SF Government Audit & Oversight Committee Meeting - Sept 15, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
SF Government Audit & Oversight Committee Meeting - September 15, 2022
The Government Audit and Oversight Committee, chaired by Supervisor Dean Preston and joined by Vice Chair Connie Chan and Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (later excused and replaced by Board President Shamann Walton for items 3-4), convened on September 15, 2022, to hear and respond to three civil grand jury reports: on capital construction projects, the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard cleanup, and park accessibility. The committee also approved multiple closed session litigation settlements and tolling agreements. Key themes included accountability for contractor performance, the need for independent oversight of the Navy's cleanup, and improving park accessibility information for the public.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Items 1-2 (Capital Construction): Francisco DeCosta criticized lack of enforcement, citing cost overruns on the Central Subway and SFPUC projects. Dennis Williams (Fillmore Merchant Collaborative) argued for inclusion of Black-owned contractors. The 2022-23 Civil Grand Jury foreperson thanked the previous jury for their work.
- Items 3-4 (Hunters Point Shipyard): Multiple community members and activists (e.g., Ariane Harrison, Dr. Hensa Porterson Chai, Bradley Angel, others) expressed strong support for a full cleanup and criticized the Navy's absence. Speakers demanded independent testing, an oversight committee, and accountability. Daniel Hirsch noted that 90-97% of radiological tests were falsified by a Navy contractor. Several speakers urged the Board to block land transfer until 100% cleanup.
- Items 5-6 (Parks): Anthony David highlighted trip hazards in parks and called for warning signs. David Oska argued the grand jury report did not go far enough, citing threats to parkland from development.
Discussion Items
Items 1-2: Civil Grand Jury Report - "Shovel Ready: Best Practices and Collaboration to Improve San Francisco’s Capital Construction Program"
- Civil Grand Jury Presentation: Michael Hoffman and Jason Golz summarized findings: a contractor performance evaluation database created via Admin Code Chapter 6 in 2016 remains unused since February 2020; no accountability for non-use; no project manager; database platform no longer supported; $40 billion in capital projects planned through 2029. They recommended the database be revived, expanded to include SIP program compliance and feedback from non-Chapter 6 departments, and that the Controller periodically audit construction performance.
- Mayor’s Office Response (Douglas Legg): Agreed improvements are needed but cited staffing shortages (20% vacancy at Public Works), the need to change low-bid contracting practices, and that the database alone won't solve problems. He noted that Public Works will be the lead agency but could not provide a firm timeline for implementation.
- Public Works Response (Ron Alameda): Detailed history: database built at $250,000, pilot done, but COVID halted rollout; now unsupported platform; no budgeted project manager; staffing and funding gaps. Presented three options: restart as-is, reassess value, or step back and focus on alternative delivery methods like best-value procurement and partnering.
- Supervisor Mandelman’s Questions: Pressed for why the database has not been implemented; expressed frustration that no timeline exists. Civil grand jury emphasized that $4 billion is spent annually without a feedback loop.
- Votes: The committee approved Supervisor Mandelman’s amendments to the board response (agreeing with all findings except finding 7, and setting deadlines for implementation reports). The hearing (item 1) was continued to the call of the chair; the resolution (item 2) was sent to the full board with a positive recommendation.
Items 3-4: Civil Grand Jury Report - "Buried Problems and a Buried Process: The Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in a Time of Climate Change"
- Civil Grand Jury Presentation: Sarah Miles and Jeff Watson highlighted risks from shallow groundwater rise due to sea level rise at the Superfund site, noting that the city’s resilience maps have a hole over the shipyard. They recommended an independent groundwater rise study (R1) and a city oversight committee (R3) to monitor the CERCLA process. They criticized the Mayor for rejecting all seven recommendations.
- President Walton’s Remarks: Stated the Navy and EPA refused to attend; reiterated that 100% cleanup must occur before any land transfer. He read into the record responses from the Navy and EPA (both written). The Navy claimed they have accounted for sea level rise (e.g., armored shoreline at Parcel E2). EPA said the five-year review (due 2023/2024) will consider climate impacts.
- DPH Response (Dr. Susan Phillip): DPH’s role is to provide input, not regulate; they rely on the five-year review process. They disagreed with the need for a new oversight committee but said they would improve communication. DPH has only minimal staff (one person) dedicated to the shipyard.
- OCII Response (Thor Kavloski): Described his agency’s role in redevelopment; read the Navy’s letter. He acknowledged the need for independent expertise but said the city lacks capacity.
- Supervisor Preston’s Questions: Pressed DPH on whether they have the capacity to independently verify Navy data; DPH said they will assess after the next five-year review. Preston expressed disappointment that the Mayor rejected all recommendations and urged collaboration. He asked the Mayor’s office to clarify if they would cooperate with any board-created oversight body; they said yes.
- Vote: The hearing and resolution were continued to September 29, 2022 (moved by President Walton).
Items 5-6: Civil Grand Jury Report - "Safe and Accessible Parks for All"
- Civil Grand Jury Presentation: Tony Al summarized findings that parks’ pathway conditions are not evaluated for safety/accessibility; the park evaluation program scores (done quarterly by Rec & Park and Controller) focus on appearance, not surface condition or ADA compliance. Scores are not posted on individual park pages. Recommended adding a pathway condition score, posting scores on park webpages, and improving on-site signage.
- Rec & Park Response (Dennis Kern): Disagreed with findings 1 and 2, partially agreed with finding 3. Argued the park evaluation program is appearance-based and not designed to assess structural/ADA issues. They are adding a third ADA coordinator. They will migrate accessibility information to the new website by end of 2022 but oppose posting quarterly scores due to workload.
- Vice Chair Chan’s Questions: Challenged the department’s claim that integrating scores is too difficult; she urged them to be open to the recommendation. She noted the department updates the website annually and could include this information.
- Vote: The committee approved Vice Chair Chan’s amendments (agreeing with all findings) and sent the resolution (item 6) as amended to the full board with a positive recommendation; the hearing (item 5) was filed.
Items 7-17: Closed Session Litigation Items
- The committee convened in closed session to discuss tolling agreements and settlements. Upon returning to open session, the clerk reported that items 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 were sent to the board with positive recommendation; item 12 was continued. The committee voted not to disclose closed session discussions.
Key Outcomes
- Items 1-2 (Capital Construction): The committee approved amendments to the board response (agreeing with all findings except finding 7) and sent the resolution to the full board. The hearing was continued to the call of the chair for follow-up within six months.
- Items 3-4 (Hunters Point): The hearing and resolution were continued to September 29, 2022, to allow further deliberation. The Navy and EPA did not appear; written statements were entered into the record.
- Items 5-6 (Parks): The board response was amended to agree with all findings and to urge Rec & Park to set baseline pathway condition scores by March 31, 2023. The hearing was filed, and the resolution sent to the full board.
- Closed Session: Settlements for lawsuits and unlitigated claims ranging from $37,500 to $9,190,511.54 were approved. Tolling agreements for three real property transfer tax disputes were also advanced. The committee voted not to disclose closed session discussions.
Meeting Transcript
Good morning. Uh, this meeting will come to order. Welcome to the September 15, 2022 regular meeting of the government audit and oversight committee of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. I am Supervisor Dean Preston, Chair of the Committee, joined by Vice Chair Connie Chan and Supervisor Raphael Mandelman. Uh, the committee clerk today is Alisa Samara, and want to thank uh the team at SFGov TV for staffing this meeting. Um Madam Clerk, do we have any announcements? Yes, Mr. Chair. The Board of Supervisors and its committees are now convening hybrid meetings that allow in-person attendance and public comment while still providing remote access and public comment via the telephone. The board recognizes that equitable public access is essential and will be taking public as follows. First, public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. Those attending in person will be allowed to speak first, and then we will take those who are waiting on the telephone line. For those watching either Channel 26, 28, 78, or 99, depending on your provider, and sfgovtv.org. The public comment call in number is streaming across your screen. The number is 415 65501. Enter the meeting ID 2490 644 7603, then pound and pound again. When connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but you will be muted and in listening mode only. When your item of interest comes up and public comment is called for your item. Those joining us in person to line up to speak, and those on the telephone to dial star three to be added to the speaker line. If you are on the telephone, please remember to turn down your TV and any listening devices you may be using. As already already indicated, we will take public comment from those attending in per first, those attending in person first, and then we will go to our public comment telephone number. Alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways. You can email them to myself, the government audit and oversight clerk at Elisa A L Isa.org. If you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. You may also send your written comments via U.S. Postal Service to our office at City Hall. One Dr. Carlton Be Good Lip Place, Room 244, San Francisco, California, 94102. Finally, actums items acted upon today are expected to appear on the Board of Supervisors agenda of September 27th unless otherwise stated. Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Please call items one and two together. Yes, items number one and two are a hearing and resolution regarding the civil grand jury report entitled Shovel Ready Best Practices and Collaboration to Improve San Francisco's Capital Construction Program. Members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item and are joining us from OLE should call 415-655-0001. Meeting ID 2490 644 7603, then pound and pound again. If you haven't already done so, please dial star three to line up to speak. The system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. Please wait until we call public comment for these items. And the system indicates that you have been unmuted, and that will be your cue to begin your comments. Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Clerk. And today we will be hearing the first batch of this year's civil grand jury reports. Each year, the civil grand jury investigates and scrutinizes our city's conduct of public business. Uh in City and County San Francisco, and their work uh shines a light on potential inefficiencies and points to improvements that can be made in our government and gives us the opportunity to respond to their recommendations officially and on the record. It's an extremely important process that helps us uh build trust with the public and improve the operations of our government. I I want to recognize and thank each uh civil grand juror for their service and their time uh and diligence, uh, including a special thanks uh to those of you who are in attendance here today. Uh I know that Michael Hoffman, who served as the uh civil grand jury for person, wanted to say a few words as well. Uh so I wanted to invite uh uh Mr.
openpublica.com