then asked what Peat, Marwick 
and Mitchell did and was told they had produced the Financial Feasibility 
Report prior to the 1975 bond issue. He said he thought John Brown Co. 
did this and was told they made a Traffic and Earnings report for the 
1975 bond statement. The Controller selects accountants to do annual 
audits for the City and they are changed every three years. 

Commissioner Kadish asked how $2 million per year was projected for 
Capital Improvements when the current requirement is already at $10 million, 
She asked J. Peter Singer, Deputy Director, Business and Finance, to 
insure that the accountants make no projections for the future and he 
agreed. He said their primary purpose is to prepare the financial state- 
ment . 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0017 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 812, 
Partial Overlay, Reconstruction 
and Repair, Runway 10R-28L, as 
satisfactorily completed; approv- 
ing and requesting the Control- 
ler's certification of Credit 
Modification No. 6 in the amount 

of $238,077.98; extending the 
completion date from October 4, 
1977 to November 16, 1977; and 
approving final payment in the 
amount of $247,333.17 in favor 
of the contractor, McGuire and 
Hester, 796 - 66th Avenue, 
Oakland, CA 94621. 

No. 78-0018 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders 925-7, No. 925-8 and 
925-9 in accordance with Airports 
Commission Resolution No. 70-0044 
and requesting Controller's 
certification of Debit Modifica- 
tion No. 4 in the amount of 
$14,533.15. 



78-7 



No. 78-0019 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 
18 to Airport Contract No. 950, 
Boarding Areas H & I and Connector 

No. 78-0020 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification 19 to 
Airport Contract No. 950, Board- 
ing Areas H & I and Connector. 

No. 78-0021 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 6 
to Airport Contract No. 977, 
Expansion of Electrical Distri- 
bution System, Phase I, autho- 
rizing payment to the contractor 
in the total amount of $35,376.63. 

No. 78-0022 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 
14 to Airport Contract No. 1000, 
authorizing payment to the con- 
tractor in the total amount of 
$46,031.00. 

No. 78-0023 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 2 8 thru 31, and re- 
questing the Controller's certi- 
fication of Modification No. 15 
to Airport Contract No. 1000, in 
the total amount of $20,354.00. 

No. 78-0024 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 
16 to Airport Contract No. 1000, 
in the total amount of $42,871.00. 

With reference to Contract 812, Commissioner McDonnell inquired whether 
April 18 was the starting date of the work, and was told that it was and 
that the contract was awarded in March 19 77. He then asked in what year 
it was budgeted and was told that it was in the budget for 1976-77. 

Commissioner Kadish said she understood it was about six weeks period 
from the time between the Commission approval and the effective date 
and felt that rapid administrative handling would have some cost effect. 

Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director, Planning and Development, informed her 
that this was not the case because only certain projects which must get 
underway immediately are hand-carried through channels. 

Mr. Heath said we are strongly involved in drafting the explanations to 
make them less technical and more descriptive. We will have that be- 
ginning next Commission meeting. 



78-8 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0025 Resolution accepting the work 

performed under Controller's 
Contract No. 70170, Professional 
Services, to conduct a seismic 
risk and site response study for 
the proposed Air Traffic Control 
Tower, as satisfactorily com- 
pleted and approving final pay- 
ment in the amount of $7,000 to 
Dames & Moore, Civil Engineers. 

Mr. Heath said this finalized the contract for seismic study. There 
was a two-month delay in completion of the contract. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if there were any seismic problems. 

Mr. Robert Lee said the seismic study is in three parts. This study 
pertains to soil and foundation. After the structural analysis is 
completed, the framework will be checked against wind studies. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if Dames & Moore is working on the Garage. 
Mr. Lee said that firm is retained by CMC for any problems that may 
occur on an ongoing contract as required during construction. 



On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolution was presented: 

Resolution approving the proposed Fiscal Year 
1978-79 operating budget for official filing 
with the City Controller, in accordance with 
Section 6.200 of the San Francisco City Charter. 

Mr. Heath explained he was only recently informed that the budget 
sessions are usually divided into two sessions, which would be the 
case in the future. He suggested that reductions can be made after 
the budget document is submitted to the Mayor. He proceeded to 
explain the various expenditures in the proposed budget, pointing out 
increases and the reasons why increases were necessary. 

Commissioner Kadish questioned the total amount of the budget and how 
that figure was determined, which was explained by Mr. Heath. 

Mr. Heath then called the Commission's attention to the fact that the 
Airport is structured by law as a break-even operation financially 
and that the expenses are met by airport revenues which can be in- 
creased by increasing landing fees and rentals. , 

Commissioner McDonnell requested that the City Attorney's portion of 
the budget be heard first. The Honorable George Agnost, City Attorney, 
explained the circumstances surrounding the requests for additional 
personnel, stating that this would enable his office to give better 
service to the Airport. He explained the additional services that 
would be included, such as preparing leases and permits for the tenants, 
as well as a training program for deputy city attorneys assigned to 
the Airport. 



- 9 



Commissioner McDonnell inquired about last year's expenditures for 
City Attorney services, asking if we were already paying over and 
above our requirement for the services we were receiving. 

Mr. Singer stated we are paying for 3^ attorneys at about $40,000 
each. Commissioner McDonnell said he would like a complete break- 
down on what we have paid and what we will pay in the future. 

Commissioner Kadish said the Commission was not contacted on the 
decision to add attorneys and secretaries. She asked if these are 
the same persons who occupied the job last year or are these new 
persons. She was told these are the attorneys who usually serve 
the Airport. 

Mr. Agnost said he had met with Mr. Heath to improve City Attorney's 
service at the airport by adding Don Garabaldi and Ms. Donbach to the 
Airport staff. 

Commission Kadish asked if the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors 
could include the necessary funds in the City Budget to make a change 
in the City Attorney's Office, rather than add to the Airport budget. 

Commissioner Bernstein questioned the City Attorney on his staff and 
its services to the airport to justify the additional staff requested. 

Mr. Agnost assured him the services would more than compensate for 
the additional staff requested, that his Airport staff would be super- 
vised and that their services would be of a better quality. 

Commissioner Kadish noted that contracts have a notation stating that 
they are approved by the City Attorney's office as to form. She 
wondered if the Attorneys would take a more active role in drafting 
the contracts and agreements and was told that they would, in fact, 
they would write some agreements and by so doing be able to remove 
some ambiguities. 

Mr. Emmett Smith, Assistant Deputy Director, Business & Finance, 
stated the operating portion of agreements is now written by the 
Airport staff and then turned over to the City Attorney for review. 
Mr. Agnost suggested that the procedure should be reversed. 

When Mr. Bernstein asked why we didn't get the service before, that 
is now proposed, Mr. Agnost stated that was under a different admini- 
stration. 

Commissioner McDonnell reminded the Commission that the former City 
Attorney operated with Public Utilities Commission until 1970 when 
the Airports Commission became a separate entity. 

Mr. Heath then went over the balance of the budget and explained 
each item. 

Commissioner Kadish congratulated the staff on the form of the budget 
and said in going over the budget it is necessary to see where it 
might be cut, noting that personnel had already been cut. She requested 
some additional information on capital expenses, and said if compared 
with last year, we would be more than tripling the landing fees, and 
asked if there is a system for setting priorities and record-keeping. 
She asked if there is a record listing all capital improvement projects, 
or a capital improvements master plan or a personnel work plan. She 
received a negative reply. 



78 - 10 



Commissioner Kadish said last year we did $3 million in capital 
improvements, and asked if we could do more than three times as 
much this year, since we have had to put out a lot of our work 
because of a lack of airport personnel. 

Mr. Lee stated his staff does not have the capability to design the 

airport bond fund expansion programs. He said his staff is entirely 

capable of doing all the field work. He cited examples and explained 

typical projects in detail. 

Commissioner Kadish said, she desired to reduce the size of this 
budget item and that appropriate cuts be made. She noted that 
contractual expenses increased 111% in other contractual services 
and asked why we are going to need more professional services this 
coming year than we have had in the past year. 

Mr. Heath stated that construction prices and lawyers fees have 
increased. There are also inflationary increases. Part of the cost 
increase is due to the growth of our activities. 

Commissioner McDonnell questioned the $9 million increase to service 
the bonds. 

Mr. Heath said there will probably be two supplemental budgets. 
There may be a supplemental budget for bonds. If we start to 
capitalize those bonds there will have to be additional expenditures. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if there was an estimate when this would 
come before the Commission and was told before March 15. Commissioner 
McDonnell then asked if this would be a portion of this budget. 

Ms. Mary Callanan, Head Accountant, said one is to go to supplemental 
budget to be considered by the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors 
together. The supplemental appropriation will be considered after 
the final budget is considered. When asked how many votes that would 
take, she said six. 

Commissioner McDonnell hoped that they would have some work sessions 
on the bond fund for the $9 million prior to its getting to the 
Commission. What about control of cost? Light, Heat and Power. 
The Airport cost for utilities is $1.8 million. Utilities costs for 
the airlines and airport have increased by $5 million. The airlines 
are suing the City of San Francisco on the basis that this is an 
unfair raise of rates. 

Mr. Al Kaiser said there is a suit by three airlines. 

Commissioner McDonnell said if the airlines win this case the amount 
of dollars is tremendous. We should look ahead to the payment of 
a suit. It could be devastating to the general fund. I think we 
must look into this charge. We should file suit so that we are on 
record that this is wrong. When he asked if the same rates are being 
charged to the Water Department, he received a negative reply. 

Ms. Mary Callanan said the Water Department indicated that they may 
lose their discount. 

Commissioner McDonnell then asked for an explanation on the top item 
under Personnel current positions. 



78 - 11 



Mr. Singer said last year the Mayor or Board of Supervisors reduced 
personnel costs by 6% under the general assumption that all positions 
would not be filled all year. We questioned whether we should use 
the same 6% figure this year or whether we should use some other 
figure. The $8.6 million is the full salary cost of each position. 
It is because of the 6% salary savings plus 1/2% for anticipated 
promotional increases. This does not reflect increases from the 
new salary standardization schedule so it will increase. It will be 
changed by the new salary standardization ordinance. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if all police positions are filled and 
was told that they were. When he asked if all janitorial supervisors 
positions were filled, he was told that they were. He asked about 
other jobs, and Mr. M. Bagan, Deputy Director, Operations/Maintenance, 
said there are several electrical jobs that are not filled. He said 
we can recruit outside of Civil Service. He asked why a third 
gardener is requested and it was explained that although the newly 
landscaped section is monitored under contract, there are lots of 
other areas that need attention, such as the new terminal areas that 
will need increased gardening services. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked about employee transportation. He was 
told that it was previously provided and the Board of Supervisors 
deleted that cost. The employees filed a lawsuit which was successful 
at the trial court level. The case is on appeal and if it is not 
reversed it will have to be paid. 

Commissioner McDonnell requested a breakdown for each division be 
forwarded to the Commission concerning telephone, maintenance and 
cleaning costs. He asked if window washing was under contract and 
was told that it is. 

Commissioner Kadish questioned the cost of a paint truck for $60,000. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that Mr. Ronald Wilson, Assistant Deputy 
Director, Maintenance, convinced him it was necessary. 

Mr. Ronald Wilson said this paint truck replaces three vehicles, 
one of which is a 20-year old pickup to tow the other two. One is 
a self-contained unit which paints the runways on a once-a-week basis. 
This has to be done so often because it is in the touchdown zone, 
which wears off frequently. All three pieces are usually out of 
commission at one time or another. The new paint truck has the 
ability of painting hot which means it will dry in about 12 minutes. 
Out of all that we are requesting, this is the most important. The 
Commission requested a brochure on the paint truck. 

Mr. Lee introduced the problem of jet blast from DC-10's and said 
that a 14 foot fence has been requested by the airlines. Commissioner 
McDonnell asked if the fence was tested and approved by the airlines 
and if the pilots are in agreement that 14 feet is as high as they 
can go. r 

Mr. Heath explained that as the blast from the lower jets goes back 
and hits the fence, it goes straight up and forms a barrier to the 
higher jet blast. 

Commissioner McDonnell again asked if the pilots are in agreement on 
the 14 foot and whether we were talking about the blast fence to take 
care of the problems on the freeway or are we thinking about moving 
the threshold back. He was told that after the blast fence is installed 
we will continue the 600 foot threshold. The only thing we are asking 
is raising the height of the blast fence. 



78 - 12 



In regard to the pulping station, Commissioner McDonnell asked if all 
the material is ready to go. 

Ms. Mary Callanan said we had a $2 million appropriation. 

Commissioner McDonnell had a question on the extension of taxiways 
regarding the start of planning on a possible $2 million project and 
whether we are that close to doing that type of job. 

Mr. Lee stated we are not and that this project could be delayed, 
that we will probably not get to it until the second half of the 
fiscal year. 

On $3 million for partial reconstruction for the intersections: 
There is no calendar date. Today we added the final contract. 
Commissioner McDonnell said he asked at that time if you had any other 
overlays, and there was never any mention of this project. He asked 
if overlay was necessary and was told that it was. Mr. Lee said we 
couldn't touch the intersections at the time because if we did we 
would have to close the airport. The intersections were last recon- 
structed in 1970 and have weak spots. He asked Gene Bordegaray, 
Engineering Staff, to explain who said, historically, the intersections 
would last about eight to ten years. 

Commissioner Kadish said there should be a procedure set up so that 
next time we won't have to rely on someone's memory and asked if 
there was record-keeping. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the utilities for plot 50 could be 
put off for a year. Mr. Emmett Smith said property that has not been 
prepared cannot be rented. Commissioner McDonnell asked that the 
item be deleted and if it has to go we would do it on a supplemental. 

On improvements to the Engineering Building, Commissioner McDonnell 
asked Mr. Lee if he has any plans, and reminded him that it was re- 
quested to completely gut that building. McDonnell said instead of 
using the $500,000.00 to get the plans made, they should begin doing 
something, and erect what is needed. There should be a timetable and 
he would like that item changed. 

McDonnell then asked why the repaving cannot be done by bond funds, 
and was told that it could. He then recommended that $200,000 be 
assigned to bond funds and reduce the Engineering Building to 
$50,000; leave other projects in, including $250,000 for terminal 
work. On total capital improvements he would vote for $5,350,000.00. 

Commissioner Bernstein called for comments from the airlines. Mr. 
Thomas Welch read a prepared statement, a copy of which is attached 
to these minutes and incorporated herein by reference. 

Commissioner Kadish said in light of the discussion and questions 
raised by the Commissioners and recognizing that the airlines re- 
ceived their copy of the budget yesterday, she recommends that the 
budget not be passed today, that a special meeting be called next 
Tuesday, and that in the interim Mr. Singer and staff be asked to 
take into consideration all the recommendations made today and put 
them into effect in the final draft of the budget. She also hoped 
that the revised budget will be in the hands of the airlines and other 
concerned parties in sufficient time to study it in depth. 

Commissioner McDonnell said this will be brought to the Policy 
Committee meeting on Thursday for the airlines to review it and come 
back to the Commission. He asked that airlines not only give the 
budget broad thought but get into the profit aspects. 



78 - 13 






A motion was made by Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell ani adopted deferring action on the proposed budget until 
2:30 PM, January 24, 1978. There being no further calendared matters, 
the meeting adjourned at 6:07 PM. 



jfMHw M/& 



Warren D. Hanson 
Acting Secretary 
Airports Commission 



78 - 14 



Brobeck. Phleger a Harrison 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 



teli copier SPEAR STREET TOWER los anoeles orr.CE 

.315 '142-IOIO /-IMC" uiDKrT o, «-y A SEVEN SEVENT1 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD 

CABLEUROBECK <JrgL - MAHt, ' tl ^1-A^A LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 900 7 

rELEx 34228 bph SFO SAN FRANC ISCO. CALI FORN I A 94105 (213) 613-OBOO 



(415) -442- 0900 

January 17, 1978 

San Francisco Airports Commission 
San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 

Attention: Mr. Morris Bernstein, President 

Members of the Airports Commission: 

We are submitting this letter on behalf of the 
Airlines Policy Committee (the "Committee") which repre- 
sents those airlines listed in Appendix A to this letter 
(the "Airlines") . 

The Committee has been advised that, contrary 
to the specific provisions of the several Landing Fees 
Agreements between the Commission and the Airlines providing 
for review and adjustment of landing fees at three-year inter- 
vals, the Commission proposes to approve a 1978-79 budget 
contemplating increased landing fees to generate additional 
revenues of up to $15,000,000. We understand that the budget 
shortages giving rise to the contemplated fee increases are 
generated in substantial part by the Commission's plan to 
finance certain capital improvements on a current rather 
than long term basis. 



BROBECK. PHLEGER & HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 2. 
January 17, 1978 



The Airlines object to and protest any proposed 
increases in landing fees on the following grounds: 

1. The Commission lacks authority under the 
Landing Fees Agreements to increase landing fees for 
this purpose at this time. 

2. The Commission has improperly depleted the 
Airports Revenue Fund by applying Airport revenues to pur- 
poses unauthorized by the Landing Fees Agreements. This 
depletion of the Airports Revenue Fund has been effected 
by (a) diverting the earnings thereon to the General Fund 
of the City in violation of Sections 6.311 and 6.408 of 
the City Charter and Section 4(h) of the Landing Fees 
Agreements; (b) diverting interest on the proceeds of the 
1967 Airport General Obligation Bonds to the General Fund 
instead of allowing such interest to accrue to the bond fund 
as required by Section 6.311 of the City Charter, thereby 
generating need for Airports Revenue Fund moneys for the 
funding of capital improvements which could and should be 
funded out of such interest accruals; (c) applying $820,000 
annually of current Airport revenues to a sinking fund for 
General Obligation Bond retirement properly chargeable to 
fiscal years ending after June 30, 1988; (d) prepaying in 



BROBECK. PHLE6ER & HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 3. 
January 17, 1978 



fiscal year 1974-75 of $4,000,000 beyond the amount specified 
by Section 4(h)(7) of the Landing Fees Agreements, for repayment 
to the City of funds previously advanced by the City for 
Airport purposes; and (e) prepaying in fiscal year 1976-77 
an additional $2,000,000 beyond the amount specified in 
Section 4(h)(7) of the Landing Fees Agreements, for re- 
payment to the City of funds previously advanced by the 
City for Airport purposes. 

3. If the Commission had not improperly applied 
moneys in the Airports Revenue Fund and accruing to the 
Airport General Obligation Bond Fund, the Airports Revenue 
Fund would currently have available well in excess of the 
additional amount required to meet whatever needs exist. 

Power of the Commission to Adjust Fees . The 
Landing Fees Agreement provides two procedures for ad- 
justing landing fees. The first requires, not less than 
120 days prior to the expiration of each three-year period, 
the Director of Airports and the Airlines shall confer with 
respect to the need for adjustments in fees for the three - 
year period beginning the July 1 next following (Section 
4(c)). Such a procedure has been followed with respect to 
the period beginning July 1, 1976, and the conclusion was 
reached, and communicated by William J. Dwyer's letter to 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 4 
January 17, 1978 



A. J. Kaiser, dated May 3, 1976, that no such increases 

were required. In such case, the Landing Fees Agreements 

provide that for the ensuing three years landing fees shall 

remain at the level fixed for the preceding three-year period 

(Section 4(d)) . 

In the interim, the landing fees may only be 

adjusted pursuant to Section 4(g) . This permits reopening 

of the subject of landing fees levels only 

"when necessary in order to avoid 
City tax support due to the apparent 
inability of Airport revenue to pay 
for all Airport expenses incident to 
its operation and maintenance, or to 
pay , subject to Section 4(e) [*] 
hereof, the interest and sinking fund 
for any bond issued for the acquisition, 
construction of said Airport." 
(Emphasis supplied.) 

Taken together, Section 4(c) and Section 4(g) 
clearly state that if landing fees are not adjusted prior 
to the adjustment date (here July 1, 1976) as provided by 
Section 4(c) , they may be adjusted prior to the next ad- 
justment date (here July 1, 1979) only if necessary to 



Section 4(e) provides for submission to the Airlines 
of any capital improvement program to be funded by 
a bond issue. 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 
January 17, 1978 5. 



provide funds for Airport operation and maintenance or 
for interest and sinking fund requirements on Airport 
bonds . 

Financing capital improvements on a current basis 
and meeting deficiencies created by past misapplication of 
funds available for airport improvements and airport pur- 
poses do not justify adjustments in the interim under 
Section 4(g) of the Landing Fees Agreements. Accordingly, 
the Commission lacks authority under the Landing Fees Agree- 
ments to adjust landing fees at this time. 

Interest on Airports Revenue Fund . Section 6.311 

of the 1971 Charter provides in pertinent part that 

"all moneys and checks received by any 
officer or employee of the city and 
county for, or in connection with the 
business of, the city and county, shall be 
paid or delivered into the treasury not 
later than the next business day after 
its receipt, and shall be receipted for 
by the treasurer . . . 



"All interest on moneys deposited 
shall accrue to the benefit of the city 
and county, except that interest derived 
from the deposit of any bond, utility, - 
pension, trust or other fund created for 
a specific purpose shall accrue to such 
fund . '. ! (Emphasis supplied. 



BROBECK. PHLEGER & HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 6 
January 17, 19 78 



The Airports Revenue Fund created by Section 6.408 

of the 1971 Charter is a "utility ... or other fund . . . 

created for a specific purpose." Section 6.408(a) of the 

1971 Charter specifically provides that 

"... The entire gross revenues of the 
airports commission shall be set aside 
and deposited into a fund in the city 
and county treasury to be known as the 
'Airports Revenue Fund. ' All amounts 
paid into said fund shall be maintained 
by the treasurer separate and apart from 
all other city and county funds and shall 
be secured by his official bond." 

The "specific purpose" of the Airports Revenue 

Fund is described by Section 6.408(b) as being 

"... the financing, maintenance and 
operation of airports and related 
facilities owned, operated or controlled 
by the [airports] commission. ..." 

The requirement that earnings on moneys in the 
Airports Revenue Fund shall accrue to the fund is found 
not only in the general language of Section 6.311 relating 
to funds for special purposes but is also a specific require- 
ment of Section 6.408 creating the Airports Revenue Fund itself 



The Airport is a public utility, People v. Western Air 
Lines, Inc. , 204 Cal.App.2d 105, 126-133. Accordingly, 
the Airports Revenue Fund constitutes a "utility fund" 
within the meaning of Section 6.311. 



BROBECK. PHLEGER &. HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 7. 
January 17, 19 78 



Section 6.408(b) provides that 

"Moneys in the Airports Revenue 
Fund including earnings thereon shall 
be appropriated, transferred, expended 
or used ..." 

for Airport purposes in accordance with the priorities set 

forth in that section. (Emphasis supplied.) 

Section 4 of the Landing Fees Agreements provides 
that for purposes of considering adjustment of landing fees, 
interest on the Airports Revenue Fund shall accrue to that 
fund. Therefore, the amount of such interest, including 
all that has been improperly excluded in the past, must be 
considered in determining whether an increase in landing fees 
is required in order to provide for the Airport purposes to 
which such moneys are to be applied. 

The preamble to the Landing Fees Agreements states 

in part that 

". . . [I]t has been and is this [Airports] 
Commission's policy that all Airport revenues 
shall be expended for Airport purposes, subject 
to the provisions of the City's Charter; . . , " 

Section 4(h) of the Landing Fees Agreements pro- 
vides that in adjusting landing fee rates, as provided 
in the Agreements, 

". . . it is understood and agreed that 
moneys in the Airports Revenue Fund, as 
defined in Charter Section 6.408, con- 
sisting (subject to the budget and fiscal 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 
January 17, 19 78 



provisions of the City Charter) of the 
entire gross revenue of the Commission 
and earnings of the Fund thereon , shall 
be appropriated, transferred, expended 
or used for the following purposes per- 
taining to the financing, maintenance 
and operation of the Airport and related 
facilities owned, operated or controlled 
by the Commission and only in accordance 
with the following priority: 

"(1) The payment of oepration and 
maintenance expenses for the Airport or 
related facilities; 

"(2) The payment of pension charges 
and proportionate payments to such com- 
pensation and other insurance or outside 
reserve funds as the Commission may es- 
tablish or the Board of Supervisors may 
require with respect to employees of the 
Commission; 

"(3) The payment of principal, interest, 
reserve, sinking fund, and other mandatory 
funds, created to secure any revenue bonds 
hereafter issued by the Commission for the 
acquisition, construction or extension of the 
Airport, or any airports or related facilities 
owned, operated or controlled by the Commission 

"(4) The payment of principal and 
interest on general obligation bonds here- 
tofore or hereafter issued by the City 
and County of San Francisco for airport 
purposes ; 

"(5) Reconstruction and replacement 
as determined by the Commission or as required 
by any Airport revenue bond ordinance or 
resolution duly adopted and approved; 



BROBECK PHLEGER a HARRISON 

San Francisco Airports Commission 9 
January 17, 1978 



"(6) The acquisition of land, real 
property or interest in real property for, 
and the acquisition, construction, enlarge- 
ment and improvement of new and existing 
buildings, structures, facilities, utili- 
ties, equipment, appliances and other pro- 
perty necessary or convenient for the develop- 
ment or improvement of the Airport or any 
airports and heliports owned, controlled or 
operated by the Commission in the promotion 
and accommodation of air commerce or naviga- 
tion and matters incidental thereto; 

"(7) The return and repayment into the 
General Fund of the City and County of San 
Francisco of any sums paid by the City and 
County of San Francisco from funds raised by 
taxation for the payment of the interest on 
and principal of any general obligation bonds 
heretofore issued by the City and County of 
San Francisco for the acquisition, construc- 
tion and improvement of the Airport, con- 
sisting fo the return and repayment into 
the General Fund of the City and County of 
San Francisco of the sum of $2,000,000 in 
each fiscal year, commencing with the Fiscal 
Year 1973-74, until there shall have been re- 
turned to the City and County of San Francisco 
the sum of $24,388,104; 

"(8) For any other lawful purpose of the 
Commission, including the deposit from time to 
time as revenues become available therefor in 
the Airport Contingencies Reserve Fund (created 
by Commission Resolution No. 73-0065, adopted 
March 30, 1973) until there shall be accumulated 
in said fund the aggregate sum of $5,000,000; 

"All remaining revenues after making the 
foregoing allocations, including the accumula- 
tion of said aggregate sum in the Airport Con- 
tingencies Reserve Fund, shall be available to 
the Commission for all lawful purposes, subject to 
the provisions of the Charter," (Emphasis supplied.) 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 

San Francisco Airports Commission 
January 17, 19 78 10 



The Airlines have estimated that in the period 
1965 through 1976 earnings in that fund aggregating approximately 
$8,000,000 have been transferred to the General Fund in contra- 
vention of Sections 6.311 and 6.408 of the Charter. Had these 
transfers not been made, this sum, increased by the further 
earnings thereon, would have been available to provide moneys 
for the budgeted capital improvements and other Airport purposes. 

Interest on Airport General Obligation Bonds . On 
March 25, 1974, the City sold the remaining $31,900,000 
principal amount of Airport Bonds authorized in the 1967 
election. Proceeds from these and previous Airport Bonds 
issued pursuant to the 1967 authorization were not immedi- 
ately expended after their receipt, but were reinvested in 
interest-bearing deposits or securities. While so held, they 
constituted a "bond ... or other fund created for a specific 
purpose." Under Section 6.311 of the Charter governing such 
a fund, "interest derived from the deposit of any [such] fund 
. . . shall accrue to such fund." 

This requirement of Section 6.311 of the Charter 
is consistent with state law. The Attorney General has 
held that interest earned on the proceeds of assessment dis- 
trict bonds should be credited to the improvement fund into 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 

San Francisco Airports Commission 11 
January 17, 19 78 



which the bond proceeds were placed ana not to the general 
fund of the City, 49 Ops .Cal . Atty .Gen , 59 (1967). The courts 
have held likewise: Pomona City School District v. Payne , 
9 Cal.App.2d 510 (school district funds); Board of Law 
Library Trustees of Los Angeles County v. Lowery , 67 Cal.App. 
2d 480 (county law library funds) ; Metropolitan Water District 
of Southern California v. Adams , 32 Cal. 2d 620 (money deposited 
as security for payment of condemnation awards) ; Ostley v. 
Saper , 147 Cal.App. 2d 671 (interpleaded funds). 

The Airlines estimate that after the 1967 general 
obligation Airport Bonds were authorized interest in excess of 
$20,000,000 on the unexpended proceeds of those issued has been 
transferred to the General Fund of the City. 

Had this interest not been transferred to the General 
Fund in violation of Section 6.311 of the Charter, these moneys 
would have been available for Airport purposes, including the 
capital improvements and other expenses now budgeted for 1978-79 

General Obligation Bond Sinking Fund . In each 
fiscal year from 1976-77 through 1987-88 the Commission has 
set aside and proposes to set aside from Airport revenues the 
sum of $820,000 to be paid into a special sinking fund to assure 
the payment of debt service on general obligation bonds here- 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 12. 
January 17, 1978 



tofore issued by the City for Airport purposes which will 
remain outstanding on June 30, 1988. These payments are not 
required for debt service on these bonds in years prior to 
1988-89, which are already separately funded by existing 
landing fees. By establishing this sinking fund of $9,840,000 
for future debt service, and by charging the Airports Revenue 
Fund for the payments to such fund, the Commission is in 
effect requiring the Airlines to prepay by as much as ten 
years a debt service obligation properly chargeable to Airport 
revenues in years subsequent to 1987-88. 

It is erroneous for the City to contend that this 
special sinking fund is required to assure the general obli- 
gation bonds nontax security because they "are now being sub- 
ordinated to the revenue bonds without corresponding elector- 
ate approval," since the electorate did approve the priority 
of revenue bond debt service over general obligation bond 
debt service in its approval of City Charter Section 6.408 in 
1970, which specifically provides for such priority. 

As landing fees are to be fixed at levels which 
will provide funds for current debt service requirements, 
charging the Airports Revenue Fund for $820,000 annually 
of non-mandatory future debt service expense is arbitrary, 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 



San Francisco Airports Commission 13 
January 17, 19 78 



unreasonable and contrary to Section 4(h) of the Landing 
Fees Agreements. 

Prepayment of Advances by the City . By its 
Resolution No. 74-0057, adopted May 7, 1974, the Commission 
authorized the transfer to the General Fund of $4,000,000 
from the Airports Revenue Fund in prepayment of advances 
by the City for Airport purposes. By Resolution No. 
76-0121, adopted July 6, 1976, the Commission authorized 
an additional prepayment of $2,000,000. The Airlines duly 
protested each of these actions by the Commission as being 
contrary to the Landing Fees Agreements. With respect to 
the 19 74 transfer the City Attorney acknowledged that the 
$4,000,000 transferred would be a credit in favor of the Air- 
lines on the occasion of any future adjustment of landing 
fees. By letter dated December 3, 1974, the Airlines ex- 
pressly reserved all rights with respect to that transfer 
"including the treatment of that transfer in adjusting land- 
ing fee rates hereafter." The same consideration should 
be given to the transfer authorized by Resolution No. 76-0121. 

By reason of these repayments, the Commission has 
paid to the City the sum of $14,000,000 through fiscal year 
1976-77, instead of the $8,000,000 specified by Section 4(h)(7) 
of the Landing Fees Agreements. As the Landing Fees Agreements 



BROBECK. PHLEGER a HARRISON 

San Francisco Airports Commission 14, 
January 17, 19 78 



specify that only $2,000,000 per year of such repayments may 
be considered in adjusting landing fees, the Airlines are 
entitled to recognition of the $6,000,000 of prepayment 
made in 1974 and 1976 in any contemplation of the adjust- 
ment of landing fees . 

Under the circumstances set forth, the Commission 
is not authorized under the Landing Fees Agreements to 
increase such fees. Any such adjustment would be arbitrary, 
unreasonable and contrary to the Landing Fees Agreements. 

Very truly yours, 
BROBECK, PHLEGER & HARRISON 

O , ■■■ 1 ? 



By ■' / / I 

Thomas A . Welch 

TAW : lp 



APPENDIX A 



Airlines Represented on 
Airlines Policy Commi 1 1 e e 



Air California 
Air Canada 
Airlift International 
American Airlines, Inc. 
Braniff International Airways 
China Airlines, Ltd. 
Continental Air Lines, Inc. 
CP Air 
Delta Air Lines, Inc. 
Flying Tiger Line, Inc. 
Hughes Airwest 
Japan Air Lines, Ltd. 
National Airlines, Inc. 
Northwest Orient Airlines, Inc. 
Pacific Southwest Airlines 
Pan American World Airways, Inc. 
Philippine Air Lines 
QANTAS Airways, Ltd. 
Trans World Airlines 
United Air Lines, Inc. 
Western Airlines, Inc. 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

NOV 2 7 1979 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



MINUTES 



SPECIAL MEETING 



JANUARY 24, 1978 



DIANNE FEINSTEIN, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR. Z.L. GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 



San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



T«l3fl 8TM3MU3Qa 



SPECIAL MEETING OF THE 
SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

On The 

ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET 
Fiscal Year 1978-79 



Held at 

San Francisco City Library 
Louis Lurie Room 
January 24, 1978 - 2 : 30 PM 



Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

William E. McDonnell and 
William K. Coblentz. 

Absent: Commissioner Ruth S. Kadish 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0028 Resolution approving the proposed 

Fiscal Year 1978-79 operating 
budget for official filing with the 
City Controller, in accordance with 
Section 6.200 of the San Francisco 
City Charter. 

Mr. M. F. Bagan, Deputy Director, Operations and Maintenance, in the 
absence of Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, said suggestions 
had been made for cuts in the budget as presented at the January 17 
meeting. These were made and were submitted for review at the Airline 
Policy Committee meeting. He asked Mr. J. Peter Singer, Deputy 
Director, Business and Finance, to explain how, where and why the cuts 
were made . 

Mr. Singer stated that the budget as revised is $58.3 million and 
summarized the major changes which resulted from the staff review. 

He understood that the Commission agreed to include two secretarial 
support salaries in the City Attorney's Office. When the budget was 
discussed with the Airlines Policy Committee on Thursday, there was 
considerable discussion on this item. We are increasing the amount 
as discussed with the Commission last week. It is the Director's 
recommendation that the budget as revised be adopted. 

Commissioner Coblentz understood the City Attorney asked for funds 
to increase his office space. He asked if money is included to re- 
model offices and library and was told that it was not. That amount 
would be approximately $200,000 for the library, equipment and re- 
modeling. The $3,870,599 in other department support includes five 
attorneys and three secretaries at the Airport and two secretaries 
in the City Attorney's Office. 



-!■ 



Commissioner McDonnell asked specific questions concerning individual 
cuts made in various sections of the budget. 

Mr. Singer, with the assistance of M. Callanan, Chief Accountant, 
gave detailed responses to each area and outlined the need for supple- 
mental appropriations at a later date. 

Mr. Singer said that regarding light, heat and power, there is an 
estimate that a 25% increase in rates will take place July 1, this 
year. When asked if there was any explanation, he said there was 
only a letter from Hetch-Hetchy . 

Commissioner McDonnell then asked if the City Attorney's office has 
given us any legal opinion as to how the PUC can increase our rates 
by one letter. 

Mr. Singer replied they have asked the attorneys to look into it but 
they have not yet had a chance to complete their research. 

There are two increases of the electrical fees for the Airport, while 
there are 4 8% discounts for other city departments. There was an 85% 
increase in rates on power sold to the Airport for its own use by 
Hetch Hetchy. A third is an upcoming increase on all power for the 
year 1978-79. 

Commissioner McDonnell said he would like someone to tell us in 
depth what is happening. He thinks there are court suits on it right 
now. When costs jump from $3 million to $8 million, I think if we 
have a successful case on it, within 4 years we are looking at a 
possible $25 million refund from the City's general fund. He asked 
for an answer within a month as to exactly where we are, but also to 
list out every department of the City to find out how they will be 
handling each department of the City. 

Mr. Singer said we have looked at nine other departments of the City. 

We found that at the time we lost our 48% discount, the discount to 

other depatments went from 48% to 60%. Next year the other departments 
are anticipating a 69% discount. 

Commissioner McDonnell suggested that we ask Oral Moore, Gen. Manager 
of Hetch Hetchy, to explain this at the next meeting. 

Commissioner Coblentz said it seems the PUC is looking at the Airport 
as a source of revenue. They know we raise our own funds. Others 
are given a greater discount. There has been a substantial increase 
in the Airport costs and there has not been one for any others. 

Mr. Singer said the Airport was notified about December 19th on the 
loss of discount and the 85% increase. 

Commissioner Coblentz said we might have to go to court to resolve 
this with PUC. 

Commissioner McDonnell said PUC is taking PG&E rates without having 
the backup in order to really justify this. The rate is over and 
above the PG&E rates for some comparable organizations. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked if the rates are covered by the State 
PUC and was told they are not. 

Commissioner McDonnell said we will be looking into this and we will 
have Mr. Moore here at the next meeting for a report. 



-2- 



Mr. Singer said the major amount of the reduction between the draft 
budget and this one is in Capital Improvement Projects. The remaining 
projects were discussed in detail. 

Mr. Singer then discussed, in detail, cuts made in the equipment 
budget. He reminded the Commission that this budget of $58 million 
does not include the expenses that are anticipated to be incurred in 
connection with the North Terminal nor with the 1978 Bond issue. He 
pointed out that in capitalizing the bond interest costs and with the 
present estimate of $9 million to operate the North Terminal, the 
total budget would be in the area of $72 million. He said most of 
the costs are fixed costs and will depend on the heat, light and power. 

Commissioner Coblentz said assuming your estimate is correct that 
would mean increasing the landing fees to what sum. Mr. Singer said 
it would depend on certain alternatives as to the amount applied to 
space rental costs. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked what were the Policy Committee's thoughts? 
Mr. Singer said they were given a series of alternatives and they will 
get back to the Commission at the February 7th meeting. In the mean- 
time, we have a total so that if they have other ideas as to space 
cost we can enter their ideas into the model. 

Commissioner McDonnell said in regard to New York, are their space 
costs comparable to ours? Mr. Singer said we did not check their space 
costs, only the landinq fees. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked how we compare in landing costs to other 
major airports. Mr. Singer read from a schedule: Atlanta 42C; 
Chicago 74C; Detroit 96C; Dallas $1.05; L.A. 50C; Seattle $1.30. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked did LaGuardia come down and Mr. Singer 
answered saying his assumption is that in the case of any terminal, 
what happens is when the major expenses are paid off, you will see a 
reduction in landing fees. The model projects to 1983 and results in 
a lowering of expenses. 

Mr. William Lauder, Co-chairman of the Airline Policy Committee, 
addressed the Commission and thanked them for giving the airlines an 
opportunity to come back and state their views on the budget. A copy 
of his remarks is attached to these minutes and incorporated herein 
by reference. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked where the court suit stands on the rate 
increase. Mr. Lauder said he estimated the amount in question would be 
millions. He said full rates are being paid but the part being 
challenged is about $5 million now. The Court will be requested to 
expedite . 

Commissioner Coblentz stated that this Commission has no desire, to 
gouge any tenants and expressed disappointment in the rates. We 
have an obligation to the citizens of San Francisco and we intend to 
take the job seriously. Some of this responsibility lies here and 
some with the Mayor's office and the Board of Supervisors. 

A member of the audience, Mr. Russell Presting, asked who established 
the 23% operating expense for the garage. 

Commissioner Bernstein informed him that the Commission approves the 
budget on which the Airport operates. Mr. Presting then asked if 
the Commission concluded that additional employees were needed to 
help people through the garage and he was told it would be necessary 
during construction. 



-3- 



Commissioner Coblentz asked if the budget had to be approved today 
and was told by Mr. Singer that any items which go into the 
Controller's office can be reduced and any items we wish to add can 
be done on a supplemental. Commissioner Coblentz then made the 
motion that the budget proposed as amended be approved, which was 
seconded by Commissioner McDonnell. 

Chief Robert Barry, Airport Fire Department, commented on the 
deletion of sprinklers on Pier D. He asked if the Fire Department 
has been notified of the deletion. 

Mr. Bagan said this work would be necessary only when we bring 
Pier D up to code. It is a judgment factor. 

Commissioner McDonnell said we have a bond issue so that is where 
the money would come from for the Pier. 

Mr. Bagan said it was a unanimous decision of the staff to delete 
it at this time. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if staff would be coming back with a 
priority list on the field projects. 

Mr. Singer said these were brought up in the Policy Committee, in 
the model of the total revenues and expenses. One of the concerns 
is regarding accuracy of financial projections over 5 years in the 
future. There was not sufficient inventory of the total projects 
involved and this will be developed within the next two weeks. 

Mr. Bagan said Mr. Heath has requested Mr. Lee to make a project 
program in book form and present it to the Commission. 

There being no further calendared business before the Commission, 
the meeting was adjourned at 3:40 PM. 



Warren D. Hanson 
Acting Secretary 
Airports Commission. 



-4- 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT '• 
S. F. AIRLINES POLICY COMMITTEE 
1/24/78 

COMMENTS ON PROPOSED SFIA BUDGET FOR 1978-1979 



The Policy Committee appreciates the time afforded by the Airports. 
Commission for airline review of the budget. We would also like to 
comment on the fine budgetary meeting we had with the Airport last 
Thursday, and particularly to commend the handling of the meeting by 
Dick Heath, Peter Singer, and Mary Callanan. Discussions were.jDpen, 
thorough, candid, and helpful — the best ever in the opinion of 
most of the airline representatives present. 

Insofar as the budget itself is concerned, Tom Welch, from the Bro- 
beck firm representing the Airline Policy Committee, presented the 
airlines' legal position to you at your January 17, 1978 meeting. 
That position remains unchanged, is reaffirmed here, and Mr. Welch 
is available to answer questions if there are any. 

Specific budget items upon which the airlines have comments are as 
follows: We agree with the items deleted between last week's Com- 
mission meeting and today. 

Page 4 

1978-1979 landed weights should be escalated by 6% over the 1977-78 
estimate to 27,136,000 thousand pound units to reflect expected landed 
weight increases. 

1978-1979 Revenue Budget Summary 

1. Air Carrier Flight Operations Revenues should be increased to 
show 6% landed weight increase. $650,000 

2. Public Parking Revenues seem increased too little in view of 
the fact that the garage addition is planned for opening 
October 1, 1978. 

3. Interest Income should be increased to include interest rn 
Airport Revenue Fund — estimate $2,000,000. 

4. Federal Grant income, hopefully, can be increased after Pete 
Singer's review. 



■2- 



1978-1979 Expense Budget Summary 

1. Light, Heat, and Power: We encourage efforts to regain the 
discount for the Airport. We do not recognize this dis- 
criminatory increased increment of charge as a proper cost 
of operation of the Airport. 

2. Capital Expenses - Additions and Reconstruction: Although 
the airlines favor the projects listed in Schedule E, they 
are opposed in principle to treating them as expense items 
to be funded out of current revenues. (Suggest they ought 
to be funded from interest on the G. 0. Bond fund . ) 

Bond Interest and Redemption Schedule 

1. Object to $320,000 G. 0. Bond Sinking Fund as unwarranted 
and not an obligation of carriers to fund in landing fee 
rate base. 

2. Repayment to City of $2,000,000: Since airlines are in- 
voluntarily ahead in these payments, suggest no payment 
in 1978-79 if an attempted landing fee increase would 
result. 

Schedule A 

1. City Attorney: Recommend 3-1/3 attorneys and 3 secretaries 
as at present until economics of airport location are known. 
$119,000 

2. Real Estate and Purchaser Personnel : Overstated by $22,000. 



In summary, we recommend the following budgetary measures to pre- 
clude the conflict likely to arise from an attempted landing fee 
increase on July 1, 1978. 

I. Delete as expenses from the budget: 

$2,000,000 Payment to the General Fund 

820,000 Payment to the G.0. Bond Sinking Fund 

119,000 Increase Attorney's Office Staff 

22,000 Real Estate and Purchaser Personnel 

SUBTOTAL $2,961,000 



■3- 



II. Increase as revenues in the budget: 

$ 650,000 In landing fee revenues for 6% 
weight increase 
2,000,000 In interest on Airport Revenue 
Fund 

SUBTOTAL 2,650,000 

TOTAL 11^611^000 

To the extent this $5.6 million swing in the budget won't handle all 
expenses, the subject of a reasonable rental increase could be broached 
at an appropriate time. 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

NOV 2 7 1979 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



MINUTES 



FEBRUARY 7, 19 78 



DIANNE FEINSTEIN, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR. Z.L. GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 



San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



Call to Order: 2:30 PM 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell . 

Absent: Commissioner William K. Coblentz 

The Minutes of the January 24, 1978, Special Airports Commission meet- 
ing were approved. 



Director of Airports Richard Heath reported on electric rates. He 
invited Mr. Oral Moore, General Manager of Hetch Hetchy to answer any 
questions. 

Mr. Moore stated he is trying to interpret what he believes is the 
attitude of the Public Utilities Commission and the Board of Super- 
visors. Last July, the PUC adopted a schedule of rates and charges 
which provided that sales of power at the Airport would be at PUC 
rates without discount. Since SFIA is an international Airport, the 
PUC felt that Hetch Hetchy should no longer underwrite the cost of 
power at SFIA and that SFIA should pay full rates. PUC adopted this 
last spring. The Board of Supervisors adopted this policy and it was 
effective in July 1977. Moore stated that the rate charges are reason- 
able in that they are identical to those charged to all other power 
consumers in the area. Airport still makes money from power which it 
resells to its tenants. He gave an example where the Airport earned 
$427,000 on power sold to tenants. He said this more than compensates 
for capital returns and operating costs to the Airport and its electric 
distribution system. 

When asked what happens to the profit from Hetch Hetchy power sales 
generally, he said that Hetch Hetchy as a Department of the City govern- 
ment cannot profit by the sale of power. Any excess funds generated go 
to subsidize other City departments or to the General Fund. In the past 
five years Hetch Hetchy has contributed $8 million to the General Fund. 
Since 1969 Hetch Hetchy has operated the transit power Division of the 
Municipal Railway absorbing the expense of that operation and capital 
improvement. Hetch Hetchy power is sold at cost to those Departments 
of City government which serve only San Francisco. He said there is a 
need to optimize Hetch Hetchy revenues for the benefit of San Francisco. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if the Airport is paying more for its power 
than any other Department. Mr. Moore said yes and added with the rates 
presently in effect, the other departments pay only cost or about 4 0% 
of the prevailing power charges. Mr. Bernstein noted the Airport is 
60% more than the other departments. 

Commissioner McDonnell said we are moving from $3 million a year to 
$8 million in power costs. 

Mr. Ted Chung of Hetch Hetchy said that in 1977-78 it was $6% million 
and that will be increased to $8 million. 

Mr. J. p. Singer, Deputy Director, Business/Finance, said in 1976 the 
cost was $3.1 million; in 1977-78 $2.9 million was approved as a rate 
increase in July 1977. We are now anticipating a budget for $6.8 
million. 

78 - 15 



Commissioner McDonnell asked if we had an increase of $5 million and 
was told that we did. He then asked if that means the 60% discount 
would mean 60% off the $8 million. He was then told the 60% would 
apply only to the power for the airport's own use. 

When asked if the discount for the other departments increased because 
of the increased cost to the airport, Mr. Chung said it did not. 

Commissioner Bernstein then stated he would like to know where we 
stand from a legal point of view. 

Mr. McMorris Dow, Deputy City Attorney, stated he represents the ' City 
in the cases brought by the airlines. Should the City lose the cases, 
funds will come from Hetch Hetchy. He reserved comment on rates to 
the Airport until he has had time to study the matter. 

Commissioner Kadish stated her understanding of the facts was that the 
48.6% discount applied to the 20% of the power the airport used for its 
own purposes, not to all power, but that in July 1977, there was a rate 
increase that applied to all power. She asked about the Airport per- 
centage as a City department. She also noted that the airport was re- 
ferred to as a regional authority providing services to others than 
San Francisco. She asked how that is applicable to the 20% that is 
used by the Airport as a City department. Mr. Moore stated that since 
power rates in the area have climbed and San Francisco has a great need 
for revenue, it was decided that the airport should pay full rates. 

Commissioner Kadish asked how the charges are divided between the power 
for airport use and the power used as a City Department; she asked how the 
charges to the Police or Muni are determined. She added that even though 
rates have gone up in the last several years, it is her understanding that 
hydroelectric power is the cheapest to produce. She was told that Hetch 
Hetchy cost of power has gone up and the increased value of power consti- 
tutes a benefit to the taxpayers of San Francisco, which explains the 
philosophy of the PUC. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if the Airport has made it possible for the 
revenues of the City and County of San Francisco to increase by $5 million, 
who receives the credit? Is that for Hetch Hetchy or does the airport 
get credit for providing additional funds of $5 million? 

Commissioner Kadish asked about the procedures for rates increases. She 
asked if they have to be approved by the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, 
the PUC and the Secretary of the Interior. She was told that the matter 
of whether or not that must be approved by the Secretary of the Interior 
is undecided. The San Francisco PUC was the body to establish the rates. 
California PUC has no jurisdiction covering only investor-owned utili- 
ties. The San Francisco PUC establishes rates which must be approved 
by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. 

Commissioner Kadish stated she is not aware when the rate increase ap- 
peared before the Board and she is not aware that we were informed so 
that we were involved in that portion. Mr. Moore said that the Airports 
Commission has been advised of every rate increase that affected them. 
The San Francisco PUC set the rates in June 1977 and removed the dis- 
count for power to the Airport. 

Commissioner Bernstein said the rationale for the increase is that the 
San Francisco International Airport is an international facility, 
whereas other departments are municipal He asked if it is true that 
some of the water charges are higher and some are lower. He was told 
there are discounts and that there are different charges. Sales of 
utilities in higher volumes get lower rates. Mr. Bernstein said if 
that is so, why can't we keep everything on the same basis. 



78 - 16 



Commissioner Kadish stated that the airport will be paying $8 million 
for what other agencies would pay $3 million and that constitutes a 
reduction in the tax rate. 

Commissioner McDonnell said any departments outside City and County 
should not be given a discount. He asked if airline people wanted to 
ask questions. Mr. Bill Lawder of United Airlines said they are tak- 
ing a look at the rates but would not make a statement now. 

Commissioner Kadish stated that the 20% of the power which the airport 
uses in running a department of the City should be separated from the 
90% used for resale. If that distinction is not made, it seems dis- 
criminatory in relation to a City department. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if this action was approved by the Board 
of Supervisors. 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr. Heath if he would evaluate this and 
determine whether there are sufficient legal questions involved for 
us to consider consulting outside legal counsel. 

Mr. Heath said we would be putting the City Attorney in a difficult 
position because any opinion expressed would be in direct conflict 
with his own office. He reminded the Commission that rates are pro- 
posed by the staff to the PUC and asked to make a presentation to 
protest the different treatment the airport receives. He said the 
$5 million profit to San Francisco is derived directly from the airport 
and it should be clear that should the airport cease operation, the 
city could lose $5 million they would otherwise receive. 

Commissioner Bernstein said it would be good to appear before the PUC. 

*** 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0029 Resolution rejecting all bids 

for Contract No. 1151A and 
approving the consolidation of 
Contract Nos. 1151A and 1151B 
into a single contract No. 1151, 
International Holding Area - 
Rotunda A. 

Mr. Heath said this is part of the provision to provide a holding room 
for international passengers. What we propose to do is to reject all 
bids and combine the contracts into one Contract No. 1151. He asked 
the Commission to approve the rejection. 



On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 



No. 78-0044 



Resolution supporting proposed 
charter amendment permitting 
sale of revenue bonds to re- 
finance existing revenue bonds, 



- 17 



No. 78-004 3 Resolution of non-support of the 

proposed charter amendment to 

k integrate Airport Police into the 

San Francisco Police Department. 

Mr. Heath said these two proposed charter amendments are before the Board 
of Supervisors and that Mr. Singer will testify, giving the City's 
position. Mr. Heath brought out that the Airport police would like to 
await results of a pending litigation before taking action on the charter 
amendment. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked who proposed the charter amendment and was 

told it was the Police Officers Association. McDonnell asked if this 

did pass would it make any change in the powers of the police at the 
airport. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that is questionable. There was legislation 
which said that if the City and County owned an airport in another county, 
the Sheriff shall deputize the police as full peace officers or in the 
alternative give the airport permission to do so. He has granted only 
limited peace officer duties. The union of Airport police is hopeful they 
can get a writ of mandamus in the pending litigation. If they are suc- 
cessful, they would prefer remaining Airport police to becoming City 
police. 

Mr. Heath said if the charter amendment is passed in June, it would in- 
crease our budget by $2 million. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if they wanted action on this now. 

Mr. Heath asked that it not be placed on the June ballot. 

*** 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0030 Resolution approving final plans 

and specifications and authoriz- 
ing bid call for Airport Contract 
No. 1151, International Holding 
Area - Rotunda A. 

Mr. Heath pointed out the new holding area on the map and said this is 
a permanent area. He felt this should be considered in terms of a 
short-range facility if it will not be completed until mid-1982. The 
main costs would be for air conditioning units since the ones they have 
are not large enough. It would be possible to put in fans and use out- 
side air, which might result in a savings of about $35,000. 

Commissioner Kadish said her concern is that the improvements would be 
destroyed and we would have nothing to show in the future for the money 
spent. If this will be amortized and provide services for passengers, 
the value is great and we should go ahead with it. The international 
airlines have reviewed the proposal as it stands. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked about another type of air cleaning. 

Mr. Robert Lee said that would just circulate the air and use carbon 
filters. 

When Commissioner McDonnell asked what the cost would be without air 
conditioning, he was told about $25,000. 



78 - 18 



Dn motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0031 Resolution rejecting all bids 

for Airport Contract No. 1126 and 
authorizing Director of Airports 
to re-advertise for new bids on 
Airport Contract No. 112 6R, 
Industrial Wastewater Collection 
System - Phase III. 

4r. Heath said some of the specifications were too strict, and that by 
changing some of them he feels we will get a better bid the next time. 

:ommissioner McDonnell asked if we have to pay the consultant and was 
:old they drew up the plans, but it is their responsibility to do so 
igain without any additional fee. 

■lr. Lee said it would be mainly writing specs, and when asked who was 
:he consultant he said Consoer & Townsend. He added the system would 
>e equally acceptable. 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0032 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order No. 925-10 in accordance 
with Airports Commission Reso- 
lution Nol 70-0044 and request- 
ing Controller's certification 
of Debit Modification No. 5 in 
the amount of $4,283.76. 

No. 78-0033 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 
20 to Airport Contract No. 950, 
in the total amount of $10,564.00, 
which incorporates Bulletin 86, 
providing for necessary relocation 
of fire sprinkler lines in Con- 
nector where they interfere with 
United ' s Boeing baggage system. 

No. 78-0034 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 32 thru 34 and 36 thru 
41, and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Modification No. 
17 to Airport Contract No. 1000, 
in the total amount of $24,078.00. 

-more- 



78 - 19 



No. 78-0035 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 42 thru 49 and 51 
thru 57, and requesting the Con- 
reoller's certification of 
Modification No. 18 to Airport 
Contract 1000, in the total 
amount of $22,226.00. 

No. 78-0036 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 

19 to Airport Contract No. 1000, 
in the total amount of $33,530.00. 

No. 78-0037 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 

20 to Airport Contract No. 1000, 

in the total amonnt of $108,581.00, 
which provides for necessary re- 
visions and modifications to the 
fire protection and alarm system 
to accomplish the original in- 
tended functions as requested by 
City. 



Ir. Heath said the majority of these modifications to the Garage came 
ibout according to the information received as a result of the haste to 
jet the garage contract bid and the ability of everyone to get in the 
•quipment to be used. A decision was made that to hold up the garage 
:ontract would cost more than the modifications. The original cost was 
5500,000 which has been reduced by some hard negotiations by CMC. 

.'ommissioner Kadish said she is glad to know that CMC engages in these 
tegotiations and it was pointed out by Mr. I. Grindheim of CMC that the 
lirport Architects deserved credit. 



>n motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
he following resolution was approved: 

No. 78-0038 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 1040, 
Furnish and Install Chlorinator - 
Water Quality Control Plant, as 
satisfactorily completed; approv- 
ing and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Debit Modifica- 
tion No. 1 in the amount -of $206.00: 
extending the completion date from 
December 6, 1977 to January 24, 
1978; and approving final payment 
in the amount of $2,869.38 in 
favor of the contractor, McCrary 
Construction Company, P.O. Box 
4120, Foster City, CA 94404. 

r. Heath said this is an approval of the completion of contract; that 
t is just a design improvement, and that it was very close to the pre- 
icted cost. Also, there was a 49-day delay which was beyond the control 
f the contractor. 

*** 



78 - 20 



On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolution was approved: 

No. 78-0039 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 1088, 
Differential Settlement Connec- 
tion, Water Quality Control Plant, 
as satisfactorily completed; 
extending the completion date from 
December 31, 1977 to January 11, 
1978; and approving final payment 
in the amount of $1,487.32 in 
favor of the contractor, Dalzell 
Corporation, P.O. Box 8284, 
Emeryville, CA 94662. 

iMr. Heath said this contract was completed as planned except for an 11- 
day delay due to rain. 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was approved: 

No. 78-004 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by Chevron, U.S.A., show- 
ing the proposed construction of 
improvements to the storm water 
drainage facilities at their 
aviation fuel storage tank area 
at Plot 24 to bring the site into 
compliance with the conditions on 
Chevron's National Pollution 
Discharge Elimination System 
permit. 

Mr. Heath said this work will be done by Chevron, U.S.A. at its own 
and sole expense for an estimated cost of $60,000. 



On motion of Commissioenr Kadish, seconded by Commissioner McDonnell, 
the following resolution was approved: 

No. 78-0041 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by Avis Rent-A-Car System, 
Inc., showing proposed modifica- 
tions to their rental car service 
facility at Lot A to improve 
operational efficiency. 

Mr. Heath stated this is another tenant improvement, the work of which 
will be done at the sole expense of Avis Rent-A-Car at an estimated 
cost of $45,000. 



78 - 21 



Director's Reports 

(A) Noise Control Regulation: (No. 78-0042) 

Mr. Heath presented a revised noise control regulation. He reviewed 
the history of the hearing leading to the development of this regu- 
lation, and pointed out sections of particular interest and concern. 

Commissioner McDonnell said he would rather not vote on it until the 
Policy Committee and the airlines have stated their positions. 

Commissioner Kadish said the resolution is couched in terminology 
which is easy for everyone to understand. 

Mr. Heath said on approval this will come back to the Commission for 
enactment. 



(B) Airports Commission Policy for 1980' s. 

The Airports Commission's policy for the 1980' s was discussed. Mr. 
Heath stated the whole process would take about 18 months and he 
would be checking with people around the airport on what measures 
should be taken to improve the airport. 

Commissioner Kadish asked about the deadline of October 1979 and 
whether it is possible to have some of the broad policy statement de- 
veloped and phased in, rather than coming in as a total package. Mr. 
Heath said that is his intention. Commissioner Kadish said it would 
get more careful attention if it is taken section by section. 

Commissioner McDonnell said he would like to have more time to review 
this and take it up at the next public meeting. Mr. Heath said he 
will move his task forces into action. 



(C) Correspondence. 

Mr. Heath called attention to Mr. Staton's letter and to his letter 
to the FAA. He said he wants to make sure all this is in our files 
and the public hearing file. 

Mr. Heath said a radar system will be installed at SFIA as an air 
collision warning system. 

Commissioner McDonnell said he would like to be kept abreast of 
where we are regarding the Central, North and South Terminals, so 
that we will not get behind. He asked if staff would be hearing . 
from Mr. Freedman and that he would like a working session with 
staff prior to bringing that to the Commission meeting. 

Commissioner Kadish requested a report on the status of the service 
representatives who have been added to the Airport and a second report 
on the Airporter Bus, which picks up within the city at other than the 
downtown terminal. 

There being no further calendared business before the Commission, the 
meeting adjourned at 4:10 PM. 



0l2qah**- O. rt +"++" J 






Warren D. Hanson 
Acting Secretary 
Airports Commission 



78 - 22 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



S FEBRUARY 21, 1978 



OCT 17 I 



DOCL 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 
william k. coblentz 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES OF THE AIRPORTS COMMISSION MEETING 
Tuesday, February 21, 1978 



1. Call to Order: 2:35 PM 

2. Roll Call: 
Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Radish, William E. 
McDonnell and William K. Coblentz 

Absent: None 

3. Pledge of Allegiance 

4. Approval of Minutes: 

The Minutes of the Airports Commission meeting of January 17, 1978 
were approved as amended. 



Calendar Items: 

(1A) Airports Director Richard Heath introduced Mr. Craven to the 
meeting. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 

McDonnell, a resolution was adopted, appointing Eric Craven 

as Secretary to the Airports Commission, effective Vvednesday, 

February 22, 1978. (78-0045) 



(1) Supplemental Appropriation for Temporary Holding Facility 
Furniture, $40,000 

On motion of Commissioner Radish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0046 Resolution requesting the Mayor 

to recommend to the Board of 
Supervisors a supplemental ap- 
propriation in the total amount 
of $40,000 to cover the cost of 
furniture for the temporary 
holding facility for arriving 
international passengers. 

Mr. Heath said this item was a request for a supplemental ap- 
propriation for furniture for the holding area in the Inter- 
national Arrival Area, which had been approved at the last 
Commission meeting. This will provide furniture which can be 
used in the South Temrinal and then moved to the new seating 
area when the new International Arrival section is built, so 
it will be of long-term benefit. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if this was a budget figure, or would 
competitive bids be taken. Mr. Heath answered that the figure 
was estimated and bids would be taken. 



- 23 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolutions were adopted: 

(2) Modification No. 32, Airport Contract No. 650C 

No. 78-0047 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of debit Modification No. 32 
to Airport Contract No. 650C, in 
the total amount of $27,111.00, 
for providing sprinkler fire pro- 
tection on the downstream air 
side of all installations of 
carbon filters. 

(3) Modification No. 33, Airport Contract No. 650C 

No. 78-0048 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders 74, 107, 108, 110, 113 
and 114 and requesting the Con- 
troller's certification of 
Modification No. 3 3 to Airport 
Contract No. 65 0C, in the total 
amount of $24,773.00, for pro- 
viding revisions to the clock 
system, structural supports for 
the glass draft curtains, instal- 
lation of exterior exit stairs 
No. 1 thru No. 7, revisions to 
hardv/are schedule, identification 
tags for valves, and revision to 
plaster partition walls. 

(4) Modification No. 6, Airport Contract No. 925 

No. 77-0049 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
ders No. 925-11 and No. 925-12 in 
accordance with Airports Commission 
Resolution No. 70-0044 and request- 
ing Controller's certification of 
Debit Modification No. 5 in the 
amount of $3,732.65. 

(5) Modification No. 1, Airport Contract No. 937R 

No. 78-0050 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
ders No. 937R-1 and No. 937R-2 
in accordance with Airports Com- 
mission Resolution No. 70-0044 
and requesting Controller's 
certification of Debit Modifica- 
tion No. 1 in the amount of 
$3,200.00. 



- 24 



(6) Modification No. 21, Airport Contract No. 950 

No. 78-0051 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
ders No. 31 thru 33, and request- 
ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Modification No. 21 to 
Airport Contract No. 950, in the 
total amount of $24,657.23. 

(7) Modification No. 22, Airport Contract No. 950 

No. 78-0052 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Modification No. 22 to 
Airport Contract No. 9 50, in the 
total amount of $33,475.00. 

(8) Modification No. 23, Airport Contract No. 950 

No. 78-0053 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 2 3 
to Airport Contract 950, in the 
total amount of $9,349.00, which 
provides for payment by United 
Airlines of one-half the cost of 
the third move-in of pile driver 
for United' s loading bridge piles 
under Contract 95 0, and revisions 
to doors and hardware to meet 
United 's intended use of tenant 
spaces. 

(9) Modification No. 22, Airport Contract No. 1000 

No. 78-0054 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
der No. 64, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 2 2 to Airport 
Contract 1000, in the total 
amount of $21,376.00. 

(10) Modification No. 2, Airport Contract No. 1015 

No. 78-0055 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
ders 4 thru 6, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 2 to Airport 
Contract 1015, in the total 
amount of $10,682.76. 

(11) Modification No. 3, Airport Contract No. 1015 

No. 78-0056 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Credit Modification No. 3 
to Airport Contract 1015, Garage: 
Stage V - Final Modifications, in 
the total credit amount of 
$25,082. 



78 - 25 



Mr. Heath said the staff had reviewed all these items and 
recommended that they be passed. Commissioner McDonnell re- 
marked that two of the items were credits, and Commissioner 
Kadish asked why there was not a credit in item six, as the 
plaster walls were deleted in the telephone rooms. Mr. Robert 
Lee, Deputy Director, Planning & Development, explained the 
item. Commissioner Kadish also commented on items two and 
seven, stating there were changes due to fire regulations and 
asked if the specifications did not indicate that all should 
be in conformity with the Fire Code. Mr. Lee said the respon- 
sibility for the changes will be assessed at the completion of 
the project. However, the Fire Code has been in existence for 
ten years, stating that if carbon filters were installed, the 
area must be sprinkled. Commissioner Kadish said if the specs 
stated everything must be in compliance, these matters would 
be taken care of. 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following items were approved: 

(12) Settling and Compromising Claims VThich Resulted in Payment 
Under $2,500.00 

No. 7 8-0057 Resolution approving the action 

of the Director of Airports in 
settling and compromising claims 
which resulted in payment under 
$2,500.00 

(13) Settlement of Claim, Florence Shaw $4 , 000 . 00 

No. 78-0058 Resolution requesting the Con- 

troller to allot funds and to 
draw a warrant against such 
funds as are, or will be, legal- 
ly available in payment of 
claim against the San Francisco 
International Airport. 

(14) Settlement of Claim, Leslie Morse $11,000.00 

No. 78-0059 Resolution requesting the Con- 

troller to allot funds and to 
draw a warrant against such 
funds as are, or will be, legally 
available in payment of claim 
against the San Francisco Inter- 
national Airport. 

Mr. Heath said he had reviewed all three claims presented and 
found the settlements were reasonable. 



(15) Pesolution Approving Two Subleases Between Airborne Freight 
Corp. and the U.S. Post Office 

On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following item was approved: 

No. 78-0060 Resolution approving two sub- 

leases between Airborne Freight 
Corp. and the U.S. Post Office. 



78 - 26 



Mr. Heath said that Airborne has the right to sublease, with 
Commission approval, and that Airborne Freight Corp. had en- 
tered into two subleases with U.S. Postal Service. Mr. Heath 
said the rental rates had been reviewed and were in line with 
fair market values, and approval was recommended. 

Commissioner Kadish noted there were two companies involved, 
and asked if there was a policy in relation to leases and sub- 
leases relative to uses of Airport property. Mr. Heath re- 
plied that the general policy was that all subleases had to be 
approved by the Commission and asked Mr. J. Peter Singer, Dep- 
uty Director for Business & Finance, and Mr. Emmett Smith, 
Assistant Deputy Director, if the Airport had a policy that 
subleases should be related to Airport activity, or if such a 
policy should be developed. Mr. Singer replied that the Air- 
port's arrangements with Airborne and other tenants permitted 
:'the option to sublease for purposes approved by the Airport. 
Ke explained that Hoffman Associates was a photography firm 
that the staff has called on to take pictures in and around 
the Airport. Foster is a building developer, but in a sup- 
plemental agreement in the Airborne lease, approved by the 
Commission, it was stated they could sublease to any commer- 
cial tenant, as long as not inconsistent with the purposes of 
the Airport. 

Commissioner Kadish said this situation should be investigated, 
and there should be a policy stating definite purposes of sub- 
leases. Mr. Heath agreed that this should be in lease agree- 
ments and that a specific policy would be developed. 



(16) Professional Services Agreement - Orrick, Kerrington, Rov/ley 
and Sutcliffe 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0061 Resolution approving Modifica- 

tion No. 2, Professional Ser- 
vices Agreement - Orrick, Her- 
rington, Rowley and Sutcliffe 

Mr. Heath said this resolution continues the services of the 
Orrick, Herrington, Rowley & Sutcliffe firm as the bond counsel, 
in order to compensate them for the services they will perform 
in connection with the $90 million bond issue. In addition to 
the normal bond counsel services, the firm will incur various 
printing costs. The estimated total charges as bond counsel 
for the Series B bonds will be $20,000 maximum and $50,000 for 
the Series A, due to more work involved. The total printing 
costs for Series A and B combined will be $70,000, with $30,000 
plus spent on Series A, leaving $39,713 available for the Series 
B bonds, the $90 million sale in April. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if Mr. Richard Walker would be the 
principal responsible, and Mr. Heath replied he would be, and 
that Mr. Walker had attended all meetings held to date. 



78 - 27 



(17) Tenant Improvement: American Airlines, Superbay Hangar, 
Fourth Floor Storage Area 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following item was approved: 

No. 78-0062 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by American Airlines, 
showing the proposed construc- 
tion of storage facilities at 
the fourth level of the core 
structure in the Superbay Hang- 
ar at Plot 40. The project con- 
sists of finishing a portion of 
presently unfinished space at the 
fourth floor level, installing a 
freight elevator in the core 
structure, and removing temporary 
storage facilities at the ground 
level. 

Mr. Heath explained that American Airlines has planned extensive 
improvements to their Superbay Hangar, to complete a fourth floor 
storage area. All costs will be borne by American. The plans 
had been reviewed by staff, and approval was recommended. 



Director's Reports 

A. Modernization and Replacement Construction Program 

Mr. Heath presented a memorandum to the Commission on this sub- 
ject, copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by ref- 
erence. 

Mr. Heath said he had failed to mention in the memo that, in the 
best interests of speed and efficiency for these new projects, 
there would not be a separate design consultant but each archi- 
tect would be asked to design both interior and exterior of the 
projects. Mr. Heath said he would work with staff to ensure 
there is conformity and compatability in the projects. 

Commissioner Kadish remarked that she hoped that the same con- 
formity and compatability approach will be used in the art work, 
so it will be integrated into the building, rather than super- 
imposed on it. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if it was planned to give the 
architects guidelines, so the projects will either be complete- 
ly different or similar, such as for the furniture. Mr. Heath 
replied he thought there should be a degree of compatability, 
but also a degree of difference. However, the choice of furni- 
ture in some cases, in terms of cost and the range of manufac- 
tured items, will limit the architects, but within those para- 
meters, he would hope to achieve aesthetic compatability, but 
not identical results. 

B. Visitor Service Representative Program 

Mr. Heath presented a memorandum to the Commission on this sub- 
ject, copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by ref- 
erence . 

-more- 



78 - 21 



Commissioner Kadish stated this effort was commendable , but 
she was disturbed that the public was unaware of this service 
and asked if someone could come up with the magic words as to 
how the public can be informed that these services are avail- 
able. 

Mr. Heath said staff is planning a distinctive uniform. When 
this is determined, pictures will be taken, blown up to life- 
size and hung with a sign such as "If you have a problem, find 
one of these Visitor Service Representatives"; word-of -mouth 
will spread news of the service, and other means are being con- 
sidered of getting this service known. 

Airporter Coach Service 

Mr. Heath asked Mr. Gordon Esposto, General Manager of the Air- 
porter Eus Company, to respond to a previous Commission request 
for a report on the new bus system. Mr. Esposto said that on 
February 1, by permission of the State Public Utilities Com- 
mission and at the request of the hotels operating on Nob Kill, 
his company started an hourly service from those hotels to the 
Airport. The ridership has been favorable, and the hotel oper- 
ators pleased. He further stated this was the beginning of 
efforts by Airporter to improve the ground transportation ser- 
vice at the Airport. Four 53-passenger buses are on order and 
will be in service prior to the summer rush, and no times are 
anticipated when Airporter will be unable to provide the ser- 
vice the public demands. 

Commissioner Kadish asked why the hotels outside this area were 
not served, and Mr. Esposto replied his company was negotiating 
with them, and also with the Fisherman's Wharf area. 

Mr. Esposto further stated that the Hilton Hotels have purchased 
the site of the Downtown Terminal and plan to have the Terminal 
remain, building around it. If the terminal does not stay there, 
however, Airporter is in a position to move to a nearby location. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked who maintained the security in the 
Downtown Terminal, as he had received recent reports of assault. 
Mr. Esposto told him that Hilton hired a security force. 

Commissioner Kadish said this was commendable, but the Airporter 
should pursue what can be done in the downtown area, as mass 
transit should be stressed. Mr. Esposto replied there were 
12,000 hotel rooms within walking distance and all the hotels 
have porter service, with bellmen to bring the bags. Commission- 
er Kadish replied that many people do not know this, and she has 
been told that many people feel if they have to take a cab to 
the Terminal, they might as well go on to the Airport. 

Mr. Michael Spain, taxi driver, asked to speak and asked Mr. 
Esposto if Airporter still had its interurban bus license, and 
Mr. Esposto replied it did, issued by the City and County of 
San Francisco, through the Police Commission. 

Mr. Spain asked if, under that license, Airporter could pick up 
on Nob Hill; if there is no State license, could they still pick 
up? Mr. Esposto replied that without the State Public Utilities 
Commission license, they would be unable to use the highway 
system. 

Mr. Spain said Airporter needs the permission of the Airports 
Commission to deposit passengers if operating under the City 
license, but asked if under the State license, Airport Commis- 
sion's approval was needed. Mr. Esposto responded that the 
Commission's approval was needed also. 



78 - 29 



Mr. Spain further remarked that there are about four differ- 
ent State and local bodies that license for transportation. 
Service to the Airport is very lucrative, many people want 
this business. He continued that Airporter was unable to 
expand its service due to the restrictions of its City li- 
cense, mentioning that there are other areas such as the 
Marina and Twin Peaks which are restricted. Mr. Spain stated 
the City had enacted the laws restricting the size of buses 
under the Police Code. 

Mr. Spain said two hotels on Nob Hill, Stanford Court and 
Mark Hopkins, are included in the Union Square area. He 
stated further that Larie's Travel Service also operates 
under a State license, which is broader than a City license, 
and is causing problems for the City 

Commissioner^ Coblentz said while he was pleased with the Air- 
porter and its extra service, there were problems requiring 
discussion regarding various modes of transportation. 

Commissioner Coblentz continued that he was very appreciative 
of the Airporter operation, pleased with what they were doing 
and with extra service . He said that there were other exclu- 
sive contracts to bring people from the Airport to San Fran- 
cisco, which was a matter of record, for Airporter chauffeur- 
driven limousines and SamTrans, as well as taxicabs . Commis- 
sioner Coblentz emphasized that he was most appreciative of 
the Airporter service. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked Mr. Esposto where the stops were, 
if traffic congestion was caused, and how they were alerting 
guests to the service. Mr. Esposto responded there was direct 
service hourly from the hotels and the management was advising 
the guests. The buses leave the Airport every hour for the 
hotels, while buses to the Terminal run as often as every five 
minutes, if necessary. Buses to the hotels are held in the 
Airport North Court until departure time, and they stopped for 
only some five minutes to load in front of the terminals, thus 
caused no congestion. The service to the Downtown Terminal 
was separate from that to the hotels. 

Other Business Before the Commission 

Mr. Heath discussed the subject of ground transportation and mass 
transit. After having written a letter of congratulation on the 
expanded services to Mr. John Mauro, General Manager of SamTrans , 
they met for lunch. Mr. Mauro informed him that the schedules are 
set according to need and ridership is increasing. The Airport will 
be working more closely with SamTrans, encouraging employees of the 
Airport and of the airlines to use this service. Mr. Heath said he 
hoped to keep to the schedule of getting people to use mass transit 
and will utilize every possible means to achieve this, such as bet- 
ter signs for direction. 

Mr. Heath reported on the Public Utilities Commission situation in 
regard to utility rates, saying he had appeared before that Commis- 
sion at their last meeting. He had also sent a letter suggesting 
that the Airport should be treated like other City agencies in the 
billing process and be allowed the same discount. If net, the Air- 
port contribution to the General Fund should be called to the at- 
tention of the public. The PUC agreed to the second request, but 



- 30 



did not change the rates in its formal proceedings. Mr. Heath said 
a new utilities rate case decided earlier this month by a Federal 
judge in Sacramento held contrary to the Opinion of Judge Poole that 
Hetch Hetchy rates had to be approved by the Secretary of the Inter- 
ior. The Sacramento case will be appealed also, and the two cases 
will probably be consolidated before the Ninth Circuit Court. It 
may be several years before a decision is reached. It had been pre- 
viously suggested by a Commissioner that it would be appropriate 
for Mr. Heath . to prepare a letter to the Mayor and to the Board of 
Supervisors, advising them of what would happen if the previous 
decision was overturned and suggesting that a trust fund be set up 
to hold the money paid. 

Commissioner Coblentz strongly recommended writing such a letter, 
stating the Airport would be blamed if the decision was reversed. 
Commissioner Kadish concurred, saying as citizens of the City, it 
was necessary to protect the City. 

Commissioner Coblentz said, long before the present Commission came 
into being, he and Commissioner McDonnell had expected to have graph- 
ics and signs up, and asked where they were. 

Mr. Heath replied there were a number of contracts out, and asked 
Mr. Lee for specifics. Mr. Lee said there were two contracts under 
construction: one for interior graphics for the North Terminal 
which were being fabricated in Los Angeles and would be in place 
when that terminal opens, and the exterior signs called for in the 
second contract were being made locally by Rosendin. All will be 
ready by September 1st. 

Mr. Heath commended and thanked Mr. Warren Hanson for his services 
as Acting Secretary of the Commission for the past nine months. 

rhere being no further business before the Commission, the meeting ad- 
journed at 3:24 PM. 



Olsom**^ 




Warren D. Hanson 
Acting Secretary 
Airports Commission 



78 - 31 



lews from 

AN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 
415 / 761 0800 




CONTACT: U.D. HANSON 
(415) 876-2217 
78-06 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94128 
P. O. BOX 8097 



bruary 21, 1978 

R IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Eric Craven, 36, San Francisco organization and management consultant, 
s been appointed Secretary to the Airports Commission effective Febru- 
y 22, 1978, Airports Director Richard R. Heath has announced. 

Craven is the unanimous selection of the members of the Airports 
mmission. 

Craven spent his formative years in New York City. He earned a 
in History at Cornell University where he was a member of the Student 
vernment Executive Board and chaired the New York State Region of the 
tional Student Association. He earned another BA at the University 

California at Berkeley where he was elected to the Phi Beta Kappa 
ciety. He is currently working on his MA in Public Administration 
Golden Gate University and expects to graduate next January. 

Director Heath pointed out that Craven brings to the Airports Com- 
ssion strong managerial and organizational skills, which he developed 
numerous business development and community oriented projects locally 
i for the U.S. Department of Labor. 

Craven was last the Northern California representative for Jerry 
ich and Associates, a Los Angeles based public relations consulting 
nn, organizing and supervising their informational campaign on Cal- 
3rnia Savings and Loan institutions. 

Craven is married to the former Katherine Carroll, native 
i Franciscan. They reside at 1747 Sutter Street in San Francisco. 

# # # 



MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

PRESIDENT 

RUTH S. KADISH 

VICE-PRESIDENT 

WILLIAM E. MCDONNELL 
WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94IZ8 

(415) 761-0800 




RICHARD R. HEATH 

DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 



MEMORANDUM 



February 16, 1978 



TO: 



MEMBERS, AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
Hon. Morris Bernstein, President 
Hon. Ruth S. Kadish, Vice President 
Hon. William E. McDonnell 
Hon. WiLliam K. Coblentz 



FROM: Director of Airports 

SUBJECT: Report on The Modernization and Replacement 

Phase of the Construction Program 



After consultation with Howard Friedman and Bob Lee and his 
staff, I have made the following determinations as to the conduct of the 
remaining portion of the construction program, the Modernization and 
Replacement Phase. 

1. Staff responsibility will include master planning of all 
Airport property, programming of needs, both functional and architectural, 
review and approval of all work done by project architects, and primary 
liaison with Airport tenants and government agencies having jurisdiction 
and input affecting program and scope of work. 

2. Project architects to be selected for the remaining construc- 
tion jobs will be directly responsible to the staff for all aspects of assigned 
services. 



3. In order to carry out the Commission's desire to bring some 
fresh architectural perspectives into the remainder of the Program, the 
remaining projects will be divided into four major projects, with a number 
of minor projects to be determined at a later date. 



To: Members, Airports Commission -2- February 16, 197! 



Package No. 1 

The new pier between the North and Central Terminals, 
now designated Pier E; the new pier emanating from the 
center of the Central Terminal, the Y-shaped pier now desig- 
nated Pier D; and the new pier between the Central Terminal 
and the South Terminal now designated Pier C, plus the four 
remaining connecting bridges to the Garage, constitute the 
first package and should be assigned to the San Francisco Air- 
port Architects, subject to agreement on appropriate archi- 
tectural fees. 

Package No. 2 

Modification of the Central Terminal and of the connector 
from Pier E to the Central Terminal, and Pier C to the Cen- 
tral Terminal, constitute package No. 2 and should be assigned 
to an architect to be selected. 

Package No. 3 

Modification of the International Terminal and Customs 
Terminal, including a new connector, constitute package three, 
and should be assigned to a second new architect. 

Package No. 4 

Modification of the center portion of the South Terminal, 
the adjacent connector to Pier C, and to the International Ter- 
minal should constitute a fourth package, with a decision as to 
the appropriate architect to be made at a later date. 

These project packages were determined on the basis of expediency, 
efficiency and economy. It was my strong feeling that because of the new 
staff responsibilities, we will be going through a transition period and the 
time pressures require optimum ability to manage new architectural functions 
simultaneously. I, therefore, feel that the number of architects must be 
limited in order to insure a more efficient and effective use of staff, parti- 
cularly during this transition period. 

4. In order to allow the staff to concentrate their attention on 
the major construction projects at the Airport, it was agreed that some of 



-2- 



TO: Members, Ai ;rts Commission -3- February 16, 1978 



the in-house designing, planning and construction projects which would 
otherwise be performed by our own staff, would be farmed out to inde- 
pendent architects and engineers. 

In a separate memorandum, Bob Lee will outline some projects 
that would fall into this category. 

5. As you know, we have selected from the Bay Area architec- 
tural community those architects who are interested in performing work 
for the Airport. From this list, we have selected six architects as 
appropriate architects to be considered for packages 2 and 3 previously 
outlined. The procedure will be that Bob Lee and his staff will provide 
these six architects with an orientation session, describing the project 
packages and the requirements of Airport work, including all affirmative 
action and human relations requirements. Following this, we will ask each 
of the six architects to make a presentation to us focused on their capability 
of handling the projects involved. We would hope that some members of 
the Commission will be able to attend those presentations. Following the 
presentations, selection of architects for packages No. 2 and package No. 3 
will be made, and the contracts completed, assuming agreement on approp- 
riate fees. 

The six architectural firms selected for final interview are: 

Anshen & Allen 

Gensler & Associates 

Wong - Brocchini 

Esherick, Homsey, Dodge &: Davis 

Marquis Associates 

Robert B. Wong 

6. We need to select a special energy consultant architect from 
among those firms having strong expertise in this area. This selection 
will occur as quickly as possible following essentially the same procedures 
outlined above. We are in the process of identifying three or four firms 
having substantial expertise in this area, following which presentations by 
selected firms will take place. The energy consultant architect will develop 
energy guidelines for design criteria, construction materials and details 

and will review preliminary plans of all project architects for energy 
effectiveness. 

7. We are also considering selection of an architectural con- 
sultant to assist us in making decisions as to the people mover system, 
a highly specialized field. 



■3- 



TO: Members, AL .orts Commission 



February 16, 197! 



This new procedure is designed to streamline management of 
the remaining construction program, to proceed with it as rapidly as 
possible in order to hold down construction costs while still giving us 
the benefit of new architectural perspectives 



I 




RICHARD R. HEATH 



February 21, 1978 



MEMORANDUM 



TO: AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

Hon. Morris Bernstein/ President 
Hon. Ruth S. Kadish, Vice President 
Hon. William E. McDonnell 
Hon. William K. Coblentz 

FROM: DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 
Richard R. Heath 

SUBJECT: Report on Visitor Service Representative Program 

San Francisco International Airport has implemented a Passenger 
and Public Assistance Program through the Federal funding of 
the Comprehensive Employment Training Act (C.E.T.A.). The Air- 
port has employed eight bilingual persons to assist visitors 
and passengers at San Francisco International. These Visitor 
Service Representatives (VSRs) patrol terminals and facilities, 
looking at the Airport through the eyes of the passenger or 
visitor. They assist the public in solving problems and invest- 
igating complaints of service or appearances. In the course 
of performing their duties numerous recommendations are made 
for improving existing situations. In monitoring all Airport 
services the VSRs look to see that the level and quality pro- 
vided is up to Airport standards. 

The VSRs are all bilingual, and the following languages are 
spoken: Cantonese, Filipino (Tagalog) , French, German, Ital- 
ian, Japanese, Mandarin, Portuguese, Spanish and Taiwanese. 
One VSR is fluent in four languages. This range of language 
capabilities is augmented by the bilingual capacities of many 
of our Airport Policemen and other employees. VSRs call on 
them as needed. 

The Visitors Service Representatives are on duty from 7:00 
a.m. to 11:00 p.m., seven days a week, and their assistance 
may be requested by contacting them directly or by calling 
the Airport Operations Supervisor on any white courtesy tele- 
phone (telephone number 6-2131) . 



Airports Commission -2- February 21, 1978 



Another important and, valued passenger aid has been provid- 
ing two information booths in the lower level of the Garage. 
These booths are manned by Airport Parking Management employ- 
ees. The reaction of the public to this service has been 
extremely enthusiastic. Typical comments are: "It is nice 
to know somebody's using their head". "Boy am I glad you're 
here", to name just a few. Installation of a third booth 
has been approved. 

These steps are the first phase of the program to humanize 
the Airport. Providing information and assistance through 
people rather than attempting to do it all through signs, 
computers and white telephones will help to make the Airport 
a less confusing and a more hospitable transportation fac- 
ility. 

We are now working with the Community College located at the 
Airport in designing a comprehensive airline industry train- 
ing program, one aspect of which would be a stint of on-the- 
job training as an Airport Visitor Service Representative. 
What better way could there be to learn how an airport 
functions than spending six months assisting passengers with 
problems? 



/ 




SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



MARCH 7, 1978 






GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 
william k. coblentz 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES OF THE AIRPORTS COMMISSION, 
March 7 , 1978 



1. Call to Order: 2:30 PM 

2. Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell, William K. Coblentz. 

Absent : None 

3. Pledge of Allegiance 

4. Approval of Minutes: 

The Minutes of the February 7, 1978, Airports Commission meeting 
were approved . 

5. Calendar Items: 

(1) Removed from the Calendar: 



(2) Supplemental Appropriation, 1977 Airport Revenue Bond Fund, 
$98,427.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0063 Resolution approving Supplemental 

Appropriation providing for con- 
struction, architectural engineer- 
ing, professional services, plans 
and specifications, inspection, 
supervision, and field engineer- 
ing interest during construction 
and Revenue Bond Reserve funds in 
connection with the sale of 
Series B Airport Revenue Bonds. 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, requested Commission ap- 
proval of this appropriation so that the money would be available 
for necessary expenditures. 



(3) Supplemental 1978-79 Budget, $176,459.00. 

It was requested that this item be handled last so as to permit 
City Attorney George Agnost to be present. For discussion prior 
to Commission action, see 7. Following discussion, on motion of 
Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner Coblentz, the follow- 
ing resolution was adopted with the additional proviso that no 
monies be expended until the Commission passed on those expendi- 
tures. 



-more- 
78 - 32 



No. 78-0064 Resolution approving submission 

of a supplemental budget for the 
fiscal year 1978-79 to provide 
funds for renovation of office 
space, procurement of furniture 
and equipment for the City 
Attorney's staff assigned to 
the Airport, and for Airport 
share of insurance Risk Manage- 
ment functions to be centralized 
in the Office of the Chief, 
Administrative Offices. 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolutions were adopted: 

(4) Modification No. 24, Airport Contract No. 950 

No. 78-0065 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Modification No. 24 to 
Airport Contract No. 950, Board- 
ing Areas H & I and Connector, 
in the total amount of $27,693. 

(5) Modification No. 21, Airport Contract No. 1000 

No. 78-0066 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certifica- 
tion of Debit Modification No. 21 
to Airport Contract No. 1000, in 
the total amount of $280,045.00. 

(6) Modification No. 23, Airport Contract No. 1000 

No. 78-0067 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order No. 59, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 23 to Airport 
Contract No. 1000, in the total 
amount of $12,227.00. 

(7) Modification No. 24, Airport Contract No. 1000 

No. 78-0068 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order Nos . 58, 60, 67 and 68, 
and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Modification 
No. 24 to Airport Contract 1000, 
in the total amount of $24,962.00. 






78 - 33 



Modification No. 25, Airport Contract No. 1000 

No. 78-0069 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order Nos. 61, 62, 63, 65 and 66, 
and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Modification 
No. 25 of Airport Contract 1000 
in the total amount of $14,091.00. 

Mr. Heath said these are various modifications to the North 
Terminal and Garage contracts which are all fairly well explained. 
He said there is a history behind the largest one, Item No. 5, 
concerning the original plans to carpet these areas. It was dis- 
covered that carpeting was not such a good idea; so after the bid 
was let, a change was made and tile was used instead, which cost a 
good deal more. Commissioner McDonnell asked if this was specifi- 
cally in the baggage claims area and was told that it was not, 
that it was around the elevator passages leading from the Garage. 
When Commissioner McDonnell asked if this is a different tile, Mr. 
Heath said it is, it is larger and of a different color; this is 
an earth tone, while the other was grey. It is presently installed 
in Core D in the Garage. 

Commissioner Kadish asked two questions relating to the use of the 
rubber base: (1) Would the grout in the quarry tile floor shrink 
as it dried creating a concave area?; and (2) Would there be a 
resultant gap between the floor and the rubber base in which dirt 
could accumulate and be difficult to dislodge? 

Len Blackford answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Kadish 
suggested that quarry tile cove base be substituted, not only from 
the point of view of aesthetics, but primarily because using it 
would eliminate what she saw as a maintenance and replacement 
problem developing. She said that coved quarry tile probably would 
be more expensive initially but in the long run it would be cheaper, 
more attractive, longer lasting and easier to maintain. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked for further clarification of the types 
of materials being used. He wondered if we would get a better job 
using quarry tile. 

Mr. Ron Wilson, Assistant Deputy Director for Maintenance, said 
use of a rubber base should be eliminated wherever possible. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked what was the difference in dollar 
amount. Mr. Grindheim of CMC, stated that it was very little when 
you consider the area being covered. He added that if the modifi- 
cation is passed he would come back with the cost figures. Com- 
missioner McDonnell asked Mr. Grindheim to bring back a large draw- 
ing so Commissioners can fully understand and relate to the areas 
involved. Mr. Grindheim said that he would. 

Mr. Heath suggested that they look into a number of alternatives 
and come up with suggestions. 

Mr. Grindheim said that the manufacturers are making the steel 
stairs to fit the tiles and that if we change the tiles, we create 
another problem. 

Regarding Item 4 (Resolution No. 78-0065) Commissioner McDonnell 
asked why the smoke detectors included in Contract 650C were not 
included in the original Contract 950. Mr. Lee explained that 
they were omitted and that they should have been included in 950. 



78 - 34 



(9) Airport Contract No. 1015, Substitution of Subcontractor, 
Garage: Stage V - Final Modifications. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0070 Resolution approving the substi- 

tution of Klinger Steel Company 
as the reinforcing steel sub- 
contractor for the subject con- 
tract in lieu of Pacific States 
Steel Corporation, the original 
subcontractor specified in the 
bid proposal. 

Mr. Heath said the present corporation's subcontractor has been 
merged with another company and permission is being requested for 
a substitution of a new subcontractor. This will result in no 
change in cost to the City. 



(10) Modification of Additional Services, San Francisco Airport 
Architects $107,550.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0071 Resolution ratifying the action 

of the Director of Airports, 
acting in accordance with Airport 
Resolution 70-0044, to make 
various assignments to the San 
Francisco Airport Architects under 
the "Additional Services" section 
of their basic agreement with the 
City. 

Mr. Heath said this is a periodic authorization for additional 
services not covered in regular contracts or for services assigned 
by Mr. Lee and his staff. Commissioner McDonnell asked about 
Item 1, Exhibit A; if United would pay for that item or would we. 
He was told that United would. 

Commissioner Kadish noted that assignments have been made in 
groups of $5,000 and she wondered if these could be made in smaller 
lumps. Mr. Heath replied that it could and that the procedure 
would be changed. 

Commissioner McDonnell suggested that in addition to having smaller 
sums, they might be fewer in number, which would give the Commission 
a better idea of what is going on. 



(11) Tenant Improvement: United Airlines Maintenance Operations 
Center - Improvements to Compressed Air System. 

(12) Tenant Improvement: United Airlines Maintenance Center - 
Modifications to Storm Water Drainage System. 



-more- 



78 - 35 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolutions were adopted: 

No. 78-0072 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by United Airlines, showing 
improvements to the compressed 
air system at Building 47 at the 
Maintenance Operations Center. 

No. 78-0073 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by United Airlines, showing 
modifications to the storm water 
drainage system at the Maintenance 
Operations Center. 

Mr. Heath said these are tenant improvements by United Airlines 
at no expense to the airport. 



(13) Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization for 

Bid Call, Airport Contract No. 650D, North Terminal Interior 
Design Elements. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted: 

No. 78-0074 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications and 
authorizing the Director of 
Airports to call for bids for 
Contract 65 0D, North Terminal 
Interior Design Elements. 

Mr. Heath said that the airport is asking for authorization to 
go out to bid on the interior design of the North Terminal. The 
specs have been drawn up and approved by staff. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked what aesthetic values are included 
in these specifications. Mr. Heath asked Mr. Laity to reply, 
who said the basic design drawings have been completed and re- 
minded the Commission that they had seen the drawings. 

Commissioner McDonnell requested the drawings be brought back to 
refresh their memories. He said this particular bid is for in- 
stallation of phone equipment. He asked if the telephone company 
would be responsible for building the booths. Mr. Lee answered 
that they would, but that these are not the standard telephone 
booths. Commissioner McDonnell then wondered what portion of the 
costs the telephone company would pay. 



Director's Reports 

A. Selection of Architects 

Commissioner Coblentz commended the airport staff and the Com- 
mission in the way that it had selected the architects to do the 
work in the North Terminal. Mr. Heath said he believes we will 
get some very interesting work. 



78 - 36 



B. Hetch-Hetchy Power Rates 

Mr. Heath told the Commission that pursuant to the direction 
of the Commission at the last meeting, he had written the 
Board of Supervisors requesting that they establish a trust 
fund with the revenues it will gain from its recent rate 
increases. 

C. Mexicana Airways 

Mr. Heath said Mexicana Airways has been given nonstop route 
rights to San Francisco. Mexicana plans to commence service be- 
tween San Francisco and Acapulco on June 1. Western Airlines 
will also be entering service on this route but is giving pref- 
erence to Mexicana Airways and will defer starting service for 
18 months. 

D. State Senate Bill 746 

Mr. Heath said that there are problems with some limousine drivers 
who are unregulated, uncouth and discourteous. Since they are 
licensed by the California PUC, it takes a long time before a 
license can be revoked. Senate Bill 746 would give the Airport 
power to screen and license these limousines so that some of these 
problems could be cleaned up. There is a hearing in Sacramento 
before the Finance, Insurance and Commerce Committee and Mr. Heath 
will be going to testify. Additionally, the City Police Department 
will be testifying. 

E. Retirements 

Three custodians are retiring and Mr. Heath requested Commission 
approval to present them each with resolutions. This was unani- 
mously approved by the Commission. 

Continuation of Discussion of Calendar Item (3) , Supplemental 
1978-79 Budget, $176,459.00. 

Mr. Heath said we need to approve this today for inclusion in the budget. 
Commissioner Kadish suggested that they pass the resolution with the 
hope that they could discuss the specific items at a later time. 

Mr. Singer, Deputy Director, Business/Finance, said this request is for 
an addition to the budget and is being requested so that we can have 
the money available in June. We need to make space available to the 
attorneys as rapidly as possible. Commissioner Kadish said that regard- 
ing items other than the number of desks, she thought discussion was 
appropriate at this time. Specifically, she wanted to discuss the word 
processing system which would cost $35,000. She wanted some information 
as to whether another type of "typewriter" is available. Hospitals and 
other businesses use some type of pooling in order to cut down on ma- 
terials and equipment. There should be an assessment as to whether there 
is a need for such expensive equipment. 

Commissioner Coblentz questioned the need for such a machine in a five- 
attorney office. 

Mr. Singer said that assuming there is a reasonable need, it has been 
indicated that there are a number of additional uses to which the 
machine might be put. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if the machine is being justified on the 
basis of possible uses to which it might be adapted. 



78 - 37 



Commissioner Coblentz asked for an explanation of Publications and 
Services. 

Mr. Kroopnick, Acting Airports General Counsel, stated that some of 
the monies are necessary to establish a library and purchase various 
other printed items necessary to conduct an entire legal operation at 
the airport. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked for a list of their needs. 

Mr. Singer suggested we go ahead and include the item in the budget. 
He further suggested that the Commission proceed with the $103,000 
budget request, and at the time purchase requests for specific items 
were submitted, the Commission could make a decision. 

Regarding the risk management portion of the item, Mr. Heath said that 
the City had lost its insurance coverage. The CAO has called in an 
outside consultant to find out how large industries operate. It has 
been suggested that a risk management office may be the solution. They 
are asking for a budget contribution from each department and we have 
been assessed $12,950. 

Commissioner McDonnell requested the whole risk management budget. 
Mr. Heath said that he has received a letter from the Port Commission 
indicating that they can get a better price negotiating alone. He said 
that he has asked his staff to compare notes with the Port. We could 
do it on our own or join the City's risk pool. He suggested that the 
Commission pass the appropriation with the promise that no money should 
be expended until a final determination is made. 

Commissioner Coblentz said we do not know how the CAO arrived at the 
figure of $12,950.00 for the Airport's share. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that the Commission should have a breakdown 
from the CAO's office. He then asked how we are now insured. 

Mr. Emmett Smith, Assistant Deputy Director, Business and Finance, 
stated that we secure our insurance through the Purchaser's office at 
various premiums. The total premiums cost about $136,000 a year. On 
liability insurance, we have a $100,000 deductible policy. 



There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:25 PM. 

Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 






78 - 38 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



^ MARCH 21, 1978 









GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 
william k. coblentz 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES OF THE AIRPORTS COMMISSION MEETING 
Tuesday, March 21, 1978 

Call to Order: 2:30 p.m. 

Roll Call Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William K. 
Coblentz 

Absent: Commissioner William E. McDonnell 

Pledge of Allegiance 

Minutes: None 

Calendar Items 

(1) Removed from Calendar 

(2) Bid Call for Airport Contract No. 980, Furnish and Install 
Carpeting, North Terminal complex. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0078 Resolution approving the plans 

and specifications and authorizing 
the Director of Airports to call 
for bids for Contract No. 980, 
furnish and install carpeting, 
North Terminal complex 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, said that this 
resolution approves the plans and specifications and authorizes 
a bid call for Airport Contract No. 980. He said that carpet 
samples were submitted from seven carpet manufacturers, 
which went through extensive testing; four carpets met all 
standards and are available for consideration. Mr. Heath 
said that last week we thought there would be only three 
carpets for consideration because one of the manufacturers 
would not post a performance bond as our asking for bond was 
a "first" in the industry. He said that when this manufacturer 
discovered that the other manufacturers had posted bond, this 
last manufacturer agreed that he would, too, and congratu- 
lated us on thinking of the bond. Mr. Heath explained that 
the manufacturers assume it will become standard in the industry, 

Mr. Heath added that he had had long discussions as to whether 
this carpet should be purchased or leased. Mr. Singer, 
Deputy Director, Business/Finance, gave an analysis and 
recommendation on purchase versus lease. It is the staff's 
recommendation, he said, that we purchase the carpet, 
although if the interest we will have to pay on the bond is 
higher than expected, leasing might be more attractive. 

(3) Bid Call, Airport Contract No. 1150, Fuel Oil Supply Line 
to South Terminal Boiler Plant. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0079 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications and 
authorizing bid call for 
Contract No. 1150, fuel oil 
supply line to South Terminal 
boiler plant 

Mr. Heath mentioned that we will have to continue to operate 
the South Terminal Building boiler plant for a number of 
years on fuel oil. He said that we are asking to go out to 

78-39 



bid to build a supply line at an estimated cost of 
$70,000.00. 



(4) Resolution Authorizing Professional Services Agreement, 
Gayner Engineers, Inc. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0080 Resolution authorizing professional 

services agreement with Gayner 
Engineers, Inc., for a cost not 
to exceed $50,000 

This resolution, Mr. Heath explained, provides for the 
services of Gayner Engineers to create a special operations 
manual for all equipment used in the Central power plant. 
He said that this manual would be in plain English and would 
enable almost anyone to operate the very complex power 
plant in an emergency. The estimated total cost is $50,000. 



(5) Award of Airport Contract No. 1125, Sludge Beds at water 
Quality Control Plant; $246,886.65. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0081 Resolution awarding Contract 

No. 1125, sludge beds at water 

quality control plant to 

E. Mitchell, Inc., 993 Tennessee 

Street, San Francisco, California 

94107, in the total amount of 

$246,886.65 

Mr. Heath said that ten bids had been received on this 
contract and E. Mitchell, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. 



(6) Award of Airport Contract No. 1151, International Holding 
Area, Rotunda A; $114,988.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0082 Resolution awarding Airport 

Contract No. 1151, international 
holding area, Rotunda A, to 
All American Construction Company, 
1229 Sobre Vista Road, Sonoma, 
California 95476, in the total 
amount of $144,988.00 on the 
base bid only and rejecting all 
other bids and alternate "A." 

Mr. Heath commented that the alternate on this contract was 
to provide additional heating to the holding area. But it 
was determined that heating was not necessary so that option 
would not be considered. 

Commissioner Kadish was pleased to have heating removed from 
the contract. She noted that the contractor is in Sonoma 
and wondered if the distance would affect their operating 
efficiency. 

78 - 40 



Mr. Robert Lee, Planning/Engineering, assured her that the 
company would hire crafts from San Mateo and San Francisco 
and, at any rate, the company has a performance bond. 



(7) Airport Contract No. 936, Industrial Waste Treatment 

Plant, Preliminary Plans and Specification; $3,000,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0083 Resolution approving the 

preliminary plans and specifica- 
tions for Contract No. 936 for 
the Airport industrial waste 
treatment plant, which is to be 
constructed on the site immediately 
north of the sewage treatment plant 

Mr. Heath said this resolution approves the preliminary plans 
and specifications. Mr. Lee had some drawings of the plant 
which he presented to the Commission. He said the Commission 
approved the waste treatment process a year ago, but that 
there was some question as to which chemical would be used. 
That has been decided upon and the final plans will be 
submitted by the end of the month. It is hoped that the 
contract can be let by the first of May. 

Mr. Jan Blais of United Airlines commented on behalf of his 
company. He said that United wanted a different waste 
treatment process to be selected, and he informed the 
Commission that the controversy between his airline engineers 
and the Airport architects continues. He mentioned that 
a meeting has been set up for representatives of his office 
to meet with Mr. Lee so that they can explore further 
whether there is a way to insure that the waste treatment 
plant will work. 



(8) Airport Contract No. 1015, Substitution of Subcontractor, 
Garage: Stage V, Final Modifications. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0084 Resolution approving the 

Substitution of Cal Tile 
Company as the tile sub- 
contractor for the subject 
contract in lieu of Durable 
Tile Company, the original sub- 
contractor specified in the bid 
proposal 

Since the original subcontractor could not reach an agree- 
ment with the contractor, Mr. Heath explained that the 
original subcontractor has requested release from his 
contract. Another subcontractor has been selected, and 
we are requesting Commission approval of them. 



78-41 



(9) Completion of Airport Contract No. 112 3, Improvements to 
Apron Lighting, Pier F; $6,444.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0085 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 1123, 
improvements to Apron Lighting, 
Pier F, as satisfactorily 
completed; and approving final 
payment in the amount of 
$6,444.00 in favor of the 
contractor, Delta Star Electric 
Company, Inc., 2662 Fair Oaks 
Avenue, Redwood City, 
California 94063 

Mr. Heath said this contract has been completed on time and 
at the original dollar estimate. 



(10) Modification No. 25, Airport Contract No. 950, Ratifying 

Action of the Director of Airports on Change Orders, Boarding 
Areas H and I and Connectors; $17,710.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0086 Resolution approving and 

ratifying the action of the 
Director of Airports in 
approving Change Orders No. 34 
through 37 and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 25 to Airport 
Contract No. 950, in the total 
amount of $17,710.00 

Mr. Heath commented that these are a series of change orders 
he had already approved. Regarding Change Order 36, Item 2, 
Commissioner Kadish asked if the braille symbols currently 
in the elevators would be installed in other parts of the 
Airport. Mr. Ron Wilson, Acting Deputy Director, Operations/ 
Maintenance, said that all future installations will have 
the braille symbols. 



(11) Supplemental Appropriation; $4,104,085.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0087 Resolution requesting the Mayor 

to recommend to the Board of 
Supervisors a supplemental 
appropriation in the total 
amount of $4,104,085 to cover 
the increased costs of light, 
heat and power, overtime and 
holiday pay, materials and 
supplies, facilities maintenance 
fire and auto insurance and 
improvements to terminal and 
parking facilities, and services 
to other departments (City 
Attorney) . 

The largest costs covered here, Mr. Heath said, would be the 
light, heat and power. He requested Commission approval. 

* * * 

7A-42 



(12) Modification No. 3, Professional Service Agreement, Hogan 
and Hartson; $18,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0088 Resolution authorizing increase 

of $18,000 in amount payable 
under this agreement for fees 
and expense reimbursements 

Mr. Heath stated the need for the increase in the contract 
results from the fact that since changes in CAB proceedings 
have made it easier to start action than in the past, 
there has been more use of the Airport's Washington, D. C. 
counsel. In a year or so, the level of legal action will 
decrease if the proposed regulatory reform goes through. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if this is based on a regular 
hourly rate. Mr. Heath replied that Hogan and Hartson bills 
us on the basis of work done. Commissioner Kadish stated 
that last year it was her understanding that Hogan and 
Hartson did not use all the money authorized. Mr. Heath 
said that this was true and that the money was refunded to us. 



(13) Modification No. 6, SFO Shuttle Bus. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0089 Resolution providing for 

increasing the hourly bus rates 
paid to contractor due to increase 
in wages and fringe benefits 
for SFO Shuttle Bus employees 

Mr. Heath said that this is a request for an increase in the 
money paid to the Shuttle Bus operator due to higher wages 
and operations costs. 

Commissioner Kadish said she had received complaints regarding 
the Shuttle Bus service and mentioned that she would like 
to have a complete report on the bus services, its opera- 
ting procedure, financial picture, number of passengers, etc. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked whether the $15.83 was the wage 
paid drivers. Mr. Singer, Deputy Director, Business/Finance, 
said that amount is determined by a formula which includes 
drivers* salaries as well as the cost of the service, fringe 
benefits, depreciation, etc. 

(14) Miami - Los Angeles Low- fare Case CAB Docket No. 31976 

(Expanded Proceeding to Include Oakland and Tampa) . 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was adopted unanimously: 

No. 78-0090 Resolution authorizing Director 

of Airports to take all necessary 
action in having CAB Order No. 
78-3-2, dated March 1, 1978, 
expanding the scope of the pro- 
ceeding to include Oakland and 
Tampa, reconsidered to include 
San Francisco and the entire 
Bay Area market 

78-43 



Mr. Heath said that this proceeding was brought to our attention 
through our Washington, D. C. attorneys because World 
Airways has decided to expand its service. We feel tnat this 
kind of expanded service should be considered for all Bay Area 
airports, and this resolution endorses the action our 
Washington counsel has been instructed to take. 

Mr. David Lilly, representing San Francisco Tomorrow, said 
that the Airport sould not encourage growth. He explained 
that his group feels Oakland should offer some service that 
San Francisco does not. He said that San Francisco Tomorrow 
opposes this resolution. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that he did appreciate Mr. Lilly's 
position, but that it seems that since Oakland is trying to 
offer a lower fare, we should be joining in so that people in 
the West Bay would not be at a disadvantage. 

Commissioner Kadish said that while she appreciate Mr. Lilly's 
position, she did not feel that the Commission should take a 
position that would be to the disadvantage of San Francisco 
residents. 

Director's Report 

A. No-smoking Area in the Airport 

Mr. Heath said that there is an initiative going on the 
state-wide ballot and that we should begin designating 
certain areas as non-smoking areas. He mentioned that after 
a trial-and-error period we will be in a better position to 
decide on permanent locations and that at that time we will 
come back to the Commission with specific regulations. 
Mr. Heath said that we have authority to do this whether or 
not the initiative passes. He confirmed that no Commission 
action is required at this point and that signs have already 
been posted in the elevators and seem to be working well. 

B. Noise Regulations 

Mr. Heath said that he felt the public hearings were constructive 
and worthwhile. As a result of those hearings, we have made 
a number of changes, one of which was suggested by Mr. Lilly. 
Mr. Heath said that he proposes to allow another month for the 
airlines, the public in general, the FAA, the Air Transport 
Association and others to submit written comments. The 
regulation would then, he explained, be brought before the 
Commission at its second meeting of April. 

Mr. Heath said we will be sending copies of the noise hearings 
to all the people who expressed an interest and were in 
attendance. 



78 - 44 



C. ADAP-9 Grant Procedure 

We are faced with a March 31st deadline, Mr. Heath said, on 
getting the application approved and that if our application is 
in by March 31st there is the possibility of some discretionary 
funding. Mr. Heath said that the grant application program 
has been approved by the Commission already and he asked for 
informal approval from the Commission. He mentioned that 
documents will be submitted at the next Commission meeting. 
Mr. Heath said that this is an agreement which is signed by 
the Director, but does need an official resolution approving it, 

Commissioner Kadish asked which projects are covered in this 
application. Mr. Heath replied that it is the reconstructing 
and releveling of runway 1R and will cost roughly about 
$4 million. 

D. Telephone Enclosures and Partition Design in the North Terminal 

A presentation of renderings and slides was given by Len 
Blackford of Airport Architects. Payment for these items 
was approved at the last meeting. 

E. Retirements 

Commission approval of two retirement resolutions was requested. 
The Commission granted their approval (Resolution Nos. 
78-0091 and 78-0092) . 

There being no further items, the meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m. 




& 



Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



78-45 



A4S 



,,. SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




^ 



MINUTES 



APRIL 4, 1978 



JUL 17 1978 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
S.F. PL LIC L 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 

william k. coblentz 

dr. z.l. goosby 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 

OF THE 

AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

MEETING 

April 4, 1978 

Call to Order: 2:30 p.m. 

Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell 

Absent: Commissioner William K. Coblentz 

Pledge of Allegiance 

Approval of Minutes : 

The Minutes of the March 7, 1978, Airports Commission meeting 
were approved . 

Calendar Items: 

(1) Second Supplemental Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of 
$90,000,000.00 Principal Amount, SFIA, Airport Revenue Bonds, 
Series B. 

(2) Resolution Approving Notice of Sale and Official Statement 
Relative to Airport Revenue Bonds, Series B, $90,000,000.00 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0093 Resolution authorizing the 

issuance of $90,000,000.00 
Principal Amount of SFIA 
Airport Revenue Bonds, Series 
B. 

No. 78-0094 Resolution approving Notice of 

Sale and Official Statement 
Relative to Airport Revenue 
Bonds, Series B, $90,000,000.00 

Mr. Heath, Director of Airports, suggested that Items 1 and 2 
should be discussed together and asked Mr. Peter Singer to give 
information regarding the resolutions and bond sales. 

Mr. Peter Singer, Deputy Director, Business/Finance, said Agenda 
Item 1 is the resolution dealing with the issuance of the Series 
B bonds. He noted that we have set an absolute maximum net int- 
erest cost at 9% although we do not anticipate a cost of 9%. He 
added that Agenda Item 2 is the draft of the proposed official 
statement and traffic and earnings report prepared by John Brown 
Company . 

Mr. David Lilly spoke on behalf of San Francisco Tomorrow who 
indicated that he had sent a letter asking that the Commission 
reconsider the authorization of the $90 million bond issue. He 
proposed that the official statement be put over until the next 
Commission meeting because (1) it is lengthy and (2) was just 
made available to him yesterday and that he has not had the op- 
portunity to examine it thoroughly. He said that it is an im- 
portant document in terms of the prospective liability of the 



78 - 46 



Airport and the City and County of San Francisco. He said that 
the public should be given the opportunity to review it and to 
comment on it. Ee said that since bond specialists and attorneys 
have given their views, he and the people he represents should be 
given time to submit their opinion. Mr. Lilly said that there is 
no pressing need to approve the document today and the potential 
liability is great. 

Commissioner Kadish asked what the time schedule is regarding the 
matter. 

Mr. Singer stated that the financial community has been notified 
of the scheduled sale date of May 2 and that we are scheduled to 
meet with the bond rating agency next week. He said that there 
are a number of items on which construction has to be begun, part- 
icularly the wastewater reclamation plant. He said that we have 
to let the construction contract on the wastewater plant no later 
than July 1 or risk a penalty for violation of the EPA's deadline. 
Mr. Singer said that the May 2 date would provide us with the 
funds on June 2 and that would enable the Airport to let the con- 
struction contract on the wastewater facility prior to July 1. 

Commissioner Kadish then asked Mr. Lilly what portions of the 
document he found questionable. Mr. Lilly said that there may be 
differences in revenue projections and the projected take-offs 
and landings. He said that his objection is to the timeliness in 
which this report was made available, since it was made available 
only t^he day before. 

Mr. Lilly asked whether the airline operators' objections to the 
Airport fees being deposited in the General Fund is covered in 
the document . 

Mr. Singer referred to a series of meetings including one that 
morning with the Airline Policy Committee and indicated that cop- 
ies of the various drafts were available to them. He said that 
the official statement incorporates language requested by the air- 
lines. Additionally, Mr. Singer said that a draft was made avail- 
able to Mr. Lilly as a special favor since it is still not an of- 
ficial document. 

Mr. Heath said that the Commission is not required to hold public 
hearings on the bond resolution; the public had its right to ex- 
press itself on the bond issue in November. He pointed out that 
with construction inflation running at 12% a year, a one month 
delay could theoretically cost $900,000. Mr. Heath said that we 
are not issuing this document without due consideration; very 
great amounts of work have gone into assuring an accurate state- 
ment. He said that there are some differences between this State- 
ment and that relating to the 1975 bond issue. He stated that pro- 
jections are predictions of what will happen in the future and 
further indicated that the SEC had expanded its disclosure re- 
quirements . 

Mr. Lilly then asked when the statement was made available to the 
airlines and was told that a draft was made available last Thurs- 
day. He asked if that draft was different from the current draft 
and was told that it was. Mr. Lilly said that the same procedures 
that were applied to the airlines should have been applied to the 
public. He said that he was asking the opportunity to examine the 
facts and that by having it at this late date,, he was not in a 
position to make a responsible reply. 

Commissioner McDonnell had a number of questions about the state- 
ments in the draft document. Mr. Warren D. Hanson, Public Rela- 
tions Officer, was asked to respond to the phrase regarding the 
Aviation Committee of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Hanson ex- 
plained that there was sucn a committee during the formative years 
of San Francisco International Airport, and described its function. 






78 - 47 



Commissioner McDonnell asked about the $10.4 million capitalized 
interest noted on Galley 6, line 9. Mr. Singer replied that the 
Airport developed model financial plans showing two alternatives: 
one in which interest is capitalized and one in which interest is 
not capitalized. He said that the airlines said that they would 
prefer the former approach in which debt service costs start at 
about the same time as the modernization of the facilities is com- 
pleted. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that regarding Galley 10, line 30, 
which reads "The Commission has no immediate plans for future 
bond issues...", it should say that we are looking into other 
financing, but we should not lock in some future Commission, so 
that there would be no chance to change things . 

Mr. Singer referred, also, to draft p. A-20, lines 29-35 and said 
that due to full disclosure requirements, we were obliged to 
identify potential sources of funds or the Commission's current 
thinking with respect to the financing of the balance of the pro- 
gram. He said that it is his understanding that the Commission 
has no plans at this time for future bond issues but this state- 
ment does not preclude the present Commission from having such a 
plan at a later date nor does this statement constrain a future 
Commission. He said that we have to inform the public how the 
Modernization and Replacement phase of the program would be fin- 
anced; the 1975 Official Statement indicated that the $143 million 
was the first in a series of bond issues that would carry the pro- 
gram to completion; if now there are no further plans for revenue 
bonds then the present Official Statement should reflect that 
situation. i 

Commissioner Kadish said that she does not see how any present 
Commission can bind any future Commission. 

Mr. Heath said there are basically two ways of financing an air- 
port: (1) issuance of public bonds, and (2) current revenues. 
He said that the reason for the language is to fulfill full dis- 
closure requirements. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked what is the feeling of the airlines 
on this wording, and was told that they have suggested a change 
in the language. Mr. Singer said that representatives of various 
airlines served by the airport believe that they have a commit- 
ment regarding landing fees and that the airport will use long 
term financing through issuance of additional revenue bonds. He 
said that appropriate language describing the airlines' position 
has been incorporated into the draft. 

Mr. Jan Blais of United Air Lines said that the concern of the 
Commission is shared by the airlines. He said that the airlines 
recognize that circumstances in San Francisco may be such that 
immediate issuance of bonds may be impractical. 

Mr. Heath said that if the Commission's present intention is not 
to finance future programs through bonds, then that statement 
must go in the bond statement. He said that he can appreciate 
the airlines' feelings that the Modernization and Replacement 
Phase projects should not be funded out of current revenues and 
he noted that, as Commissioner Kadish pointed out, this Commis- 
sion cannot make decisions which are binding on future Commissions. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked Mr. Happeny of Salomon Brothers if he 
agreed on the necessity for disclosing the present lack of inten- 
tion to issue another series of bonds. Mr. Happeny felt that this 
intent or lack thereof should be stated. Mr. Happeny said that 
what we are trying to do is paint a true picture of this moment 
in time; also, we should point out that, in the event that the 
Airport is not able to complete the program, it will not affect 
either the present bondholders or the purchasers of the Series B 
issue . 



78 - 48 



Commissioner McDonnell said that the only problem is the possi- 
bility of having new Commissioners on board. He felt that the 
words that should be used should be something like "as the pre- 
sent Commission" or the ''present intent of the current Commission". 

Commissioner Kadish suggested that the wording be changed to read 
"the present Commission has no immediate plans..." 

Mr. Singer said that changes would be made in the wording on page 
A-20 to bring it in to conformance with the Cortimissioners ' wishes. 

Commissioner McDonnell commented on Galley 28, line 34, regarding 

the "Airport Contingencies Reserve Fund" : he said that there 

should be an ability to remove the contingency at the time of re- 
financing. 

Commissioner McDonnell then asked about the section titled "Tax 
Limitation Initiative and Related Legislation" (Galley pps . 32-3) 
relating to the Jarvis-Gann Initiative and Behr Act. He wondered 
if there was a requirement for full disclosure on state-related 
matters. Mr. Singer said that there is no direct mandate to do 
that, but it was felt that since the Airport is located in Cali- 
fornia, the measures and the lack of their direct impact should 
be described in the disclosure statement. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked about the 'Estimated Cost' items on 
Galley 10, lines 39-42: he asked if these items were what was be- 
ing covered by the current bond issue. Mr. Singer answered in the 
affirmative. 

f 
Commissioner McDonnell then asked if the items not being touched 
by the bond issue were the South Terminal modernization, the people 
mover system, the electrical distribution system, Eoarding Area C 
and the aircraft aprons. Mr. Singer said that all these items are 
part of the Modernization and Replacement Phase, hut the current 
bond issue would only cover the first four items and part of the 
last item, "other miscellaneous projects, art enrichments, etc.". 
Commissioner McDonnell asked if there was any idea of trying to 
finance the additional items over a 5-year period. Mr. Singer 
said that he referred earlier to a 5-year financial plan which is 
based on $152 million of Modernization and Replacement Phase cap- 
ital project costs. He said that part of these costs are finan- 
ced by the Series B bonds and the balance is shown as current rev- 
enue as explained earlier by Mr. Heath. 

Mr. Blais of United Air Lines said that the program is very op- 
timistic but that the airlines would cooperate as much as possible. 

Commissioner Kadish commented that it was remarkable to have the 
draft in such a short period of time. 

Commissioner Bernstein felt they should pass the program and that 
they should maintain the present time schedule. Mr. Heath added 
that timing is very important in dealing with this type of issue; 
the more delay, the more interest that will have to be paid. 



3) Removed from Calendar. 



78 - 49 



(4) Airport Development Aid Program; (ADAF-9) , Acceptance of Federal 

Grant Offer in the Amount of $587,754.00 for Project No. 6-06-0221-09 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0095 Resolution ratifying author- 

ization given the Director of 
Airports to accept the Federal 
grant offer in the amount of 
$587,754.00 under ADAP-9, Pro- 
ject No. 6-06-0221-09 for Re- 
construction and Overlay - South 
End of Runway 1R-19L, and Run- 
way Intersections . 

Mr. Heath said that this is the resolution referred to at the last 
meeting which authorizes the acceptance of Federal grant offer in 
the amount of $587,754.00. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked when the work will start and was told 
by Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director, Planning/Engineering, that it 
will start about Labor Day and could not start earlier because of 
summer traffic. 



Bid Call for Airport Contract No. 1159, Construction of Valet 
Parking Facilities, North Terminal. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish", seconded by Commissioner • 

McDonnell, the following item was placed in front of the Commission 
for discussion; subsequently no action was taken on it. 

Resolution approving the final 
plans and specifications and 
authorizing the Diiector of Air- 
ports to call for bids on Con- 
tract No. 1159, Construction of 
Valet Parking Facilities, North 
Terminal. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a bid for authorization of the con- 
struction of parking shelters identical to the ones we already 
have in front of the Central and South Terminals. He showed a 
rendering of the existing shelters. He said that the breakdown 
of the cost is contained on page 2: about $45,000 for various 
work including constructing concrete guardrails, which is a part 
of the valet construction cost. 

Commissioner Kadish said that we are currently losing money on the 
valet parking, and by building this shelter, we would be increas- 
ing that loss by another $60,000. She said that the only way we 
could make money or break even, is by having a valet parking shel- 
ter that is self-supporting and not subsidized by us. She said 
that there should be a management study to inform the Commission 
how they could continue valet parking on a self-supporting basis; 
only when we determine that should we spend any further monies. 

Mr. Singer said that there have "been a number of conflicting stud- 
ies. He said that one study shows an excessive loss but a second 
study indicates that the cessation of valet service would not re- 
duce the entire amount of the loss. He said that there should be 
a definitive study of the valet operation, the assignment of valet 
attendants and the accounting of valet costs. 

Commissioner Kadish then asked that the item be taken off calendar. 
It was removed. 



78 - 50 



(6) Modification No. 2, (Debit) Airport Contract No. 937R, Indus- 
trial Wastewater Collection System - Fhase I, $8,870.00 

On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0097 Resolution approving and rat- 

ifying the action of the Dir- 
ector of Airports in approving 
Change Order No. 937R-2 in ac- 
cordance with Airports Commis- 
sion Resolution No. 70-0044 and 
requesting Controller's certifi- 
cation of Debit Modification No, 
2 in the amount of $8,8 70.00. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a modification for part of the waste- 
water treatment program construction. 



(7) Modification No. 1 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 960, Road Graphics, 
$13,286/00 

Cn motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0098 Resolution approving and rat- 

ifying the action of the Dir- 
ector of Airports in approving 
Change Order No. 960-1 in ac- I 
cordance with Airports Commis- 
sion Resolution No. 70-0044 
and requesting Controller's 
certification of Debit Modifi- 
cation No. 1 in the amount of 
$13,286.00. 

Mr. Heath said that these change orders are mainly to increase the 
size of the footings around the road signs. 



(8) Modification No. 7 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 977, Expansion 
of Electrical Distribution System - Phase I, $30,917.00 

No. 78-0099 Resolution approving and re- 

questing the Controller's 
certification of Debit Mod- 
ification No. 7, to Airport 
Contract No. 977, Expansion 
of Electrical Distribution 
System, Phase I, in the total 
amount of $30,917.00. 

Mr. Heath said this is a modification of Contract 977 caused by a 
phasing problem between two contracts. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she is concerned about the legal 
responsibility. Mr. Lee said tfhat he, too, is concerned. 



- 51 



(9) Completion of Airport Contract No. 1094R, Waterproofing Observa- 
tion Decks, $11,723.00 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0100 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 
1094R, Waterproofing Observa- 
tion Decks, as satisfactorily 
completed; extending the com- 
pletion day from February 14 , 
1978 to March 10, 1978; and ap- 
proving final payment in the 
amount of $11,723.00 in favor 
of the contractor, Malott and 
Peter son-Grundy, 2312 Harrison 
Street, San Francisco, CA 94110 

Mr. Heath said that this is a resolution by which we accept the 
contract for waterproofing the observation decks as satisfactor- 
ily completed; the only delay on the contract was due to bad 
weather. 

Commissioner Kadish asked how long a guarantee we have. Mr. Lee 
said that we have a two year guarantee on materials and workman- 
ship. 



Speed Limit on Airport Roads • 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0101 Resolution amending Section 

1.4.6(g) of the Airport Rules 
and Regulations that specify 
the speed limits on Airport 
roads. New speed limits will 
be up to 35 mph. 

Mr. Heath commented that the present speed limits on Airport 
roads, as a result of studies, are recommended to be increased 
to 35 mph. He said that it would help to solve one of our prob- 
lems with the shuttle bus not moving fast enough because with a 
higher speed limit it could then move faster. Mr. Heath said 
that it is the feeling of the traffic people that 35 mph is a 
more realistic speed limit. 



Approval of Schematic Plans, Contract No. 1100, Boarding Area "E" 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0102 Resolution approving the 

schematic plans submitted by 
San Francisco Airport Archi- 
• tects for Contract No. 1100, 
Boarding Area E. 

Mr. Heath said that the Airport Architects have been working on 
the schematic plans for Boarding Area E. He asked Mr. Len 
Blackford to explain the plans. 



78 - 52 



Mr. Blackford of Airport Architects said that this is a significant 
project and part of the Modernization and Replacement Phase. He 
said that the project is really three separate structures: (1) a 
boarding area which will replace the present one; (2) finishing of 
the Northeast corner of the North Terminal; and (3) the concourse 
from the North Terminal to the Central Terminal . 

Commissioner McDonnell asked about the amount of the Architects' 
budget. Mr. Blackford explained that it is necessary to get this 
work completed as soon as possible, which will require additional 
staff time. 



L2) Tenant Improvement: Host International, North Terminal Restaurant, 
Executive Offices, Employee Facilities and Employee Cafeteria, 
$1,000,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0103 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by Host International 
showing proposed improvements 
in their tenant spaces in the 
North Terminal, including the 
North Terminal Restaurant, Ex- 
ecutive Offices, Employee fac- 
5 ilities , and Employee Cafeteria. 

Mr. Heath said that this is one of the smaller facilities of Host 
in the North Terminal and that the plans have the approval of the 
Airport staff. Mr. Garrett of Host International showed renderings, 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

3) Tenant Improvement: United Air Lines Ancillary Building, Service 
Center Hangar, Plot 4, $600,000.00. 

No. 78-0104 Resolution approving preliminary 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by United Air Lines, showing 
the proposed construction of a 
single story metal building at 
the west side of United Air Lines 
Service Center Hangar at Plot 4. 

4) Tenant Improvement: American Airlines, Ground Equipment Mainten- 
ance Shop, $380,000.00. 

No. 78-0105 Resolution approving the prelim- 

inary plans and specifications 
submitted by American Airlines 
showing their proposed Ground 

. Equipment Maintenance Shop at 

1 Plot 7S and 7E . 

5) Tenant Improvement: Qantas Airways, Ltd., Install Cargo Handling 
Equipment at Cargo Building No. 7., $290,000.00. 

No. 78-0106 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by Qantas Airways, Limited, 
showing the installations of 
containerized cargo handling 
equipment in Air Cargo Building 
No. 7. 



78 - 53 



Tenant Improvement: Pacific Southwest Airlines, Remodel Cargo 
Building 6A-1, $50,000.00. 

No. 78-0107 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by Pacific Southwest Airlines, 
showing the proposed remodeling 
of the Air Cargo Building 6A-1 
at Plot 6A. 

Mr. Heath said that these are interior improvements to existing 
buildings. Commissioner Kadish asked if these have to be ap- 
proved by the Art Commission. Mr. Robert Lee said that they do 
and that they will go to the Art Commission after Airport ap- 
proval . 



(17) Resolution Approving Five-Year Extension of Candy Shop Lease. 

The following resolution was moved, seconded and unanimously 
adopted : 

No. 78-0108 This resolution will approve the 

Candy Shop Concessionaire's exer- 
cise of the first five-year 
option at renegotiated terms and 
conditions . 

I 

Mr. Heath said that there was a ' misprint which shows the agreement 
beginning on August 30, 1969. It should read August 30, 1966. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if this lease affects the North Term- 
inal and was told by Mr. Heath that it is for the existing termin- 
als only and that there would be a separate agreement for the North 
Terminal. However, Mr. Heath said that space has been allocated 
for a candy shop, newsstand, shoe shine stand, bank and Host. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would appreciate having the Com- 
mission informed as to whether that aspect of the contract which 
deals with fair and equal pricing of products compares the price 
of goods at the Airport to the price of goods within the City of 
San Francisco. 

Commissioner McDonnell added that he would like to know what the 
policy for assigning space is before specific leases or permits 
are brought to the Commission. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she feels it is incumbent upon the 
Commission to look at current tenants and their contracts to see 
whether they are fulfilling the contracts. She said that this was 
important when new contracts for the same tenants were being con- 
sidered. 

Commissioner McDonnell commented that with the opening of the North 
Terminal projected for October, if we still have not leased space 
at this time, it should be done quickly. He said that the Com- 
mission needs to know what spaces have already been leased and what 
spaces may be up for bid. \ 

Mr. Singer stated that it was his intention to bring the policy 
questions to the Commission for decision. 

David Kroopnick, Acting Airports General Counsel, said that the 
Supreme Court made a recent decision which held that municipali- 
ties could be held in restraint of trade although the exact ap- 
plicability of this decision to San Francisco Airport will have 



78 - 54 



to be explored in greater detail. Mr. Kroopnick said that under 
the Charter, the Commission has the power to give space on a non- 
exclusive basis. 

Commissioner Kadish asked when the Commissioners would receive a 
contract adherence report. Peter Singer replied that the Com- 
mission should receive one in about a month. 



I) Resolution Authorizing Professional Service Agreement, W. Grayson 
Heath and Company . 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0109 w . Grayson Heath and Company 

will perform professional ser- 
vices for a cost not to exceed 
$10,000.00. Said services to 
consist of inspection, report- 
ing, recommendation and monitor- 
ing of major repair work to the 
Airport's escalators, elevators 
and moving walks . 

Mr. Richard Heath said that the Maintenance staff has noticed a 
large number of breakdowns in escalators, elevators and moving 
walkways. He said that the Airport does not have the expertise 
within its staff to analyze the situation or do the work, so it 
is recommended that Mr. W. Grayson Heath and Company be employed 
for that purpose. Mr. Richard Heath said that it will save a lot 
of money and frustration. 



Director's Reports 

Al. Hetch Hetchy Rates 

Mr. Heath informed the Commission that the injunction in the Hetch 
Hetchy case had been extended. He said that this will prevent 
Hetch Hetchy from putting into effect the new rate increases and 
that the City Attorney has advised Hetch Hetchy that they would 
have to go back, at least regarding rates for the Airport, to the 
rates that were applicable before this litigation. Mr. Heath said 
that we had received a letter from Mr. Moore saying that the rates 
would be the pre-1975 rates and that the rates for Airport usage 
would be current rates without discount. He estimated that the 
result would be that our utility bill would drop from about $8 
million to about $4 million. Mr. Heath said that it appears we 
will get substantial relief en next year's budget. 

A. Cash Collection at the Airport 

Mr. Singer said that we have made a study of our own cash receipts, 
a copy of which was distributed to Commission members and which is 
attached to these minutes and incorporated by reference. He said 
that he has found no scandals at the Airport and discussed the 
figures in the report. ' 



78 - 55 



B. Rubber Molding 

Mr. Blackford of Airport Architects gave a report on rubber 
molding and cove tile in the garage. He described the dif- 
ferent types of time and presented samples. He estimated 
that the cost would be about $150,000 to add tile base to all 
six floors. He said that to add it to stairways would prob- 
ably cost an additional $180,000. 

Commissioner Kadish requested that the architects take the 
matter under advisement and let the Commission know what 
conclusion they reach. 

C. New Personnel Officer 

Mr. Heath introduced Pat Gibbons, the new Personnel Officer, 
to the Commission. 



There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting 
adjourned at 5:00 p.m. 



-<P. n 



Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



78 - 56 



MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

PRESIDENT 
RUTH S KADISH 

VICE-PRESIDENT 

WILLIAM E. MCDONNELL 
WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94128 

(415) 761-0800 




RICHARD R. HEATH 

DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 



MEMORANDUM 



April 3, 1971 



TO: MEMBERS, AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

Hon. Morris Bernstein, President 
Hon. Ruth S. Kadish, Vice President 
Hon. William E. McDonnell 
Hon. William K. Coblentz 

FROM: Director of Airports 

SUBJECT: Cash Collections at S.F.I. A. 



In light of the recent cash collection discrepancies reported 
in the Tax Collector's office, we have again reviewed audit 
procedures at the Airport. 

Although a significant amount of cash changes hands at the 
Airport, most of it is controlled by tenants, lessees or 
concessionaires. The Airport is particularly concerned with 
the areas listed below where an accurate report of all gross 
revenues is vital to the Airport's receipt of all commissions 
or net revenues. Details of audit procedures are attached for 
your information. 



Parking: 

A. Garage and Lots 

B. Employee Parking 



1976-77 Gross 

$7,322,237 
65,005 



Airport Revenue 

$5,636,895 
65,005 



A. This area is covered by a management contract with 
Airport Parking Management. Terms of the contract 
require that all monies received be deposited to the 
credit of the City and County of San Francisco - 






To: Members, Airports Commission April 3, 1971 



Airports Commission and all approved expenditures, 
plus .597% of gross receipts are paid by the Airport. 

The financial records of the garage are audited by 
independent C.P.A.'s each year. In addition, we have 
hired private investigators to check on operations of 
the garage and certain other concessionaires with 
particular emphasis on possible problems with 
employees' honesty, ability and general cash control. 

We have reviewed the "General Work Rules" which APM 
requires each employee to read and sign an acknowledg- 
ment for in regard to their very strict code of conduct. 
If you are interested in this detail we will make a 
copy available. Details of audit procedures are 
attached. 

Employee Parking - - 

Special remote parking lots are provided for Airport 
employees. Tenant employees pay $5.00 per quarter for 
employee parking passes. These are issued and 
controlled by the Airport Accounting Department. All 
tickets (decals) are pre-numbered and color-coded by 
calendar quarter. Details of audit procedures are 
attached. 



Taxicabs Gross Revenue Airport Revenue 

1/8/77 - 12/31/77 $474,459 $287,642 

Operation of this activity is almost identical to the 
garage. Exceptions include the "short haul," four-part 
ticket, and daily 20-hour operation (6:00 A.M. - 2:00 A.M.) 

Briefly, a four-part ticket is provided for: 

A. Central Control - given to Supervisor at South 
Terminal to assure fee ($1.50) has been paid. 

B. First Short Haul - Driver determines destination 
of passenger before leaving cab stand. If it is 
a nearby location and driver will return to the 
cab lot in 30 minutes or less, he informs the 



- 2 - 



To: Members, Airports Commission April 3, 1978 



supervisor who stamps the date and time on 
this portion of ticket. The taxi must return 
within 30 minutes, and can then by— pass the 
taxi lot and go into the short line free after 
having their ticket stamped again. 

C. Second short trips are also time and date 
stamped, and they must also return within 
thirty minues, but they must pay $1.50 for 
the second short. They then receive a new 
ticket which lets them return to the short 
line. This transaction is not recorded in 
either the gate count or the booth count, 
but is controlled by a ticket number and a 
cash register transaction. The daily summary 
sheet gives a complete accounting of the 
previous days activities. These sheets are 
distributed to the Accounting and the Police 
Departments. 

D. Audit Control - Sent to Accounting Department. 

3 . Coin Lockers Groste Revenue Airport Revenue 
9/1/75 - 8/31/76 $24,120 $18,331 

Time period based on latest audited statements. 

This service, baggage lockers, is covered by a concession 
agreement with Mercury International. Detailed control 
procedures established by Mercury and Airport Accounting 
are attached. Audited reports by independent certified 
public accountants indicate controls are adequate. 

4. Pay Toilet (Dressing Room) Facilities — 

Gross Revenue Airport Revenue 

7/1/76 - 6/30/76 $12,606 $7,320 

This service is covered by a concession agreement with 
Nik-O-Lok Company for 35 dressing rooms in toilet areas. 
They install and maintain the locks and make all 
collections. Periodic audit of meter reading reports 
and collection procedures as shown on attached sheet do 
not reflect any irregularities in this area. 



- 3 - 



To: Members, Airports Commission April 3, 1971 



5. Telescopes Gross Revenue Airport Revenue 

7/1/76 - 6/30/77 $2,832 $739 

Current permit to Eyman Instrument Company for four coin 
operated telescopes. 

Airport receives 25% of the first $100.00 and 33% of 
revenue over $100.00 per instrument per month. 

These telescopes were located on the observation decks 
but they have been temporarily removed and will not be 
put back in service until the second floor observation 
deck is reactivated. 

6. Sanitary Napkin Dispensers 

7/1/77 - 3/31/78 Gross Revenue: $1,579 

Collections from these dispensers are made by the Airport 
custodian and placed in a suspense account by the 
Accounting Department from which supplies are purchased. 
A small unit profit is realized which is available for 
repair or replacement of the vending machines. Collection 
and audit procedure is attached. 

You will note that Airport (City) employees are direct recipients 
of cash in only two instances — Employee Parking Permits and 
Sanitary Napkin Dispensers. The amounts for those items are 
relatively small. Major receipts are under control of our tenants 
and concessionaires and the Airport revenues are paid either 
through direct deposit into the City's bank account or paid by 
checks. Daily revenue receipts are recorded by an appropriations 
accountant and sent to the revenue accountant for deposit. 
Receipt totals and deposit totals are checked by a principal 
accountant. Accounts Receivable and cash reconciliations are 
maintained by the general ledger section of the Accounting 
Department. This three-way control should preclude any 
possibility of cash manipulation. 

As you are aware, the Airport issues contracts to independent 
certified public accountants to periodically audit selected 
tenants, concessionaires or service contractors to assure no 
Airport revenues are lost. This is in addition to internal 
desk and field audits performed by our Accp«Ti^i.ng Depa^W&ent . 




Richard R. Heath 
Director of Airports 



- 4 - 



PUBLIC PARKING 



REVENUE INFORMATION 



Period Cash Receipts Commission APM Corporation 

1976-77 Fiscal Year $7,322,237.48 $5,636,895.24 $1,685,342.24 

Note: APM Corporation receives expenses plus 0.597% of cash receipts. 

Ca sh Received . Duplicate deposit slips for all cash deposited by 
Airport Parking Management are received by the Airport Accounting 
Department. Cash is received for parking fees, lien sales, towing 
fees, and in payment of credit cards. 

Auditing Procedures . 

i 

1. The Daily Cash Summary is postjed daily to the monthly Parking 
Fees ledger sheet. The Daily Cash Summary lists cash receipts, credit 
card receipts and collections, lien sales,, and tow deposits. The daily 
cash receipts are verified against the bank's duplicate deposit slips. 

2. Lien sales are attended by an Airport accountant. Total sales 

on date of sale are recorded by the accountant. This is checked against 
deposited cash receipts from lien sales and the monthly Summary of 
Lien Sales. 

3. A monthly list of vehicles towed is received from the Airport 
Parking Management. A separate monthly list of collections from 
tows is also received. The collections from tows are verified 
against the deposit for tows. 

Though not done at present, the list of collections from tows and 
the Summary of Lien Sales can be checked against the monthly list 
of vehicles towed. 

4. A current balance of unpaid credit cards is maintained. 

5. Some daily cashier envelopes are selected at random for audit 
luring the month. Details on the cashier envelopes are checked 
igainst established procedures and are verified against cashier 
'orksheets and the Daily Cash Summary lists. A memorandum of Audit 
liscrepancies is submitted to the Chief Accountant monthly. 



6. Other audit procedures include comparing ticket numbers and 
otal tickets on individual cashier envelopes against the Daily 
ntrance and Exit Control Form and ascertaining that total cash on 
he individual cashier envelope agrees with the Daily Cash Summary, 
hese procedures are less extensive but performed more frequently 
ian those in step 5. 






7. When a car is leaving the garage, it passes over a "loop" 
which counts the vehicle leaving; the cashier computes the 
parking fee and requests payment from driver; when cash is 
received it is rung up on the register — this results in a 
"register count" .and amount of fee is shown on an indicator to 
the front and left of the driver (patron also receives receipt 

so he can verify amount paid was amount recorded in the register) ; 
the register ring-up automatically lifts a wooden arm creating a 
"gate count." Therefore, no car can exit without a register 
count and gate count. In some instances - an extremely large 
bill or lost ticket problem - the cashier may have to "back off" 
the car, in which case the loop count will be higher than the 
register and gate counts. 

Large or recurrent irregularities in these various counts are 
reported to the Head Airport Electrician to correct equipment 
problems or ascertain reason for wide differences. 

8. The following reports, prepared by an Airport accountant 
may be useful in spotlighting areas of operation that are being 
controlled well or poorly. 

a. Monthly report of Unaccounted Parking Tickets. 

b. Comparison of Gross Revenue and Cars Exited. This 
comparison is made monthly and for the latest 12 
months. • 

c. Daily and Monthly Reconciliations of Register and 
Gate and Booth Counts and the Quarterly Comparison 
of Register to Gate and Booth Counts. 



EMPLOYEE PARKING TICKETS 



REVENUE INFORMATION 



Period Revenue 

1976-77 Fiscal Year"' $65,005 

An airport employee sells pre-numbered employee parking tickets. 
A ticket sells for $5.00 and is valid for a designated quarter- 
year (example: January through March). Each day's sales are 
reported to a different employee of the Accounting Department 
responsible for preparing a tape total of daily checks and cash 
received. This tape is used to verify the total of the Airport's 
daily deposit, which is prepared by the Airport's cash receipts 
accountant. 

The cash receipts accountant receives the money (cash and checks) 
from employee parking ticket sales, receipts for each sale, and a 
receipt listing ticket numbers sold and money received. The total 
of money received must be in agreement with the total of the receipts 
for each sale and the total due for all tickets sold. 

The daily deposit madr by the cash receipts accountant must agree 
with the tape total of daily checks and cash received. This assures 
that all checks and cash received are deposited. 

All pre-numbered tickets sold for a particular quarter are accounted 
for by the cash receipts accountant. Another accountant verifies 
the existence of all unsold tickets for the quarter by visual 
examination. He destroys the unsold tickets. Thus, whether sold or 
unsold, a full accounting is made for all tickets. 



OPEN TAXICAB TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 
REVENUE INFORMATION 

Period Gross Receipts Commission Taxicab Operator 

1/8/77 thru 12/31/77 $474,459- $287,642.18 $186,816.82 

Note: The Taxicab operator receives a salary, expenses, and one 
percent of gross receipts. 

Daily, the previous day£ taxicab receipts are deposited to the credit 
of the Airport's account at the Bank of America branch located at the 
Airport. The actual deposit is made by an Airport Parking Management 
employee. The Airport Accounting Department receives an authenticated 
duplicate deposit slip for all deposits. 

Auditing Pr oceedures . The following auditing procedures are utilized to 
ensure that cash collectons are deposited! 

1. The cash reported on the Daily Summary sheet is verified 
against the deposit slip and daily cashier envelopes. 

2. There are two shifts for each workday. The cashier envelope 
for each shift is checked for the following items: 

a. Cash collections, 

b. Tickets sold, 

c. Cash register transactions 

d. Differences between cash collected and cash register 
transactions total, cash collected and total due for 
tickets sold, and cash register, transactions total and 
total due for tickets sold, 

e. The beginning and ending number of the pre-numbered tickets 
sold for each shift are visually verified. 



COIN LOCKERS 



REVENUE INFORMATION 



Period Revenue Commission 

9/1/75 thru 8/31/76, $24,120 $18,331.20 

Note: Lockers were out of operation during the entire months of 
December 1975 through April 1976. 

Mercury International Travel Service collects the money from coin 
lockers at the Airport. They submit a report listing collections 
by lockers, total collections, and commission to the Airport, along 
with a check paying the Airport's commission. 

Yearly, Mercury International Sales and Service Company (allied with 
Mercury International Travel Service at the Airport) submits an 
audit report by a Certified Public Accountant of gross receipts from 
insurance sales and Western Union Commissions. This audit report 
does not include collections from lockers-. 

The Airport has not audited revenue from locker collections. However, 
Touche Ross and Company audited this revenue for the year ended 
August 31, 1976 for the Airport. Touche Ross found no difference 
between audited and reported revenue from coin lockers. Ken Kjellman 
of Touche Ross discovered that locker reports and locker operating 
records of Mercury tied in with Mercury's financial records. The 
reported amount collected (total difference between beginning and 
ending readings for all lockers) agreejwith financial records. 
Touche Ross was dependent on the locker readings taken by Mercury. 



Mercury International Travel Service Procedures for their Coin 
Locker Operation. 

1. Collection of Coins . The coins from the lockers are collected 
weekly, sometimes more or less frequently. The coins are 

not always collected by the same person. Sometimes Mr. Bennett 
collects the coins. The lockers are separated into location areas. 
There is a separate collection bag for each location area. 

2. Money Count and San Francisco Locker Collections Report . The 
money is given by the collector to the bookkeeper for counting. 
The bookkeeper does not collect the coins. The bookkeeper counts 
the coins by location area and prepares the San Francisco Locker 
Collections report. This is a monthly report which shows weekly 
collections from lockers by location areas. 

3. Locker Operating Record . The monthly report entitled Locker 
Operating Record is a daily record for each individual locker. 

It serves a number of purposes, including the disclosure of long- 
term storage of items in a particular locker and a record of meter 
readings from lockers. Items stored for a long time in a locker 
are removed to a storage area. A charge of 25C per day is made 
for items in storage. The maximum charge is $5.00. 

Basically, the Locker Operating Record is the document used to 
record meter readings. The readings are read often during the 
month. The readings are taken by someone other than the collector 
of locker money and the counter of locker money (persons in parts 
2 and 3 of this report) . The ending meter readings of two months 
(say, October and November) provide the information to calculate the 
metered collection for a month (November) . 

4. San Francisco Locker Report . The San Francisco Locker Report is pre- 
pared by Mr. Bennett from the San Francisco Locker Collections report 
(actual collections) and the Locker Operating Record (metered collections; 
The San Francisco Locker Report is a monthly report which shows 

metered and actual collections by locker area; total collections 
from lockers; refunds, tests, and foreign coins; storage collections,* 
total net collections; commission to the San Francisco International 
Airport; and Mercury's share of collections. Mercury pays a 
commission to San Francisco International Airport based on actual 
cash collected or metered collections total, whichever is larger. 

Ad ditional Information 1. The monthly total of amounts on the 
Ncn-Revenue Locker Register Record forms supports the total or 
refunds, tests, and foreign coins. 

2. The Lock Serial Numbers Replacement Report sheet plus actual 
storage money received during the month supports the storage 
collections. Most items in storage are never claimed. After a 
period of time, usually a few months, unclaimed storage items are 
tossed out or donated to charity. 



3. A replacement charge of $5.00 is made for a lost key. This 
is not reported as revenue. The average expense of replacing a 
key is at least $5.00. The service charge for retooling the key 
is $3.00. Other costs include postage and insurance to deliver 

the key to be retooled (usually a number of keys are sent together) , 
handling, and accounting expenses. 

4. Internal control is promoted by having different people responsible 
for collecting Coins, counting coins and recording collection 
totals, reading the meters, and preparing the monthly San Francisco 
Locker Report. Mr. Bennett, the manager of Mercury, prepares the 

San Francisco Locker report. Occasionally, he collects the locker 
money. 

5. This information was received via an interview with Mr. Bennett 
on 3/31/78. 



PAY TOILET FACILITIES 



REVENUE INFORMATION 



Period • Revenue Commission 

1976-77 Fiscal Year $12,606.00 $7,320.03 

An employee of the Nik-O-Lok Company collects cash from the Airport's 
35 dressing rooms in toilet areas. He counts and makes up rolls of 
coins for deposit, using a counting machine owned by the Airport. 
He deposits the cash collected to the Nik-O-Lok Company account at 
the Airport branch of the Bank of America. 

Nik-O-Lok' s employee submits to the Airport Accounting Department a 
duplicate deposit slip for the coins collected, authenticated by 
the Bank of America, and a collection report listing the following 
items: reporting period, toilet coin lock numbers, opening and 
closing register readings on the coin locks, total amount collected, 
and the signature of the employee collecting the coins. 

At a later date, the Nik-O-Lok Company pays a commission to the 
Airport based upon the collected cash from the pay toilets. The 
Airport Accounting Department verifies the amount of the commission 
by checking the Nik-O-Lok Company's calculations and ascertaining 
that the commission is based upon the previously received duplicate 
deposit and Nik-O-Lok' s collection report. 

The Nik-O-Lok collection report is periodically audited by the 
Airport Accounting Department as to total number of pay toilets from 
which collections were taken, collections based on meter readings, 
and reconciliation of any differences between actual collections and 
collections based on meter readings. The report submitted indicates 
when problems are encountered, such as foreign coins, defective 
locks and jammed locks. 



TELESCOPES - REVENUE INFORMAT I ON 



Period Gross Revenue 

1976-77 Fiscal Year $2,832.45 



Commission 
$739.05 



Andrew Eyman reports the monthly gross revenue from telescopes on 
the observation deck at the Airport. He pays the Airport T 
commission based on- the gross revenue. 

No audit has been made of the reported monthly gross revenue. 



SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSERS 

COLLECTION INFORMATION 

Amount Expended 
Period Amount Collected for Supplies 

July, 1977 thru March, 1978 $1,579.30 $1,204.08 

Collections from sanitary napkin dispensers are made weekly by 
Airport custodial personnel. The collections along with a written 
note of the total collections are forwarded to the Airport employee 
who sells parking tickets. He uses the Airport counting machine to 
count and roll the coins. His count is checked against the 
custodial count. The two counts have differed on a few occasions 
by 10$. 

The record of the two counts and the coins are given to the cash 
receipts accountant for inclusion in the daily deposit for credit 
to a suspense account from which supplies are ordered. 

Audit of the amount that should be collected is made by comparing 
total collected and cost of supplies. A small profit should 
result since unit cost is less than price charged. Current 
balances indicate that collections are in order. 






A4S 
* i 



* ' SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



APRIL 18, 1978 



JUL 17 1978 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
S.F. PC LIC LIBRARV 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 

william k. coblentz 

dr. z.l goosby 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 
OF THE 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
MEETING 
April 18, 1978 



Call to Order; 



The regular meeting of the Airports Commission was called to 
order at 2:35 p.m., in Room 282, City Hall, San Francisco. 

Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell, William K. Coblentz 

Absent: None. 

Pledge of Allegiance 

Approval of Minutes : 

The Minutes of the February 21, 1978 and March 21, 1978 Airports 
Commission meetings were approved. 

Calendar Items: 

(1) Award of Airport Contract No. 980, North Terminal Complex 
Carpeting, $929,333.33 , 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following item was discussed and subsequently re- 
moved from the Calendar: 

Resolution awarding Contract 
No. 980, North Terminal Com- 
plex Carpeting, in the total 
amount of $929,333.33, to 
American Contract, Suite 250-C, 
World Trade Center, San Fran- 
cisco, CA 94111, as the lowest 
regular and responsible bidder. 

Mr. Richard Heath, . Director of Airports, stated that four carpet 
manufacturers submitted acceptable samples: Bigelow, Lees, 
Walter and Wellco. He said that of seven installers contacted, 
only two submitted bids and the ones that did not submit bids 
said that the time of year, the size of the job and considera- 
tion for their other work were all factors contributing to their 
refusal to bid. Mr. Heath said that while the Bigelow price was 
lower, with analysis of price, performance and aesthetics, Lees 
came out with the best ratio. He said that it is therefore the 
staff's recommendation that the award be made to American Con- 
tract and that Lees carpets be used. 

Mr. Len Blackford of Airport Architects said that Walter Carpets 
submitted the most attractive sample, but they withdrew from the 
project. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked why there was such a difference in 
price between the carpets bid and whether installation and over- 
head were included in those bids. Jason Yuen, Airport Architect, 
said that actually the prices except for Walter's, which was 
withdrawn were rather close when you consider that it is a 
million dollar project. 



78 - 57 



Commissioner McDonnell reviewed the history of the selection of 
carpeting. He said that a great deal of time had been spent on 
selection, visiting other airports, etc. Commissioner McDonnell 
said that our carpet consultant had said that he, the consultant, 
felt the only carpet that should be used in airports was tufted 
carpet. Commissioner McDonnell said that he, personally, felt 
that woven carpet was better. He said that several years ago 
the Commission had talked about other floor coverings, such as 
tile, and a sample had been shown the Commission. He said that 
at that time the Commission had asked where they could see it in 
use and were told at Serramonte Center. Commissioner McDonnell 
said that he had looked at it and found it bland. He said that 
even such aspects of carpeting as static electricity had been 
considered. Commissioner McDonnell said that this meeting was 
the first time he had seen the report on carpets. He said that 
the Commission should have been asked to sit in on the planning 
meetings . 

Commissioner McDonnell said that these are not the carpets that 
the Landor Company had recommended, and felt that when a re- 
placement is needed, we will wish that we had carpet with a 
rubber backing, not carpet sitting on concrete. He said that 
he had sent mail from various carpet companies to the staff but 
had heard nothing from staff in response. He said that he 
would not vote on any carpets at this time. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she had an article from the New 
York Times which gives high points to Commissioner McDonnell's 
and Commissioner Coblentz ' earlier decision to use carpeting. 
She said that carpeting tended to be colorful, yet provide a 
soft environment. She recalled clearly that carpet samples had 
been presented to the Commission and discussion has been held 
as to the amount of static electricity in carpets. She said 
that her first choice was the most expensive carpet and that it 
was also the first choice of others who had viewed the carpet 
samples. She said that if she were selecting carpeting for her 
own home, she could make the decision, but that it would be ex- 
cessive and not fiscally responsible to spend $300,000 extra of 
the City's money just because she felt one carpet type was bet- 
ter. She felt that since the Commission was faced with an open- 
ing date of late September or early October for the North Termi- 
nal and many thousands of yards of carpet will have to be put in 
place, it was incumbent upon the Commission to make a decision 
now. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he had been at the meeting at 
which the Commission had said that they v.ere gcing to get some 
larger samples and that they were going to look at some padding. 
He said that he believed, too, that it was important that the 
terminal be opened on time, but that he did not feel the Com- 
mission should choose anything it didn't feel was the best. 
Commissioner McDonnell said that we should try to get some other 
company to build the type of carpet that is the same as the 
sample that the Walter Company had sent in. 

Mr. Heath said that when considering what is the best carpet, we 
have to consider price as well as performance. He said that the 
price and quality rating system had been devised to come up with 
the best overall product. He said that the ratings were based 
on actual testing of the carpets. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked where the various carpets are used. 
He said that the Lee's carpet is not installed anywhere that he 
knows of. He was told that the Bigelow carpet is in Tampa Air- 
port and has served there for some years. 



78 - 51 



Mr. Ed Sullivan, a representative of Lees Carpets, said that 
this type of carpet was installed in the Bank of America build- 
ing on Market Street. Ke said that the Airport could not look 
at five year old carpets because the 'Unibond' system is only 
two years old. 

Commissioner McDonnell then asked if it was everyone's opinion 
that there should be no padding. Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Dir- 
ector, Planning/Engineering, and Mr. Jason Yuen replied in the 
affirmative, emphasizing stretching problem. Mr. Sullivan said 
that the problem with carpets is that seams open up and it be- 
comes necessary to tape them or put a colored strip over them. 

Mr. Robert Plann of American Contract (one of the two bidding 
carpet installing firms) spoke about the 'Unibond' process. 
He said that some 'Unibond' carpet has been installed in bus- 
inesses in San Francisco and can be visited. Mr. Plann said 
that the type of backing used for those carpets would be best 
for the Airport. Commissioner McDonnell asked why Mr. Plann 
didn't bid any other carpet. Mr. Plann said that he didn't 
feel he could guarantee any other carpets for five years. He 
said that the way the terminal is designed would call for bias 
cut seams and he could not guarantee any other carpet except 
Lees if it were cut on the bias. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if they had ever before bid under 
the five-year guarantee provisions. Mr. Plann said that it is 
not unusual in the industry to have a five-year guarantee pro- 
vision on the yarn, but the five-year installation guarantee 
is new for the industry. 

s 

Commissioner Kadish said that she wanted to ask questions re- 
garding the lack of bid by American Contract on other carpets. 
She asked what was the aspect of Lees' carpets that enables 
diagonal seaming. Mr. Plann said that it is in the backing 
system which makes it difficult to snag the carpet. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that he wondered what the difference 
was between the Walter carpet specifications and the others. 
Mr. Yuen said that Walter's had about 10 ounces more yarn per 
yard. Commissioner Bernstein wondered what the bid price would 
have been if the others had put in 10 oz. more yarn. Mr. Yuen 
said that the bids would have been closer. 

Mr. Heath said that he felt we have proceeded in as scientific 
a way as possible to enable us to get bids on the specified 
carpets . 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr. Keith Williams of Williams and 
Williams to compare Wellco and Lees carpets. 

Mr. Williams said that Wellco used a less expensive yarn than 
Lees, which would not perform as well. He said that the car- 
pet would not maintain its appearance over the long haul and 
that the Lees carpet had a better fiber. Mr. Williams said 
that Wellco was the only company of those submitting samples 
which used a notably inferior yarn. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if a representative of Landor Associ- 
ates was present. She said that she assumed they had approved 
the pallet of the Lees carpets. There was no representative of 
the Landor firm present and Commissioner McDonnell said that he 
felt it was inexcusable that someone from Landor was not there . 



78 - 59 



Jason Yuen said that the carpet colors selected were based on 
the colors selected by Landor 's office. 

Mr. Blackford of Airport Architects said that the color of the 
Walter's carpet was better than the other combinations. 

Commissioner Bernstein wondered if the amount of yarn per inch 
would have an effect on the color of the carpet. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that he felt the color of the carpet 
is important and that someone from Landor should be available 
for comment. He said that he wished to request a special meet- 
ing and have Landor appear. 

Commissioner Bernstein suggested putting the matter off for a 
few days . 

Mr. Heath said that it would be alright if we could set a 
date. It was agreed to have a special meeting on Tuesday, 
April 25. Commissioner McDonnell requested that representa- 
tives of all manufacturers and installers be present. 



(2) Award of Airport Contract No. 650D, North Terminal Interior 
Design Elements, $498,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0110 Resolution awarding Contract 

650D, North Terminal Interior 
Design Elements, in the total 
amount of $4 98,000.00, to 
Ralph Larsen & Son, Inc., 1849 
Bayshore Highway, Burlingame, 
CA 94010, as the lowest regu- 
lar and responsible bidder. 

Mr. Heath said this is the contract for the design elements of 
the North Terminal interior. He said that four bids had been 
received and the low bidder was Larsen & Son, Inc. Mr. Heath 
recommended award of contract. 



(3) On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

Modification No. 34 (Debit) , Airport Contract No. 650C, Ratify- 
ing Action of the Director of Airports on Change Orders, Com- 
pletion of North Terminal Building, $22,098.00. 

No. 78-0111 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Or- 
ders 111, 115, 116, 117, 119, 120, 
121 and 122 and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 34 to Airport 
Contract No. 650C, in the total 
amount of $22,098.00, for pro- 
viding revisions to exit signs 
and hardware, braille indica- 
tions in elevators, neoprene 
compression seals, water meters, 
relocation of thermostats in pub- 
lic toilet rooms, additional pre- 
cast concrete column covers, re- 
vising ductwork and relocation of 
electrical items at glass draft 
curtains . 



78 - 60 



(4) Modification No. 35 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 650C, 
Ratifying Action of Director of Airports on Change Orders, 
Completion of North Terminal Building, $21,418.00 

No. 78-0112 Resolution approving and rat- 

ifying the action of the Dir- 
ector of Airports in approving 
Change Orders 118 and 123 and 
requesting the Controller's 
certification of Modification 
No. 35 to Airport Contract No. 
650C, in the total amount of 
$21,418.00, for providing 
structural steel angle frames 
to support window wall closures 
and relocating existing supply 
air duct to clear heads of doors. 

(5) Modification No. 7 (Credit), Airport Contract No. 925, North 
Terminal Aprons and Reconstruction of Taxiways "S" and "SS", 
$2,062.85. 

No. 78-0113 Resolution approving and rat- 

ifying the action of the Dir- 
ector of Airports in approving 
Change Order No. 925-13 in ac- 
cordance with Airports Commis- 
sion Resolution No. 70-0044 and 
requesting Controller's certifi- 
cation of Credit Modification 
No. 7 in the amount of $2,062.85. 

(6) Modification No. 1 and Completion of Airport Contract 1049, Im- 
provements to Restrooms, Upper Level, Piers "F" amd "FF", $427.00. 

No. 78-0114 Resolution accepting the work 

under Airport Contract No. 104 9, 
Improvements to Restrooms , Upper 
Level, Piers "F" and "FF", as 
satisfactorily completed; approv- 
ing and requesting the Control- 
ler's certification of Debit Mod- 
ification No. 1 in the amount of 
$427.00; extending the completion 
date from February 20, 1978 to 
February 24, 1978; and approving 
final payment in the amount of 
$11,724.45 in favor of the con- 
tractor, Hodgson Construction, 
Inc., 2815 Fair Oaks Avenue, Red- 
wood City, CA 94 063. 

(7) Modification No. 1 and Completion of Airport Contract 1127, Dif- 
ferential Settlement Connection, Sewage Lift Station Nc . 5, 
$1,696.38. 

No. 78-0115 Resolution accepting the work un- 

der Airport Contract No. 1127, 
Differential Settlement Connection, 
Sewage Lift Station No. 5, as 
satisfactorily completed; approv- 
ing and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Credit Modifica- 
tion No. 1 in the amount of 
$1,696.38; and approving final pay- 
ment in the amount of $8,327.80 in 
favor of the contractor, Monterey 
Mechanical Company, 8275 San 
Leandro Street, Oakland, CA 94621. 



78 - 61 



Mr. Heath said that these are various change orders he has 
already approved and asked for Commission confirmation. Com- 
missioner Bernstein asked about the $35.00 refund in item (3) . 



(8) Completion of Professional Services Agreement, Pacific Environ- 
mental Laboratory, Wastewater Testing and Analysis, $6,859.70. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 7 8-0116 Resolution accepting the work 

performed under Controller's 
No. 60491, Professional Ser- 
vices for Wastewater Analysis 
at San Francisco International 
Airport, as satisfactorily 
completed and approving final 
payment in the amount of 
$6,859.70 to Pacific Environ- 
mental Laboratory. 

Mr. Heath said that this contract approves final payment to the 
contractor, completing payment on the $36,000 contract. 



(9) Settlement of Claim, Anthony Harris, $5,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0117 Resolution requesting the Con- 

troller to allot funds and to 
draw a warrant against such 
funds as are, or will be, legal- 
ly available in payment of said 
claim against the San Francisco 
International Airport. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a personal injury claim which our 
attorneys have advised us to settle for $5,000.00. He said 
that he concurred with their recommendation. 



(10) Proposed Noise Control Regulations at San Francisco International 
Airport. 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following item was placed before the Commission 
for discussion; subsequently, the item was taken off calendar: 

Proposed Noise Control Regula- 
tions at San Francisco Inter- 
national Airport. 

Mr. Heath said that his recommendation is that the Commission not 
take any action until the next meeting in order to give themselves 
and members of the public time to review the material. He said 
that he had asked the City Attorney to review the regulations and 
give an opinion. 

Mr. Paul Leonard, Regional Vice President of the Air Transport 
Association, said that his organization is the trade and service 
organization of the scheduled air carriers. He said that he had 



78 - 62 



come to answer any questions about the ATA's position on the 
noise regulations. He said that the ATA does realize that the 
Airport Director and Commissioners feel it necessary to con- 
sider and possibly adopt a noise regulation. He said that ATA 
members feel they are good tenants trying to conduct their 
operations with the least amount of noise and that they are 
active and responsive members of the Noise Abatement Committee. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked what Mr. Leonard felt was wrong 
with the suggested regulation. 

Mr. Leonard said that there have been a number of noise abate- 
ment programs over the years. He said that the federal govern- 
ment adopted a regulation in 1976 which mandates an eight-year 
program for retrofitting or replacing aircraft so that all air- 
craft will meet FAR 36 Noise Standards. He said that the car- 
riers he represents operate at about 460 airports and if each 
jurisdiction adopted a separate regulation, the carriers would 
have difficulty operating. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if other airports have regulations. 
Mr. Leonard said that San Diego has a curfew and Orange County 
and Logan Airports have noise regulations. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if Mr. Leonard felt that all car- 
riers should be retrofitted by 1985. Mr. Leonard said he 
agreed with the FAA that federal rules should be followed in 
developing those programs. Mr. Leonard said that San Francisco's 
proposed regulation is not specific enough with regard to what 
FAR 36 retrofit would be required. He said that the original 
FAR 36 was adopted in 1969 and that since then, there have been 
about seven or eight amendments. 

Commissioner Kadish said that the comments of the ATA would be 
taken into consideration,' adding that there is no doubt that 
this Commission will make a policy statement on noise. Com- 
missioner Kadish said that the state requirements necessitate 
our moving in that direction and that any input is greatly ap- 
preciated. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked whether there were members of the 
ATA who would fall in the category of international carriers 
with planes that would not be retrofitted by 1985. Mr. Leonard 
said that as the current FAA regulation is formulated, there 
could be airlines whose planes operated internationally and a 
portion of whose fleet would not be retorfitted. 

Ms. Anita Maraviglia of the Airport Impact Reduction Force said 
she was glad that a portion of the regulation on public hearings 
had been added and that members of the public would be notified 
of Commission meetings, but that she has not been receiving the 
minutes . 



Director's Reports 

A. Welcome Sign 

Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director, Planning/Engineering, gave a 
presentation of artists concepts of what the new welcome sign 
might look like. He said that there was a request to delay 
destruction of the old sign until something could be found to 
replace it. He said that it had been suggested that maybe 
replacement should come under the Art Enrichment Program. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that we should contact Mr. Landor 
and see if we can get him to come up with something. 



78 - 63 



B. Retirement 

Mr. Heath asked the Commission to approve a resolution to be 
presented to Mr. John Mullen on his retirement. The Commis- 
sion unanimously gave its approval. (Resolution No. 78-0118). 

C. Senate Bill 1788 

Mr. Heath said that he was bringing this bill to the attention 
of the Commission because it would take powers away from the 
Joint Powers Board. He said that authority to conduct land use 
planning would be taken away and that authority passed on to a 
regional authority. Mr. Heath said that it would provide for 
a tax on jet fuel and would result in that money being spent 
in the L.A. area. He said that none of the benefits of the 
tax would flow to this area. The Commission indicated its op- 
position to the bill. 



There being no further matters before the Commission, the meeting 
adjourned at 4:10 p.m. 




Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



78 - 64 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



APRIL 25, 1978 



JUL 17 1978 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
S.F. PU ;LIC LIBRARY 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 

william k. coblentz 

dr. z.l. goosby 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 
OF THE 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
SPECIAL MEETING 

AND 
PUBLIC HEARING 

April 25, 1978 

Call to Order; 

The Special Meeting and Public Hearing of the Airports Commission was 
called to order at 2:04 p.m., Tuesday, April 25, in Room 300, 101 
Grove Street, San Francisco. 

Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell, William K. Coblentz 

Absent: None 

Calendar Items: 

(1) Award of Airport Contract No. 980, North Terminal Complex 
Carpeting, $929,333.33 

The following item was before the Commission from the regular 
Commission meeting of April 18, 1978. At that time it was 
moved by Commissioner Coblentz and seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish. At the Special Meeting of April 25, it was passed 
three ayes (Commissioners Bernstein, Kadish, Coblentz) to one 
nay (Commissioner McDonnell) . 

No. 78-0119 Resolution awarding Contract 

No. 980, North Terminal Com- 
plex Carpeting, in the total 
amount of $929,333.33, to 
American Contract, Suite 
250-C, World Trade Center, 
San Francisco, CA 94111, as 
the lowest regular and res- 
ponsible bidder. 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, said that this is a 
continuation of the discussion from the regular Commission 
meeting of a week ago. He said that one of the questions 
raised was why the best looking carpet selected by the Com- 
mission was not being used. He said that the contractor with 
the best overall sample withdrew from the process and as a 
result, the next best carpet was selected, the Lee carpet. 

Mr. Jason Yuen, Airport Architect, said that it was requested 
that the Lee sample be brought closer to the color chosen by 
the Landor Associates. He said that the final product will 
look very much like the color of the Wellco sample, which 
Landor has selected as the best aesthetically. 

Mr. Glen Gardner of Landor Associates said that it was his 
original recommendation that a woven carpet with rubber back- 
ing be used. He said that, however, since the Airport was 
willing to accept both tufted and woven carpet, he would be 
willing to accept both tufted and woven carpet; he would be 
willing to work with whichever is selected to arrive at an 
acceptable appearance. 



78 - 65 



Commissioner McDonnell asked if there were carpet color sam- 
ples from Landor at the present meeting. he said that one 
pattern and two colors were selected to be used as control 
colors and each of the mills came up with slightly different 
colorations. Commissioner McDonnell said that it was his 
opinion that the Wellco color was the most desirable and 
that United Airlines and other tenants preferred Wellco as 
well. He asked if Landor ' s recommendation before the re- 
quest for samples was for tufted or woven carpet. Mr. Yuen 
said that it was woven, but we had followed the recommenda- 
tion of Williams and Williams, the Airport's carpet consult- 
ants that we accept both tufted and woven samples. Commis- 
sioner McDonnell then asked that the original patterns be 
brought forward. He said he did not like having a carpet 
without a pattern, because a carpet with a pattern would 
help disguise soil and stains. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that the carpet proposed by Landor 
was not considered the best and he asked Mr. Williams if he 
would address himself to that. Mr. Williams of Willians and 
Williams displayed the original sample and four additional 
samples that were thought to be acceptable for the Airport. 
Mr. Williams presented a hand-held microscope for the Commis- 
sion to view and compare the Landor sample with the approved 
samples. He also showed a blown-up picture of the yarn sys- 
tem and said that if money was no object, there is one yarn, 
which costs about $30 or $40 a yard, that would last for 20 
years. He said that all his samples were tested for clean- 
ability. 

Commissioner McDonnell raised the question of a carpet with a 
pattern. He said that the Landor people should have told the 
Commission that the original idea of a pattern was thrown out 
and that a tufted carpet was chosen. 

Mr. Len Blackford of Airport Architects and Mr. Glen Gardner 
both stated that this was brought out at earlier Commission 
meetings. Commissioner Kadish recalled that this had been 
done. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked Mr. Williams to explain how he had 
tested the carpet samples. Mr. Williams said that he collect- 
ed soil, weighed it, brushed it into the carpet, sprayed oil 
on it, ran a machine over it and then cleaned it. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked why did we get away from using a 
patterned carpet. He added that one of Landor samples had a 
pattern. Mr. Yuen said that the Landor pattern cannot be pro- 
duced in a tufted carpet. Commissioner McDonnell said that a 
nylon blend carpet was recommended because we are judging this 
not only from the wear viewpoint, but also aesthetics. He 
said that the previous Commission did not recommend tufted car- 
pet because it looks cheap. He asked Mr. Gardner of Landor 
Associates what his opinion was. Mr. Gardner said that he 
could not recommend tufted carpet as the best for the Airport. 
Commissioner McDonnell said that this was never said at a Com- 
mission meeting. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she thought it would be a good 
idea if the Commission had a free hand in choosing the best 
carpet there is, but that the Commission had financial con- 
straints. She said that she was satisfied that they had a 
carpet of a material and fabrication that will last for five 
to seven years and will be easy to maintain. She said that 
if the Commission undertakes to have the carpet respecified 
and rebid, it would pay a higher price than they would have 
to pay now. 



78 - 66 



Commissioner Coblentz said that he would not be qualified to 
make a judgment based on his own opinion. -. He said that from 
his experience of purchasing carpets for various hospitals, 
he felt that it was incumbent on him to bow to the experts. 
He said that he did not want to intrude himself unless he 
saw egregious error. He said that this type of carpet has 
been chosen not only by Mr. Williams but although the Landor 
firm objects to tufted, they don't object to the color. Mr. 
Gardner from Landor Associates said he believed the color 
problem could be resolved. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that he planned to vote aye with 
the caveat that Landor Associates be involved with the final 
color selection. 

Mr. Williams said that the photo of the fiber showed that the 
nylon was more practical than the acrylic. He said that you 
could imagine what a change it would be if you had thousands 
of people a day walking over the acrylic. He said that the 
fibers break down in acrylic yarn but not in the nylon yarn. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the reason why there is no 
pattern in the carpet is because it is tufted. Jason Yuen 
replied that that was the case. Commissioner McDonnell ask- 
ed when this was decided and if Landor Associates knew that 
when the carpet was put out to bid. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if the point had not been raised 
already that with a curved terminal it would be very diffi- 
cult to make a patterned carpet look attractive. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he felt it was unusual that 
all this had not been explained to the Commission. 

The motion was moved again by Commissioner Kadish and second- 
ed by Commissioner Coblentz. 

Commissioner Coblentz stated that he did not want to pass 
judgment on the color because consultants were hired for this. 
He said that if they had made e mistake, they would be blamed. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that he was inclined to agree with 
Commissioner Coblentz that there are merits and demerits in 
the whole thing. He said that the Commission had a problem of 
time and he believed the Commission should pass this resolution, 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would like to hear Len Black- 
ford's views. Mr. Len Blackford said that he recommends that 
he get sample colors and patterns and look at them in the mock- 
up they have in their engineer's office which has flourescent 
lights exactly like those which will be in the North Terminal. 
He said that he had color coordinated the carpets as closely 
as possible and that the selection was based on the color 
closest to the original that they could produce. Mr. Black- 
ford said that they should have a final sample and look at it 
under lights exactly like those in which it will be seen. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that the carpet in Rotunda A looked 
bad when it was finally installed, although samples had looked 
good, all because of the light. 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr. Blackford to speak about instal- 
lation time and the opening of the North Terminal. Mr. Black- 
ford said that CMC has been doing everything they can in order 
to get heat into the terminal and if everything goes right, he 
could see it being ready at the appointed time. 



78 - 67 



Commissioner McDonnell said that he felt it would be impossible 
to open it by October. 

Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director, Planning/Engineering, said 
that as far as he knows, the City's work will be finished by 
October 1st and that United Airlines plans to move in on Oct- 
ober 15. He said that UAL is ordering a double shift so that 
they can meet their target date. 



There being no other business on the agenda of the Special 
Meeting and Public Hearing, the meeting was adjourned. 




Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



78 - 68 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 







oocur 



MINUTES 



May 1, 1978 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 

william k. coblentz 

dr.z.l goosby 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 

OF THE 

AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

SPECIAL MEETING 
May 1, 1978 



Call to Order: 

The Special Meeting was called to order at 11:00 a.m. in Room 300, 101 
Grove Street, San Francisco. 

Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William K. 
Coblentz 

Absent: Commissioner William E. McDonnell 

Calendar Items : 

Consideration of Action to be Taken with Respect to the $90,000,000.00 
Bond Issue. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0120 Cancellation of Sale of 

$90,000,000.00 Revenue Bonds. 

Mr. Heath, Director of Airports, read his memorandum in entirety (which 
is attached and included by reference) . Generally, the memorandum stat- 
ed the Airports' position that the sale of $90 million revenue bonds 
must be cancelled. Mr. Heath said that he would respond to any questions 

Commissioner Coblentz asked Mr. Richard Walker of Orrick, Herrington, 
Rowley and Sutclifffe, the Airport's bond counsel, if he would like to 
add anything. Commissioner Coblentz asked when the air carriers were 
notified of the bond sale. Mr. Walker said that the airlines were 
notified about two or three weeks ago, before the official statement 
was completed. Commissioner Coblentz asked if this resolution were 
adopted, does it mean that the Airport can no longer resurrect the bond 
sale. Mr. Walker said that this action would rescind the resolution 
relating to the notice of sale of the bonds. But he said that the 
resolution authorizing the sale of bonds would stay in effect with no 
specific time limit. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked Mr. Happeny of Saloman Brothers, financial 
advisors to the Airport in bond matters, if he had any remarks. Mr. 
Happeny said that he agreed with Mr. Heath's statement. Commissioner 
Coblentz then asked if Mr. David Kroopnick, Deputy City Attorney and 
Acting Airports General Counsel, wanted to add anything. Mr. Kroopnick 
said that he was in concurrence with the statement. 

ttr. Jan Blais of United Airlines and Chairman of the Airlines Policy 
Committee identified various airlines spokespeople who wanted to make 
short statements following his remarks. He said that he would not 
Dffer a competing legal opinion, but he felt that many of the statements 
nade in Mr. Heath's memorandum were incorrect. He asked what has hap- 
pened that was new since the bond statement was drafted. He said that 
there was no difference between the position of the airlines at the time 
the bond statement was drafted and the present. Mr. Blais asked for a 
City Attorney's opinion on the airlines' position. Commissioner Cob- 
lentz said that as a result of the recent statements by the airlines, 



-1- 



he believed, now, that the differences of opinion between the airlines 
and the Airport were not made clear in the official statement. Com- 
missioner Coblentz said that the original statement was one-sided and 
was modified to reflect the Airport's position, but these modifica- 
tions did not reflect the implication of the more recent airlines 
statements. 

Mr. Blais said that the airlines' claims and contentions are the same 
and there had been no change; the airlines have made no decision con- 
cerning suing the Airport. He said that the airlines were given an 
opportunity to make a statement only last week but that they could not 
give up their rights at the present moment. Mr. Blais said that he 
noticed in the draft resolution that the Airport and the airlines hoped 
to resolve their differences. He said that he certainly hoped that 
that would be the case. 

Mr. Blais said that he would like the Airport to provide the airlines 
with a copy of the Airport's position on the issues raised. He said 
that the airlines do not engage lightly in decisions to litigate. He 
said that the airlines believe that they have given a guarantee to the 
Airport that the debt service cost of the revenue bonds will be funded. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that the Commission completely agrees with 
the statements raised in the letter of April 28th from the Mayor (a 
copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference) . He said that 
the Commission is now in the position where he would strongly recommend 
passage of this resolution. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she agreed with everything Commissioner 
Coblentz had said, but additionally she felt that the Commission must 
protect the integrity of the City and County of San Francisco. She 
said that it was incumbent upon the Commission to see that full dis- 
closure takes place. She said that it was not a very pleasant task, 
but the. Commission must do it and see how the matter could be resolv- 
ed and then go ahead with the Modernization and Replacement program. 

Commissioner Bernstein said to Mr. Blais that it was not the intention 
of the Commission to ask the airlines to give up any of their rights. 

Mr. Blais said that he was surprised that things had progressed to 
that point because he felt that the matter had been settled. Mr. 
Heath said that the problem is that the airlines were asking for im- 
possible action on the part of the City. He said that he had asked 
them to resolve the problems, but as long as they remained in the 
position of threatening litigation, the bond sale could not go forward. 

Mr. James Chamberlain of Delta Airlines said that he felt the current 
situation was a serious one and he hoped it would be resolved in the 
near future . 

Commissioner Coblentz said that the airlines knew this was the atti- 
tude of the Commission and the Mayor but had persisted in their atti- 
tude. He said that the Commission is not going to permit the inte- 
grity of the Airport to be threatened. 

Mr. Chamberlain said that we have problems which stem from a change 
on the part of the Commission regarding funding for Airport improve- 
ments. He said that the airlines, in good faith and relying on their 
agreement with the Commission, had proceeded with a modernization pro- 
gram that will benefit all users. He said that halting it at this 
point, will leave users without upgraded facilities and that it was 
a breach of contract. He said that the landing fee agreement states 
how the program was to be financed. Mr. Chamberlain said that on be- 
half of all users of the facilities he would ask that the Commission 
proceed with the bond issue so that the program can go forward. He 
said that he would like to ask that the City Attorney give an opinion 
on all the issues raised. 



-2- 



Commissioner Coblentz said that international carriers have high 
priority for the Airport. He said that he regrets having to do this 
but that in fact, the fault does not lie with the Airport, and, in 
order to act responsibly, the Airport cannot go ahead with the sale. 
He said that he thought Commissioners might even be personally liable 
for damages should the sale go ahead at this point. 

Mr. Chamberlain replied that he didn't argue with the Airports' coun- 
sel, but he felt that nothing had really changed. 

Commissioner Kadish said that it was very interesting that there were 
statements regarding a breach of faith. She said that the Commission 
might turn that around and say that there is a breach of faith on the 
part of the carriers. She said that unless there could be information 
given to potential bond purchasers that the possibility of litigation 
was real and could endanger the financing of those bonds, there would 
not be full disclosure. Commissioner Kadish said that for weeks there 
have been phone calls and attempts to resolve the situation. 

Mr. Chamberlain said that this situation should not have come up and 
that an agreement soon would settle it. He said that the biggest prob- 
lem with stopping the bond sale is the funding of capital improvements 
out of current revenues . 

Mr. Heath said that he would like to call the Commission's attention 
to the letter from the Airlines Policy Committee to the Mayor and the 
Commission (a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by 
reference). Mr. Heath read from pages two and three of that letter, 
noting that not only were conditions suggested, but even if the Air- 
port and the City met those conditions, the airlines would continue 
to defer a decision on litigation. He said that the airlines were 
not committing themselves to any new action; they were only saying 
that they would look at the City Attorney's opinion. 

Mr. David Lilly, representing San Francisco Tomorrow, said that if 
the $90 million bond issue is to be revived, would the Commission 
allow sufficient time for public notice and public input. When ask- 
ed by Commissioner Kadish what he would consider sufficient notice, 
Mr. Lilly replied that two weeks would be considered adequate. 

The resolution was read in its entirety by Commission Secretary Eric 
Craven and the vote taken. 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:54 a.m. 




Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



-3- 



ORRIS BERNSTEIN 
RESIDENT 

UTH S. KADISH 
'ICE-PRESIDENT 

ILLIAM E. MCDONNELL 
ILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94128 

(415) 761-0800 



MEMORANDUM 



^"W^ 



P29K 






L 



Wwies- 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS 



May 1, 1978 



TO: 



MEMBERS, AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
Hon. Morris Bernstein, President 
Hon. Ruth S. Kadish, Vice President 
Hon. William E. McDonnell 
Hon. William K. Coblentz 



FROM: Director of Airports 

SUBJECT: Cancellation of Sale of $90,000,000 Revenue Bonds 



I would like to set forth the full context within which this Special 
Meeting of the Airports Commission is being held in order to adequately 
explain the action recommended. 

The electorate approved the issuance of $90,000,000 of Airport 
Revenue Bonds at the election of November 8, 1977. The purpose of the 
Bond Issue was to provide funds for the Modernization and Replacement 
Phase of the Terminal Expansion Program. 

The Master Resolution covering these Bonds constitutes a contract 
between the Airports Commission and the bondholders, under which the 
Commission has irrevocably pledged the Net Revenues of the Airport to the 
payment of bonded indebtedness. The Commission has agreed to establish 
and at all times maintain rates, rentals, charges and fees which will yield 
Net Revenues (after operating expenses) at least sufficient to meet all pay- 
ments required for debt service and retirement of all bonds when they 
become due and payable. 

Since approximately 50% of the total income of the Airport is gener- 
ated by air carriers, their contribution to our Net Revenues is vital. 



To: Members, Airports Commission -2- May 1, 1978 



All of the major air carriers serving the Airport are signatories 
to the Landing Fee Agreement having an original term from July 1, 1973 
through June 30, 1988. 

Briefly stated, the Landing Fee Agreement provides that the air 
carriers will meet the financial requirements of the Airport. This Agree- 
ment further provides that landing fees and terminal building rentals may 
be adjusted at certain specified periods to reflect increases in any fees 
and charges required for maintenance and operation expenses, bond debt 
service or other payments as provided for by the Charter and the Master 
Bond Resolution. In addition, the Landing Fee Agreement specifies that 
the Commission may make any adjustment in landing fees at any time when 
necessary in order to avoid tax support by the City and County of San 
Francisco due to the apparent inadequacies of Airport revenues to pay for 
all Airport expenses incident to its operation and maintenance, or to pay 
for debt service and retirement of bonds. 

The Official Statement designed to supply information to prospective 
bidders or buyers of the $90,000,000 of San Francisco Airport Revenue 
Bonds, Series B, was issued and dated April 4, 1978. This Official State- 
ment summarizes certain provisions of the Landing Fee Agreement. The 
air carriers had ample opportunity to review and approve the Official State- 
ment. The Official Statement on page 23 states that "The Modernization 
and Replacement phase of the expansion program being financed by Series 
B bonds has been approved by the signatory air carriers with operational 
details to be finalized". 

. The air carriers have objected over the past 4 or 5 years to cer- 
tain budgeted expenses and to certain fiscal and accounting practices in- 
cluding: (a) establishment of a special sinking fund; (b) advancing reimburse- 
ments to the General Fund of the City and County of San Francisco; (c) 
application of earnings on the Airport Revenue Fund to the General Fund of 
the City and County of San Francisco; (d) application of the interests on the 
proceeds of General Obligation Bonds to the General Fund of the City and 
County; (e) funding of capital expenditures from operating revenues; and 
(f) the charging of P. G. &E. electric rates by Hetch Hetchy for Airport 
general use. Despite the continued rejection of their contentions by the City, 
the air carriers have neither filed a claim with the City nor have they diligently 
commenced and prosecuted an action as required by the Landing Fee Agreement. 

The air carriers were specifically informed by the Airport Staff, 
Bond Counsel for the Airport, and by the Financial Consultant for the 
Airport that their intentions regarding any contemplated litigation against 



To: Members, Airports Commission -3- May 1, 1978 



the City or the Airport had to be correctly reported in the Official State- 
ment. The Official Statement does not contain a statement that the Airlines 
contemplate litigation over these issues. The Official Statement was re- 
viewed and approved by the official representative of the Airlines Policy 
Committee. 

Nevertheless, on April 18, 1978, the Airline Policy Committee 
appeared through counsel before the Finance Committee of the Board of 
Supervisors and raised these legal issues and objections again. The counsel 
for the air carriers alleged to the Board of Supervisors that numerous 
accounting and fiscal practices of the City and the Airports Commission in 
diverting Airport revenues were unlawfii. The nature of this appearance 
clearly implied that the air carriers were studying the possibility of liti- 
gation concerning the revenue diversions. 

In view of the position taken by the air carriers before the Finance 
Committee, the Airports Commission and the Mayor of the City and County 
of San Francisco requested an official statement by the air carriers on 
whether or not the air carriers intended to litigate the matter with respect 
to Airport funding. 

The carriers delivered a letter, dated April 27, 1978 to the Mayor 
and to the President of the Airports Commission. This letter reiterates the 
air carrier position on diversion of Airport revenues and requests a City 
Attorney opinion on five separate issues. In addition, it attempts to modify 
the present Landing Fee Agreement and Lease Agreements by making any 
future increases conditioned on a mutual agreement between the air carriers 
and the Airports Commission. Finally, the air carriers state that they 
"will also continue to defer any decision on litigation concerning these revenue 
diversions until after studying the City Attorney's opinion". 

Because there is clearly no possibility for the City to comply with 
the carriers' demands, the possibility, indeed the probability, of litigation 
seems apparent. 

One of the cardinal rules of public financing is the requirement to 
make full disclosure of all relevant and material facts with respect to the 
issuance o f any security. Airport revenues are the sole security for Air- 
port Revenue Bonds, and air carrier payments are vital to Airport Revenues. 

In view of the statements of the air carriers before the Finance Com- 
mittee on April 18, 1978, and in the letter dated April 27, it is apparent 
that they are now attempting to qualify their approval and willingness to 



-3- 



To; Members, Airports Commission -4- May 1, 1978 



to provide funds for the Modernization and Replacement Program as set 
forth in the Landing Fee and Lease Agreements. The most recently 
expressed position of the Airlines thus differs substantially from their 
former position as reported in the Official Statement. 

In addition, the Airlines Policy Committee's letter of April 27 
makes it clear that litigation on the issues raised in that letter is a 
definite, not a remote, possibility. That fact should have been disclosed 
by the Airlines to those preparing the Official Statement. That failure to 
disclose a material fact has caused the Official Statement as now written 
to be inadequate in terms of the standards of full disclosure applicable to 
this Commission. 

Thus, under the circumstances, the Airports Commission has no 
alternative but to hold this special meeting on Monday, May 1, 1978, for 
the purpose of reviewing the air carriers change of position in Airport 
funding and considering deferring the sale of the Revenue Bonds, Series B, 
to a later date. This action must be considered in order for the Airports 
Commission to comply with the rules and regulations on full disclosure, 
to protect potential bond purchasers, and to protect the integrity of the 
City of San Francisco. The bids for these bonds are scheduled to be re- 
ceived and opened tomorrow, May 2, 1978, at 11:00 A.M. 

In view of the above, it is the Staff recommendation that the 
resolution cancelling the sale of the bonds be approved. 




RICHARD R. HEATH 



■4- 



April 23, 1976 



Mr. Jan David Blais 

Regional Manager of Property 

United Airlines 

San Francisco International Airport 

San Francisco, California 94128 

Dear Mr. Blai6: 

I have your letter of April 27, 1978 and must tell you that I 
find it unacceptable in both tone and content. 

This office has been trying to woz>k with you for the mutual 
benefit of the people of the City and the tenants of its aiiport. 
Despite all of my efforts to make you understand our concerns 
the only response we received from you is a letter which, on 
its face, appears to be a contract under which I am supposed 
to deliver certain specifics in return for your undertaking 
no more than what, in my opinion, you are obligated to do in 
any event. Apart from the terms of this offer you should be 
advised that this Mayor does not do business like that. 

Under the present circumstances I have no intention of forward- 
ing any appropriation to the Board of Supervisors. I am 
referring the matter to the City Attorney for his information 
and to the Airport Commission for whatever action they may want 
to take. 

Sincerely, 



George R. Mo scone 
Mayor 

V cc: Mr. Dick Heath, Director of Airports 
SF International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 

Mr. George Agnost, City Attorney 
City Hall, Room 206, SF 

GRM/fplr 



SAN FRANCISCO AIRLINES POLICY COMMITTEE 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94128 

April 27, 1978 

Hand Delivery 

The Honorable George R. Moscone 
Mayor, City and County of San 

Francisco 
200 City Hall 
San Francisco, California 94102 

Mr. Morris Bernstein 

President - San Francisco Airports 

Commission 
San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, CA 94128 

Gentlemen: 

This responds to your request, transmitted 
Tuesday by Airport Director Heath, for assurances con- 
cerning the airlines' position on the matter of airport 
funding . 

The airlines have no intention of backing away 
from their responsibilities at the airport including 
necessary costs to service bond indebtedness. The City 
of San Francisco needs both the airlines and the airport. 
That thought should be the starting point for understand- 
ing our remarks in this letter. 



The Honorable George R. Moscone 
Mr. Morris Bernstein 



The airlines would be willing to agree to pay 
landing fees and rental rates determined to be necessary 
in the 1978-79 Airports Commission Budget now before the 
Board of Supervisors on the following understandings: 

1. That any increase in landing fees over 
current levels unless mutually agreed to, and any in- 
crease in rentals over amounts mutually agreed to, 
the airlines will pay under protest with full reser- 
vation of their rights until the existing disputes 
are resolved; and 

2. That the supplemental appropriation 
supporting the $90 million Revenue Bond issue be 
passed on to the Board of Supervisors with the 
Mayor's recommendation for favorable action and 

the Bonds be sold and delivered as presently scheduled; 
and 

3. That the Mayor request the City Attorney 

to render his legal opinion on all of the issues 

which the airlines have raised concerning revenue 

diversions from the airport, namely: 

A. Accrual of earned interest to the 
General Obligation Bond Fund and 
creation of a special General 
Obligation Bond sinking fund; 



The Honorable George R. Moscone 
Mr. Morris Bernstein 



B. Accrual of earned interest to 
the Airports Revenue Fund; 

C. Advance payment by the airport 
on the $24 million debt to be 
repaid to the City according to 
a schedule in the Landing Fees 
Agreements ; 

D. Funding of capital projects from 
operating revenues; and 

E. The charging of discriminatory 
Hetch Hetchy rates for airport 
general use; 

and 

4. This legal opinion be made available for 
review by the airlines by June 1, 1978. 

In addition to supporting the airport in its 
fiscal needs as described, the airlines will also continue 
to defer any decision on litigation concerning these revenue 
diversions until after studying the City Attorney's opinion. 
Provision of this opinion, parts of which the airlines had 
requested several years ago, should assist both the City and 
the airlines in judging the merits of this controversy. 

Thank you for your consideration. We continue to 
believe this matter can be resolved to the mutual satisfac- 
tion of all concerned. 

~yery truly yours , 



(^/an David Blais 



Chairman, 
Airlines Policy Committee 
JDB:lp 

cc: Richard R. Heath - Director of Airports 

Air California - George Galvin 
Air Canada - A. R. Grant 



Airlift International - Kuddus Kamay 

American Airlines - Max Fenson 

Braniff International - Don Sorenson 

China Airlines - William Sun 

CP Air - W. A. Genereux 

Continental Airlines - C. T. Argue 

Delta Air Lines - J. A. Chamberlin 

Flying Tiger Line - Steve Adler 

Hughes Airwest - G. F. Hill 

Japan Air Lines - F. Kuwano 

National Airlines - M. B. Class 

Northwest Airlines - R. James Thorne 

Pacific Southwest Airlines - Bob Baxter 

Pan American World Airways - Douglas E. Holmes 

Philippine Airlines - Charles E. Russell 

Qantas Airways - Rogert T. Andriesse 

Trans World Airlines - John Westad 

United Air Lines - J. D. Blais 

Western Airlines - Craig W. Crawford 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



May 2, 1978 



DOCUMENTS 

OCT 2 91985 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 
william k. coblentz 

RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 



San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



Call to Order 

The Special Meeting of the Airports Commission was called to order at 
5:30 PM in Room 282, City Hall, San Francisco, California. 



Roll Call 

Present: Commissioners Morris 3ernstein, Ruth 

S. Cakish, William K. Coblentz. 

Absent: Commissioner William E. McDonnell 



3. Pledge of Allegiance Led by Commissioner Kadish 



4. Approval of Minutes 

No Minutes were before the Commission for approval. 



5. Calendar Items 

On motion of Commissioner Coblents, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

(1) Modification No. 2 and Completion of Airport Contract No. 910, 
Emergency Exits for International Rotunda 

No. 78-0122 Resolution accepting the work under 

Airport Contract No. 910, Emergency 
exits for International Rotunda, as 
satisfactorily completed; approving 
and requesting the Controller's 
certification of Debit Modification 
No. 2 in the amount of $332.40; 
extending the completion date 
from October 4, 1977 to February 23, 
1978; and approving final payment 
in the amount of $11,663.73 in 
favor of the contractor, Beiser 
Construction Company, 735 Industrial 
Way, San Carlos, CA 94070. 

-1- 



I 



No. 78-0122 Resolution approving and ratifying 

the action of the Director of Air- 
ports in approving Change Orders No. 
925-tl4 and 925-15 in accordance with 
Airports Commission Resolution No. 
70-004 and requesting Controller's 
certification of Debit Modification 
No. 8 in the amount of $34,987.00. 

(3) Modification No. 3 (Debit) , Airport Contract No. 937R, Industrial 
Wastewater Collection System, Phase I, $10,700.00 

No. 78-0123 Resolution approving and ratifying the 

action of the Director of Airports in 
approving Change Order No. 937R in ac- 
cordance with Airports Commission Res- 
olution No. 70-0044 and requesting the 
Controller's certification of Debit Mod- 
ification No. 3 in the amount of 
$10,700.00. 

Commissioner Kadish requested that for every contract modifica- 
tion, the Commission receive complete information. 



(4) Tenant Improvement: American Airlines, Ground Eqipment Mainten- 
ance Shop, $380,00.00 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0124 Resolution approving the final plans 

and specifications submitted by 
American Airlines showing their 
proposed Ground Equipment Mainten- 
ance Shop at Plot 7S and Plot 7E. 
The work consists of constructing 
a two story metal building with a 
ground floor area of 7,200 square 
feet to house a paint shop, a car- 
penter shop, an auto shop and offices, 



(5) Resolution Establishing Policy for Commercial and Public Service 
Advertising in Airport Terminal Buildings. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted as amended 

No. 78-0125 Resolution defining Commission policy 

regarding advertising in the airport 
terminal buildings for guidance of 
staff as new facilities open or 
as existing facilities are modernized. 

Mr. Heath said that staff's recommendation was that one contract 
be let to the company which would provide the best service to 
the travelling public. He said that in discussions with the 

-2- 



because commercial ads'wo^'detrtctlror^trt'pr^^; ^"* 

Commissioner Kadish said that she felt an addition should te 
made to the resolution regarding aesthetic criteria. 

Mr. Heath said that he thought that would be a good addition. 

Mr. Jan Blais of the Airline Policy Committee said that he had 
not seen the resolution under consideration but he understood 
that the intention was to promote good aesthetics in the terminals. 
He said that he would have to oppose such a resolution which would 
eliminate a source of revenue at a time when new sources of 
revenue were being searched for. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that he understood the position of 
the airlines but some of the terminal ads were a disgrace. 
He said that the satisfaction derived from having good ads would 
more than offset the loss of revenue. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she in no way saw this as a way 
to cut revenues. She said that staff would be pursuing other 
means of revenues but not in areas that would detract from the 
appearance of the terminals. 



(6) Claims Settlement, $7,633.67. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0126 Resolution approving action of the 

Director of Airports in the settle- 
ment and/or compromise of claims 
in accordance with Commission 
Resolution No. 74-02337. 



Agenda Items (7), (8) and (9) were removed from the Calendar. 



(10) Tenant Improvement: Flying Tiger Line, Office Space Improve- 
ments in FTL Hanger, $70,000. 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0127 Resolution approving the final plans 

and spefications submitted by Flying 
Tiger Line to construct an addition 
to the existing office structure. 



* 
-3- 



No. 78-0128 Industrial Wastewater Treatment 

Plant, $3,450,000. 

No. 78-0129 South Terminal Addition, $14,950,000. 

Mr. Heath said that these resolutions stem directly from the action 
taken yesterday at the Special Commission meeting. He said that 
as a result of the cancellation of the bond program, staff had 
reviewed the M & R Program and identified these two projects 
as being of such high priority that the Airport should go ahead 
withthem. He said that the funding for the projects could be 
spread over two fiscal years. He said that the International 
Arrivals Area was such a disgrace to the City at the present time 
that the Airport must move forward and correct that situation, 
as quickly as possible, despite the cost. 

Commissioner Coblentz asked what the Airport would do with the 
money raised as a result of this action if the bonds were to be 
sold at a later date. 

Mr. Heath said that the money could be held as surplus or could 
be transferred to other uses or a reduction in landing fees could 
be given the airlines. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she. felt if the Airport collected 
the money and the bonds were subsequently sold, the airlines should 
get some credit or a refund. 

Mr. Heath said that there were several ways that the situation 
could be handled: landing fees could be temporarily reduced; 
the money could be applied to the following year's expenses; and 
there were a number of projects in the master plan which were awaiting 
funding. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she felt it was important to make 
it clear that the Commission was not trying to 'sock it to' the 
airlines. 

Mr. Blais said that the Airlines Policy Committee's objections 
to using current revenues to finance capital projects were well 
known and the Committee had to oppose the resolution. He directed 
the Commission's attention to the letter of January 18, 1978 
from Mr. Thomas A. Welch of Brobeck, Phleger and Harrison. 



Director's Report 

(A) Airport Shuttle Bus Operations 

Mr. Heath referred the Commission to the material before them. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she just wanted to make sure the 
buses were an assistance and not a problem. 



-4- 



£or developing a computer sy.tem which could be u.od « teth 
San Francisco Airport and Logan Airport in Boston was belnq 
followed up on by the FAA. 



Director's Report (continued) 

(B) Retirement Resolution 

Mr. Heath said that Mr. Jorgen Jorgenson had retired and Mr. Heath 
requested a retirement resolution . 

Commission President Bernstein so ordered. 



Cntroduction of New Business by Commissioners 
Jo new business was introduced. 



adjournment 

?here being no further business before the Commission, the meeting 
idjourned at 6:10 PM. 







Eric Craven 
Commission Secretary 



-5- 



/ 



pt» SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



May 17, 1971 



JAN 1 1 197Q 



OCCLV ZNTi 
LIC L 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR. Z.L. GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 

OF THE 

AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

SPECIAL MEETING 

May 17, 1978 



Call to Order 

The Special Meeting of the Airports Commission was called to order at 
2:30 p.m. in Room 300 of 101 Grove Street (the Public Health Building), 
San Francisco, California. 



Roll Call 
Present: 

Absent: 



Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 
Ruth S. Kadish, William K. 
Coblentz. 

Commissioner William E. 
McDonnell . 



Pledge of Allegiance 



Led by Commissioner Kadish. 



Calendar Items 

On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner Kadish, 
the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

(1) Adoption of San Francisco International Airport Noise Abatement 
Regulation. 



No. 78-0131 



Resolution adopting a Noise 
Abatement Regulation for San 
Francisco International Air- 
port. 

The purpose of this resolution 
is to provide for a reduction 
of the noise levels at San 
Francisco International Airport 
and its environs by: (1) re- 
quiring all commercial jet- 
powered transport aircraft to be 
noise certificated under FAR 
Part 36 by January 1, 1985, and 
(2) restricting introduction of 
aircraft types not presently 
operating at San Francisco In- 
ternational Airport unless those 
aircraft types have been certi- 
fied as being in compliance with 
FAR Part 36 noise emission 
standards . 



Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, stated that the purpose 
of the noise regulation was to reduce noise levels at the Airport. 
The regulation had been before the Commission at a prior time, 
only one change was made, the one suggested by Ms. Maraviglia, 
that the notice of public meeting on variance will be published in 
a local newspaper in the same manner as the announcement of a spe- 
cial meeting, etc. Mr. Heath said that Mr. David Lilly of San 
Francisco Tomorrow has presented material to the Commission just 
prior to the meeting which detailed suggested amendments for the 
regulation (that material is attached and included by reference) . 
Mr. Heath said that a cut-off date had been established for sub- 
mitting suggestions and these additions were well after the cut- 
off deadline. He said that he has read the material and believes 
the suggestions have considerable merit and that additional study 
should be made. He suggested that the Commission pass the regu- 
lation now in order to have effective regulations in place and 
consider Mr. Lilly's recommendations in the future. 

Mr. Lilly said that he realized it was late to present these 
amendments, but he said San Francisco Tomorrow's proposed amend- 
ments are generally in the nature of additional clauses to the 
existing proposed regulation. 

Commissioner Kadish said that the Commission had adopted a policy 
that the Airport would become the leading airport in the United 
States of noise abatement and with this resolution it has begun 
to follow through on that commitment. She said that she felt con- 
sideration of Mr. Lilly's amendments were important, but she said 
that they are really arriving too late for consideration at the 
present time. 

Mr. Lilly said that he wanted to make it clear that his organiza- 
tion appreciated the regulation, it was just that they felt some 
improvements could be made . 

Mr. Heath suggested that the staff follow the same procedure re- 
garding amendment of the regulation as had been followed in adopt- 
ing it, i.e., repeated public hearings and considerable redrafting. 
He said the Airport had found that that process produced a better 
regulation than had been started with due to the public input. 

Mr. Leonard of the Aircraft Transportation Association said that 
he wanted to reiterate the airlines' preference that the Airport 
not adopt local regulations. He said that if these regulations 
passed, they would pose an unreasonable burden on interstate com- 
merce. 

Mr. Heath said that Congressman Anderson has a bill which, like the 
proposed regulation, maintains the January 1, 1985 compliance date. 
He said that Senator Cannon's bill allows the date to slip until 
1990 and by passing these regulations the Airport can bring pres- 
sure on the Senate to hold fast on the date. 

Commissioner Coblentz said that the staff is to be commended on 
the writing of the regulation and the procedures followed. He said 
that people are looking to local government to lead in noise regu- 
lation and he felt all cooperating bodies were to be congratulated. 

Commissioner Kadish said that the Airport has involved people in 
San Mateo County who are the people most closely touched by noise 
problems. 



-2- 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

(2) Ratification and Approval of Budget for Additional Services 
Assignments, San Francisco Airport Architects. 

No. 78-0132 Resolution ratifying the action 

of the Director of Airports act- 
ing in accordance with Airports 
Resolution No. 70-0044, to make 
various assignments to the San 
Francisco Airport Architects 
under the "Additional Services" 
section of their basic agreement 
with the City. The Resolution 
also provides for the approval 
of budgets for on-going Addi- 
tional Services. No additional 
funds are required as money has 
been allocated from time to time 
in their contract for this spec- 
ific purpose. The period cover- 
ed for these assignments is from 
February 23, 1978 through May, 
1978. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a periodic approval for miscellaneous 
assignments made to the Airport Architects between February 2 3 
and May, 1978. He asked that the expenditures be approved by the 
Commission. 



On motion of Commissioner Bernstein, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolutions were unanimously passed: 

(3) Resolutions Defining Succession in Absence of Director of Airports 
and Secretary to the Airports Commission. 

No. 78-0133A A. This resolution updates the line 

of succession in the absence of 
the Director of Airports. 

No. 78-0133B B. This resolution establishes the 

line of succession in the ab- 
sence of the Secretary to the 
Airports Commission. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a housekeeping matter and would estab- 
lish that in the absence of the Director, Mr. Mike Bagan, Deputy 
Director for Operations and Maintenance, would be the Acting Dir- 
ector and in Mr. Bagan * s absence, Mr. Peter Singer, Deputy Direct- 
or for Business and Finance, would be Acting Director; also, in 
the absence of the Secretary to the Commission, Mr. Emmett Smith 
would be the Acting Secretary and in Mr. Smith's absence, Mr. 
Warren Hanson would be Acting Secretary. 



-3- 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz , seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

(4) Airport Contract No. 1125, Substitution of Subcontractor, 
Sludge Beds at Water Quality Control Plant. 

No. 78-0134 Resolution approving the sub- 

stitution of McGrath Steel Com- 
pany in lieu of F & M Steel 
Company to perform the rein- 
forcing steel fabrication work 
under Contract No. 1125. The 
general contractor for this 
work is E. Mitchell, Inc. 

(5) Modification No. 1, Airport Contract No. 1125, 
Sludge Beds at Water Quality Control Plant (No cost) . 

No. 78-0135 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order No. 1125-1 in accordance 
with Airports Commission Reso- 
lution No. 70-0044. The con- 
tractor for this is E. Mitchell, 
Inc. 

This modification requires the 
contractor to comply with the 
Affirmative Action Requirements 
specified by the Federal Environ- 
mental Protection Agency in ad- 
dition to the provisions of the 
City's Human Rights Commission. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if the contracting companies had fulfil- 
led the human rights requirements and why were the affirmative 
action provisions being fulfilled so late. 

Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director for Planning and Development, said 
that the City non-discrimination clause is included in every con- 
tract, but since this contract is under jurisdiction of the EPA, 
we have to include their affirmative action requirements as well. 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

6) Modification No. 8, Airport Contract No. 977, Ratifying Action 

of Director of Airports on Change Orders, Expansion of Electrical 
Distribution System - Phase I, $13,534.89. 

No. 78-0136 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders 8 and 10, and requesting 
the Controller's certification 
of Modification No. 8 to Airport 
Contract No. 977, in the total 
amount of $13,534.89. 

Mr. Heath said that there were two changes made in the contract: one 
was necessitated due to the lateness of another contract completion 
and the other was due to field conditions. 



-4- 



On motion of Commissioner Radish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz , the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

(7) Tenant Improvement: Host International, North Terminal Cocktail 
Lounge, Snack Bar, Fast Bar, and H & I Hub Coffee Shop, 
$650,000.00 

No. 7 8-0137 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications sub- 
mitted by Host International 
showing the Cocktail Lounge, 
Fast Bar, and Snack Bar in the 
North Terminal and Coffee House 
in the Concourse H & I Hub. 
The work consists of construct- 
ing restaurant and bar facilities 
within unfinished lease spaces 
in the North Terminal Complex. 
The work will be done by Host 
International at its own and sole 
expense and without rental credit, 
The estimated cost is $650,000.00. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a formal resolution approving final 
plans and specifications which have been reviewed by staff. He 
recommended approval . 



On motion of Commissioner Radish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following item was placed before the Commission; 
subsequently no action was taken: 

I) Supplemental Appropriation for 1978-79, $13,047,952.00. 

A supplemental appropriation for 
1978-79 is required to provide 
for operating expenses of the 
North Terminal, the Central Heat- 
ing and Cooling Plant and certain 
other expenses for the year that 
were previously not included in 
the regular budget for 1978-79. 
The proposed amount of this ad- 
dition to the budget is 
$13,047,952.00. 

The Commission normally considers 
the budget at two meetings, the 
first of which is a public hear- 
ing. Although this item is a re- 
quest for supplemental appropria- 
tion, it is a major addition to 
the budget and covers items not 
previously incorporated in the 
budget. 

Airport management is therefore 
bringing this item before the 
Commission for preliminary con- 
sideration at this time with the 
anticipation of final considera- 
tion at the next meeting. 



-5- 



Mr. Heath saxd that this is the supplemental appropriation for the 
operation of the Worth Terminal for the remainder of fiscal year 
1978-79. He said that it includes an additional $2.1 million in 
revenue bond interest that was not included in the original fiscal 
year request. He said that staff is not asking for Commission ap- 
proval today. He said that the appropriation does not technically 
require a public hearing but he believes it best to hold a public 
hearing, ask for comments and then take action at the June 6 Com- 
mission meeting. 

In regard to the painting maintenance contract for the North Term- 
inal, Commissioner Kadish said that she would like to know for how 
long the contract would be in effect. 

Mr. Heath responded that it would be in effect for one year. 

Mr. Ron Wilson, Assistant Deputy Director for Maintenance, said 
that the $240,000 was thought to be an appropriate figure to bring 
the facilities up to standard by outside contractors. He said that 
this money would be well spent as a one time expense and afterward, 
hopefully, we would have current staff maintain it. He said that 
his staff estimated that 1210 man days are needed for the necessary 
work and based on the current rate of $135 per man day plus $27.50 
worth of materials per man day and $48,881 for profit and overhead 
the total would come out to about $24 0,0 00. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if that figure included materials. 

Mr. Wilson said that it did and the cost included fringes, etc. for 
an outside contractor. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would question the magnitude of 
the figure. She asked whether the Airport was planning to have the 
painting done by an outside contractor. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that the balance of expenses would be 
recovered by the airlines. 

Mr. Bob Bartlett of the San Francisco Chronicle asked how it was 
possible to overlook a $13 million budget request. 

Mr. Heath said that the expenditures do not have to take place until 
the opening of the North Terminal. 

Mr. Bartlett questioned the painters' rates. 

Mr. Wilson suggested that Mr. Rartlett might check with a painter's 
union for accuracy of the rates. 

Mr. David Lilly said that this item is partly bond debt service 
and the bond schedule calls for payments in May and November. 

Mr. Singer said that '-'hen the original budget was put together in 
January, the Airport did not allow for putting money into the Novem- 
ber payment which has to be made in May. 

Mr. Lilly asked if this item will go before the Board of Supervisors. 

Mr. Heath said that it would. 



-6- 



On motion of Commissioner Coblentz, seconded by Commissioner 
Radish, the following resolution was unanimously passed: 

(9) Resolution Approving Professional Services Agreement Touche Ross 
& Company, $25,500.00. 

No. 78-0138 This agreement covers profes- 

sional services relative to 
present and future operations, 
equipment and related matters 
connected with public parking 
facilities at the Airport. 

Mr. Heath said that this is the accounting firm that did the 
management report for the Airport and the current item would have 
them look at the present money collection and management systems 
and at computerized systems to determine if those should be put 
in the garage. Also, this agreement would provide the Airport 
with a recommendation as to how the garage contract should be 
structured and how the Airport can be assured that it will get 
good responsible management. He said that the staff believes 
Touche Ross is able to do this and he recommends approval of this 
contract. 

Commissioner Radish asked what was the timetable for completion 
of the contract. 

Mr. Singer said that it would take 60 days. 

Commissioner Radish said that at Miami Airport all cars that are 
waiting to unload passengers are required to turn off their en- 
gines in order to not pollute the air. She said that she be- 
lieved this was a good idea. 

Mr. Heath said that as part of the architectural work on the 
Central and South Terminals, the Airport would be bringing back 
Dr. Faustman who is a traffic engineering expert. 



On motion of Commissioner Radish, seconded by Commissioner 
Coblentz, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

(10) Approval of Professional Services Agreement, 

Master Architect Services, San Francisco Airport Architects, 
$172,000.00. 

No. 78-0139 Resolution approving the pro- 

fessional services agreement 
with the San Francisco Airport 
Architects to provide master 
architect services to update 
the terminal area master plan 
and to maintain the terminal 
area master plan on a continu- 
ous and current basis, reflect- 
ing authorized changes in re- 
quirements including changes in 
Commission, airlines and con- 
cessionaire programs; in air 
transport industry trends; in 
Commission policies and objec- 
tives; and in construction 
phasing . 



-7- 



Consultant will also review 
projects in the modernization 
and replacement program that 
are assigned to other design 
architects for conformance 
with the master plans as well 
as review all proposals for 
tenant improvements for estab- 
lished criteria, design stand- 
ards, and external esthetics. 

Mr. Heath said that this is the resolution which the architects 
need for approval of their work under master architect services. 
He said that this contract would include publishing a booklet 
which would have the master plan spelled out so that as changes 
are made, the master plan can be kept up to date. He said that 
the maximum amount to be spent would be $173,000. 



Director's Report 

Al. Sound System in Room 28 2 

Mr. Heath called attention to the letter he had received from the 
Civil Service Commission requesting a better public address system, 
Mr. Heath requested permission from the Commission to write to Mr. 
Boas on behalf of the Airports Commission. 



A. Retirement Resolution 

Mr. Heath said that Gerry Raye , Head Electrician, had retired and 
requested a retirement resolution. 

Commission President Bernstein so ordered. 



Public Information Program Review 

Mr. Heath said that San Jose State graduate students have looked 
at the Airport's public relations program and have presented a 
report to the staff. He said that the students hope to present 
the same program to the Commission in June. 



Communications 

No discussion of communications took place. 



Introduction of New Business by Commissioners 

Commissioner Kadish asked if there was a problem of thefts in the 
garage. 

Mr. Mike Bagan, Deputy Director for Operations and Maintenance, said 
that there is a problem once in a while but nothing serious enough to 
consider increased security. He said that the only alternative would 
be video, which would be very expensive and not too effective, since 
a potential thief could hide behind pillars. He said that the Air- 
port had found that patrolling of the area is the most effective method 
of discouraging thefts. 

Mr. Russell Presting of Onorato Garages said that when they were man- 
aging the garage they had discussed the question of TV surveillance and 
were told that the ceiling is not high enough for effective surveillance 



Adjournment 

There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting ad- 
journed at 3:20 p.m. 



si 

Eric Craven 
Commission Secretary 



-9- 




^/ faa^z^coj&inrLOvroW 



9 FIRST STREET • ROOM 826 • SAN FRANCISCO, CA 941 OS • TELEPHONE 566-7050 



May 17, 1978 



San Francisco Airport Commission 
San Francisco, California 94128 



Dear Commissioners 



CU. 



RE CE3v ED 
MAY 1 7 1978 



On behalf of San Francisco Tomorrow, I wish to applaud 
the proposed noise control regulation and urge its 
adoption. 

Attached you will find some proposed amendments which we 
feel tend to strengthen this regulation. It is our hope 
that you will seriously consider adopting these amendments 



Very truly yours, 




DAVID M. LILLY X - 
Chairman, Airport Commission 

DML:ct 

Attachment 






AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 

Part 2 - In order to operate at San Francisco International 
Airport all commercial jet powered transport type 
aircraft, subsonic or supersonic, which are of a 
type not presently operating at San Francisco 
International Airport must be certified under 
Federal Aviation Regulations - Part 36 Noise 
Standards prior to commencing operation. 

For the purposes of Parts 1 and 2, "now operating" 
is defined to mean in regularly scheduled service 
into and out of San Francisco International Airport 
within the year immediately preceding the adoption 
of this regulation. 

Part 3 - Airlines certified by the Civil Aeronautics Board 
or the California Public Utilities Commission to 
serve at San Francisco International Airport will 
file at the office of the Director of Airports, 
San Francisco International Airport, within 90 days 
of the adoption of this regulation an initial report 
which contains a listing by aircraft registration 
number of all aircraft in their respective fleet 
which operate at San Francisco International Airport, 



-6- 



denoting each aircraft's certification status with 
respect to FAR Part 36 as implemented by FAR Part 91, 
Sub-part E. 

The Airports Commission recognizes that the airlines 
must conform to the Part 36 phased compliance 
schedule in Section 91.305 of Sub-part E, FAR Part 91, 
on a fleetwide basis. In order to demonstrate 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 

Commission when submitted in writing and accompanied 
by an Environmental Impact Report prepared by the 
airline pursuant to the provisions of the California 
Environmental Quality Act to the Director of Airports, 
San Francisco International Airport, not later than 
60 days prior to the time the variance, if granted, 
would become effective. Requests for a variance must 
show the type of variance being requested, the 
effective time frame of the variance and the basis 
upon which the variance is sought. 

Requests for variances will be heard by the Airports 
Commission at regularly scheduled meetings. Notice of 
the time, place and subject matter of the consideration 
of the request for variance will be published in the 
official minutes of the meeting of the Airports Commission 
not less than thirty days prior to that Airports Commission 
Meeting wherein the request for variance will be 
considered. In addition written notice of such meetings 
will be published in local newspapers of general 
circulation 30 days prior to the variance hearing. 



-8- 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 

At the Airports Commission Meeting considering the 
request for variance, the airline operator requesting 
the variance and interested members of the public may 
present evidence relevent (sic) to the determination 
of the existence of good cause. 

Good cause will be found to exist if it is determined 
that the granting of the variance satisfies the public 
interest. In weighing the public interest the Airports 
Commission's consideration includes but is not necessarily 
limited to the following: 

A) The adverse environmental impact of granting 
a variance including, but not limited to, the 
effect of "single event" incidents of noise 
generated by the aircraft for which a variance 
is sought. 

B) The economic and technological feasibility 

of complying with the noise control regulation 
of San Francisco International Airport. 

C) The noise impact at San Francisco International 
Airport with respect to Title 21, Sub-chapter 6, 



-9- 



of the California Administrative Code should 
the variance be granted. 

D) The value to the public of the services for 
which the variance is sought. 

E) Whether the airline operator is taking bona 
fide measures to the best of its ability to 
comply with these regulations. 

The burden of proof shall be upon the applicant for a 
variance. The Airports Commission in granting a 
variance may impose reasonable conditions which it deems 
necessary to accomplish the purposes of these noise 
control regulations. 

Among the conditions which may be imposed are the 
following; 

A) Curfew restrictions. 

B) Limitation of the number of operations. 

C) Load limitation. 

D) Limitations on the number, duration and/or 
time of day of engine testing (run-up) . 

In no event will a variance exceed one year from its 
effective date. Thereafter, should a renewal be sought, 



the air carrier seeking a renewal will be required to 
comply with all provisions of this regulation. 



AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 



Notice of the decision of the Airports Commission on the 
requested variance will be made in writing by the Director 
of Airports to the aircraft operator prior to the effective 
date of the variance. 

No variance will be considered which requests relief from 
the provisions of FAR Part 36 or FAR Part 91 as they apply 
to this Airports regulation unless a variance from the 
provisions of FAR Part 36 and FAR Part 91 has been previously 
granted to the airline operator by the appropriate Federal 
agency. Under no circumstances will the Airports Commission 
extend the time of compliance with the Regulation beyond 
January 1, 1985. 

6. ENFORCEMENT 

The Airports Commission in and for the City and County of 
San Francisco and pursuant to the authority granted by the 
State of California, shall reserve the right to revoke or 
6uspend any and/or all operating permit(s) or license(s) 
granted by the Airports Commission to any airline operation and wil 
do SO when it has been determined that said airline has not 
complied with the provisions set forth herein. 

- 1C - 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



JUNE 6, 1978 



;978 






GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

President 

RUTH S. KADISH 

Vice-President 

william e. McDonnell 

william k. coblentz 

dr. z.l goosby 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 

OF THE 

AIRPORTS COMMISSION 

MEETING 

June 6, 1978 

Call to Order: 

The regular meeting of the Airports Commission was called to order 
at 2:30 p.m. in Room 282, City Hall, San Francisco. 

Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein*, 

Ruth S. Kadish, William E. 
McDonnell, Zuretti L. Goosby. 

Absent: Commissioner William K. Coblentz 

Pledge of Allegiance: Led by Commissioner Goosby. 



Calendar Items : 

(1) Approval of Professional Services Agreements, Modernization & 

Replacement Phase of the Airport Expansion Program, $2,598,500.00. 

On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted, in 
principle : 

No. 78-0140 Resolution approving professional 

services agreements with various 
architects/engineering firms to 
provide professional services on 
specific projects in the Moderni- 
zation and Replacement Phase of 
the Airport Expansion Program. 

Mr. Richard Heath, Director of Airports, said that this is a 
resolution which approves professional services agreements with 
various firms for work which includes the West Addition to the 
South Terminal, modifications to the Central Terminal building, 
construction of connectors to the North & South Terminals, board- 
ing areas, pedestrian bridges, the South Terminal East Addition 
and field exploration, sampling, testing, inspection as well as 
foundation engineering design and advisory services for projects. 
He noted that the contracts with San Francisco Airport Architects 
and Associated Geotechnical Engineers, Inc. would last through 
the entire Modernization and Replacement Phase. 

Commissioner McDonnell requested that the financing of these pro- 
jects be reviewed. Mr. Heath said that financing will be avail- 
able either from the Series A Revenue Bonds or the 1967 General 
Obligation Bonds. 



Arrived during discussion of the first Calendar Item at 2:37 p.m., 
having just come from a meeting of Commission presidents. 



-1- 



Commissioner Kadish said that she understood that the money in 
the 1976 Bonds was earmarked for specific programs, and wondered 
if the Airport would be within its rights to use that money for 
the items under consideration. 

Mr. Heath said that it was his understanding that sufficient 
funds are available. 

Ms. Mary Callanan, Chief Accountant, said that the Airport has 
used 1967 bond funds for projects which are a part of the 
$143,000,000 Series A projects; these expenditures can be trans- 
ferred to the 1976 bond fund, thereby releasing funds from the 
1967 Bond Fund for certification of these contracts. She said 
that it was an accounting mechanism which would provide funds 
for these architectural and engineering services. 

Commissioner Kadish said that, in other words, 1967 G.O. Bond 
money could be used where 1976 Revenue Bond money could not be 
used. She said she thinks it is very important to have that 
matter checked out. She said that she had some additional 
questions, the first of which concerned the terms of the con- 
tracts as well as the dollar amounts. She said that with Gensler 
& Associates and the Anshen & Allen contracts, the term of the 
agreement is not spelled out, nor are the amounts of the contracts 
stated. 

Mr. Heath said that these contracts are not the same as those used 
in the past. He said that when these firms made their presenta- 
tion to the Airport, they indicated that they wanted to work on an 
hourly basis because no one knew how much work would be needed. 
He said that the Airport was not sure how much earthquake protec- 
tion was needed, or renovation, etc. Mr. Heath said that it was 
decided to have a contract that would go through the schematic 
phase and then a fixed-fee contract would be negotiated at that 
time, once the scope of the work was determined. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if there could be a figure set that was 
not to be exceeded. She said that it would seem that a contract 
which leaves out any statement relative to financial expenditures 
is a loose contract. 

Mr. Heath said that this is a specific contract for a specific 
type of work. He said that for the second phase, there would be 
a whole new contract with a fixed amount. 

Commissioner Kadish said that another question she had related to 
the proposed contract with Willis & Associates, page 2, Section B. 
She said that the Willis contract allows for one nine-week period, 
plus another three-week period from the date Willis is given notice 
to proceed. She said that this would be approximately four months 
from the date Willis was given notice to proceed. She asked why 
Willis got that much more time when the other contracts require 
that the firms have their work completed four months from the date 
of signing. 

Commissioner Kadish said that another question she had related to 
the proposed contract with San Francisco Airport Architects, page 
2, item 2, d; page 3, item 3, e ; and page 4, item 4, e, where the 
word "reasonable" was used. She said that she recommended that 
the word should be further clarified or deleted. 

Mr. Heath said that the word is a word of the art in legal matters. 
He said that it was used to eliminate "unreasonable" and that he 
does not think any contractual problems would arise. 



-2- 



Mr. Dave Kroopnick, Deputy City Attorney and Acting Airports 
General Counsel, said that he had advised that the word should 
be deleted in most cases. He said that it should be assumed 
that the Commission would act in good faith. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would like to address some 
questions to Mr. Howard Friedman, an architectural and engineer- 
ing consultant to the Airport. She referred him to the proposed 
contract with Airport Architects, p. 4, item 6, c, where it says 
that the consultant shall make visits to the site to determine 
if work is proceeding as stated. She said that there is a ques- 
tion as to who is really responsible: the consultant, the arch- 
itect, or construction management. 

Mr. Friedman said that construction management and contractors 
services include inspection necessary to give the contractor 
reasonable knowledge of the work, the amount of completion of 
the work, etc. He said that it was important that full time in- 
spection be had in order to assure that work was being done in 
accordance with plans and specifications. He said that the work 
could best be done in a different arrangement from that which is 
currently in use, an arrangement which would allow the architect 
to exercise more control and review than in the past. Mr. Fried- 
man said, though, that the language to which Commissioner Kadish 
referred was normal architectural jargon. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked Mr. Friedman if he envisioned the 
need for a construction management team. 

Mr. Friedman answered that the Airport was looking for a project 
that meets design, program and budget needs and gives full value. 
He said that the architects needed their own full-time inspector. 
He said that construction management could assist with their own 
estimating and inspection people. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he thought this point was well 
taken and asked what policy the staff was planning regarding 
architectural and construction management. 

Mr. Heath said that the staff had not come to a decision on that. 
He said that Mr. Robert Lee, Deputy Director, Planning and Devel- 
opment, will be reviewing the plans and will make a report to the 
staff. He said that he had not gotten into the inspection pro- 
grams yet but would when the Airport was close to the construction 
phase. He said that if there is a change required to give the 
architects additional responsibility, it would be made, although 
as the contracts are now drawn, they continue in the present ar- 
rangement. He said that if the contracts were changed, that area 
of responsibility would go to either the staff or architects; and 
if it was shifted to the architects, there would have to be a 
change in the contract. He said that regarding all these projects, 
construction was at least a year off. 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr, Kroopnick if he felt comfortable 
with the contracts; she asked how much staff time had been spent 
going over the contracts. 

Mr. Kroopnick said that he had spent a day and a half and would 
like more time. He said that there had been several drafts and 
that he didn't believe the latest suggested changes had been in- 
corporated into the new documents. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she did not want delay, but she was 
concerned about contracts that have not been entirely gone over 
by the legal staff. She said that she was concerned about approv- 
ing documents that were not final, but were "in the works". She 



-3- 



said that the Airport recognizes that contracts need to be 
amended but if the homework is done, it would minimize the num- 
bers of amendments in the future because we would have a clean, 
standard form in which terminology is clear. 

Commissioner Kadish said that additionally, she was concerned 
that there was not a meshing between the energy planning and the 
schematics. She said that it would be her recommendation that 
approval be put off until the next meeting when the Commission 
would have the final documents. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked Commissioner Kadish if she felt that 
it would be possible to get the Willis contract going. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she didn't think any architects 
should assume that the projects are not going ahead, but she 
said that there are several things in the Willis contract that 
are repetitive. 

She said that none of the four firms involved should assume there 
would be any question of proceeding, but there was a problem with 
the clarity of the contracts, especially the terminology, and it 
should be clarified. 

Mr. Heath said that if a decision was delayed, the Commission 
would be putting off the start of the contract for two weeks. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if it would be possible to approve 
it with the understanding that the form would be cleaned up. 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr. Kroopnick if he had gone over the 
Willis contract. Mr. Kroopnick said that he thought that on page 
4 a specific amount had to be inserted. He said that other than 
that, he thought this contract could be approved in principle. 
He said that getting a good contract was a matter of rearranging 
some of the terms. He said that if specific amounts were incor- 
porated into page 4 and an addition made that the total amount 
could be increased only by appropriate amendments of the document 
that then it would be satisfactory. He said that he felt that the 
documents could be cleaned up and back to the Commission by the 
next meeting. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that Mr. Lee should note all the points 
brought up and the changes should be made and coordinated with the 
City Attorney's office. Commissioner McDonnell said that he would 
suggest that the Commission go ahead and approve all the agreements 

Commissioner Kadish asked what the urgency was in moving ahead if 
the standards had not been set. 

Mr. Lee said that standards are not needed until the architects 
get to the schematic stages. He said that some work on the seis- 
mic condition of the terminal was needed immediately. He said that 
during the development, there would be weekly or bi-weekly meetings 
with all the consultants so that by the time they made their final 
draft, they would be quite familiar with the program. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if Mr. Friedman was in agreement that the 
standards had to be set first before plans were developed. 

Mr. Friedman said that he was very much in agreement. 

Commissioner Kadish said that if the Commission was approving these 
documents in principle, then she felt that could be done at the 
current meeting. 



-4- 



Mr. Heath said that the staff would bring the documents back with 
the final form. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked whether under the San Francisco Air- 
port Architects contract, the firm would be in the same manage- 
ment position as in the past. 

Mr. Len Blackford of Airport Architects said that the work under 
consideration at present is only for construction documents and 
doesn't apply to the construction itself. 

Commissioner Goosby asked if the Airport had a permanent con- 
struction management firm or would it hire a new one . 

Mr. Heath said that the Airport had a five year contract with the 
present firm. 

Commissioner Kadish said that the resolution should be amended by 
adding the words "in principle". She said that the contract form 
should be standardized and dollar amounts added and the corrected 
versions should come back in two weeks. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he suggested Commissioner Kadish 
be closely involved with changes in the contracts. 



) Bid Call for Airport Contract No. 1161, Remodeling Fifth Floor 
Offices, Central Terminal. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0141 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications and 
authorizing the Director of Air- 
ports to call for bids on Con- 
tract No. 1161, Remodeling Fifth 
Floor offices, Central Terminal. 

Mr. Heath said this resolution approves going to bid to remodel 
the fifth floor offices. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked whether this was an area which had 
been previously remodeled. Mr. Heath said that it had not been. 



) Airport Contract No. 1126R, Rejection of Bids, Industrial Waste- 
water Collection System, Phase III. 

On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted after 
discussion in executive session. 

No, 78-0160 Resolution rejecting all bids 

for Contract No. 1126R, In- 
dustrial Wastewater Collection 
System, Phase III. 

Mr. Heath said that the Airport had received two bids. He said 
that due to some attempts to change bids after they had been sub- 
mitted, Mr. Kroopnick indicated that it would be best to reject 
all bids. 



-5- 



Mr. Lee said that this was the second rejection of this contract, 
He said that the first time everyone overbid and on the second 
bid we only got two bidders and they were slightly over the en- 
gineer's estimate. 

Mr. Heath said that in light of the possibility of litigation, 
discussion should be postponed until after other agenda items 
when this item would be taken up in executive session of the 
Commission. 



4) Modificaton No, 36 (Debit) , Airport Contract No. 650C, Completion 
of North Terminal Building, $30,112.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0142 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certification 
of Debit Modification No. 36 to 
Airport Contract No. 650C, in the 
total amount of $30,112.00 for 
providing redesign and installa- 
tion of fire protection system, 
including hydraulic calculations, 
at grid lines E and F between 
column lines 95 and 107 in the 
basement level . 

Mr. Heath said that this was a modification of the North Terminal 
building fire protection system in the basement area. 



On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: 

Modification No. 37 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 650C, Ratifying 
Action of the Director of Airports Change Orders Completion of 
North Terminal Building, $22,407.00. 

No. 78-0143 Resolution approving and ratifying 

the action of the Director of Air- 
ports in approving Change Orders 
109 and 124 and requesting the 
Controller's certification of Mod- 
ification No. 37 to Airport Con- 
tract No. 650C, in the total 
amount of $22,407.00, for provid- 
ing additional zonolite insulating 
concrete on low roofs and revisions 
to hardware schedule including 
electrical powered door alarm de- 
vice at door 266 for increased 
security protection. 

Modification No. 9 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 925, North Terminal 
Aprons and Reconstruction of Taxiways "S" and 'SS", $3,498.00. 

No. 78-0144 Resolution approving and ratifying 

the action of the Director of Air- 
ports in approving Change Orders 
Nos. 925-16 and 925-17 in accord- 
ance with Airports Commission 
Resolution No. 70-0044 and request- 
ing Controller's certification of 
Debit Modification No. 9 in the 
amount of $3,498.00. 



-6- 



(7) Modification No. 1 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 941, Improvements 
to Sewage Pumping Station No. 1, $1,646.00. 

No. 78-0145 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director of 
Airports in approving Change Order 
No. 941-1 in accordance with Air- 
ports Commission Resolution No. 
70-0044 and requesting Controller's 
certification of Debit Modifica- 
tion No. 1 in the amount of 
$1,646.00. 

(8) Modification No. 26 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 950, Boarding Areas 
H & I and Connectors, $15,894.00. 

No. 78-0146 Resolution approving and requesting 

the Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 2 6 to Airport Con- 
tract No. 950, in the total amount 
of $15,894.00. 

(9) Modification No. 27 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 950, Boarding Areas 
H & I and Connectors, $32,212.00. 

No. 78-0147 Resolution approving and requesting 

the Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 27 to Airport Con- 
tract No. 950, in the total amount 
of $32,212.00. 

10) Modification No. 26 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 1000, Ratifying 
Action of the Director of Airports on Change Orders, Garage: Stage 
IV - Superstructure Addition, $16,400.00. 

No. 78-0148 Resolution approving and ratifying 

the action of the Director of Air- 
ports in approving Change Orders 
69 through 79, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of Mod- 
ification No. 26 to Airport Con- 
tract 1000, in the total amount of 
$16,400.00. 

11) Modification No. 28 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 1000, Garage: 
Stage IV - Superstructure Addition, $102,670.00. 

No. 78-0149 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certification 
of Debit Modification No. 27 to 
Airport Contract No. 1000, in the 
total amount of $102,670.00. 

12) Modification No. 4 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 1015, Ratifying 
Action of Director of Airports on Change Orders, Garage: Stage V - 
Final Modifications, $17,742.00. 

No. 78-0150 Resolution approving and ratifying 

the action of the Director of Air- 
ports in approving Change Orders 
7 through 10, and requesting the 
Controller's certification of 
Modification No. 4 to Airport Con- 
tract No. 1015, in the total 
amount of $17,742.00. 



-7- 



Modification No. 1, Airport Contract No. 1098R, Emergency Airfield 
Pavement Repairs, Extension of Time. 

No. 78-0151 Resolution approving Modification 

No. 1, extending the completion 
date 90 calendar days from June 
30, 1978 to September 28, 1978, 
at no additional cost to the City, 

Mr. Heath said that the reason there are so many modifications is 
that the staff had requested CMC to get in all the modifications 
they could for the current meeting. When asked if this was all of 
the modifications before completion of the North Terminal, Mr, 
Heath said that this was the bulk of them, although there are still 
a few more . 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if Mr. Heath could inform the Commis- 
sion and the public as to the projected date for opening the North 
Terminal. Mr. Heath said that the Airport will not be able to open 
the North Terminal this fall because it would be too close to the 
Christmas rush and United Airlines would not want to be moving dur- 
ing that period. He said that United will be moving around January 
10 and the opening will be about February 10, 1979. 



Tenant Improvement: United Airlines Maintenance Operations Center, 
Replacement of Fire Mains, $400,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 7 8-0152 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submit- 
ted by United Airlines showing 
the proposed replacement of fire 
mains serving the B-2 9 hangars 
at the Maintenance Operations 
Center. 

Mr. Heath said this is a tenant improvement, which will be paid for 
by United Airlines without rental credit. 



Aircraft Noise Bill 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0153 Resolution supporting Congressman 

Glenn Anderson's Airport Noise 
Bill and opposing Senator Howard 
Cannon's Bill, S.B. 3064. 

Mr. Heath said that he is requesting that the Commission adopt this 
resolution opposing the Cannon Bill. He asked that this resolution 
be approved and he will send copies to the Mayor and the Board of 
Supervisors. 

Mr, David Lilly, representing San Francisco Tomorrow, stated his 
opposition to any of the Calendar items numbered 15 through 20, 
since public notice was not given until the time of the Commis- 
sion meeting. He asked that these items be put off until the 
next meeting. 



Mr. Eric Craven, Secretary to the Airports Commission, said that 
the additional items to the Calendar, Items 15 through 20, had 
only been finished the day before. 

Mr. David Kroopnick said that the notice was adequate since this 
is a regular meeting of the Commission. 

Mr. Heath said that he could appreciate Mr. Lilly's desire to re- 
ceive the agenda ahead of time, and that in the future, the Air- 
port will try to get items to people who appear regularly so that 
they will have a chance to consider them. 

Commissioner Kadish said that for those Commissioners who work on 
the material they receive, it is important that the Commission 
packets be delivered by the Thursday before the Commission meeting 



Possible Extension of BART to the Airport 

On motion of Commissioner McDonnell, seconded by Commissioner 
Kadish, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0154 Resolution urging a maximum 

effort to obtain an extension 
of BART or an equivalent mass 
transportation facility from 
downtown San Francisco to the 
Airport. 

Mr. Heath said that he had met with people from BART and they felt 
the Airport's position was unclear. Consequently, he thought that 
it was appropriate to have the Commission reiterate its policy. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she was surprised that the hole in 
the ground under the parking garage was not statement enough rela- 
tive to BART. She said that with the extra millions it cost to 
make the garage ready to receive BART, she was surprised that BART 
didn't clearly understand the Airport's position. 

Commissioner McDonnell suggested that this action should be taken 
every year but should really not be necessary since San Francisco 
has invested more money than any other community in BART. 



Public Hearing on Supplemental Appropriation for 1978-79, 
$11,550,752.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0155 Public hearing on proposed reve- 

nues and expenses incidental to 
the operation and maintenance of 
the North Terminal, the Central 
Heating and Cooling Plant, and 
certain other expenses for fis- 
cal year 1978-79. 

Mr. Heath said that when the Commission approved the regular budget 
for the Airport, City rules did not allow the Airport to include 
money for items and activities which would begin after the start of 
the fiscal year, July 1; such things as the North Terminal which 
would start operation during the fiscal year, but would not be op- 
erating at the beginning of the fiscal year. He said that the Com- 
mission indicated at that time that the Airport would be back to 



-9- 



the Board of Supervisors for additional money for costs related 
to the North Terminal. He said that Mr. Pete Singer, Deputy 
Director for Business and Finance, would answer any questions. 

Mr. Singer said that this item was carried forward from the 
previous Commission meeting in conformity with the general pro- 
cedure of having two readings of a budget matter. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he would like some information 
regarding the new employees listed on Page 41, item 471. He felt 
that the number of employees requested for the North Terminal was 
excessive . 

Mr. Heath said that these employees would also be used when the 
South and Central Terminals have been remodeled. He said that 
sufficient personnel is needed to direct traffic and patrol the 
airfield. He said that if the Airport lacked sufficient person- 
nel, it might be liable in a suit. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that there should be working sessions 
with the Commission and the staff regarding the projected budget, 
so that the Commissioners could help get the budget through the 
Board of Supervisors. He said that he felt it was important that 
what the Commission asked for not be excessive. 

Mr. Singer stated that there is an indication for a need to re- 
organize the security forces at the Airport. 

Mr. Parskey of the International Association of Machinists, and a 
15-year employee at the Airport, said that more safety officers 
were needed. 

Mr. Heath said that there are some areas around the Airport that 
have not been painted for sometime and really look terrible. Com- 
missioner McDonnell asked if one area was on the south side of the 
Central Terminal and was told that it was . 

Mr. Singer said that there are a number of items in the appropria- 
tion that do not apply to the North Terminal and that this had been 
mentioned at the previous meeting. Mr. Singer also distributed some 
additional information to the Commissioners on additional items for 
the appropriation that increased the total by $65,360, from 
$11,485,392.00 to $11,550,752.00. 



Public Hearing on Airline Landing Fee and Terminal Space Rates for 
1978-79. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0156 Resolution adopting a schedule 

of rates and charges for landing 
fees and terminal space rates 
for 1978-79. 

Mr. Heath said that the Airport staff proposed a rate increase in 
each of the categories, for landing fees, from the current $0.48 
to $1.03. He said that in order to fund the waste water treatment 
plant and improvements to the international arrival area, it is 
proposed that there be a special charge of $0.85 for the first 
year and $0.69 for the second year. He said that as soon as the 
$90 million bonds were sold, these charges would be dropped. 



-10- 



Mr. Heath said that he had received a telegram from Mr. Chamberlin.. 
of Delta Air Lines objecting to the discount which is part of the 
current schedule of landing fees. Mr. Heath said that he had dis- 
cussed this with Mr. Chamber lin on the phone and told him that the 
landing fee agreements signed by all airlines precluded the Airport 
from changing the graduated rate provision at this time, but that 
it might be considered by the airlines and the Airport in the 
future . 

Commissioner McDonnell asked what the opinion of the Airlines 
Policy Committee was on the proposed fees and rates. Mr. Heath 
said that the airlines have not expressed a formal opinion and 
there are differing opinions among the airlines . 

Mr. Thomas Welch of Brobeck, Phleger & Sussman, representing the 
airlines, said that the airlines protested both the increase in 
landing fees and the increase in space rental rates. He said that 
the need for increases was because of an illegal diversion of 
funds from the Airport to the General Fund of the City of San 
Francisco. He said that the Airport Director had said that the 
airlines would be reimbursed for the special charges collected, 
but the current version of the resolution does not specify this; 
rather, it says that those funds which have not been expended 
will be credited back to the airlines. 

Mr. Heath said that if the funds had already been spent, it cer- 
tainly would not apply. 

Commissioner McDonnell asked if the airlines were protesting the 
supplemental appropriation. 

Mr. Welch said that he could not say as he had just received a 
copy of it. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that the whole point is that if we 
move ahead with the bond sale, then there wouldn't be any problem. 

Mr. Heath said that if the bond sale goes ahead, the special charg- 
es would not go into effect. 

Mr. Welch reiterated the airlines' position that they protest any 
increases at all on the basis of the fact that there have been il- 
legal diversions of funds. 

Mr. Singer said that the $1.03 landing fee base rate does not in- 
clude any allowance for debt service on Series B bonds. 

Mr. Lilly said that at the time the $90 million bonds was post- 
poned, he had requested that if the matter was to be revived, it 
should be brought back for a public hearing. He said that he is 
hoping that that will be the case. 

Mr. Heath said that he doubted if the bond sale would go ahead in 
the next few weeks . 



Supplemental Appropriation, Accident Compensation, $21,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0157 Resolution requesting the Mayor 

to recommend to the Board of Sup- 
ervisors a supplemental appropri- 
ation in the amount of $21,000.00 
to provide additional funds re- 
quired for payment of worker's 
compensation and medical fees in 
connection with industrial acci- 
dents . 



-11- 



Mr. Heath said that these are various claims that have caused the 
Airport to go over its budgets. 



(20) Settlement of Litigated Claim of F. P. Lathrop Construction 
Company, Contract 569 - Airport Maintenance Facility. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
McDonnell, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0158 Resolution allowing the City 

Attorney to settle the liti- 
gated claim of F. P. Lathrop 
Construction Company for 
$60,000.00. 

This item was discussed in Executive Session by the Commission 



)irector's Report 

)ue to the length of the previous discussion, certain items listed in 
:he Calendar under Director's Report were not discussed. 

:. Medical Clinic 

Mr. Heath said that the contract runs out July 1. He said that Dr, 
Smookler is on vacation and Mr. Heath wanted Dr. Smookler present 
for the discussion. Mr. Heath said that the contract was planned 
to be put over until next meeting but that would be after July 1. 
He said that we could continue the contract on a month-to-month 
basis and if changes are to be made, they should be discussed when 
Dr. Smookler has returned. 



Space Allocation in the North Terminal 

Mr. Heath said that the staff wants the Commission to give thought 
to space allocations. He said that certain space has been obligated 
but contracts and leases have not yet been signed. 

Commissioner Kadish asked to hear what has been planned to date. 

Mr. Singer issued maps, leases, etc., to the Commissioners and 
pointed out areas on maps that had been leased, and those not yet 
leased but under consideration for specific activities. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would like a proposal as to how 
areas would be put out to bid and how we would get prospective 
tenants. 

Commissioner Goosby said that he assumes that the master lease or 
contract allows the Airport to make suggestions as to whom areas can 
be subleased. 

Mr. Heath said that, as an example, if we wanted to have a juice bar, 
it would have to contracted with Host. 

Commissioner McDonnell said that he would like to explain the reasons 
why the Airport has exclusive leases. He said that in the Central 
Terminal we have now a newsstand, fast food service, cocktail lounyes. 



-12- 



and two restaurants. He said that as soon as United has moved, 
there would be a cut in traffic. He said that if those same ten- 
ants are in the North Terminal, there would be a possibility of 
picking up customers. Commissioner McDonnell said that one example 
is the food service. That was put in the International Rotunda be- 
cause the Commission insisted on it. He said that the numbers of 
people going through there did not warrant it, but the profits in 
one place made up for the slack in another. He said that this 
policy was set up many years ago. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked what was the process that was set up 
for selecting concessionaires for locations. 

Commissioner McDonnell explained that the staff had a list of the 
slots and suggestions of what would be right for various slots. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if the Airport had any subleases now 
and was told by Mr. Singer that it did not, at least not in the 
terminal area. 

Mr. Heath said that the staff would bring the matter back to the 
Commission. He said that Mr. David Ellis had a few comments on the 
sublease matter. 

Mr. David Ellis, representing Skyline Candy and Gifts, said that he 
has had some discussions with Mr. Kroopnick about what the rights of 
an exclusive tenant in the terminal area are. He said that it was 
his opinion that Skyline Candy's exclusive contract would cover the 
North Terminal as well as the existing terminal. He said that his 
client does desire to go into the North Terminal and that his client's 
advice should be sought in connection with the plans , but they are 
concerned about where they can go at this point. He said that with 
the departure of United from the Central Terminal the area will be 
less valuable. He said that he would encourage the staff to take 
care when looking at that question, and be sure to take into account 
the economic possibilities. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would like to discuss this with him. 
She said that the people along Market Street suffered during the Mar- 
ket Street reconstruction, their businesses were affected, but it was 
part of progress and the same thing holds for Airport tenants who 
might be affected during reconstruction of various terminals. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that with more attractive prices, his 
client might be able to attract more people. Commissioner Bernstein 
said that it is the intention of this Commission to see that the Air- 
port has the best products at the best price. 



Retirement Resolution: Clyde Volens 

The Commission approved the issuance of a retirement resolution to 
Mr. Clyde Volens. 



The Commission then went into Executive Session and following dis- 
cussion unanimously passed Calendar Items (20) and (3) . 



There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m. 

Eric Craven 

Secretary 

Airports Commission 



-13- 



u 



SAN FRANCISCO 
AIRPORTS COMMISSION 




MINUTES 



JUNE 20, 1978 



GEORGE R. MOSCONE, MAYOR 

COMMISSIONERS 

RUTH S. KADISH 

President 

MORRIS BERNSTEIN 

Vice-President 

WILLIAM K. COBLENTZ 

DR. Z.L GOOSBY 
J. EDWARD FLEISHELL 



NOV 13 1978 

OpCMUNTi DEPT. 



RICHARD R. HEATH 

Director of Airports 

San Francisco International Airport 
San Francisco, California 94128 



MINUTES 

OF THE 

AIRPORTS COMMISSION MEETING 

June 20, 1978 



1. Call to Order: 

The regular meeting of the Airports Commission was called to 
order at 2:30 p.m. in Room 282, City Hall, San Francisco, 
California. 

2. Roll Call: 

Present: Commissioners Morris Bernstein, 

Ruth S. Kadish, Z. L. Goosby. 

Absent: Commissioners William E. McDonnell, 

William K. Coblentz. 

3. Pledge of Allegiance 

4. Approval of Minutes: 

The Minutes of the Airports Commission meeting of April 18, 1978 
were approved. 



Secretary's Report on Items Passed in Commission Executive 
Session, June 6, 1978. 

The Secretary to the Airports Commission, Eric Craven, gave a 
report on the items that were approved in executive session on 
June 6, 1978. He reported that both Items No. 20 and Item No. 3 
were unanimously passed. A copy of his statement is attached to 
these minutes. 



Calendar Items 

(1) Supplemental Appropriation: Judgments & Claims, $60,000.00 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0161 Resolution requesting the Mayor 

to recommend to the Board of 
Supervisors a supplemental ap- 
propriation in the amount of 
$60,000.00 to provide funds for 
payment of the settlement of the 
litigated claim of F. P. Lathrop 
Construction Company against the 
San Francisco International Airport. 

Mr. Peter Singer, Acting Director of Airports, said that the 
Commission had approved the item in executive session at its 
last meeting, but the Airport did not have sufficient money 
and would have to ask for a supplemental appropriation for 
$60,000. 



-1- 



(2) Completion of Professional Services Agreement, Interactive 
Resources, Inc., Solar Energy Feasibility Study, $4,046.20. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0162 Resolution accepting the work as 

satisfactorily completed by Inter- 
active Resources, Inc., for the 
making of Solar Energy Study at 
the Airport, including the prepa- 
ration of an application and pro- 
posal for a demonstration grant 
with the U.S. Department of 
Energy, and requesting the Con- 
troller to certify and make final 
payment in the amount of $4,046.20 
to Interactive Resources, Inc. of 
Point Richmond, CA 94801. 

Mr. Singer said that the solar energy study had been under- 
taken by Interactive Resources, Inc. upon approval of the 
Commission at its November 15 meeting last year and now the 
work has been satisfactorily completed. 

Commissioner Goosby asked if we have heard from Washington yet 
about the grant. 

Mr. Lee, Deputy Director, Planning/Development, said that we 
have not, but the Airport expects to hear by the end of July. 

Commissioner Kadish said that the Commission had asked for a 
progress report on the state of energy programs at the Airport. 
She said that the Commission had not received any information 
or a copy of the grant proposal. 

Commissioner Goosby asked if the solar installation would be 
going on the roof and was told it would be going on the roof 
of the South Terminal West Addition. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she would like Interactive 
Resources to make a report to the Commission. 

Mr. Lee said that he would try to arrange for a report. Addi- 
tionally, he said that he had a call from Mr. Alden Bryant of 
the Mayor's Office who said that he was going to try to follow 
through for the Mayor's Office on getting Washington to approve 
the grant. 



-2- 



(3) Modification No. 4 (Debit) , Airport Contract No. 937R, 

Industrial Wastewater Collection System, Phase I, $1,098.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0163 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Orders No. 937R-5 and 937R-6 in 
accordance with Airports Commission 
Resolution No. 70-0044 and request- 
ing Controller's certification of 
Debit Modification No. 4 in the 
amount of $1,098.00. 

Mr. Singer said that this particular modification encompasses 
three items in two change orders and that it was the staff's 
recommendation that it be passed. 



(4) Modification No. 28 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 1000, 
Garage: Stage IV - Superstructure Addition, $24,713.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following item was placed before the Commission for 
discussion; subsequently no action was taken on it and it was 
removed from the agenda: 

Resolution approving and requesting 
the Controller's certification of 
Debit Modification No. 28 to 
Airport Contract No. 1000, in the 
total amount of $24,713.00. 

Mr. Singer said that this relates to the cooling tower louvers. 
He said that it was originally believed there would not be a 
problem of water spray but that after further consideration, it 
was felt that the chemically treated water might land on cars and 
these louvers would protect cars in the garage from the spray. 

Commissioner Kadish asked what was the size of the stainless steel 
louvers. 

Mr. Robert Lee said that they were 6 feet by 7 feet. 

Commissioner Kadish asked what investigation had been undertaken 
to determine if the price of $4,000 per louver was justified. 

Mr. L. Grindheim of Construction Management Company said that his 
company's estimates were higher than the construction company's 
estimates. He said that not only CMC, but Airport Architects 
had reviewed this item and found it justified. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if we were to complete the job and the 
Airport then were to take a separate bid for this item might the 
Airport not come out with a better price. 

Mr. Len Blackford of Airport Architects said that he doubted it. 
He said that this was the recommendation of his mechanical 
engineer. 

Mr. Lee said that if the louvers are not installed the Airport 
may be liable. 



-3- 



Commissioner Kadish asked if the garage would be used before 
the cooling tower is in use. 

Mr. Grindheim said that the garage would be in use long before 
the cooling tower. He added that this is a minimum installa- 
tion, considering some of the more elaborate solutions suggested 
for the problem. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if it wasn't apparent when the 
plans were drawn that the water would come down. 

Mr. Grindheim said that it wasn't clear if the louvers would 
be necessary. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if the contractor would guarantee 
that the louvers were necessary. 

Mr. Blackford said that his firm had started out opposing the 
louvers but then they had considered it further and changed 
their minds because they decided that under certain wind con- 
ditions the spray might come down. 

Commissioner Kadish asked Mr. David Kroopnick, Deputy City 
Attorney and Acting Airports General Counsel, what his opinion 
was. 

Mr. Kroopnick said that he would have to take a closer look at 
it to determine who might be legally liable. 

Commissioner Kadish said that we should put the item over until 
we see who will be liable. 

Commissioner Bernstein stated that the item would be put over 
until the next meeting while the City Attorney made a legal 
determination . 



(5) Modification No. 29 (Debit), Airport Contract No. 1000, Ratify- 
ing Action of the Director of Airports on Change Orders, 
Garage: Stage IV - Superstructure Addition, $15,479.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0164 Resolution approving and ratify- 

ing the action of the Director 
of Airports in approving Change 
Order 81 and 82, and requesting 
the Controller's certification 
of Modification No. 29 to Airport 
Contract 1000, in the total amount 
of $15,479.00. 

Mr. Singer said that this item encompasses a number of change 
orders. 

Commissioner Kadish asked how the figures were arrived at under 
Change Order 80. 

Mr. Grindheim said that Airport Architects had requested a new 
color plan which necessitated new color samples. He said that 
the contractor quoted a price of $443.00 but due to mark-ups it 
now had gone to $587.00. He said that the paint samples were 
enamel baked on pieces of metal. 



-4- 



Commissioner Kadish asked whose paint is being used. She said 
that manufacturers always make a sample free on cardboard and 
if the paint manufacturers were to be given 5 pieces of metal 
by the Airport, they would make them free on the metal. She 
asked how many colors were samples made for. 

Mr. Grindheim said that there were seven colors. 

Commissioner Kadish said that one would get the impression 
that we have paid $3,500 for samples. Mr. Grindheim said that 
there were many colors at first, but now they were down to one. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she cannot approve this until it 
is investigated further to see whether the manufacturer will 
do the samples free if we provide the material. 

Mr. Lee said that the original colors were approved by the 
Architect but now they have changed their minds. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if the Commission hadn't already 
approved the color to be used. 

Mr. Grindheim said that they hadn't in this case. 

Commissioner Kadish suggested they approve the rest of the modi- 
fication with the deletion of Change Order 80. 



(6) Modification No. 5, Airport Contract No. 1015, (Credit), 
Garage: Stage V - Final Modifications, $42,020.64. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0165 Resolution approving and request- 

ing the Controller's certification 
of Credit Modification No. 5 to 
Airport Contract 1015, Garage: 
Stage V - Final Modifications, in 
the total credit amount of 
$42,020.64. 

Commissioner Goosby asked for an explanation of Contract 1015. 

Mr. Grindheim briefly explained the contract and said that the 
Airport will have use of the entire garage before the end of 
the year. 

Mr. Len Blackford of Airport Architects said that the existing 
garage needs quite a bit of work to bring it up to code and that 
this is what these modifications are for. 



-5- 



(7) Tenant Improvement: Bank of America North Terminal 
Branch, $40,000.00. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-0166 Resolution approving the final 

plans and specifications submitted 
by the Bank of America, showing 
the proposed bank office in the 
North Terminal. 

Mr. Singer said that the Bank of America's proposed branch is 
on the mezzanine area of the North Terminal and that this item 
is for acceptance of the B of A's proposed schematics. He said 
that the estimated cost is $40,000 and that the plans have been 
approved subject to certain modifications. The Bank of America 
architect, with the use of maps, explained the work to be done. 



(8) Modification No. 1, Professional Services Agreement, San 
Francisco International Airport Medical Clinic. 

On motion of Commissioner Kadish, seconded by Commissioner 
Goosby, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: 

No. 78-016 7 Resolution approving modification 

No. 1 to Professional Services 
Agreement, San Francisco Inter- 
national Airport Medical Clinic. 

Mr. Craven called attention to the fact that there is a misprint 
in the published Calendar and the Calendar item explanation 
should read "not to exceed three months" rather than as it was 
printed (which reads "not to exceed six months"). 

Commissioner Goosby asked how long the Clinic had been in 
operation. 

Mr. Singer noted that he had developed a report on the operations 
of the Clinic. He said that it has been operating for three to 
four years and that the last couple of years the Airport has asked 
the Clinic to undertake a 24-hour service; the a.m. shift is 
supervised by a registered nurse only; there is a physician on 
call, but the RN is stationed in the Clinic. 

Commissioner Goosby asked how many people make up the whole 
complement. 

Mr. Singer said that there are a number of people who are there 
on a consultant basis and as he recalled there were three paid 
doctors as well as three principals. He said that the three 
principal physicians are partners who hire some physicians on 
salary. 

Commissioner Kadish said that perhaps Mr. Singer could send a 
copy of the report to Commissioner Goosby. 

Mr. Singer said an attempt had been made to prepare a statistical 
record of the past 12 months' operations. He said that this had 
been sent to Commission members some time ago and that he would 
send a copy to Commissioner Goosby. 

-6- 



Commissioner Goosby asked if it is customary at most airports 
to have a permanent staff of physicians. 

Mr. Singer said that it was not and, in fact, was quite unusual. 
He said that is is unusual to have the clinic located in a 
terminal area; there are three or four other airports that have 
medical services located on the property but not in the terminal 
areas. Additionally, he said that San Francisco Airport is one 
of the few airports with a 24-hour clinic. 

Commissioner Goosby said that the Airport should investigate to 
see whether it is worth spending that money; what the subsidy 
covers; and where the clinic is making or losing money. He 
said that, apparently, someone years ago had seen the need for 
a clinic. He said that he would appreciate having Mr. Singer's 
report. 

Commissioner Kadish said that it would be a good idea for 
Commissioner Goosby and Dr. Smookler to meet one another. 



7. Director's Report. 

A-l. Meat Sales to Passengers. 

Mr. Singer said that there have been inquiries regarding 
the sale of frozen meat on Airport premises. He said 
that currently there are four companies selling meat to 
tourists and that additionally, two tenants have asked 
permission to sell meat: the florist and the Duty Free 
Shop. He said that the four companies presently serving 
tourists represent themselves as taking orders off pre- 
mises, but the Airport has been having trouble with these 
companies because there have been occasions in which 
passengers have been solicited at the terminal. He said 
that it was his feeling that the Airport should approve 
one. two or more of these companies for taking orders in 
return for a percentage of sales. He said that he would 
like the sense of the Commission on how to proceed. 

Commissioner Kadish said that she had been aware of this 
for some time and was glad it had been brought up. She 
said that it was her feeling that any arrangements that 
could be made would be to the advantage of Airport. 

Commissioner Goosby said that he thought it unfair to 
other merchants who weren't aware that meat could be sold 
at the Airport and said that this might be a good oppor- 
tunity to assist minority merchants in doing business at 
the Airport. He said that there should be a formaliza- 
tion of the contract. Mr. Singer said that judging from 
the representatives of the companies that he had talked 
with, all four companies were minority companies. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that he thinks this is one 
of the items that should be considered in discussing 
boutiques. He asked if there weren't certain require- 
ments such as permits, etc., for people to do business 
at the Airport. 



-7- 



A-2. Parking 



Mr. Singer said that regarding parking problems, both 
Lot D and the regular garage have been full since Memorial 
Day weekend. He said that the staff has been working 
closely with United Airlines, the tenant of Plot 19, with 
the idea of eventually taking over Plot 19, but that in 
order to do this, United needed to have space to accommo- 
date their people. He said that the staff hoped to have 
the situation resolved in a short time. 

Commissioner Kadish asked if a survey had been done to 
determine why the garage was filled. She asked if it 
was filled with long term or short term parkers. She 
said that reports indicate that Anza, Park ' N Fly and the 
new service are getting filled up. She said that the 
number of people coming to the Airport is rapidly increas- 
ing because of the increased air traffic. She said that 
she would like to reconsider a rate increase in the garage 
as a short term means of making spaces available for the 
person who comes to the Airport for a few hours. 

Commissioner Bernstein asked if there are sufficient 
policemen on duty today. He said that on the past 
Saturday he had only found one policeman on duty between 
the freeway and the Central Terminal. 

Mr. Singer said that the situation had been called to 
Chief Dempsey's attention. He said that it was his under- 
standing that in the morning all available police, includ- 
ing administrative staff, are out on the upper roadway; 
and that in the evening hours all available staff would 
be on the lower roadway. 

Commissioner Kadish said that this is something that 
should be dealt with immediately: both the traffic situ- 
ation and freeing up spaces in the garage. She said that 
it requires good public information to let people know 
that they should take public transportation to get to the 
Airport. 

Mr. Singer asked if it was the sense of the Commission 
that parking should be raised on a short term basis. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that the Commission should 
let the professionals tell the Commission what was best. 

Mr. Lee said that the staff was studying various solutions 
and would have the traffic engineers air their views to 
the Commission. 

Commissioner Bernstein said that this is an immediate 
problem and the Commission couldn't wait for a study. 
He said that the present situation was a callous disre- 
gard for the rights of the public. 

Mr. Ron Wilson, Acting Deputy Director, Operations/ 
Maintenance, assured him that data would be gathered on 
the problem immediately. 

Mr. Singer said that the staff would have the information 
at the next meeting. 



-8- 



8. Communications 

No comment was made on the communications transmitted to the 
Commission. 

9. New Business 

A. Air Pollution 

Commissioner Kadish said that she had some new business: the 
last time she was at the Airport the air pollution was immedi- 
ately noticeable. She said that the Commission should adopt 
a new rule, providing the experts can fit this into the study, 
that all cars, cabs and busses at curbside should have their 
engines turned off, and that there should be a careful perusal 
of the schedule of officers on duty, not only to monitor this, 
but to keep traffic moving. She said that the Commission should 
have a report as to how this can be accomplished. She said 
that if it is determined that it would be feasible that engines 
should be turned off, then there will have to be signs notifying 
drivers that this is the rule. She said that in Miami, this 
was how the problem was handled and now no car can stop at the 
terminals and leave its engine running. 

B. Map of Underground Utilities 

Commissioner Kadish asked if there was a map of all underground 
utility lines. 

Mr. Lee said that there is no such map but that each system had 
its own map. He said that the staff has a problem getting the 
current data on the maps because of the volume of construction 
work. 

Commissioner Kadish said that some one should be detailed to 
take all that information and transfer it to one map in a form 
that can be utilized so that when we go into the new program, 
the architects will have information on everything below the 
surface. 

Mr. Lee said that when the staff supplies bidders with contract 
documents the information is on many maps and we have a problem 
getting it on one map. He said that such a map was needed. 

Mr. Grindheim said that CMC has been documenting everything 
they uncover on maps. He said that they have utility location 
information back to 1940. 

Mr. Blackford said that Airport Architects receives drawings 
but they find that utility lines are not now where they are 
shown to be on the plans. He said that he has found some lines 
as much as 4 feet lower than shown. He said that the Engineering 
Division could not be held responsible, but it did seem that they 
would be derilect in not putting down what information is available 
He said that he had found the existing maps to be very unreliable. 

Commissioner Kadish asked that Mr. Singer transmit to Mr. Richard 
Heath, Director of Airports, her feeling that someone should 
work on the problem until the job is completed. 



-9- 



Mr. Craven read a statement that the July 5th meeting will be 
a Special Meeting and will be held in the Auditorium of the 
Health Department, 101 Grove Street at 2:30 p.m. 



There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting 
adjourned at 3:40 p.m. 



Eric Craven 
Secretary to the 
Airports Commission 



-10- 



Statement of the Secretary to the Airports Commission, Eric Craven, 
read as Agenda Item 5 at the Airports Commission meeting, June 20, 
1978: 



IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.1 OF THE 
BROWN ACT, I AM REPORTING ON THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE AIR- 
PORTS COMMISSION IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON JUNE 6, 1978. THE 
ACTION AND ROLL CALL OF THE VOTE THEREON ARE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. AGENDA ITEM (20) OF THE JUNE 6 CALENDAR, SETTLE- 
MENT OF LITIGATED CLAIM OF F.P. LATHROP CONSTRUCTION 
COMPANY, CONTRACT 569, AIRPORT MAINTENANCE FACILITY, 
$60,000.00, WAS APPROVED BY A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF COM- 
MISSIONERS BERNSTEIN, KADISH, MC DONNELL AND GOOSBY. 

2. AGENDA ITEM (3) OF THE JUNE 6 CALENDAR, REJECTION 
OF BIDS, AIRPORT CONTRACT 1126R, INDUSTRIAL WASTE- 
WATER COLLECTION SYSTEM, PHASE III, WAS ADOPTED BY 

A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS BERNSTEIN, KADISH, 
MC DONNELL AND GOOSBY. 



Q