Regular Meeting San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Tuesday, May 8, 2012 9:00 A.M

REGULAR MEETING SAN MATEO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2012 9:00 A.M.

A copy of the Board of Supervisors’ agenda packet is available for review at the Law Library, 710 Hamilton Street at Marshall Street, across from the Hall of Justice. The library is open Monday through Thursday 8:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., and Saturday 12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

Meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals who need special assistance or a disability-related modification or accommodation (including auxiliary aids or services) to participate in this meeting, or who have a disability and wish to request an alternative format for the agenda, meeting notice, agenda packet or other writings that may be distributed at the meeting, should contact Rebecca Romero, Agenda Administrator at least 2 working days before the meeting at (650) 363-1802 and/or [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the County to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting and the materials related to it. Attendees to this meeting are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical based products.

If you wish to speak to the Board, please fill out a speaker’s slip located on the table near the door. If you have anything that you wish distributed to the Board and included in the official record, please hand it to the Clerk of the Board who will distribute the information to the Board members and staff.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENT

(This item is reserved for persons wishing to address the Board on any County-related matters not otherwise on this agenda, and on any listed agenda items other than those Matters Set for a Specified Time or on the Regular Agenda. Members of the public who wish to address the Board should complete a speaker request form. Speakers are customarily limited to two minutes.)

ACTION TO SET AGENDA and TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

(This item is to set the final consent and regular agenda, and for the approval of the items listed on the consent agenda. All items on the consent agenda are approved by one roll call motion.)

PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS

A) Presentation of a proclamation designating May 2012 as Foster Care Month (Supervisor Adrienne Tissier)

B) Presentation of a proclamation designating May 19th and 20th, 2012 as Maker's Weekend (Supervisor Carole Groom)

MATTERS SET FOR SPECIFIED TIME

Times listed under this section are approximate. The Board makes every effort to adhere to the times listed, but in some cases, because of unexpected presentations, items may not be heard precisely at the time scheduled. In no case will any item be heard before the scheduled time.

9:00 a.m.

Public hearing to consider a resolution authorizing: (Department of Housing)

A) An amendment to the County’s FY 2011-12 Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to include new ESG requirements under the federal 2009 HEARTH Act; and

B) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to submit the amendment and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

1) Report and recommendation

2) Close public hearing

3) Adopt resolution

9:00 a.m.

Public hearing to consider a resolution authorizing: (Department of Housing)

A) The approval of the FY 2012-2013 Annual Action Plan for the use of federal funds provided under three entitlement programs Community Development Block Grant, Emergency Solutions Grant, and HOME Investment Partnerships; and

B) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to submit the Annual Action Plan and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and

C) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to execute contract amendments that modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not exceed the total annual HUD funding allocations

1) Report and recommendation

2) Close public hearing

3) Adopt resolution

REGULAR AGENDA

SHERIFF

1. 1) Resolution authorizing the County Manager or his designee to execute:

A) An agreement with Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. for the provision of architectural and engineering services for the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way, Redwood City in the amount of $8,934,220; and

B) Subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $100,000

2. Resolution authorizing a transfer in the amount of $350,000 from Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Projects for architectural and engineering consulting services for FY 2011-12 (4/5ths vote required)

2. 1) Resolution authorizing the County Manager or his designee to execute:

A) An Agreement for Construction Management Services with Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, for managing the construction of the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $7,387,929; and

B) Subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $100,000

2) Resolution authorizing a transfer in the amount of $960,100 from Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Project for construction management services for FY 2011- 12 (4/5ths vote required)

3) Approve the use of the design-build delivery method as permitted by Public Contracts Code § 20133, with certain trade contractors performing work on the replacement jail project

3. Resolution authorizing the County Manager to execute a project labor agreement with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council and signatory unions for the replacement jail project

COUNTY MANAGER

4. Introduction of an uncodified ordinance setting the requirements for the leasing of the Circle Star Plaza buildings owned by the County without competitive bidding if the lease is limited to an initial rent of no more than $300,000 per month and for a term not to exceed ten years and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety

5. County Manager's Report

BOARD OF SUPERVISOR

6. Board members' reports

CONSENT AGENDA

All items on the consent agenda are approved by one roll call motion unless a request is made at the beginning of the meeting that an item be withdrawn or transferred to the regular agenda. Any item on the regular agenda may be transferred to the consent agenda.

7. Approve the minutes from the meeting of April 24, 2012

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

8. Recommendation for the appointments of Chris Johnson representing El Granada and Kris Lannin Liang representing Moss Beach to the Design Review Committee, terms expiring June 30, 2015 (Supervisors Dave Pine and Don Horsley)

9. Recommendation for the appointments of William G. Gass representing Director, Agricultural Community and Beverly Miller representing Board Director to the San Mateo County Event Center, terms expiring June 30, 2015 (Supervisor Carole Groom)

10. Recommendation for the reappointment of Angel Barrios to the First Five Commission, term expiring March 31, 2015 (Supervisor Don Horsley)

11. Ratification of a resolution honoring Eunice Kushman upon her retirement from the Caminar Board of Directors (Supervisor Adrienne Tissier)

CONTROLLER

12. Resolution authorizing the Controller to temporarily transfer available funds to County Operating Funds, the Superintendent of Schools, County Board of Education and School Districts during FY 2012-13

COUNTY COUNSEL

13. Introduction of an ordinance amending Section 2.14.040 Use of Outside Counsel for Legal Services, Advice, or Representation and Chapter 2.14 of Title 2 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code relating to legal services from outside counsel and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety 4

COUNTY MANAGER

14. Resolution authorizing an amendment to the agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates, adding an addendum which incorporates the provisions of California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7056

15. Resolution authorizing a transfer in the amount of $3.3 million from Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves to the Capital Projects Fund for the upgrade to One Circle Star Plaza to an essential services building

16. Accept the response to the Grand Jury report: The County, San Carlos, and Cal Fire, A Missed Opportunity?

17. Adoption of an ordinance amending the Master Salary Ordinance, adding a Deputy Probation Officer III, a Legal Office Specialist and a Human Services Supervisor, previously introduced on April 24, 2012 and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety

GOVERNING BOARD

18. Acting as the Governing Board of County Service Area No. 11, adopt a Resolution: (Department of Public Works)

A) Setting June 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. at the regularly scheduled Board meeting, as the time and place for a public hearing on the water rates and meter service charges for County Service Area No. 11 Pescadero area; and

B) Directing the Director of the Public Works Department to send a notice of the proposed water rates and meter service charges to each property owner within County Service Area No. 11

HEALTH SY STEM

19. Resolution authorizing:

A) An agreement with the California Department of Public Health for the provision of funding the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program for the term of July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2014 in the amount of $823,260; and

B) The Chief of the Health System or her designee to execute subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $25,000

20. Resolution authorizing:

A) A memorandum of understanding between the San Mateo Medical Center and the San Mateo County Health Foundation for a term beginning July 1, 2011 and continuing indefinitely in the amount of $250,000; and

B) The Chief of the Health System or her designee to execute subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $25,000 5

21. Resolution authorizing:

A) An amendment to the agreement with Lawrence A. Saunders, DDS for the provision of oral and maxillofacial surgery services, increasing the amount by $24,000 to $124,000; and

B) The Chief of the Health System or her designee to execute subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $25,000

22. Adoption of an ordinance repealing and replacing three sections of Title 5, Sections 5.64.060 and 5.64.070 in Chapter 5.64 and Section 5.120.040 in Chapter 5.120 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code, which establishes Environmental Health program fees, previously introduced on April 24, 2012 and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety

HUMAN RESOURCE S

23. Report recommending the denial of claims (Non-culpable)

HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

24. Resolution authorizing:

A) An agreement with San Mateo County Community College District - Skyline College for the provision of training a new workforce in Allied Health for the term April 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012 in the amount of $120,000; and

B) The Director of the Human Services Agency or her designee to execute subsequent contract amendments in an amount not to exceed $360,000

PLANNING AND BUILDING

25. Resolution authorizing:

A) An amendment to the agreement with Environmental Science Associates for the provision of administrative and technical support to the San Francisco International Airport/Community Roundtable, modifying the scope of services, increasing the amount by $193,000 to $373,000, and modifying the term so that in coincides with the end of the fiscal year

B) The Community Development Director or his designee to execute subsequent contract amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $25,000

PUBLIC WORKS

26. Resolution authorizing:

A) An agreement with the City/County Association of Governments for the provision of staff services; and

B) The Director of the Public Works Department to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications in the types of services and payment arrangements provided under the agreement

SHERIFF

27. Resolution authorizing:

A) An amendment to the agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for the provision of distribution of FY 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative grant funds, increasing the amount by $668,058 to $3,010,277; and

B) The Sheriff or his designee to sign Appendix B, grant assurances; and

C) The Sheriff in his capacity as OES Area Coordinator to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications in an amount not to exceed $25,000

28. Resolution authorizing the county purchasing agent to renew licenses, software and maintenance for an additional two years for the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center's Fusion Center Application Suite from Digital Sandbox in the amount of $258,000

CLOSED SESSION

(The Board will adjourn to closed session to consider the following items at the end of the agenda, or at any time during the meeting as time permits. At the conclusion of closed session, the Board will reconvene in open session to report on any actions taken for which a report is required by law.)

A) Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation

Satorre, Ray, et al., v. Mark Church, et al. San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 504866

B) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation

Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9

One case

C) Conference with Labor Negotiators

Agency designated representatives attending closed session: Donna Vaillancourt Employee organizations: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; Service Employees International Union; California Nurses Association; and Union of American Physicians and Dentists

D) Conference with Real Property Negotiators

Property: 1100 Trousdale Drive, Burlingame Agency negotiators: Jean Fraser or her designee; John Beiers or his designee Negotiating Parties: Vince Muzzi or his designee; Shlomo Rechnitz or his designee; other potential successors-in-interest in the property Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

Telecasts of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors meetings can be seen throughout most of San Mateo County, Thursdays at 7:30PM, replayed on Fridays at 8:00AM and Saturdays at 10:00AM on Peninsula TV Channel 26. Palo Alto Cable viewers can see the meetings Thursday nights at 7:00PM on Channel 29. For more information on air dates for other communities, please contact Peninsula TV at (650) 637-1936.

Public records that relate to any item on the open session agenda for a regular board meeting are available for public inspection. Those records that are distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting are available for public inspection at the same time they are distributed to all members, or a majority of the members of the Board. The Board has designated the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, located at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063, for the purpose of making those public records available for inspection. The documents are also available on the County's Internet Web site, at the link for Board of Supervisors agendas for upcoming meetings. The website is located at: http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/smc/department/bos/home/0,2151,1864_26218,00.html. The San Mateo County Ordinance Code can be accessed on the World Wide Web at: http://library2.municode.com/default-now/home.htm?infobase=16029&doc_action=whatsnew

Proclamation

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA DESIGNATING

MAY 2012 AS FOSTER CARE MONTH ************************************************

WHEREAS, the family, serving as the primary source of love, identity, self-esteem and support, is the very foundation of our communities and our State; and

WHEREAS, in San Mateo County there are approximately 300 children and teens in foster care being provided a safe, secure and stable home along with the compassion and the nurture of a foster family; and

WHEREAS, all young people in foster care need a meaningful connection to a caring adult who becomes a supportive and lasting presence in their lives; and

WHEREAS, foster, kinship and adoptive families, who open their homes and hearts and support children whose families are in crisis, play a vital role in helping children and families heal and reconnect thereby launching young people into successful adulthood; and

WHEREAS, there remains a great and continuous need for capable and compassionate foster parents, and adults interested in helping sibling groups and teenagers experience a stable home.

NOW, THEREFORE, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors do hereby proclaim May 2012 as FOSTER CARE MONTH and urge San Mateo County residents to volunteer their talents and energies on behalf of foster children, foster parents, and the professional staff working with them during this month and throughout the year.

Dated: May 08, 2012

SUPERVISORS:

ADRIENNE J. TISSIER, PRESIDENT

DAVE PINE

CAROLE GROOM

DON HORSLEY

ROSE JACOBS GIBSON

Attest: ______Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 19 th AND 20 th , 2010 AS

MAKER’S WEEKEND * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

PROCLAIMED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of California, that

WHEREAS, Maker Faire celebrates the County of San Mateo’s creativity, ingenuity and the Do-It-Yourself spirit; and

WHEREAS, it brings together artists, crafters, engineers, hackers, food makers, music makers and scientists who like to tinker and who love to make things; and

WHEREAS, this family-friendly weekend encourages resourcefulness, green ethos and an overall passion for learning among Makers of all ages; and

WHEREAS, it reaffirms the value of Makers, risk-takers and innovators in San Mateo County as contributors to both the community and humanity;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County hereby designates May 19 th and 20th , 2012 as Maker’s Weekend in San Mateo County and urges every member of our community to continue to foster the innovative and creative spirit of a Maker.

DATED: May 15, 2012

SUPERVISORS:

ADRIENNE J. TISSIER, PRESIDENT

DAVE PINE

CAROLE GROOM

DON HORSLEY

ROSE JACOBS GIBSON

______Attest: Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Housing (Department of Housing) Department of Housing

Date: April 26, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: 10 Day Publication Public Hearing Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors

From: Duane Bay, Director Subject: Approval of the Substantial Amendment to the County FY 2011-12 Action Plan to HUD

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing:

A) The President of the Board to Approve a Substantial Amendment to the County’s FY 2011-12 Action Plan to HUD to include new ESG requirements under the federal 2009 HEARTH Act; and

B) The Director of the Department of Housing or the Director’s designee to submit the Substantial Amendment to HUD and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

BACKGROUND: Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) funds for homeless needs are received from HUD by the County as annual entitlement grants, and have averaged $120,000. The Homeless Emergency and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act) consolidated three separate homeless assistance programs, revising and renaming the Emergency Shelter Grant program as the Emergency Solutions Grant Program. The name change is significant because the program has shifted focus from emergency and transitional housing to permanent housing. This change increased the County’s ESG allocation by $69,973 from $124,420 to 194,393 for the current year, and again to $212,010 for FY2012-13. The incremental funding may be used for homelessness prevention, rapid re-housing assistance, and the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) only, unlike the existing portion of ESG funding which the County may and does use to fund shelter operations.

In order to receive this incremental 2011-12 ESG allocation, each HUD grantees must approve a Substantial Amendment to its 2011-12 Action Plan, and must appropriately involve stakeholders in the review process, including the local Continuum of Care, service providers, the general public, and homeless and formerly homeless persons.

The timing of the ESG second allocation for the current year (FY2011-12) coincides with the allocation of new ESG funding for next year (FY 2012-13).Therefore, both grants will come to the Board at the same time, but as separate items. This particular item pertains to approval of the Substantial Amendment of the current Annual Action Plan only. The grant for next year will be incorporated into the FY 2012-13 Annual Action Plan which is a separate Board item.

DISCUSSION: The Department of Housing is the designated County party for administration of ESG funds. However, the Department of Housing will block-grant available ESG funds to the Human Services Agency (HSA) for distribution because HSA coordinates the Center on Homelessness and Continuum of Care process.

In concert with the Continuum of Care, HSA issued a Request for Qualifications for parties interested in administering the two years’ ESG allocations for rapid re-housing assistance. Shelter Network, the sole respondent, submitted a responsive application. Shelter Network proposes to lead a multi-agency collaborative which will draw on partner agencies’ experience to provide comprehensive re-housing services to homeless individuals and families. Shelter Network will serve as the lead agency, fiscal agent, and project coordinator to distribute funds directly to homeless individuals/families directly, or through contracts with Samaritan House and Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse (CORA), and referrals from Project We Hope.

The overall goal for both years’ ESG rapid re-housing funds is to serve 47 persons in 25 families; for the FY2011-12 funds enabled by this Substantial Amendment, 22 persons in 12 families.

The action request before the Board with this particular item is approval of the Substantial Amendment to secure funding for a subsequent contract with Shelter Network.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution as to form.

Approval of this Substantial Amendment contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Livable Community by providing resources to vulnerable families and individuals to help them quickly regain stability in permanent housing after experiencing a housing crisis.

PERFORMANCE MEASURE(S): Measure FY 2011-12 Projected, to be achieved in FY2012-13 Goals – Numbers Served 12 families (22 persons)

FISCAL IMPACT: No Net County costs are involved in this activity. Upon HUD approval of the Substantial Amendment, the County will receive $69,973 of FY 2011-12 ESG funds.

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION Resolution authorizing the: A) President of the Board to Approve a Substantial Amendment to the County’s FY 2011-12 Action Plan to HUD to include new ESG requirements under the federal 2009 HEARTH Act; and B) Director of the Department of Housing or the Director’s designee to submit the Substantial Amendment to HUD and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, as an HUD entitlement grantee, the County receives annual entitlement grants under the following programs: Community Development Block Grant

(CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and the Emergency Shelter

Grant program, now known as the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG); and

WHEREAS, the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to

Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act) revised ESG and shifted its priorities from homeless assistance in shelters and transitional housing to providing assistance to help homeless persons and families quickly regain stability in permanent housing; and

WHEREAS, HUD provided ESG allocations in 2011, allowing jurisdictions to use the first allocation under the old ESG rules, and requiring that the second allocation be used for rapid re-housing, homeless prevention, and/or data management under the homeless management information system; and

WHEREAS, the second ESG allocation must be spent in accordance with the new requirements as proposed in a grantee’s substantial amendment to the annual action plan; and

WHEREAS, there has been presented to this Board for its consideration and acceptance the Substantial Amendment to the FY 2011-12 Annual Action Plan;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that this

Board of Supervisors: (A) approves and accepts the Substantial Amendment to the FY

2011-12 Annual Action Plan; and (B) authorizes the Director of the Department of

Housing (Director) to submit the Substantial Amendment and the related certifications and all understandings and assurances contained therein to HUD, and to take all necessary actions in connection with the submission of the Action Plan, including providing additional information as the United States government may require.

* * * * * *

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION Resolution authorizing: A) The President of the Board to Approve the FY 2012- 2013 Annual Action Plan for the use of Federal Funds provided under three entitlement programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME); and B) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to submit the Annual Action Plan and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and C) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to execute contract amendments that modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not exceed the total annual HUD funding allocations. ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 570.201, Title 24 of the Code of Federal

Regulations regarding the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program,

CDBG assistance may be used to fund eligible activities to be carried out by public agencies or by private nonprofit entities which are duly organized to undertake community development; and

WHEREAS, the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, Public Law 100-77, enacted July 22, 1987, and which was revised by the Housing Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act), provides for the distribution of federal funds, including the revised and renamed Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)

Program, for homeless assistance to units of local governments, including urban counties as defined under the CDBG Program; and

WHEREAS , the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, Public Law 101-625, enacted November 28, 1990, provides for the distribution of federal funds through the

HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) Program to eligible entities and consortia; and

WHEREAS , the County of San Mateo, on behalf of itself and the 16 small cites represents the Urban County for CDBG funding purposes, and which has formed a

HOME Consortium with the City of South San Francisco for the purposes of receiving

HOME funds to increase the supply of affordable housing in this County; and

WHEREAS , there has been presented to this Board for its consideration and acceptance the FY 2012-13 Annual Action Plan for the use and allocation of HUD funds for the following programs: CDBG, ESG, and HOME (Action Plan); and

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

Board of Supervisors: (A) approves and accepts the Annual Action Plan; and (B) authorizes the Director of the Department of Housing (Director) to submit the Annual

Action Plan and the related certifications and all understandings and assurances contained therein to HUD, and to take all necessary actions in connection with the submission of the Action Plan, including providing additional information as the United

States government may require; and (C) authorizes the Director or the Director’s designee to execute contract amendments that modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not exceed the total annual HUD funding allocations.

* * * * * *

Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO A. Housing Development & Rehabilitation (through HCDC Allocation process) 2 phase sr hsg proj. Ph. I - N/C of Multiyear proj is integral part of Hsg approx 48 units on 1-acre of vacant Authority's disposition strategy to MidPen Housing Corporation/ land. Ph. II - demo of existing HMV 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 10,942 989,058 replace HMV (60 units) and add Half Moon Village (HMV) units (60 sr units) with n/c of approx 100 units of sr hsg for total of 160 112 units. new units. Total 160 new units A/R of 2 existing aff hsg devts located near each other. Sponsor to Sponsor is undergoing County Mid-Peninsula The Farm, Inc./ combine into single proj for refi with review for CHDO certification (affil. 2 2,600,000 2,000,000 2,600,000 1,353,812 1,246,188 Woodlands Newell, East Palo Alto 4% tax credits to undertake extensive with MPH). HCDC recom. full rehab and preservation of existing 49 funding. LI units. Category Uses 3,600,000 3,000,000 3,600,000 1,364,754 989,058 1,246,188 Category Sources 3,600,000 3,600,000 3,600,000 1,364,754 989,058 1,246,188 Any category notes Category Surplus / (Deficit) 0 600,000 0 0 0 0

B. Non-Profits' Housing Rehab Programs Center for the Independence of Sponsor meeting performance Provides modifications to homes of 3 Individuals with Disibilities/ 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 goals. Staff recom. continued disabled LI residents. Goal 70 HH HAM & TAP Programs funding. If Sponsor doesn't expend all Provides minor home repair services $70,000 from FY11-12, HCDC El Concilio of San Mateo County/ to residents of San Mateo County recom. contract ext'n into next yr/no 4 100,000 0 70,000 70,000 Peninsula Minor Home Repair incorporating the benefit of energy new funds. If spend current yr's conservation Goal 75 HH funding by 6/30/2012, HCDC recom. FY 12-13 $70,000. North Peninsula Neighborhood Provides minor home repairs to low & Sponsor meeting performance 5 Services Center/ very low income homeowners. Goal 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 goals. Staff recom. continued Home Revitalization Program 20 HH funding. Rebldg Together Peninsula Volunteer home repair and Sponsor meeting performance 6 (RTP)/ renovation for low-income 27,500 27,500 27,500 27,500 goals. Staff recom. continued National Rebldg Day-Home homeowners. Goal 8 HH funding. Sponsor meeting performance RTP - Safe at Home - Minor Year-round Minor Home Repair Prog. 7 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 goals. Staff recom. continued Home Repair Program Goal 80 HH. funding. Yr-round & 1-day vol. progs to do Sponsor meeting performance Sr. Coastsiders - Coastside Minor 8 minor homes repairs for srs/disabled 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 goals. Staff recom. continued Home Repair Project HHs. Goal 40 HH . funding. Category Uses 407,500 307,500 377,500 377,500 Category Sources 307,500 307,500 377,500 377,500 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -100,000 0 0 0

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 1 of 6 Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO C. Public Facilities Funds will be used for painting & City of Belmont/ Sponsor encouraged to collaborate 9 carpeting for the Comm. Cntr. 69,000 53,850 25,000 25,000 Twin Pines Sr. & Comm. Ctr. with RTP. Goal 1 Facility City of San Bruno Public Library/ Multi-year project to complete ADA 10 63,000 63,000 63,000 63,000 Proj. meets NOFA funding goals. Library Accessibility requirements. Goal 1 Facility Coastside Children's Program Funds to assist in the continued (CCP)/ rehab of the child care facilties in 11 94,080 90,000 90,000 90,000 Proj. meets NOFA funding goals. Coastside Children's Programs Montara, El Granda and Half Moon (CCP) Rehabilitation Bay. Goal 3 Facilities Volunteer repair and renovation for Applicant meeting current contract Rebuilding Together Peninsula/ 12 low-income community facilities. Goal 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 requirements. Staff recom. National Rebuilding Day-Facilities 5 Facilities continued funding.

Part of larger multi-use devt w/ Funds to assist w/ architect fees to Senior Coastsiders/ Mercy Hsg to provide 40 units of sr. 13 design space for new Senior 75,000 0 75,000 75,000 Coastside Adult Comm. Ctr hsg atop ground flr svs cntr. Staff Coastsiders facility. Goal 1 Facility in agt with HCDC Rec.

Due to RDA dissol'n & new A/R for relocation/build-out of dining St. Vincent de Paul (SVdP) - Café Oversight Bd, project timeline not room & food prog. facilitiy, currently 14 St. Vincent Rehab, 638 Linden 300,000 0 300,000 300,000 definitive. HCDC recom. $300,000. located in downtown SSF. Goal 1 Av, . SSF Staff may hold funding in Off-Cycle Fac. Reserves. Reserve for qualified mid-cycle Reserve for qualified mid-cycle 0 900,000 900,000 900,000 applications projects (non-HCDC) Category Uses 626,080 1,131,850 1,478,000 1,478,000 Category Sources 700,000 1,300,000 1,478,000 1,478,000 Category Surplus / (Deficit) 73,920 168,150 0 0

D. Micro-Enterprise & Economic Devt. Child Care Coordinating Council Class series for new family child care Contract to extend into next year to of SMCo./ 15 owners to gain skills to sustan their 24,374 25,000 0 0 allow Sponsor to expend Fy11-12 Family Child Care Business Class business. Goal 5 HH funds. No new funds. Series Renaissance Entrepreneurship Prg. provides training and support for Applicant meeting performance 16 Center/ low-income entrepreneurs. Goal 100 50,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 goals. Staff recom. continued Renaissance Mid-Peninsula HH funding. Category Uses 74,374 65,000 40,000 40,000 Category Sources 75,000 75,000 40,000 40,000 Category Surplus / (Deficit) 626 10,000 0 0

E. Public Services - Emergency Shelter Operations SEE PAGE FIVE F. Public Services - Fair Housing SEE PAGE FIVE G. Public Services - Core Service Agencies SEE PAGE FIVE

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 2 of 6 Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO H. Public Services - General Bay Area Legal Aid/ Civil legal services to domestic Applicant meeting current contract 17 Domestic Violence Legal Safety violence survivors and their families. 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 requirements. Staff recom. Net Project Goal 307 P continued funding. Coastside Adult Day Health Prg. provides comprehensive health Applicant meeting current contract 18 Center/ care prog. that assist srs. on the 40,006 25,000 25,000 25,000 requirements. Staff recom. Aging in Place Program coast. Goal 150 P continued funding. Community Legal Services in Sponsor provides legal svs for Hsg Applicant meeting current contract East Palo Alto/ 19 and Anti-Predatory Lending. Goal 24,750 25,000 25,000 25,000 requirements. Staff recom. Homeless Prevention and 471 P continued funding. Housing Advocacy Provides youth mentoring/other basic Prg. has effect of keeping families Friends for Youth, Inc./ 20 needs svcs to low-income children 57,777 0 12,500 12,500 intact and keeping them in their Mentoring Services and youth. Goal 131 P homes.

Provides aff. Hsg option by matching Applicant meeting performance Human Investment Project/ home providers w/ LI home seekers. 21 84,000 49,015 65,000 65,000 goals. Staff recom. continued Home Sharing Program Provides referrals to comm resrcs funding. and hsg options. Goal 906 P

Legal asst for people threatened with Legal Aid Society of San Mateo Applicant meeting performance losing hsg or living in substandard 22 County/ 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 goals. Staff recom. continued conditions with the goal of keeping Homesavers funding. people hsd. Goal 1200 P

Mental Health Association/ 23 Supported Housing Program APPLICATION WITHDRAWN 0 0 0 0 APPLICATION WITHDRAWN (HOT Team Case Mgmt)

Meals on Wheels: Provision of meals Program strives to keep people in Peninsula Volunteers, Inc./ for homebound srs. Rosener House: their homes. Sponsor to decide how Meals on Wheels / Assists LI, disabled srs to access 24 50,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 to allocate funding amt between Rosener House Adult Day therapeutic treatment svs while Meals on Wheels and Rosener Services providing family caregivers respite House. and support. Goal 347 P

Service League of SMCo./ Sponsor meeting performance Case mgt for clients exiting 25 Hope House(s) Transitional Case 33,000 25,000 12,500 12,500 goals. Staff recom. continued incarceration. Goal 14 P Management funding. Provides subst. abuse, mental and Important service, but due to limited Sitike Counseling Center/ 26 violence prevention svcs to SMC 25,000 0 0 0 funding, prg. is lower CDBG funding Sitike Counseling Center residents. Goal 185 P priority. Intensive 24/7 residential facility for women with subs abuse problems. Important service, but due to limited The Latino Commission/ 27 Tnnts receive counseling, coaching & 25,000 0 0 0 funding, prg. is lower CDBG funding Casa Adelita Residential Housing prep. to re-enter community. Goal 15 priority. P

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 3 of 6 Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO Intensive 24/7 residential facility for women with subs abuse problems. Important service, but due to limited The Latino Commission/ 28 Tnnts receive counseling, coaching & 25,000 0 0 0 funding, prg. is lower CDBG funding Casa Maria Residential Housing prep. to re-enter community. Goal 15 priority. P Category Uses 414,533 199,015 215,000 215,000 HUD CDBG regs cap total funding Category Sources 199,015 199,015 215,000 215,000 in the Public Services categories. Category Surplus / (Deficit) -215,518 0 0 0

E. Public Services - Emergency Shelter Operations (funding through Human Services Agency) Community Overcoming Emerg shltr for victims of dom Relationship Abuse/ violence/their children, providing 29 30,000 27,274 CORA Emergency Shelter confidentital/safe living env. for 6-8 Program weeks. Goal 42 IND Shltr, 3 daily meals, full-svc day Home & Hope/ 30 center, and case mgmt for homeless 60,000 22,694 Interfaith Sheltering Program families. Goal 60 P Project We HOPE/ Emerg shltr op for shltr located in 31 50,000 45,592 Warming Shelter Operations Ealt Palo Alto. Goal 400 P Emergency (less than 30 days) and $377,048 ($171,689 CDBG + transitional (30 days to 6 months) Samaritan House/ 205359 ESG) to be block-granted to 32 shelter for single homeless adults 90,000 50,000 Safe Harbor Shelter H.S.A. to administer as part of over the age of 18 in SMCo. Goal H.S.A. funding pool for Shelters. 358 P Amt. includes $72,153 for Rapid Re- Transitional Hsg/comprehensive Hsg. Shelter Network/ support svcs for homeless families 33 250,000 3,435 $133,206 Shelter Operations and indiv. at various sitesin SMCo. Goal 792 P

Shelter Network/ A portion of the Shelter Network grant 33 $72,153 Shelter Operations is for Rapid Rehousing services.

Transitional Hsg and Independent Star Vista (formerly YFES)/ 34 Living Skills Training for Homeless 35,000 22,694 Daybreak Shelter Operations Youth. Goal 30 P Category Uses (block grant total) 515,000 352,377 377,047 171,689 $205,359 Category Sources 304,894 377,047 377,047 171,689 $205,359 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -210,106 24,670 0 0 $0

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 4 of 6 Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO F. Public Services - Fair Housing Project Sentinel/ Comprehensive fair housing Sponsor meeting current 35 50,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 Fair Housing Enforcem't Svs enforcement svcs. Goal 270 HH performance goals. Category Uses 50,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 Category Sources 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -15,000 0 0 0

G. Public Services - Core Service Agencies (funding through Human Services Agency) Part-time food program coord Coastside Hope/ 36 position providing food to those most 25,000 18,115 Food Program Coordinator in need. Goal 550 HH

El Concilio of SMCo./ Provides emerg. svcs/access to 37 50,000 18,115 Emergency Services Partnership safety net services. Goal 157 HH $95,330 CDBG funds to be block- North Peninsula Neighborhood Emerg asst/safety net svcs to low granted to San Mateo County 38 Services Center/ and very low inc. residents. Goal 15,000 13,508 Human Services Agency for Core Social Services 1317 HH Agency safety-net services. H.S.A. Provides emerg asst, counseling, will administer the CDBG funds Puente de la Costa Sur/ literacy programs & other safety-net along with H.S.A. funds for Core 39 30,953 18,318 Safety Net Services svcs to low and very low income Agencies. residents in Pescadero. Goal 870 HH

Provides case mgmt, emergency and Samaritan House/ 40 safety net services to low and very 35,000 27,274 Core Services Program low income residents. Goal 307 HH

Category Uses (block grant total) 155,953 120,000 95,330 95,330 Category Sources 120,000 120,000 95,330 95,330 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -35,953 0 0 0

TOTAL - all NOFA categories (A- Category Uses 5,843,440 5,210,742 6,217,877 3,777,273 0 989,058 1,246,188 $205,359 H). See Grand Total on next Category Sources 5,341,409 6,013,562 6,217,877 3,777,273 0 989,058 1,246,188 $205,359 page. Category Surplus / (Deficit) -502,031 802,820 0 0 0 0 0 $0

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 5 of 6 Attachment A - FY2012-13 CDBG/HOME/ESG ACTION PLAN PROJECTS

Requests & Recommendations Funding Source HOME Applicant/Project Name Project/Program Description Amt Req Staff Rec HCDC Rec CDBG CDBG RLF HOME ESG NOTES CHDO NON-HCDC CATEGORIES (below)

I. Housing Development & Rehabilitation (funded through "over the counter" Rehab non-HCDC Revolving Loan Program) East Palo Alto Community Alliance & Neighborhd Dev't. Roof replacement on Clarke Av. 41 Org./ 52,444 50,000 50,000 50,000 Apts. (15 units in 3 bldgs). 2377- 2397 Clarke Avenue Apts Roof Replacemt, EPA Hermanas Assoc. ( MidPen Hsg Corp.)/ Rehab of Ph. I of devt (36 units in 10 42 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 Main Street Park I, HMB (36 bldgs). units) Metro Senior Homes, Inc. (BRIDGE Housing)/ Window replacement for one of two 43 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000 Metro Center Senior Apts, Foster structures. City Mid-Peninsula The Farm, Inc./ Rehab of 14 unit homeless trans. hsg 44 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Family Crossroads, Daly City run by Shelter Network. Add CDBG Program Income to Shows in source breakouts, but nets 45 0 0 1,131,246 -1,131,246 Rehab Revolving Loan Fund to zero in total Reserve for qualified mid-cycle Non-profit Affordable Housing 200,000 200,000 200,000 applications Reserve for qualified mid-cycle Single-Family Housing Rehab 550,000 550,000 550,000 applications Category Uses 1,652,444 2,400,000 2,400,000 1,131,246 1,268,754 Category Sources 1,650,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 1,131,246 1,268,754 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -2,444 0 0 0 0

J. Administrative non-HCDC 46 Section 108 Repayment 627,719 627,719 627,719 Program Administration 47 894,477 894,477 571,866 57,600 248,361 0 $16,651 Allowance Project Delivery Allowance (direct 48 290,998 290,998 56,936 234,062 0 0 project-delivery costs) Reserves (excluding reserves For other program and/or HUD- 0 0 0 0 noted above in categories) related obligations Category Uses 1,813,195 1,813,195 1,256,521 291,662 248,361 0 $16,651 Category Sources 1,813,195 1,813,195 1,256,521 291,662 248,361 0 $16,651 Category Surplus / (Deficit) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0

Category Uses 7,495,884 9,423,937 10,431,072 6,165,040 1,560,416 1,237,419 1,246,188 $222,010 TOTAL - ALL CATEGORIES Category Sources 6,991,409 10,226,757 10,431,072 6,165,040 1,560,416 1,237,419 1,246,188 $222,010 Category Surplus / (Deficit) -504,475 802,820 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Checksum 0 0 0 0 0 0

FY2012-13 Action Plan Sources & Uses_v12 Revised: 9APR12 6 of 6 FY 2012-13 SOURCES & USES Version: 4/9/2012

SOURCES FY 2012-13 CDBG HOME TOTAL CDBG REHAB HOME CHDO ESG Notes PROJECTED ENTITLEMENT GRANT 1 3,645,601 2,479,330 0 802,622 141,639 222,010 PROJECTED NEW PROGRAM INCOME 2 ( Jan. thru Dec. 2012) 1,041,200 380,000 288,000 373,200 0 0 OTHER PROGRAMMABLE FUNDS 3 (as of 12/31/2011) 5,744,271 3,305,709 1,272,416 61,597 1,104,549 0 TOTAL SOURCES 10,431,072 6,165,039 1,560,416 1,237,419 1,246,188 222,010

CDBG HOME USES FY 2012-13 HCDC Non-HCDC TOTAL CDBG REHAB HOME CHDO ESG Category Notes A. Affordable / Supportive Housing Dev. 4 3,600,000 3,600,000 1,364,754 989,058 1,246,188 A. Section 108 Loan Payment 5 0 627,719 627,719 627,719 B. Minor Home Repair Grants 6 377,500 0 377,500 C. Public Facilities - Loans 6 578,000 0 578,000 995,500 C. Public Facilities - Grants 6 0 0 0 D. Micro-Enterprise / Ec. Dev. Grants 6 40,000 0 40,000 E. Public Services - Shelter Services 7,8 304,894 304,894 133,206 E. Public Services - Rapid Rehousing 7,8 72,153 72,153 72,153 G. Public Services - Core Service Agencies 9 95,330 95,330 517,018 F. Public Services - Fair Housing 10 0 35,000 35,000 H. Public Services - Other 11 215,000 0 215,000 Major Rehab Loans - County 12 0 1,650,000 1,650,000 1,131,246 518,754 0 0 Program Administration 13 0 894,477 894,477 571,866 57,600 248,361 16,651 Project Delivery Costs 14 0 290,998 290,998 56,936 234,062 Reserves 15 0 1,650,000 1,650,000 900,000 750,000 0 0 TOTALS 4,810,500 5,620,572 10,431,072 6,165,039 1,560,416 1,237,419 1,246,188 222,010

NOTES FY 2012-13

1 Annual federal entitlement grants for CDBG, HOME, and ESG. Adjusted down for two HUD-cancelled projects CDBG CDBG 2 Projected new program income from loan pay-offs expected during calendar 2012 Breakout: Breakout: Includes: Trust fund balances + reprogrammable funds previously allocated but cancelled or returned; also adjusted to Total Current 3 reconcile w/ HUD's official un-expended funds reports CDBG CDBG Housing Development: recommend allocating 1/2 of total CDBG, excluding rehab revolving loan fund, to affordable 4 housing development & rehabilitation projects. 32% 70% Current-year CDBG funds are used to pay off HUD for a Section 108 loan that went into Trestle Glen apartments. This 5 will be offset eventually as the development is able to pay back the program. Remaining CDBG (after Housing & Public Services) goes to: Minor Home Repair, Public Facilities, Micro-Enterprise, 6 16% 35% Economic Development Pub Svcs 7 Public Services: recommend allocating HUD maximum, which is 15% of CDBG (grant + PI) 8% 18% Breakout Shelter Services & Rapid Rehousing - block granted to HSA: recommended allocation approx. 1/3 of public service 8 33% funds + all ESG.

9 Core Service Agencies - block granted to HSA: recommended allocation as approx. 1/4 of public service funds 18%

10 Fair Housing: recommended allocation as approx. 5% of public service funds. HUD requires some. 7%

11 Remaining Public Services funds are the residual after Shelters, Cores and Fair Housing. 42%

Major Rehab is an "over the counter" program funded primarily from its own Revolving Loan Fund, and excluded from 12 18% 40% calculations. However, this year due to high demand and few new developments, we recommend funding.

Program Administration fees that pay for all admin other than direct casework are capped by HUD at 20% for CDBG; 13 10% for HOME. This calculation excludes "Other Programmable Funds" for which the admin. allowance has been 9% 20% k l d 14 Housing Department can claim reimbursement for Project Delivery Costs for direct casework subject to limitations. 1% 2%

Reserves are necessary to manage timing and contingencies. Reserves in CDBG Revolving Loan Fund cover over 15 15% 31% the counter requests for home rehab. Reserves in regular CDBG all mid-year, off-cycle responsiveness.

This calculation shows % of all CDBG allocated to revolving loans versus grants. Grants to go Public Services, Micro- 16 55% Enterprise, Minor Home Repair, and some Public Facilities. Recommend at least 50% to loans. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Housing (Department of Housing) Department of Housing

Date: April 26, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: 10 Day Publication, Public Hearing Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors

From: Duane Bay, Director Subject: Approval of the FY 2012-2013 Annual Action Plan for the Use of Federal Funds

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing:

A) The President of the Board to Approve the FY 2012-2013 Annual Action Plan for the use of Federal Funds provided under three entitlement programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME); and

B) The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to submit the Annual Action Plan and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and

BACKGROUND: HUD provides the following annual entitlement grants to the County: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME); and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), formerly the Emergency Shelter Grant program. The Housing and Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act) shifted ESG’s program priority to helping persons quickly regain stability in permanent housing, rather than through shelters and transitional housing.

CDBG funds are provided to the County as the Urban County, comprising itself and the 16 small cities. The four largest cities (Daly City, South San Francisco, San Mateo, and Redwood City) each receive their own CDBG allocation. HOME funds are provided to the County HOME Consortium comprising the Urban County and the City of South San Francisco. The other three large cities each receive their own HOME allocations. The County, on behalf of the Urban County, is the sole entitlement recipient of ESG funds.

HUD requires a locally-defined citizen participation process for allocation of entitlement funds. This process, which is delineated in the HUD-required five-year Consolidated Plan and confirmed in each year’s Action Plan, includes the following steps. County staff, in consultation with the Board-appointed Housing and Community Development Committee (HCDC), develops funding priority guidelines. Then the County issues a Notice of Funding Availability. The staff makes initial funding recommendations to the HCDC, and HCDC holds a public hearing to consider the applications, staff recommendations and testimony by applicants. Finally, HCDC recommendations are compiled into the Annual Action Plan and forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for review, public hearing and approval. After approval the Action Plan will be finalized for submission to HUD not later than May 15, 2012.

DISCUSSION: The County will receive $3.6 million of federal housing entitlements funds from the CDBG, HOME, and ESG programs, combined. This is 16% less than last year. ESG funding will increase, but ESG is only 6% of the total entitlement funding.

For administrative efficiency in response to shrinking HUD allocations, Department of Housing will block-grant all ESG funds and a portion of CDBG funds to the Human Services Agency (HSA) to allocate for housing information and referral, shelter operations, and rapid re-housing activities. By combining these funds with other funds already administered by HSA, redundant County contracts with service providers will be eliminated, reducing paperwork for County staff and partner agencies alike.

HSA has sub-allocated the block-granted funds to core agencies and shelter operators through its Continuum of Care process. Attachment A of the Annual Action Plan lists all proposed activities, including the HSA-allocated programs.

Approval of the Annual Action Plan contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Livable Community by increasing the affordable housing supply, rehabilitating existing housing stock, improving facilities that provide vital services to low income populations, and offering opportunities for low-income entrepreneurs to participate in the County’s economic vitality through microenterprise assistance.

Action Plan Budget A $10.4 million budget will be submitted to HUD, shown below: CDBG Grant $2,479,330 HOME Grant $944,261 ESG Grant $222,010 Program Income (loan repayments) $1,041,200 Other Reprogrammable Funds $5,744,271 TOTAL $10,431,072

HUD Certifications: In order to receive CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds, the County must submit pro forma certifications to HUD assuring that the County: (1) will not discriminate in providing services; (2) is following a citizens participation process delineated in a citizen participation plan; (3) is providing a drug-free workplace for staff; and (4) has adopted and is enforcing a policy prohibiting the excessive use of force against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations. In approving the Annual Action Plan, the Board is, therefore, asked to approve the aforementioned certifications as well.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution as to form.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Annual Action Plan activities are included in the Department of Housing Budget for FY 2012-13. There is no Net County Cost.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Department of Housing

DATE: April 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: 10 Day Publication, Public Hearing VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Duane Bay, Department of Housing Director

SUBJECT: Executive Summary Approval of the FY 2012-2013 Annual Action Plan for the use of Federal Funds

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing:

A. The President of the Board to Approve the FY 2012-2013 Annual Action Plan for the use of Federal Funds provided under three entitlement programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME); and

B. The Director of the Department of Housing or his designee to submit the Annual Action Plan and required certifications to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and

C. Director of the Department of Housing or the Director’s designee to execute contract amendments that modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not exceed the total annual HUD funding allocations.

Background HUD provides annual funding allocations to the County under programs including Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME); and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG). The three HUD programs require a locally-defined public participation process for the distribution of funds. The County’s public process is facilitated by a 15-member Housing and Community Development Committee (HCDC). Preliminary staff recommendations are made to the HCDC, which presides over a public hearing with the funding applicants. The HCDC may choose to concur with staff recommendations or choose to revise with their own recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. The final step of the public process is the public hearing held by the Board, after which the Action Plan is finalized for submission to HUD, due no later than May 15 of each year.

Discussion The total FY 2012-13 Plan budget, including repayment and reprogrammed funds, is approximately $10.4 million. The Action Plan table with the recommendations of staff and the HCDC is included as Attachment A to the full Board report.

Approval of the FY 2012-13 Annual Action Plan contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Livable Community increasing the affordable housing supply, rehabilitating existing housing stock, improving facilities that provide vital services to low income populations, and offering opportunities for low-income entrepreneurs to participate in the County’s economic vitality through microenterprise assistance.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution as to form.

Fiscal Impact The Annual Action Plan projects are included in the Department of Housing Budget for FY 2012-13. There is no Net County Cost.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence Sheriff's Office

Date: April 23, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: 4/5ths To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Sheriff Greg Munks

Subject: Architectural and Engineering Consulting Services for the Replacement Jail Project

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing:

A) the County Manager or his/her designee to execute :

1. An agreement for architectural and engineering services with Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) for the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $8,934,220 , and

2. Contract amendments which increase the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $100,000, in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of architectural and engineering services of the Replacement Jail to exceed the current or revised fiscal provisions.

B) Approve a project allowance account established in the FY 2012 -13 budget of $852,670 in Capital Projects to be used as needed for items that are to be paid by the County over the course of the Project .

C) Approve an Appropriation Transfer Request in the amount of $350,000 from Non- Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Projects for architectural and engineering consulting services for FY 2011 -12. Costs for FY 2012-13 are estimated to be $3 million.

BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City just east of Highway 101 on Maple Street at Blomquist Street for the express purpose of constructing a new Replacement Jail. Additionally, the Board approved a mitigated negative declara tion for the Replacement Jail on the Chemical Way location. On October 4, 2011, the Board approved the scope and size of the replacement jail project, clearing the way for the project to enter the design phase. In February, 2012, the Board approved the first phase of the jail construction process with the approval of a contract with WEST Environmental Services to oversee and coordinate the Site Management Plan that was approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). WEST has begun their work; the next step is to begin the actual design of the Replacement Jail. The scope of work for the design and engineering of the Replacement Jail has been clearly articulated and includes, but is not limited to:

Research and Program Verification This phase establishes overall direction for the Project, identifies participants and their defined roles and responsibilities, defines decision-making procedures, and establishes budget and schedule guidelines.

Demolition and Grading Permit / Early Procurement As soon as possible develop a demolition and grading package for permitting and bidding according to the preliminary project schedule.

Schematic Design This phase will define the overall design for the Replacement Jail, provide a baseline through design development and serve as a beginning template for the final construction documentation. The architect will develop schematic plans and 3-D concepts while working with consulting engineers and the Sheriff's Jail Planning Unit. Initial plans and 3-D design will address such issues as orientation, interior circulation, sightlines, building access, exterior circulation, and code/regulatory requirements.

Building Information Modeling (BIM) Project Execution Planning Architect to work with the general contractor to develop a BIM execution plan to document the team standards and protocols for the BIM model as well as determine what the team will use the BIM model for. This will include a detailed description of what is being modeled, who is modeling it, when it is being modeled and how it will be modeled.

Analysis of Structural Systems Working with sub-consultants, develop an analysis of alternative structural systems for the project, considering availability of materials, lead times, cost, and schedule. This task includes a deliverable in the form of a description of alternatives, and a cost analysis of various structural systems for both the secure and administrative housing structures.

Acoustics Develop acoustical requirements in conformance with State regulations for all spaces within the Project. Provide recommendations on criteria to the Jail Planning Unit and strategies for ensuring that criteria are met. Provide a plan for integrating acoustical requirements into the design, and an overall quality control plan to ensure that acoustical criteria is achieved by the final design.

Security Develop basic security concepts, and review with the Jail Planning Unit and transition team. Establish a quality control plan to ensure that the security requirements are achieved by the final design, and that the Jail Planning Unit and transition team have an active role in reviewing the security design from concept through construction, commissioning, and transition.

Design Development The architect, working closely with the design engineers and general contractor will provide detailed design development documents as required to fix and describe the size and character of the entire project as to civil, landscape, architectural, structural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, fire sprinkler, fire alarm and pool systems, materials, and other such elements as may be appropriate to establish the exact character for the final design.

Construction Documentation, Permitting and Bidding As soon as possible and concurrent with the construction documents, develop early procurement packages for the structural steel, exterior skin, long lead equipment as required to maintain the schedule. This will require that these portions of the work accelerate through the design process so that they can be bid separately.

Document Distribution The Architect shall be responsible for the printing and distribution of all copies of drawings and documentation required by the Jail Planning Unit.

DISCUSSION: On December 9, 2011, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office issued a Request for Statements of Qualifications (RFSOQ) to qualified architectural and engineering firms throughout the United States. RFSOQ advertising and outreach included ads placed in local newspapers, posting on the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning website and postings on Facebook and Twitter. Seven firms responded to the RFSOQ. Representatives from the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit along with a Deputy County Counsel and a representative of the County Manager’s Office carefully reviewed all RFSOQ submittals and recommended that the top three ranked firms be moved forward into the Request for Proposal (RFP) stage of the process. Those recommended firms were: Hellmuth, Obata+ Kassabaum, Inc., HMC+ Beverly Prior Architects in association with Ricci Greene Associates, and KMD Justice in association with Dewberry. On January 27, 2012, the Sheriff’s Office issued an RFP to the top three firms and received responses from those firms on February 8, 2012. On February 15, 2012, a selection panel consisting of members of the Sheriff’s Jail Planning Unit (JPU) and a representative of the County Manager’s Office conducted interviews with the top three firms. After receiving input from the selection panel, the Sheriff recommends the selection of Hellmuth, Obata+ Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) as the architect of record for the Replacement Jail project. Approval of this architectural and engineering services contract contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring a safe and cost effective Replacement Jail Facility. Performance Measure(s): Measure FY 2011 -12 FY 2012 -13 Projected Projected Percent of all required plans, specifications and bid documents for architectural and engineering services 100% 100% prepared and completed within industry standard time guidelines.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this Architectural and Engineering Consulting Services contract is $8,934,220. The not-to-exceed contract amount is based on $400,980 for reimbursable expenses, $706,500 for sub consultant allowances and $7,826,740 for design fees. The project allowance account of $852,670 will be kept in Capital Projects and established in the FY 2012-13 budget. It is anticipated that $350,000 in costs will be incurred during FY 2011-12 and an estimated $3 million for FY 2012-13. These costs will be funded from Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves. The remaining balance of the contract will be funded by either Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves or bond proceeds for the Replacement Jail Construction Project. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS MATRIX

1. General description of The Sheriff’s Office is seeking a firm or individual for RFP architectural and engineering services for the San Mateo county Replacement Correctional Facility 2. List key evaluation Proposals were evaluated based on the following: criteria 1. Completeness of response submission 2. Personnel experience and qualifications 3. Depth and quality of respondent’s performance 4. Technical/Management Approach 5. Availability 6. Financial Stability 7. Sustainable Practices 3. Where advertised San Francisco Examiner Posted on the Sheriff’s Office web page 4. In addition to Sent to all those enrolled to receive automatic notifications advertisement, list others and announcements on the Sheriff’s web page, Facebook, to whom the RFP and Twitter announcement was sent. 5. Total number of RFP’s None directly sent to prospective proposers 6. Number of proposals Seven received 7. Who evaluated the Lieutenant Deborah Bazan proposal Sargent Dave Titus Project Manager Sam Lin Paul Scannell, representing the County Manager’s Office

8. In alphabetical order, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. names of proposers (or 300 California, Suite 600 finalists, if applicable) San Francisco, CA 94105 and location DLR Group, Inc. of California 1050 20 th Street, Suite 250 Sacramento, CA 95811

HDR Architecture, Inc. 251 South Lake Avenue, Suite 1000 Pasadena, CA 91101

HMC + Beverly Prior Architects RicciGreene Associates 417 Montgomery Street 8 th Floor San Francisco, CA 94110

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104

Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Justice with Dewberry 222 Vallejo Street San Francisco, CA 94111

Rosser International, Inc. DES Architects/Engineers, Inc. 524 West Peachtree St NW Atlanta, GA 30308

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE: A) AN AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES WITH HELLMUTH, OBATA + KASSABAUM, INC.(HOK) FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT JAIL ON CHEMICAL WAY IN REDWOOD CITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,934,220; AND B.) CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH INCREASE THE COUNTY’S MAXIMUM FISCAL OBLIGATION BY NO MORE THAN $100,000 IN AGGREGATE, AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES DO NOT CAUSE THE TOTAL COST OF ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES OF THE REPLACEMENT JAIL TO EXCEED THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS.

______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , in December, 2010, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City east of Highway 101 for the purpose of constructing a replacement jail and the Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the replacement jail on that location; and

WHEREAS , a Site Management Plan (SMP) and a Mitigated Negative

Declaration has been approved by the Board of Supervisors for the Replacement Jail location; and

WHEREAS , the County is desirous to retain a qualified architectural and engineering firm with the requisite experience and technical qualifications necessary to provide and oversee the design and engineering of the replacement jail; and

WHEREAS , the Sheriff issued a Request for Proposals in January of 2012 seeking responses from three pre-qualified architectural and engineering consulting firms to assist with the design of the Replacement Jail; and

WHEREAS , a selection committee comprised of members of the Sheriff’s Jail

Planning Unit, the County Counsel’s Office and the County Manager’s Office reviewed and carefully evaluated the proposals submitted in response to the RFP; and

WHEREAS , said selection committee is recommending the retention of

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum (HOK) to provide architectural and engineering services for the Replacement Jail project for the amount of $8,934,220; and

WHEREAS , this Board has been presented with an Agreement with HOK for the provision of architectural and engineering services for the Replacement Jail Project and has examined and approved said Agreement as to both form and content and desires to enter into the same; and

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

Board of Supervisors authorizes and directs the County Manager or his/her designee to execute:

1. An Agreement for architectural and engineering services with Hellmuth,

Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. for the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on

Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $8,934,220.

2. Contract amendments which increase the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $100,000. in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of architectural and engineering services of the Replacement Jail to exceed the current or revised fiscal provisions.

* * * * * *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Sheriff’s Office

DATE: April 23, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 vote

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Sheriff Greg Munks

SUBJECT: Executive Summary: Architectural and Engineering Consulting Services for the Replacement Jail Project

RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the County Manager or his/her designee to execute:

A. An agreement for architectural and engineering services with Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) for the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $8,934,220.

B. Contract amendments which increase the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $100,000, in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of architectural and engineering services of the Replacement Jail to exceed the current or revised fiscal provisions.

2. Approve a project allowance account established in the FY 2012-13 budget of $852,670 in Capital Projects to be used as needed for items that are to be paid by the County over the course of the Project.

3. Approve an Appropriation Transfer Request in the amount of $350,000 from Non- Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Projects for architectural and engineering consulting services for FY 2011-12. Costs for FY 2012-13 are estimated to be $3 million.

BACKGROUND: In December, 2010 the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City just east of Highway 101 on Maple Street at Blomquist Street for the express purpose of constructing a new Replacement Jail. Additionally, the Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the Replacement Jail on the Chemical Way location. On October 4, 2011, the Board approved the scope and size of the jail project, clearing the way for the project to enter the design and engineering phase.

On January 27, 2012, the Sheriff’s Office issued an RFP to the top three firms and received responses from those firms on February 8, 2012. On February 15, 2012, the selection panel conducted interviews with the top three firms. After receiving input from the selection panel, the Sheriff recommends the selection of Hellmuth, Obata+ Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) as the architect of record for the Replacement Jail project.

Approval of this architectural and engineering services contract contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring a safe and cost effective Replacement Jail Facility.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the resolution and agreement as to form.

Professional Services Agreement

With

Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc.

May __, 2012

2105-001\2349762.2 Revision April 18, 2012

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO AND

HELLMUTH, OBATA & KASSABAUM, INC. at One Bush Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104

This Professional Services Agreement (the “Agreement”) is dated May __, 2012 and is by and between the County of San Mateo, a political subdivision of the State of California (“Owner”) and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. (“Architect”).

Recitals

WHEREAS, Owner wishes to retain Architect to provide architectural, engineering and related services for its Replacement Correctional Facility Project;

WHEREAS, Architect was selected by means of Owner’s consultant selection process, and represents that it is qualified to provide the services required by Owner as set forth in this Agreement;

WHEREAS, Owner’s rules and regulations authorize Owner to enter into agreements for expert professional temporary services; and

WHEREAS, the services proposed in this Agreement are professional and temporary in nature.

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, stipulated and agreed, the parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT 1. Definitions

1.1 Where any word or phrase defined below, or a pronoun used in place thereof, is used in any part of this Agreement, it shall have the meaning herein set forth.

“Agreement” This Agreement together with all attachments and appendices and other documents incorporated herein by reference, including, but not limited to, Appendix A (Services to be Provided by Architect), Appendix B (Payments to Architect), Appendix C (Milestone Schedule), Appendix D (Deliverables) and Appendix E (Insurance) attached hereto “Architect” Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: (415) 243-0555 Fax: (415) 882 7763 Owner” County of San Mateo

“Project” The project described in Appendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect.

“Services” All work, labor, materials and services required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, provided pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including without limitation architectural, engineering, building information modeling, coordination and administrative services. “Sub-consultants” Architect’s consultants, Sub-consultants, contractors and sub-contractors, of any tier.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 1 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

2. Term of Agreement

2.1 All work comprising the Services shall be deemed performed under this Agreement. This Agreement shall conclude upon the completion of the Project.

3. Services Architect Agrees to Perform

3.1 Architect shall perform all Services described in Appendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect, attached hereto and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.

3.2 Architect shall complete all Services required by this Agreement within the times specified in the Milestone Schedule in Appendix C. Architect agrees that the Milestone Schedule includes reasonable allowances for completion of the Services, including all time required for Owner’s review and approval of deliverables and for approval of the deliverables by all authorities having jurisdiction over the Project and Services. Architect shall achieve its scheduled Milestones (as shown on the Milestone Schedule) unless an Excusable Event causes delay (”Excusable Delay”), and unless Architect gives written notice of the Excusable Event and requests a time extension within twenty one (21) days of the occurrence of the Excusable Event. (“Excusable Events” shall be limited to acts of neglect by Owner or Owner’s agents, contractors or consultants when acting at Owner’s direction, breaches of this Agreement by Owner, Acts of God such as fire, flood, earthquake, or epidemic, or delay by a construction contractor during the construction phase of the Project, or any other circumstances beyond Architect’s reasonable control.) If the period of Excusable Delay caused by an Excusable Event concurs with an Architect caused or other nonexcusable delay, Owner may (but shall not be required to) grant a time extension without compensation.

3.3 Architect may recover extra costs resulting from Excusable Delay upon showing that the costs claimed (i) resulted from time and/or expenses actually incurred in performing Services, (ii) were incurred by Architect as a direct result of the delay and not otherwise within Architect’s scope of Services, and (iii) are documented to Owner’s satisfaction. (For example, and not by way of limitation, contract punch list and final inspection Services, when performed no more than twice, and Services related to correcting deficiencies in Architect’s work, shall be within Basic Services and not entitle Architect to extra costs or Additional Services.)

3.4 Should the progress of the Services under this Agreement at any time fall behind schedule for any reason other than Excusable Delays, Architect shall apply such additional manpower and resources as necessary without Additional Services Compensation to bring progress of the Services under this Agreement back on schedule and consistent with the standard of professional skill and care required by this Agreement. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement

4. Compensation

4.1 Owner shall pay Architect compensation according to the Compensation Schedule established in Appendix B, “Payments to Architect”. Owner shall pay Architect in monthly payments on or before the last day of each month for Services in an amount which the Owner, in its sole discretion, concludes is the value of the Services which have been properly performed as of the last day of the immediately preceding month and is invoiced and due under Appendix B.

4.2 Owner shall not incur any charges under this Agreement, nor shall any payments become due to Architect for any payment period on the Project, until Owner receives all deliverables required under Appendix D, “Deliverables”, for the payment period (if any) and reasonably accepts such deliverables as meeting the requirements of this Agreement. In cases where Architect has partially completed one or more deliverables due during a payment period, and if Architect demonstrates diligent progress thereon, then Owner will make a partial progress payment based upon Architect's percentage completion of the partially completed deliverables and diligent progress but taking into account any

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 2 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

adverse impacts upon Owner. Owner shall not be liable for, and Architect shall not be entitled to, any payment for Services performed before this Agreement’s execution. Architect shall be entitled to compensation retroactively once Agreement is fully executed and provided said Services are included within Architect’s Scope of Services.

4.3 Owner will not withhold entire payment if a questioned amount is involved, but will issue payment in the amount of the total invoice less any questioned amount(s). Owner will make payment for questioned amounts(s) upon Owner’s receipt of any requested documentation verifying the claimed amount(s) and Owner’s determination that the amount is due under the terms of this Agreement. Owner shall advise Architect, in writing, within 15 days of receipt of the requested documentation. Final payment will be made when all Services required under this Agreement have been completed to the reasonable satisfaction of Owner including, without limitation, Architect’s transmittal of all deliverables to Owner required by Appendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect.

4.4 Invoices furnished by Architect under this Agreement must be in a form acceptable to Owner. All amounts paid by Owner to Architect shall be subject to audit by Owner. Payment shall be made by Owner to Architect at the address stated in Paragraph6.1 below.

4.5 Owner may set off against payments due Architect under this Agreement any sums that Owner determines that Architect owes to Owner because of Architect’s errors, omissions, breaches of this Agreement, delays or other acts that caused Owner monetary damages. Prior to exercising such right, Owner must demand and attend mediation pursuant to Paragraph22.2 below of this Agreement, to be attended by Owner, Architect, and any applicable insurance carriers; such mediation to occur within 30 days of demand. If the parties cannot agree upon the time, place, and mediator, within one week of the Owner’s demand, then the San Mateo County Superior Court may upon application by any party make such selection for the parties. If a party other than Owner refuses to mediate under this Paragraph4.5, then Owner shall have satisfied its obligations under this Paragraph.

5. Maximum Costs

5.1 Owner’s obligation hereunder shall not at any time exceed the amount approved by Owner’s Board of Supervisors and approved by Owner’s Representative or designee for payment to the Architect pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

5.2 Except as may be provided by applicable law governing emergency conditions, Owner has not authorized its Supervisors, employees, officers and agents to request Architect to perform Services or to provide materials, equipment and supplies that would result in Architect performing Services or providing materials, equipment and supplies that exceed the scope of the Services, materials, equipment and supplies agreed upon in the Agreement unless the Owner amends the Agreement in writing and approves the amendment as required by law to authorize the additional Services, materials, equipment or supplies.

5.3 Owner shall not reimburse Architect for Services, materials, equipment or supplies provided by Architect beyond the scope of the Services, materials, equipment and supplies agreed upon in the Agreement and unless approved by a written amendment to the Agreement having been executed and approved in the same manner as this Agreement.

6. Qualified Personnel

6.1 For purposes of this Agreement, except for notices specified under Paragraph17 below, Owner and Architect shall direct all communications to each other as follows:

Owner Architect

Project Executive Lynn Filar, Principal-in-Charge

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 3 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

Jail Planning Unit Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. 400 County Center One Bush Street, Suite 200 Redwood City, CA 94063 San Francisco, CA 94104

6.2 Services under this Agreement shall be performed only by qualified, competent personnel under the supervision of and/or in the employment of Architect. Architect shall conform with Owner’s reasonable requests regarding assignment of personnel, but all personnel, including those assigned at Owner’s request, and shall be supervised by Architect.

6.3 Architect agrees that all senior professional personnel assigned to the Project will be those listed in its proposal, Exhibit1 to Appendix A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and that the listed personnel will continue their assignments on the Project during the entire term of this Agreement. It is recognized that the listed personnel may in the future cease to be employed by Architect and because of the termination of such employment no longer able to provide Services. However, Architect agrees that replacement of any of the listed personnel during the Agreement period shall only be with other professional personnel who have equivalent experience and shall require the prior written approval of Owner. Any costs associated with replacement of personnel shall be borne exclusively by Architect. Resumes for all listed senior professional personnel are attached via Exhibit1 to Appendix A and by this reference incorporated herein.

6.4 Architect agrees that should the above personnel not continue their assignments on the Project during the entire term of this Agreement, then Architect shall not charge Owner for the cost of training or “bringing up to speed” replacement personnel. Owner may condition its reasonable approval of substitution personnel upon a reasonable transition period wherein new personnel will learn the Project and get up to speed at Architect’s cost.

7. Representations

7.1 Architect represents that it has reviewed Appendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect, and that in its professional judgment the Services to be performed under this Agreement can be performed for a fee within the maximum amount set forth in the Compensation Schedule established in Appendix B, Payments to Architect, and within the times specified in the Milestone Schedule.

7.2 Architect represents that it is qualified to perform the Services and that it possesses, and will continue to possess at its sole cost and expense, the necessary licenses and/or permits required to perform the Services or will obtain such licenses and/or permits prior to time such licenses and/or permits are required. Architect also represents that it has knowledge of, and will comply with, all applicable building codes, laws, regulations and ordinances.

7.3 Architect represents that it and its Sub-consultants have specialized expertise in designing and observing construction of facilities similar to those intended for the Project. Sub-consultants’ Statements of Qualification, will be incorporated into this Agreement as an Exhibit2 to Appendix A. Architect agrees that the Services shall be performed in a manner that conforms to the standards of professional practice observed by a specialist in performing services pertaining to adult detention facilities similar to the Services (“Standard of Care”). Architect agrees that for a period of one year after the completion of the Services or at the final acceptance of the construction resulting from the Services, whichever is later, it will re-perform or replace any part or all of the Services deemed by Owner to be defective and/or not meeting the above standard.

7.4 The granting of any progress payment by Owner, or the receipt thereof by Architect, or any inspection, review, approval or oral statement by any representative of Owner or any other governmental entity, shall in no way waive or limit the obligations in this Paragraph7 or lessen the liability of Architect for unsatisfactory Services, including but not limited to cases where the defective or below standard Services may not have been apparent or detected at the time of such payment, inspection, review or approval.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 4 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

8. Indemnification and General Liability

8.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation, California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), Architect shall defend (including providing legal counsel reasonably acceptable to Owner at no cost to Owner) indemnify and hold harmless Owner and its Supervisors, officers, agents, departments, officials, representatives and employees (collectively “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, suit, action, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, economic harm, injury to or death of an employee of Architect or its Sub-consultants), expense and liability of every kind, nature and description, at law or equity, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to (including, without limitation, incidental and consequential damages, court costs, reasonable attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith and costs of investigation) any negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Architect, any Sub-consultant, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone that they control (collectively “Liabilities”). Such obligations to defend, hold harmless and indemnify any Indemnitee shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in whole or in part by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee, but shall apply to all other Liabilities.

8.2 Architect shall defend (including providing legal counsel reasonably acceptable to Owner at no cost to Owner), indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnitees from all loss, cost, damage, expense, suit, liability or claims, in law or in equity, including attorneys’ fees, court costs, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses, that may at any time arise for any infringement of the patent rights, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, service mark or any other proprietary right of any person or persons in consequence of the use by Owner, or any of the other Indemnitees, of articles or Services to be supplied in the performance of this Agreement.

8.3 Owner shall include a provision in the construction contract with the general contractor on the Project requiring the general contractor to indemnify Architect for damages resulting from the negligence of the general contractor and its subcontractors. Owner shall also include a provision in the construction contract with the general contractor on the Project requiring the general contractor to name Architect as an additional insured on its Comprehensive General Liability insurance coverage. If the Architect has the opportunity to review the construction contract prior to bidding, the risk of an inadvertent omission of such provisions is on Architect.

8.4 Architect shall place in its sub-consulting agreements and cause its Sub-consultants to agree to indemnities and insurance obligations (except insurance limits) in favor of Owner and other Indemnitees in the exact form and substance of those contained in this Agreement.

8.5 Owner acknowledges that the discovery, presence, handling or removal of asbestos products, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) or other hazardous substances which may presently exist at the Project site is outside of Architect’s responsibilities and expertise and is not included in the scope of Services Architect is to perform nor included in Architect’s insurance. Owner shall hire an expert consultant in this field if the Project involves such materials. Architect shall not be responsible or be involved in any way with the discovery, presence, handling or removal of such materials. Architect shall be responsible to coordinate with Owner’s expert consultant as required by Article2.2.13 below2.3ofAppendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect.

9. Liability of Owner

9.1 Except as provided in Appendix A, Services to be Provided by Architect and Appendix E, Insurance, Owner’s obligations under this Agreement shall be limited to the payment of the compensation provided for in Paragraphs 3, 4 and 5of this Agreement.

9.2 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall Owner be liable, regardless of whether any claim is based on contract, tort or otherwise, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, lost profits or revenue, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the Services, or the Project.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 5 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

9.3 Owner shall not be responsible for any damage to persons or property as a result of the use, misuse or failure of any equipment used by Architect, or by any of its employees, even though such equipment be furnished, rented or loaned to Architect by Owner. The acceptance or use of such equipment by Architect or any of its employees shall be construed to mean that Architect accepts full responsibility for and shall exonerate, indemnify, defend and save harmless Owner from and against any and all claims for any damage or injury of any type, including attorneys’ fees, arising from the use, misuse or failure of such equipment, whether such damage be to the Architect, its employees, Owner employees or third parties, or to property belonging to any of the above.

9.4 Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver or limitation of any right or remedy, whether in equity or at law, which Owner or Architect may have under this Agreement or any applicable law. All rights and remedies of Owner or Architect, whether under this Agreement or other applicable law, shall be cumulative.

10. Independent Contractor; Payment of Taxes and Other Expenses

10.1 Architect shall be deemed at all times to be an independent contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner in which Architect performs the Services required of Architect by the terms of this Agreement. Architect shall be fully liable for the acts and omissions of it its Sub- consultants, its employees and its agents.

10.2 Nothing contained herein shall be construed as creating an employment, agency or joint venture relationship between Owner and Architect. Architect acknowledges that neither it nor any of its employees or agents shall, for any purpose whatsoever, be deemed to be Owner employees, and shall not be entitled to receive any benefits conferred on Owner employees, including without limitation workers’ compensation, pension, health, insurance or other benefits.

10.3 Architect shall be solely responsible for payment of any required taxes, including California sales and use taxes, city business taxes and United States income tax withholding and social security taxes, levied upon this Agreement, the transaction, or the Services delivered pursuant hereto.

10.4 Architect shall make its designated representative available as much as reasonably possible to Owner staff during the Owner’s normal working hours or as otherwise requested by Owner. Terms in this Agreement referring to direction from Owner shall be construed as providing for direction as to policy and the result of Architect’s Services only and not as to the means by which such a result is obtained.

11. Insurance

11.1 Prior to execution of this Agreement, Architect shall furnish to Owner Certificates of Insurance showing satisfactory proof that it maintains the insurance required by this Contract as set forth in Appendix E, Insurance, which is attached and made a part of this Agreement. Architect shall maintain all required insurance throughout the term of this Agreement and as otherwise provided in Appendix E. In the event Architect fails to maintain any required insurance, and notwithstanding Paragraph4.5 above, Owner may (but is not obligated to) purchase such insurance and deduct or retain premium amounts from any sums due Architect under this Agreement (or Architect shall promptly reimburse Owner for such expense).

12. Suspension of Services

12.1 Owner may, without cause, order Architect to suspend, delay or interrupt Services pursuant to this Agreement, in whole or in part, for such periods of time as Owner may determine in its sole discretion. Owner shall deliver to Architect written notice of the extent of the suspension at least seven (7) calendar days before the commencement thereof. Suspension shall be treated as an

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 6 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

Excusable Delay and Architect shall be compensated for such delay to the extent provided under this Agreement.

12.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Paragraph12, no compensation shall be made to the extent that performance is, was or would have been so suspended, delayed or interrupted by a cause for which Architect is responsible.

13. Termination of Agreement for Cause

13.1 If at any time Owner believes Architect may not be adequately performing its obligations under this Agreement, that Architect may fail to complete the Services as required by this Agreement, or has provided written notice of observed deficiencies in Architect’s performance, Owner may request from Architect prompt written assurances of performance and a written plan acceptable to Owner to correct the observed deficiencies in Architect’s performance (“Cure Plan”). The Cure Plan must include, as applicable, evidence of necessary resources, correction plans, Sub-consultant commitments, schedules and recovery schedules, and affirmative commitments to correct the asserted deficiencies, must meet all applicable requirements and show a realistic and achievable plan to cure the breach. Architect shall provide such written assurances and Cure Plan within ten (10) calendar days of the date of notice of written request. Architect acknowledges and agrees that any failure to provide written assurances and Cure Plan to correct observed deficiencies, in the required time, is a material breach under this Agreement.

13.2 Architect shall be in default of this Agreement and Owner may, in addition to any other legal or equitable remedies available to Owner, terminate Architect’s right to proceed under the Agreement, in whole or in part, for cause:

a. Should Architect make an assignment for the benefit of creditors, admit in writing its inability to pay its debts as they become due, file a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, be adjudged a bankrupt or insolvent, file a petition or answer seeking for itself any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under any present or future statute, law, or regulation, file any answer admitting or not contesting the material allegations of a petition filed against Architect in any such proceeding, or seek, consent to, or acquiesce in, the appointment of any trustee, receiver, custodian or liquidator of Architect or of all or any substantial part of the properties of Architect, or if Architect, its directors or shareholders, take action to dissolve or liquidate Architect; or

b. Should Architect commit a material breach of this Agreement and not cure such breach within ten (10) calendar days of the date of notice from Owner to Architect demanding such cure; or, if such failure is curable but not curable within such ten (10) day period, within such period of time as is reasonably necessary to accomplish such cure. (In order for Architect to avail itself of this time period in excess of ten (10) calendar days, Architect must provide Owner within the ten (10) calendar day period a written Cure Plan acceptable to Owner to cure said breach, Owner must approve of such plan, and then Architect must diligently commence and continue such cure according to the written Cure Plan.); or

c. Should Architect violate or allow a violation of any valid law, statute, regulation, rule, ordinance, permit, license or order of any governmental agency in effect at the time of performance of the Services and applicable to the Project or Services and does not cure such violation within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the notice from Owner to Architect demanding such cure; or, if such failure is curable but not curable within such ten (10) calendar day period, within such period of time as is reasonably necessary to accomplish such cure. (In order for Architect to avail itself of this time period in excess of ten (10) calendar days, Architect must provide Owner within the ten (10) calendar day period a written Cure Plan acceptable to Owner, and then Architect must diligently commence and continue performance of such cure according to the written Cure Plan.)

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 7 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

13.3 In the event of termination by Owner as provided herein for cause:

a. Owner shall compensate Architect for the value of the Services delivered to Owner upon termination as determined in accordance with the Agreement, subject to all rights of offset and back charges, but Owner shall not compensate Architect for its costs in terminating the Services or any cancellation charges owed to third parties;

b. Architect shall deliver to Owner possession of all tangible aspects of the Services in their then condition including, but not limited to, all copies (electronic, CAD, and PDF format, and hard copy) of designs, engineering, Project records, cost data of all types, drawings and specifications and contracts with vendors and Sub-consultants, and all other documentation associated with a Project, and all supplies and aids dedicated solely to performing Services which, in the normal course of the Services, would be consumed or only have salvage value at the end of the Services period.

c. Architect shall remain fully liable for the failure of any Services completed and drawings and specifications provided through the date of such termination to comply with the provisions of the Agreement. The provisions of this Paragraph shall not be interpreted to diminish any right that Owner may have to claim and recover damages for any breach of this Agreement, but rather, Architect shall compensate Owner for all loss, cost, damage, expense, and/or liability suffered by Owner as a result of such termination and failure to comply with the Agreement, including without limitation, Owner’s costs incurred in connection with finding a replacement.

13.4 In the event a termination for cause is determined to have been made wrongfully or without cause, then the termination shall be treated as a termination for convenience pursuant to Paragraph14 below, and Architect shall have no greater rights than it would have had if a termination for convenience had been effected in the first instance. No other loss, cost, damage, expense or liability may be claimed, requested or recovered by Architect.

14. Termination of Agreement for Convenience

14.1 Owner may terminate performance of the Services under the Agreement in accordance with this Paragraph14in whole, or from time to time in part, whenever Owner shall determine that termination is in the Owner’s best interests. Termination shall be effected by Owner delivering to Architect, at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the effective date of the termination, a Notice of Termination (“Notice of Termination”) specifying the extent to which performance of the Services under the Agreement is terminated.

14.2 After receipt of a Notice of Termination, and except as otherwise directed by Owner, Architect shall:

a. Stop Services under the Agreement on the date and to the extent specified in the Notice of Termination;

b. Place no further orders or subcontracts (including agreements with Sub-consultants) for materials, Services, or facilities except as necessary to complete the portion of the Services under the Agreement which is not terminated;

c. Terminate all orders and subcontracts to the extent that they relate to performance of Services terminated by the Notice of Termination;

d. Assign to Owner in the manner, at times, and to the extent directed by Owner, all right, title, and interest of Architect under orders and subcontracts so terminated. Owner shall have the right, in its discretion, to settle or pay any or all claims arising out of termination of orders and subcontracts;

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 8 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

e. Settle all outstanding liabilities and all claims arising out of such termination of orders and subcontracts, with approval or ratification of Owner to the extent Owner may require. Owner’s approval or ratification shall be final for purposes of this clause;

f. Transfer title and possession of Architect’s and Architect’s Sub-consultants’ work product to Owner, and execute all required documents and take all required actions to deliver in the manner, at times, and to the extent, if any, directed by Owner, completed and uncompleted designs and specifications, Services in process, completed Services, supplies, and other material produced or fabricated as part of, or acquired in connection with performance of, Services terminated by the Notice of Termination (including mockups and model(s)), completed or partially completed plans, drawings, information, in hard-copy and electronic CAD, and PDF format[for consideration], all intellectual property rights (including without limitation, to the extent applicable, all licenses and copyright, trademark and patent rights) and all other property and property rights which, if the Agreement had been completed, would have been required to be furnished to Owner; Owner acknowledges that said documents were prepared for the purpose of the Project.

g. Use its best efforts to assist Owner in selling, in the manner, at times, to the extent, and at a price or prices that Owner directs or authorizes, any property of the types referred to in Paragraph14.2f above, but Architect shall not be required to extend credit to any purchaser, and may acquire any such property under conditions prescribed and at a price or prices approved by Owner. All proceeds from the foregoing shall be applied to reduce payments to be made by Owner to Architect under this Agreement, shall otherwise be credited to the price or cost of Services covered by this Agreement or be paid in such other manner as Owner may direct;

h. Complete performance of any part of the Services that were not terminated by the Notice of Termination; and

i. Take such action as may be necessary, or as Owner may direct, for the protection and preservation of property related to this Agreement which is in Architect’s possession and in which Owner has or may acquire an interest.

14.3 After receiving a Notice of Termination, Architect shall submit to Owner a termination claim, in the form and with the certification Owner prescribes. The claim shall be submitted promptly, but in no event later than three months from the effective date of the termination, unless one or more extensions in writing are granted by Owner upon Architect’s written request made within such three month period or authorized extension. However, if Owner determines that facts justify such action, it may receive and act upon any such termination claim at any time after such three month period or extension. If Architect fails to submit the termination claim within the time allowed, Owner may determine, on basis of information available to it, the amount, if any, due to Architect because of the termination. Owner shall then pay to Architect the amount so determined.

14.4 Subject to provisions of Paragraph14.3 above, Architect and Owner may agree upon the whole or part of the amount or amounts to be paid to Architect because of any termination of Services under this Paragraph. The amount or amounts may include a reasonable allowance for profit on Services done. However, such agreed amount or amounts, exclusive of settlement costs, shall not exceed the total Agreement price as reduced by the amount of payments otherwise made and as further reduced by the Agreement price of Services terminated. The Agreement may be amended accordingly, and Architect shall be paid the agreed amount.

14.5 If Architect and Owner fail, under Paragraph14.4 above, to agree on the whole amount to be paid to Architect because of termination of Services under this Paragraph14.5, then Architect’s entitlement to compensation for Services specified in the Agreement which are performed before the effective date of Notice of Termination, shall be the total (without duplication of any items) of:

a. Reasonable value of Architect’s Services performed prior to Notice of Termination, based on Architect’s entitlement to compensation under Appendix B, Payments to Architect. Such amount

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 9 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

or amounts shall not exceed the total Agreement price as reduced by the amount of payments otherwise made and as further reduced by the Agreement value of Services terminated. Deductions against such amount or amounts shall be made for deficiently performed Services, rework caused by deficiently performed Services, cost of materials to be retained by Architect, amounts realized by sale of materials, and for other appropriate credits against cost of Services. Such amount or amounts may include profit, but not in excess of ten (10) percent of Architect’s total costs of performing the Services.

b. When, in opinion of Owner, the cost of any item of Services is excessively high due to costs incurred to remedy or replace defective or rejected Services (including having to re-perform Services), reasonable value of Architect’s Services will be the estimated reasonable cost of performing Services in compliance with the requirements of the Agreement, and any excessive actual cost shall be disallowed.

c. Reasonable cost to Architect of handling material returned to vendors, delivered to Owner or otherwise disposed of as directed by Owner.

14.6 Except as provided in this Agreement, in no event shall Owner be liable for costs incurred by Architect (or Sub-consultants) after receipt of a Notice of Termination. Such non-recoverable costs include, but are not limited to, anticipated profits on the Agreement or subcontracts, post-termination employee salaries, post-termination administrative expenses, post-termination overhead or unabsorbed overhead, costs of preparing and submitting claims or proposals, attorney’s fees or other costs relating to prosecution of the claim or a lawsuit, pre-judgment interest, or any other expense that is not reasonable or authorized under Paragraph14.5 above.

14.7 This Paragraph shall not prohibit Architect from recovering costs necessary to discontinue further Services under the Agreement as provided for in Paragraph14.2 above or costs authorized by Owner to settle claims from Sub-consultants.

14.8 In arriving at amount due Architect under this Paragraph14.5 there shall be deducted:

a. All unliquidated advance or other payments on account theretofore made to Architect, applicable to the terminated portion of Agreement,

b. Any substantiated claim that Owner may have against Architect in connection with this Agreement, and

c. The agreed price for, or proceeds of sale of, any materials, supplies, or other things kept by Architect or sold under the provisions of this Paragraph14.5, and not otherwise recovered by or credited to Owner.

14.9 If the termination for convenience hereunder is partial, before settlement of the terminated portion of this Agreement, Architect may file with Owner a request in writing for equitable adjustment of price or prices specified in the Agreement relating to the portion of this Agreement that is not terminated. Owner may, but shall not be required to, agree on any such equitable adjustment. Nothing contained herein shall limit the right of Owner and Architect to agree upon amount or amounts to be paid to Architect for completing the continued portion of the Agreement when the Agreement does not contain an established price for the continued portion. Nothing contained herein shall limit Owner’s rights and remedies pursuant to this Agreement or at law.

15. Conflicts of Interest/Other Agreements

15.1 Architect represents that it is familiar with Section 1090 and Section 87100, et seq., of the Government Code of the State of California, and that it does not know of any facts that constitute a violation of those sections.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 10 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

15.2 Architect represents that it has completely disclosed to Owner all facts bearing upon any possible interests, direct or indirect, which Architect believes any member of Owner, or other officer, agent or employee of Owner or any department presently has, or will have, in this Agreement, or in the performance thereof, or in any portion of the profits thereunder. Willful failure to make such disclosure, if any, shall constitute ground for termination of this Agreement by Owner for cause. Architect shall comply with the Owner’s conflict of interest codes and their reporting requirements.

15.3 Architect covenants that it presently has no interest, and during the term of this Agreement shall not have any interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner with the performance of Services required under this Agreement. Without limitation, Architect represents to and agrees with the Owner that Architect has no present, and in the future during the term of this Agreement will not have any, conflict of interest between providing the Owner the Services hereunder and any interest Architect may presently have, or will have in the future, with respect to any other person or entity (including, but not limited to, any federal or state wildlife, environmental or regulatory agency) that has any interest adverse or potentially adverse to the Owner, as determined in the reasonable judgment of the Owner.

16. Proprietary or Confidential Information of Owner; Publicity

16.1 Architect acknowledges and agrees that, in the performance of the Services under this Agreement or in the contemplation thereof, Architect may have access to private or confidential information that may be owned or controlled by Owner and that such information may contain proprietary or confidential details, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to Owner. Architect agrees that all private, confidential, or proprietary information disclosed by Owner to or discovered by Architect in the performance of it Services shall be held in strict confidence and used only in performance of the Agreement. Architect shall exercise the same standard of care to protect such information as a reasonably prudent Architect would use to protect its own proprietary data, and shall not accept employment adverse to the Owner’s interests where such confidential information could be used adversely to the Owner’s interests. Architect shall notify the Owner immediately in writing if it is requested to disclose any information made known to or discovered by Architect during the performance of or in connection with the Services pursuant to this Agreement.

16.2 Any publicity or press releases with respect to the Projector Services shall be under the Owner’s sole discretion and control. Architect shall not discuss the Services, the Project, or matters pertaining thereto, with the public press, representatives of the public media, public bodies or representatives of public bodies, without Owner’s prior written consent. Architect shall have the right, however, without Owner’s further consent, to include representations of Services among Architect's promotional and professional material, and to communicate with persons or public bodies where necessary to perform under this Agreement.

16.3 The provisions of this Paragraph16 shall remain fully effective indefinitely after termination of Services to the Owner hereunder.

17. Notices to the Parties

17.1 All notices (including requests, demands, approvals or other communications other than Ordinary course Project communications) under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall include the word “NOTICE” in the subject line.

17.2 Notice shall be sufficiently given for all purposes as follows:

a. When personally delivered to the recipient, notice is effective on delivery.

b. When mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested, notice is effective on receipt if delivery is confirmed by a return receipt.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 11 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

c. When delivered by reputable delivery service, with charges prepaid or charged to the sender’s account, notice is effective on delivery if delivery is confirmed by the delivery service.

d. Notice by facsimile or electronic mail shall not be allowed or constitute “Notice” under this Paragraph 17.

17.3 Any correctly addressed notice that is refused, unclaimed, or undeliverable because of an act or omission of the party to be notified shall be considered to be effective as of the first date that the notice was refused, unclaimed, or considered undeliverable by the postal authorities, messenger, or overnight delivery service.

17.4 Addresses for the purpose of giving notice are set forth in Paragraph 6.1 above. Either party may, by written notice given at any time or from time to time require subsequent notices to be given to another individual person, whether a party or an officer or a representative, or to a different address or fax number, or both, by giving the other party notice of the change in any manner permitted by this Paragraph 17.

18. Ownership of Results/Work for Hire

18.1 Any interest (including, but not limited to, property interests and copyright interests) of Architect or its Sub-consultants, in drawings, plans, specifications, studies, reports, memoranda, computational sheets or other documents (including but not limited to, electronic media) prepared by Architect or its Sub-consultants in connection with Services to be performed under this Agreement shall become the property of and will be transmitted to Owner upon their creation. Architect may, however, retain one copy for its files. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the normal course of the Architect’s activities, Architect shall have an unrestricted right to reuse its standard construction drawings, details, specifications and other related documents, including the right to retain electronic data or other reproducible copies thereof, and the right to reuse portions of the information contained in them which is incidental to the overall design of any Project.

18.2 Any and all artworks, copy, posters, billboards, photographs, videotapes, audiotapes, systems designs, software, reports, diagrams, surveys, source codes or any original works of authorship created by Architect or its Sub-consultants in connection with Services performed under this Agreement shall be Works for Hire as defined under Title 17 of the United States Code, and all copyrights in such works are the property of Owner. In the event that it is ever determined that any works created by Architect or its Sub-consultants under this Agreement are not Works for Hire under U.S. law, Architect hereby assigns to Owner all copyrights to such works. With Owner’s prior written approval, Architect may retain and use copies of such works for reference and as documentation of its experience and capabilities.

18.3 Both parties understand and agree that Owner must comply with the California Public Records Act (“Act”). If Architect believes that any document or information furnished to Owner in connection with Architect’s performance of Services is exempt from public disclosure under the Act, it shall so advise Owner in writing at the time the document or information is furnished.

19. Audit and Inspection Records

19.1 Architect shall maintain all drawings, specifications, calculations, cost estimates, quantity takeoffs, statements of construction costs and completion dates, schedules and all correspondence, internal memoranda, papers, writings, electronic media and documents of any sort prepared by or furnished to Architect during the course of performing the Services and providing services with respect to any Project, for a period of at least five years following final completion and acceptance of the last Project. All such records (except for materials subject to the attorney client privilege, if any) shall be available to Owner, and Owner’s authorized agents, officers, and employees, upon request at reasonable times and places. Monthly records of Architect’s personnel costs, Architect costs, and

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 12 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

reimbursable expenses pertaining to both Basic Services, and Additional Services shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis, and shall be available to Owner, and Owner’s authorized agents, officers, and employees, upon request at reasonable times and places. Architect shall not destroy any Project records until after advising Owner and allowing Owner to accept and store the records.

19.2 Architect shall maintain full and adequate records in accordance with Owner requirements to show actual costs incurred by Architect in its performance of this Agreement, and to make available to Owner during business hours accurate ledgers, books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, cancelled checks, and accounting and other books, records and documents evidencing or relating to all expenditures and disbursements charged to Owner or relative to Architect’s activities under this Agreement. Architect will furnish to Owner, its authorized agents, officers and employees such other evidence or information as Owner may request with regard to any such expenditure or disbursement charged by Architect. Architect will, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of Owner’s written request, permit Owner, and Owner’s authorized agents, officers, and employees, to audit, examine and make copies, excerpts and transcripts from such items, and to make audits of all invoices, materials, payrolls, records or personnel and other data related to all other matters covered by this Agreement, whether funded in whole or in part under this Agreement.

19.3 Architect shall maintain all items described in this Paragraph19 in an accessible location and condition for a period of not less than five years after final completion and acceptance of the [last] Project or until after final audit has been resolved, whichever is later. If such items are not kept and maintained by Architect within a radius of fifty (50) miles from Owner’s offices at Redwood City, California, Architect shall, upon Owner’s request and at Architect’s sole cost and expense, make such items available to Owner, and Owner’s authorized agents, officers, and employees, for inspection at a location within said fifty (50) mile radius, or Architect shall pay Owner its reasonable and necessary costs incurred in inspecting Architect's books and records including, but not limited to, travel, lodging and subsistence costs. The State of California and any other governmental agency having an interest in the subject of this Agreement shall have the same rights conferred upon Owner by this Paragraph.

19.4 The rights and obligations established pursuant to this Paragraph shall be specifically enforceable and survive termination of this Agreement.

20. Subcontracting/Assignment/Owner Employees

20.1 Architect and Owner agree that Architect’s unique talents, knowledge and experience form a basis for this Agreement and that the Services to be performed by Architect under this Agreement are personal in character. Therefore, Architect shall not subcontract, assign or delegate any portion of this Agreement or any duties or obligations hereunder unless approved by Owner in a written instrument executed and approved by the Owner in writing. Neither party shall, on the basis of this Agreement, contract on behalf of or in the name of the other party. Any agreement that violates this Paragraph20.1shall confer no rights on any party and shall be null and void.

20.2 Architect shall use the Sub-consultants identified in this Agreement or an Exhibit hereto and shall not substitute Sub-consultants unless approved by written instrument executed and approved by the Owner in writing.

20.3 To the extent Architect is permitted by Owner in writing to subcontract, assign or subcontract any portion of this Agreement or any duties or obligations hereunder, Architect shall comply with all applicable prompt payment laws and regulations (including, without limitation, California Civil Code, Section 3321). Architect shall remain fully liable and responsible for all acts and omissions of its Sub-consultants in connection with the Services or the Project, as if it engaged it the acts and omissions directly.

20.4 Architect shall not employ or engage, or attempt to employ or engage, any person who is or was

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 13 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

employed by Owner or any department thereof at any time that this Agreement is in effect, and for a period of two years after the termination of this Agreement or the completion of the Services, without the written consent of Owner.

21. Other Obligations

21.1 Discrimination, Equal Employment Opportunity and Business Practices. Architect shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment, nor against any Sub-consultant or applicant for a subcontract, because of race, color, religious creed, age, sex, actual or perceived sexual orientation, national origin, disability as defined by the ADA (as defined below) or veteran’s status. To the extent applicable, Architect shall comply with all federal, state and local laws (including, without limitation, Owner ordinances, rules and regulations) regarding non-discrimination, equal employment opportunity, affirmative action and occupational-safety-health concerns, shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations thereunder, and shall comply with same as each may be amended from time to time. With respect to the provision of employee benefits, Architect shall comply with San Mateo County Ordinance Code which prohibits contractors (as defined in that ordinance) from discriminating in the provision of employee benefits between an employee with a domestic partner and an employee with a spouse.

21.2 Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Architect acknowledges that pursuant to the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1989, the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited on Owner premises. Architect agrees that any violation of this prohibition by Architect, its employees, agents or assigns shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement.

21.3 Compliance with Americans with Disabilities and Rehabilitation Act. Architect acknowledges that, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to the public, whether directly or through a contractor, must be accessible to the disabled public. Architect shall provide the Services specified in this Agreement in a manner that complies with the standard of care established under this Agreement regarding the ADA and any and all other applicable federal, state and local disability rights legislation. Architect agrees not to discriminate against disabled persons in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under this Agreement and further agrees that any violation of this prohibition on the part of Architect, its employees, agents or assigns shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. Architect shall comply with § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which provides that no otherwise qualified handicapped individual shall, solely by reason of a disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in the performance of this Agreement.

21.4 Employee Jury Service Ordinance. Architect shall comply with San Mateo County Ordinance Code with respect to provision of jury duty pay to employees and have and adhere to a written policy that provides that its employees shall receive from the Architect, on an annual basis, no less than five days of regular pay for actual jury service in San Mateo County. The policy may provide that employees’ deposit any fees received for such jury service with the Architect or that the Architect deducts from the employees’ regular pay the fees received for jury service.

21.5 Violation of Non-discrimination Provisions. Violation of the non-discrimination provisions of this Agreement shall be considered a breach of this Agreement and subject the Architect to penalties, to be determined by Owner’s County Manager, including but not limited to: (a) termination of this Agreement; (b) disqualification of the Architect from bidding on or being awarded a County contract for a period of up to 3 years; (c) liquidated damages of $2,500 per violation; and/or (d) imposition of other appropriate contractual and civil remedies and sanctions, as determined by the County Manager. To effectuate the provisions of this section, the County Manager shall have the authority to examine Architect’s employment records with respect to compliance with this paragraph and/or to set off all or any portion of the amount described in this paragraph against amounts due to Architect under this Agreement or any other agreement between Architect and Owner. Architect shall report to the County Manager the filing by any person in any court of any complaint of discrimination or the

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 14 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

filing by any person of any and all charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission or any other entity charged with the investigation of allegations within 30 days of such filing, provided that within such 30 days such entity has not notified Architect that such charges are dismissed or otherwise unfounded. Such notification shall include the name of the complainant, a copy of such complaint, and a description of the circumstance. Architect shall provide Owner with a copy of Architect’s response to the complaint when filed.

22. Disputes

22.1 Should any question arise as to the meaning and intent of this Agreement, the question shall, prior to any other action or resort to any other legal remedy, be referred to the Project Executive and a principal of the Architect who shall attempt, in good faith, to resolve the dispute. Such referral shall be initiated by written request from either party and a meeting between the Project Executive and principal of the Architect shall then take place within five (5) days of the date of the request.

Provided that Owner continues to compensate Architect in accordance with this Agreement, Architect shall continue its Services throughout the course of any and all disputes. Nothing in this Agreement shall allow Architect to discontinue Services during the course of any dispute. Architect’s failure to continue Services during any and all disputes shall be considered a material breach of this Agreement. Architect agrees that the existence or continued existence of a dispute does not excuse performance under any provision of this Agreement including, but not limited to, the time to complete the Services. Architect also agrees that should Architect discontinue Services due to a dispute or disputes, Owner may terminate this Agreement for cause as provided herein.

22.2 In the event of claims exceeding [$50,000], as a precondition to commencing litigation, the parties shall first participate in non-binding mediation pursuant to the construction mediation procedures of JAMS, in San Francisco, California, before a mediator mutually agreeable to the parties (and such mediator need not be employed by or affiliated with JAMS), and in the event the parties are unable to agree, selected by a judge of the San Mateo County Superior Court from an approved list of JAMS qualified construction mediators. The parties may initially agree to engage in discovery prior to mediation. Should parties proceed with discovery, they shall follow the procedures prescribed in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 2019, et. seq., and discovery so conducted shall apply in any subsequent litigation as if conducted in that litigation.

23. Agreement Made in California; Venue

23.1 This Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed in the City of Redwood City, County of San Mateo. The formation, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflict of laws rules. The exclusive venue for all disputes or litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo unless the parties agree otherwise in a written amendment to this Agreement.

23.2 The parties shall execute two originals of this Agreement, both of which shall be deemed originals.

24. Compliance with Laws

24.1 Architect shall comply with the Standard of Care in the interpretation and application of all applicable laws in the performance of the Services, regardless of whether such laws are specifically stated in this Agreement and regardless of whether such laws are in effect on the date hereof. Architect shall comply with all security requirements imposed by authorities with jurisdiction over any Project, and will provide all information, work histories and/or verifications as requested by such authorities for security clearances or compliance.

24.2 Architect represents that all plans, drawings, specifications, designs and any other product of the Services will comply with all applicable laws, codes and regulations and be consistent with the

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 15 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

Standard of Care.

25. Miscellaneous

25.1 All section and paragraph captions are for reference only and shall not be considered in construing this Agreement.

25.2 As between the parties to this Agreement: as to all acts or failures to act by either party to this Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations shall commence to run on the date of issuance by Owner of the final Certificate for Payment, or termination of this Agreement, whichever is earlier. This Paragraph25.2shall not apply to latent defects as defined by California law or negligence claims, as to which the statute of limitations shall commence to run on discovery of the defect and its cause. However, the applicable statutes of repose, California Code of Civil Procedure, Sections 337.1 and 337.15, shall continue to apply.

25.3 Any provisions or portion thereof of this Agreement that is prohibited by, unlawful or unenforceable under any applicable law of any jurisdiction, shall as to such jurisdiction be ineffective without affecting other provisions of this Agreement. If the provisions of such applicable law may be waived, they are hereby waived to the end that this Agreement may be deemed to be a valid and binding agreement enforceable in accordance with its terms. If any provisions or portion thereof of this Agreement are prohibited by, unlawful, or unenforceable under any applicable law and are therefore stricken or deemed waived, the remainder of such provisions and this Agreement shall be interpreted to achieve the goals or intent of the stricken or waived provisions or portions thereof to the extent such interpretation is consistent with applicable law. In dispute resolution arising from this Agreement, the fact finder shall receive detailed instructions on the meaning and requirements of this Agreement.

25.4 Either party’s waiver of any breach, or the omission or failure of either party, at any time, to enforce any right reserved to it, or to require performance of any of the terms, covenants, conditions or other provisions of this Agreement, including the timing of any such performance, shall not be a waiver of any other right to which any party is entitled, and shall not in any way affect, limit, modify or waive that party’s right thereafter to enforce or compel strict compliance with every term, covenant, condition or other provision hereof, any course of dealing or custom of the trade or oral representations notwithstanding.

25.5 Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement shall operate to confer rights or benefits on persons or entities not party to this Agreement. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.

26. Entire Agreement; Modifications

26.1 The Agreement, and any written modification to the Agreement, shall represent the entire and integrated Agreement between the parties hereto regarding the subject matter of this Agreement and shall constitute the exclusive statement of the terms of the parties’ Agreement. The Agreement, and any written modification to the Agreement, shall supersede any and all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral, express or implied, that relate in any way to the subject matter of this Agreement or written modification, and the parties represent and agree that they are entering into this Agreement and any subsequent written modification in sole reliance upon the information set forth in the Agreement or written modification and the parties are not and will not rely on any other information. All prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral, express or implied, that relate in any way to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall not be admissible or referred to hereafter in the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement.

26.2 To the extent this Agreement conflicts with the terms of any proposal, invoice, or other document submitted to or by either party, the terms of this Agreement shall control.

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 16 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

26.3 This Agreement may not be modified, nor may compliance with any of its terms be waived, except by written instrument executed and approved by a fully authorized representative of both Owner and Architect expressing such an intention in the case of a modification or by the party waiving in the case of a waiver.

26.4 Architect, in any price proposals for changes in the Services that increase the Agreement amount, or for any additional Services, shall break out and list its costs and use percentage markups. Architect shall require it’s Sub-consultants (if any) to do the same, and the Sub-consultants’ price proposals shall accompany Architect’s price proposals.

26.5 Architect and its Sub-consultants shall, upon request by Owner, permit inspection of all original unaltered Agreement bid estimates, subcontract Agreements, purchase orders relating to any change, and documents substantiating all costs associated with all cost proposals.

26.6 Changes in the Services made pursuant to this Paragraph26and extensions of the Agreement time necessary by reason thereof shall not in any way release Architect’s representations and agreements pursuant to this Agreement.

26.7 Whenever the words “as directed”, “as required”, “as permitted”, or words of like effect are used, it shall be understood as the direction, requirement, or permission of Owner. The words “approval”, “acceptable”, “satisfactory”, or words of like import, shall mean approved by, or acceptable to, or satisfactory to Owner, unless otherwise indicated by the context.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day first mentioned above.

“Owner” COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, a political subdivision of the State of California

By:

Its:

“Architect” By:

Its:

By:

Its:

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 17 of 17 Revision April 18, 2012

SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY ARCHITECT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paragraph Page

1. Conceptual Program

1.1 General ...... A-1 1.2 Construction Budget...... A-1 1.3 Criteria Governing Architect’s Services on Project ...... A-1 1.4 Building Information Modeling ...... A-2

2. Basic Services

2.1 Scope ...... A-2 2.2 General Description and Requirements ...... A-2 2.3 Coordination of Architectural and Engineering Sub-consultants ...... A-4 2.4 Coordination with Scheduling and Owner Operations ...... A-4 2.5 Deliverables Required Under This Agreement - Generally...... A-5 2.6 Deliverables Required Under This Agreement - By Phase ...... A-5 2.7 Monthly Progress Report ...... A-6 2.8 Compliance with Laws ...... A-6 2.9 State Communications ...... A-7 2.10 Architect’s Scope of Services ...... A-7

3. Programming Phase

3.1 Period of Service ...... A-7 3.2 Detailed Requirements ...... A-7 3.3 Space Schematics/Flow Diagrams ...... A-8 3.4 Estimate of Project Cost ...... A-8

4. Schematic Design Phase

4.1 Period of Service ...... A-9 4.2 Consultation with Owner ...... A-9 4.3 Site Visit and Investigations ...... A-9 4.4 Recommendations on Required Additional Information ...... A-9 4.5 Preliminary Estimates of Construction Costs ...... A-9 4.6 Schematic Layouts, Sketches and Conceptual Design Criteria ...... A-10 4.7 Lifecycle and Alternates Workshop ...... A-10 4.8 Opinion of Probable Project Costs ...... A-11 4.9 Design Schedule Report ...... A-11 4.10 Attend Required Meetings ...... A-11 4.11 Interface with Owner Groups ...... A-11

5. Design Development Phase

5.1 Period of Service ...... A-12 5.2 General Scope of Project and Final Design Criteria ...... A-12 5.3 Design Requirements ...... A-13

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 1 of 3 Revision April 18, 2012

5.4 Design Development Documents ...... A-14 5.5 Design Development Phase Drawings ...... A-15 5.6 Additional Data or Services ...... A-18 5.7 Report on Additional Information Required ...... A-18 5.8 Revised Opinion of Probable Costs ...... A-18 5.9 Attend Required Meetings ...... A-18 5.10 Work Phasing Recommendations ...... A-18

6. Construction Document Phase

6.1 Period of Service ...... A-18 6.2 Final Drawings and Specifications ...... A-19 6.3 Compliance with Codes, Regulations and Requirements ...... A-19 6.4 Compliance with State Standards ...... A-19 6.5 Drawings & Specifications ...... A-19 6.6 Revised Opinion of Probable Total Project Costs ...... A-19 6.7 Report ...... A-20 6.8 Review of the Final Design by Owner ...... A-20

7. Bidding Phase

7.1 Bidding ...... A-20 7.2 Where Bids Exceed Budget ...... A-20

8. Construction Phase

8.1 Period of Service ...... A-21 8.2 General Administration of Construction Contract ...... A-21 8.3 Visit to Site and Observation of Construction ...... A-21 8.4 Resident Project Representative ...... A-22 8.5 Defective or Nonconforming Services...... A-22 8.6 Interpretations, Clarifications and Corrections ...... A-22 8.7 Verified Reports ...... A-22 8.8 Review of Submittals and Requests for Information ...... A-22 8.9 Communications with Contractor ...... A-23 8.10 Substitutions ...... A-23 8.11 Inspections and Tests ...... A-23 8.12 Disputes Between Owner and Contractor ...... A-24 8.13 Applications for Payment ...... A-24 8.14 Contractor’s Completion Documents ...... A-24 8.15 Final Inspections ...... A-24 8.16 Post-occupancy Review ...... A-24 8.17 Time of Construction Phase ...... A-25

9. Operation/Project Close-Out Phase

9.1 Operation/ Project Close-Out ...... A-25

10. Payments to Architect

10.1 Payments to Architect ...... A-26

11. Additional Services

11.1 Performance ...... A-26 11.2 Compensation for Additional Services ...... A-26

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 2 of 3 Revision April 18, 2012

11.3 Services ...... A-26 12. Periods of Service

12.1 Milestones ...... A-27 12.2 Commencement of Services ...... A-27

13. Owner’s Responsibilities

13.1 Project Manager ...... A-27 13.2 Design Requirements ...... A-27 13.3 Property Information...... A-27 13.4 Documents ...... A-27 13.5 Surveys ...... A-27 13.6 Hazardous Materials ...... A-27 13.7 Permits and Approvals ...... A-28 13.8 Site Access ...... A-28 13.9 Resident Inspector ...... A-28

Professional Services Agreement between County of San Mateo And Architect for Architectural Design of Adult Detention Facility Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX A

SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY ARCHITECT

This is an Appendix attached to, and made a part of and incorporated by reference with the Agreement dated May __, 2012, between the County of San Mateo (the “Owner”), and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. (“Architect") providing for professional services.

1. Conceptual Program and Project Under this Agreement

1.1 General

1.1.1. The Project is described as follows:

The County’s Replacement Correctional Facility will be located on an approximately 4.85-acre site within Redwood City, CA. The Project will initially house 576 beds (including 88 non-secure transitional beds) with future expansion to 832 beds. The Project scope also includes remediation of a brownfield site, demolition of existing structures, and certain on- and offsite improvements to prepare the site for development.

1.1.2. Owner anticipates that the construction management services will be performed by a Construction Manager to be engaged by the Owner approximately concurrently with the selection of Architect. Owner further anticipates that the actual Project work will be performed by separate trade sub-contractors who will be selected utilizing an estimated 15-30 separate bid packages after selection of the Construction Manager and completion of Architect’s final designs.

1.2 Construction Budget

The agreed upon “Budgeted Bid Day Construction Cost” above means the anticipated value of the construction contract for the Project when initially let. Architect shall treat the Budgeted Bid Day Construction Cost so identified as the Owner’s required construction cost for the Project. In performing its Services under this Agreement, Architect shall include within the Budgeted Bid Day Construction Cost design contingency amounts as follows: 15% during schematic design; 10% during design development; and 5% during construction documents.

1.3 Criteria Governing Architect’s Services on Project

1.3.1 The Project shall be developed and designed in conformance with the Needs Assessment Study (“Needs Assessment Study”) submitted to the Corrections Standards Authority (“CSA”) by the County, a copy of which has been provided to the Architect.

1.3.2 The Project shall be developed and designed in close cooperation with the County’s Sheriff’s Office and its consultants. Architect acknowledges its obligation to work with, coordinate with, interface with, exchange ideas and design materials with, and otherwise cooperate and collaborate with the Sheriff’s Office, its independent consultants, including personnel required for transition from Owner’s prior adult detention facility to the Project facility, and operational matters throughout development and design of the Project.

1.3.3 The Project shall be developed and designed to meet all applicable and the most current codes, laws, regulations, and professional standards, consistent with the

2105-001\2349762.2 A-1 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

standard of care of an Architect with experience in California adult detention facility design, and shall meet the criteria set forth below.

1.3.4 Architect shall not, unless otherwise permitted in writing by Project Executive, propose or recommend any design which has the effect of shifting design responsibilities from Architect to a contractor, through performance specifications or any other means. Performance specifications will be allowed only when necessary to preclude single vendor sources.

1.3.5 During the pre-construction phase, the Architect will collaborate with Construction Manager Contractor selected by the County on the design, constructability, cost, and schedule of the Project as the Construction Manager develops a Not to Exceed proposal to construct the Project.

1.3.6 Architect shall not, unless otherwise directed or permitted in writing by Project Executive, specify unique, innovative, proprietary or sole source equipment, systems or materials. Whenever a proprietary or sole source design or equipment is requested by Architect, Architect shall provide Owner with a written evaluation of whether all periodic maintenance and replacement of parts, equipment or systems, can be performed normally and without excessive cost or time. Owner will consider such report in making its decision. If requested by Owner, as Basic Services, Architect shall comment on any Owner-proposed unique, innovative, proprietary or sole source equipment, systems or materials.

1.3.7 Architect’s design shall provide that all surfaces, fixtures and equipment are readily accessible for maintenance, repair or replacement by ladders, power lifts, cat walks, and the like without exceeding the design loads of the floors, roofs, ceilings, and that such access is in conformance with applicable portions of CCR Title 8 (Cal OSHA) Subchapter 7 – General Industry Safety Orders, Group 1, General Physical Conditions and Structures. Architect shall allow representatives of the Owner’s operation and maintenance departments to review, comment, and participate in meetings regarding Architect’s design as necessary to consider their requirements in design development, provided, however, that Architect shall exercise its professional judgment respecting all ultimate design decisions.

1.3.8 Architect must coordinate with other consultants on the Owner’s Capital Improvement Program, as directed by Owner’s Representative, to specify designs, equipment and systems on a Program-wide basis to secure Program- wide efficiencies and economies in procurement and maintenance. Architect shall not have responsibility for the technical adequacy or accuracy of consultants separately engaged by Owner.

1.4 Building Information Modeling

1.4 Architect shall comply with its obligations regarding Building Information Modeling identified on Attachment BIM attached to this Appendix A and incorporated herein.

1.4.2 Attachment BIM is subject to modification by Owner at Owner’s reasonable request. Architect must notify Owner within seven (7) days of receipt of any modification to Attachment BIM if it believes the modification is so extensive as to justify additional services compensation. 2. Basic Services

2105-001\2349762.2 A-2 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

2.1 Scope

Basic Services shall include all the services and activities specified below and herein in Programming Phase, Schematic Design Phase, Design Development Phase, Construction Document Phase, Bidding Phase, Construction Phase, Operation/Project Close-Out Phase, and Post-Construction Claims Resolution Phase.

2.2 General Description and Requirements

2.2.1 Performance of Services will require Architect to work with, meet with, and attend meetings with Owner staff and sub-consultants, with Inspectors, with Project Executive, with testing agencies, with other governmental agencies, with Construction Manager Contractor, and with such other consultants as Architect determines necessary, to the extent reasonably necessary for the design and construction of the Project and performance of Architect’s duties under this Agreement (including, but not limited to, Architect’s express duties of coordination with Sub-consultants or other Owner consultants).

2.2.2 Services performed by Architect shall conform to the requirements of the laws of the State of California applicable to construction of adult detention facilities, including, but not limited to, the requirements of the California Business and Professions Code, the Minimum Standards for Adult Detention Facilities contained in Title 15, California Code of Regulations (“CCR”), the Minimum Standards for Adult Detention Facilities and the fire and life safety regulations contained in Title 19 and Title 24, Part 2, CCR, Title 8 (Cal OSHA), CCR, the California Penal Code, the California Public Contract Code, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) contained in California Public Resources Code Section 2100 et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 et seq. As referenced in those codes, “Responsible Charge” for the work shall be with a Licensed Architect or Registered Engineer in the State of California.

2.2.3 Plans, specifications, design calculations, Site data, and cost estimates, if any, required to be prepared by Architect shall be prepared by licensed personnel or personnel under the direction of licensed personnel, as required by the California Public Contract Code and Code of Regulations, and such personnel shall also be in Responsible Charge of observation of the construction, as required by those codes.

2.2.4 Architect shall provide to Owner all professional architectural and engineering services necessary to perform the Services in all phases of the Project to which this Agreement applies. Services will include, but are not limited to, providing all professional architectural and engineering services necessary to perform the Services and complete Project to which this Agreement applies including, but not limited to, all architectural services and all acoustical, civil, electrical, fire protection, mechanical, and structural engineering, medical planning, security, landscape, and cost estimating services required to perform the Services on the Project to which this Agreement applies.

2.2.5 Architect shall have adequate personnel, facilities, equipment and supplies to complete Architect’s Services. Architect shall provide all materials to complete its services.

2.2.6 Architect shall engage all appropriate specialty Sub-consultants as are necessary for proper completion of the Services. Architect’s contracts with Sub-consultants (and their contracts with their sub-consultants) shall incorporate this contract by

2105-001\2349762.2 A-3 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

reference to the extent not inconsistent with Sub-consultants' scope of work. Owner shall have the right (but not the obligation) to approve specialty Sub- consultants engaged by Architect as well as their form of contract, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

2.2.7 Architect shall require each of its Sub-consultants to execute agreements containing standard of care and indemnity provisions coextensive with those in this Agreement and that will indemnify and hold Owner harmless from any negligent errors or omissions of the Sub-consultants.

2.2.9 Architect shall make any required corrections or revisions to reports, drawings or specifications that are a result of any errors or omissions by Architect, at no additional cost to Owner. Architect shall make or cause to be made any and all corrections to said documents necessary to comply with the requirements of the California Code of Regulations applicable to adult detention facilities.

2.2.10 Throughout Architect’s performance of the Services, Architect shall make written recommendations to Owner concerning any additional information necessary to complete the Services.

2.2.11 Architect shall provide Owner with written evaluations of the effect of any and all governmental and private regulations, licenses, patents, permits, and any other type of applicable restriction and associated requirements on the Services and its incorporation into the Project.

2.2.12 Architect shall provide Owner with a copy of all written communications and submittals to Authorities Having Jurisdiction regarding this Project. Costs of reproduction and transmittal of submittals will be a reimbursable expense.

2.2.13 On all Projects, Architect shall prepare all energy saving calculations and deliverables necessary for Owner to submit to PG&E, CSA, the State Office of Energy Assessments, and any other authority with jurisdiction, for energy savings rebates and any additional information required. Architect shall then monitor construction for compliance with such rebate requirements and report to the Owner any problems encountered or anticipated. The Project will incorporate sustainable design measures and is expected to achieve a minimum of LEED silver certification. 2.3 Coordination of Architectural and Engineering Sub-consultants/Other Architects

2.3.1 Architect shall fully coordinate all architectural and engineering disciplines and Sub-consultants involved in completing the Services. Architect’s Sub-consultants shall fully coordinate with Architect and all architectural and engineering disciplines and Sub-consultants involved in completing the Services. The objective of this coordination shall be the development of a complete, comprehensive and workable design in which the work of Architect and each Sub-consultant interfaces well and is properly coordinated, with details that work together with regard to all affected disciplines.

2.3.2 Architect shall coordinate its work on the Project with Owner personnel and (including Project Executive), as directed by Project Executive, as necessary to achieve desired Program-wide efficiencies in procurement and maintenance.

2.3.3 Architect shall coordinate its work on the Project with work of the Owner’s separately maintained hazardous material consultants. Such coordination shall

2105-001\2349762.2 A-4 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

not impose on Architect responsibility for the work of the hazardous materials consultant. However, Architect shall consider the work of the hazardous materials consultant in developing work phasing recommendations, overall cost estimates, and design and product specifications, where applicable.

2.3.4 Architect shall immediately advise Owner in writing if any consultant fails in any manner to coordinate its work with Architect.

2.4 Coordination with Project Master Schedule and Owner Operations

2.4.1 Architect shall complete or cause to be completed all services required under this Agreement in accordance with the Master Schedule and Milestone Schedule to be developed in conjunction with the Construction Manager and the Owner.

2.4.2 For each phase of the Services under this Agreement, Architect shall prepare and submit for Owner’s acceptance a task list identifying the principal tasks (and subtasks) defining the scope of work of each phase. The main purpose of the task list shall be to promote coordination and scheduling of the Owner and third parties whose actions might impact Architect’s progress.

2.4.2.1 The task list shall list all points of Owner and third party interface, for example, approvals, reviews, design input and supplying information. The task list shall include a listing of Architect’s anticipated specific requirements for information, decisions or documents from Owner necessary for Architect’s performance of its services, and required third party approvals and preliminary meetings required to obtain agreement in principle with agencies and third parties involved in the Project

2.4.3 For the Project, Architect shall prepare, submit for Owner’s acceptance, and maintain a design schedule detailing Architect’s scheduled performance of the Services. The schedule shall comply and coordinate with the Owner’s Master Schedule and Milestone Schedule including all updates to the Master Schedule.

2.4.3.1 Architect shall submit a preliminary schedule within twenty (20) days of commencement of the Programming Phase (covering in summary fashion all Services of each phase of the Project).

2.4.3.2 For each succeeding phase of Services, Architect shall supplement this schedule with a detailed schedule covering by task (and subtask) Architect’s work during the succeeding phase of Services. (The required schedule supplement shall be submitted as part of Architect’s deliverables at the conclusion of the current phase of Services.)

2.4.4 Architect’s schedule shall be updated monthly, and shall meet the following requirements:

2.4.4.1 Architect’s schedule shall outline dates and time periods for the delivery of Architect’s services, requirements for information from Owner for the performance of its services, and required third party approvals and preliminary meetings required to obtain agreement in principal with County’s sheriff’s office and its sub-consultants, CSA, State Fire Marshall, and any other agencies involved in the Project.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-5 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

2.4.4.2 The schedule shall include appropriate Owner, CSA, and State Fire Marshal design review durations for each contract package (in minimum durations of one (1) week for Schematic Phase, Design Development Phase, and 50% Construction Document phase, and two weeks for 100% Construction Documents phase.)

2.4.4.3 The schedule shall be in a computer software format compatible with Owner’s existing computer software format, which is Microsoft Project.

2.4.5 Architect shall adjust and cause its Sub-consultants to adjust activities, personnel levels, and the sequence, duration and relationship of services to be performed in a manner that will comply with the accepted schedules.

2.4.6 For the Project, Architect shall include in Architect’s monthly progress report written recommendations regarding ongoing design and construction work, including constructability (including actual and reasonable constructability in light of Owner’s objective to secure a completed Project with the lowest reasonable construction costs), Project scheduling, and any and all design changes affecting size or cost of the Project.

2.4.7 Architect shall make these written recommendations from the standpoint of a design professional observing the construction work and shall not by these recommendations assume construction management responsibilities.

2.5 Deliverables Required Under This Agreement - Generally: Each deliverable shall be reviewed with representatives of Owner. Deficiencies in deliverables and modifications to conform with program requirements and modifications to achieve acceptability of deliverables to Owner, shall be promptly performed, and the cost thereof included in the fee for Basic Services.

2.6 Deliverables Required Under This Agreement - By Phase: Required Deliverables are listed in Appendix D.

2.7 Monthly Progress Report: Architect shall provide Owner with a Monthly Progress Report, in writing, reporting on Architect’s progress and any problems in performing the Services of which Architect becomes aware. The Monthly Progress Report may cover more than one Project, provided it does so in separate sections. The Monthly Progress Report shall include, but is not limited to:

2.7.1 A narrative of the work performed (including a list of any contract deliverables) and identification of areas of concern, actions and approvals needed.

2.7.2 A schedule assessment and proposed ways to work around any problems that arise.

2.7.3 Monthly schedule status reports clearly identifying actual performance with respect to the current approved version of the schedule.

2.7.4 The original summary schedule as updated to reflect current progress, updates and revisions, submitted in both CD (three sets) and 81/2” x 11” bound hard copy forms (three sets).

2.7.5 All written submittals will be prepared using Microsoft Word software program.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-6 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

2.8 Compliance with Laws: Architect shall comply with the standard of care applicable to a specialist in design of adult detention facilities, regarding complying with all requirements of all applicable laws as if set forth in this Agreement, including without limitation California Administrative Code Title 24 (Public Works), Part 1 (Department of General Services), Chapter 13 (Administrative Regulations for the Corrections Standards Authority) (“Title 24”). Architect shall perform all duties that Title 24 imposes on adult detention facility project architects and engineers, including those summarized generally in Sections 13-102 and 470A of Title 24, all of which include, but are not limited to, the following:

2.8.1 Prepare all project designs to meet or exceed building standards set forth in Part 2, Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, which are minimum standards applicable to construction of adult detention facilities; coordinate submission and approval of same to CSA, the State Fire Marshal, any other public authority with jurisdiction.

2.8.2 Coordinate and cooperate fully with CSA and the State Fire Marshal and any other authority with jurisdiction, to secure timely review and approval of Architect’s work including, but not limited to:

2.8.2.1 Determining the estimated time from submission to CSA and State Fire Marshal of plans and specifications to approval of same, including “bin time” for initial review of plans and specifications, and incorporating same into Project schedule;

2.8.2.2 Securing from CSA change order pre-approvals, where appropriate to minimize Project delays caused by delays in review and approval of change orders;

2.8.2.3 Securing early review and approval by CSA of deferred approval items, including advising Owner of the need to require immediate submission after construction contract award of all necessary submittals for such items, including specifications to this effect in final design documents, and review of proposed contract documents to assure presence of necessary enforcement provisions.

2.8.2.4 Determine and advise Owner on four (4) weeks advance notice all necessary CSA and State Fire Marshal fees, so as to avoid any delay.

2.8.3 Coordinate and cooperate fully with CSA in its required observation of construction.

2.8.4 Subject to Owner’s approval, designate an architect or structural engineer in general responsible charge of the preparation of the plans, specifications, and observation of the work of construction for Project.

2.8.5 Issue Verified Reports on the form and frequency required by Title 24, showing Architect’s personal knowledge that the work is in every material respect in conformance with the approved plans and specifications. Require that the Project Inspector’s, the Contractor’s, and Architect’s Sub-consultants of all necessary disciplines Verified Reports are submitted as required by Title 24.

2.8.6 Advise on:

2.8.6.1 Selection of resident inspector and testing laboratories;

2105-001\2349762.2 A-7 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

2.8.6.2 Preparing addenda and change orders as required by conditions on the Project.

2.8.7 Performing general observation of the work of construction, interpreting the approved drawings and specifications.

2.8.8 Receive and act upon all technical correspondence from the authority (ies) having jurisdiction to the architect or engineer in general responsible charge of the Project.

2.8.9 Perform those responsibilities imposed upon it under Title 24 including, but not limited to, observation and personal contact with the Project, Sub-consultants, submitting information to CSA and the State Fire Marshal, and general direction of the work of the Project Inspector (as contemplated by Title 24).

2.8.10 Architect shall establish the extent of the testing of materials consistent with the needs of the Project, shall issue specific instructions to the testing agency prior to the start of construction, and shall notify CSA as to the disposition of materials noted on laboratory reports as not conforming to the approved specifications.

2.8.11 Owner will engage Project Inspector(s) as required by the California Corrections Standards Authority and Title 24, which Project Inspectors shall have been approved by Architect and submitted by Architect to CSA, as required. Said Project Inspectors shall be under the direction of Architect, as required by the California Code of Regulations.

2.9 State Communications: Assist with and coordinate all communications with State Fire Marshal, secure necessary approvals from Corrections Standards Authority, and assist with and coordinate any necessary approvals with other Authorities Having Jurisdiction.

2.10 Architect’s Scope of Services: Architect’s scope of work on Project shall also include the following work items:

2.10.1 Diagram of Building Areas

2.10.2 ADA compliance surveys and report

2.10.3 Incorporation of sustainable design measures necessary to achieve a minimum of LEED silver certification.

3. Programming Phase

3.1 Period of Service: The services called for in the Programming Phase will be completed and the required deliverables submitted within the stipulated periods of time indicated in Appendix C, “Milestone Schedule”. Written authorization to proceed with the Programming Phase will be given at such time as Owner may direct.

3.2 Detailed Requirements: Consistent with the Needs Assessment and Pre-Architectural Programming submitted to CSA, consult with Owner to establish and document the following detailed requirements for the Project:

3.2.1 Design objectives, limitations and criteria, functions, priorities, including sustainability; 3.2.2 Development of initial approximate gross facility areas and space requirement;

2105-001\2349762.2 A-8 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

3.2.3 Space relation, requirements and restraints (including comparing requested space requirements to similar projects and space standards, diagramming space relationships by using massing diagrams, flow diagrams, stacking diagrams, bubble diagrams and other graphical methods); 3.2.4 Number of functional responsibilities and personnel; 3.2.5 Flexibility and expendability; 3.2.6 Special equipment and systems; 3.2.7 Site requirements and existing conditions, and utilities services; 3.2.8 Development of a preliminary budget for the work based on programming and scheduling studies; 3.2.10 Zoning and other applicable regulations; 3.2.11 Expandability; 3.2.12 Access, parking, including visitors; 3.2.13 Construction feasibility and phasing; 3.2.14 Security criteria, including the ability to provide visual supervision; 3.2.15 Communications relationships; and 3.2.16 Project schedule.

3.3 Space Schematics/Flow Diagrams: Prepare diagrammatic studies and pertinent descriptive text for:

3.3.1 Conversion of programmed requirements to net area requirements; 3.3.2 Internal functions; 3.3.3 Human, vehicular and material flow patterns; 3.3.4 General space allocations; 3.3.5 Analysis of operating functions; 3.3.6 Adjacency; 3.3.7 Special facilities and equipment; and 3.3.8 Flexibility and expansibility.

3.4 Estimate of Project Cost: Based upon the programming verification phase services performed, work with Construction Manager to review initial budget estimates existing by applying unit costs and other standard cost data to space and facilities requirements. Work with Construction Manager to consider all foreseeable Project costs, including design, construction, utilities connections, off-Site improvements, permits, fees, furniture, and movable and installed equipment. Report to Owner regarding continued accuracy of initial budget estimates contained in Owner’s Implementation Plan.

4. Schematic Design Phase

4.1 Period of Service: The services called for in the Schematic Design Phase will be completed and the required deliverables submitted within the stipulated period of time indicated in Appendix C, “Milestone Schedule”. Written authorization to proceed with the Schematic Design Phase will be given at such time as Owner may direct.

4.2 Consultation with Owner

4.2.1 Consult with Owner to clarify and define the requirements for the Services and review available data.

4.2.2 Review Needs Assessment Study submitted by Owner to CSA as required by Title 24, CCR.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-9 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

4.2.4 Identify, analyze and conform to the requirements of governmental and private authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the Project and participate in consultations with such authorities.

4.3 Site Visit and Investigations

4.3.1 Investigate existing conditions through Site visits and otherwise, to determine scope of work and effects on design and construction. Obtain from Owner all available information on hazardous materials and advise Owner immediately of any other hazardous materials Architect has observed. (This paragraph does not impose on Architect any duty to locate hazardous materials.)

4.3.2 Advise Project Executive as to the necessity of obtaining additional information related to the Site, necessary for purposes of design. Such advice and statement of necessity shall be in writing and explain fully the considerations involved. Such information might include, without limitation and by way of example only: description of property boundaries or as built information, rights of way, topographic, hydrographic, and utility surveys, soil mechanics, seismic and subsoil data, chemical, mechanical and other data logs of borings, etc.

4.3.3 Review information generated pursuant to Paragraphs 2.2.8, 4.2.2, 4.3.2, and 4.4, and advise Project Executive whether such data is adequate for purposes of design. Determine if additional data is necessary because of apparent errors, conflicts, and incomplete information or otherwise, before Architect can proceed with design.

4.4 Recommendations on Required Additional Information

4.4.1 Advise Owner as to the necessity of Owner’s providing or obtaining from others available or additional information pertinent to the Project including previous reports, as built conditions, information, and any other data relative to design or construction of the Project.

4.4.2 Make recommendations on required additional information necessary to complete the design and complete the preliminary reports and schematic materials.

4.4.3 Additional information required by Architect under Paragraph 4.4.2 shall be secured by Architect as directed in writing by Project Executive and compensated as Additional Services pursuant to Paragraph 11.

4.5 Preliminary Estimates of Construction Costs

4.6.1 Work with Construction Manager to prepare preliminary estimates of construction costs and times of completion for the Project.

4.6.2 Develop alternative conceptual plans applicable to various design alternatives including, but not limited to, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire safety, electronics, and security systems. Include analyses of Owner’s program requirements.

4.6 Schematic Layouts, Sketches and Conceptual Design Criteria

4.6.1 Prepare reports containing schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-10 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

4.6.2 At the beginning of each design phase, identify all Owner decisions required to maintain the Master Schedule. Provide Owner with at least 15 working days notice of all decisions required to maintain the Master Schedule. Delays associated with time required for Owner to make decisions where adequate notice was not given will not result in Additional Services. Reports and exhibits shall incorporate Owner’s program requirements and shall include structural concepts, Site utilization plans, floor plans, elevations, sections, study perspectives and other drawings necessary to describe the Project. Two initial concepts shall be developed with two subsequent rounds of iterations to achieve a single acceptable design concept for approval by Owner. Architects shall participate in weekly progress meetings with representatives of Owner and shall coordinate with Project Executive formal design presentations at times indicated on the Project schedule.

4.6.3 Prepare and submit to Owner for approval:

4.6.3.1 Outline specifications including architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation systems and materials proposed;

4.6.3.2 Floor plans and elevations at a scale acceptable to Owner as necessary to convey the architectural design, and tabulation of both gross and assignable floor areas including a comparison to the initial program area requirements; prepare mounted presentations and rendered perspectives.

4.6.4 Reports and exhibits shall indicate clearly the considerations involved including, but not limited to applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction or private licensing, patent, easements, or other legal restrictions. Reports and exhibits shall indicate any alternative solutions available to Owner and set forth Architect’s findings and recommendations.

4.6.5 Architect shall provide a narrative report by each design discipline describing their proposed design philosophy with a description of, and the rationale for, the proposed structural, mechanical, electrical, electronics, plumbing, fire safety, security systems, types of equipment, materials, finishes, site development and landscaping. The rationale shall include initial costs, lifecycle costs, life expectancy and maintenance considerations.

4.7 Lifecycle and Alternates Workshop

4.7.1 Participate with Project Executive and any other consultants designated by Project Executive in the conduct of an approximate eight hour Lifecycle and Alternates Workshop. This session may be held during any appropriate stage of the design phase.

4.7.2 Participate, and arrange for the participation of Sub-consultants in the Lifecycle and Alternates Workshop and provide with Sub-consultants lifecycle analysis on all major components and equipment and cost/benefit of alternate systems and materials.

4.7.3 Prepare and submit to Project Executive for Owner’s approval comparative cost studies of proposed major building systems for analysis in the Lifecycle and Alternates Workshop. Studies shall include first cost and lifecycle cost for all major components and equipment. Study shall estimate the yearly energy

2105-001\2349762.2 A-11 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

savings which shall be anticipated and shall list alternatives for systems and materials.

4.8 Opinion of Probable Costs: Assist CM with information to prepare opinion of probable costs based on the schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria provided including, but not limited to, the following that will be separately itemized. Reports shall include:

4.8.1 Estimate of Probable Total Construction Cost (defined as the total anticipated cost of the construction contract to be let to a general contractor)

4.9 Design Schedule Report: A report on the anticipated schedule for Project design, including a detailed schedule of progression and submittals of drawings and specifications in the subsequent phases, verifying Architect’s ability to conform to the Contract schedule.

4.10 Attend Required Meetings: Attend no more than four (4) meetings with the community, representatives of Owner, interested parties, governmental entities, and provide information and diagrams developed as part of the instruments of service for Schematic Design to fully describe the Project. Additional meetings will be an additional service.

4.11 Interface with Owner Groups: Throughout all phases of programming and schematic design, Architect shall work with, coordinate with, interface with, exchange ideas and design materials with, and include throughout the decision-making process the Sheriff’s Office and its consultants. Architect acknowledges and agrees that the Sheriff’s Office and its independent consultants shall have an active role in design development of the programming and schematic phases. Architect shall seek input from Owner groups and prepare a report covering identifying responses and resolutions to the following:

4.11.1 Is the design consistent with the County’s mission, philosophy, and objectives? 4.11.2 Does the design fully meet operational requirements (as detailed in the functional/operational program)? Is the design completely consistent with the architectural program? 4.11.3 Have any spaces been left out or added inadvertently? 4.11.4 Is the design capacity correct? Does the flow work well? How is the security zoning? 4.11.5 What are the relationships among components (e.g., the relation of food services to staff dining, warehouse, and housing units) and within components (e.g., food preparation, storage, and cleaning areas? This is needed only if adjacency relationships have not been fully resolved during architectural programming). 4.11.6 What are the site constraints (such as buildable areas for this project, areas that need to be reserved for other functions, setbacks, wetlands, utilities that should not be moved)? 4.11.7 How much land should be reserved for expansion of the facility? 4.11.8 Are two-level (including mezzanine) or three-level housing units acceptable? 4.11.9 How many recreation areas are needed and what sizes should they be (if not identified in the architectural program)? 4.11.10 How many parking spaces are needed? Must staff parking be separate from visitor parking? Is secure parking needed, and if so, for whom (if not identified in the architectural program)? 4.11.11 What size trucks will deliver and pick up food, garbage, and other items? How many trucks should the loading dock and staging area accommodate? 4.11.12 Is a vehicular sallyport or secure vehicular yard needed? If so, for how many vehicles of what sizes (if not identified in the architectural program)?

2105-001\2349762.2 A-12 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

4.11.13 Are there adjoining buildings into which inmates in cells and other areas should not be able to see? 4.11.14 Are there any building materials that the County wants to use or avoid? 4.11.15 How many staff would each design option require? 4.11.16 Have County user groups prioritized design alternatives based on estimated costs? 4.11.17 What are the needs for transitioning from the County’s prior adult detention facility to the new Project facility and for occupancy of the new Project facility?

5. Design Development Phase

5.1 Period of Service

5.1.1 After acceptance by Owner of the required deliverables in the Schematic Design Phase, and upon written authorization from Owner, Architect shall proceed with the performance of the services called for in the Design Development Phase. Written authorization will be within a week of the submittal and the submittal review will be done in a workshop with the Architect, Construction Manager and Owner.

5.1.2 Architect shall submit the deliverables required by the Design Development Phase including preliminary design documents and within the stipulated period indicated in Appendix C, “Milestone Schedule”.

5.2 General Scope of Project and Final Design Criteria: After consultation with Owner and on the basis of the accepted schematic, study and report documents, determine the general scope, extent and character of the Project and establish final design criteria. Participate in weekly progress meeting with Owner’s personnel and Sub-consultants.

5.2.1 Adult Detention Facility Specific Design Criteria Items:

5.2.1.1 Incorporation of all other design elements required for highly functional adult detention facility. Key items for consideration in design development include without limitation:

a. Are there blind spots caused by columns or anything else? Can these be eliminated or minimized? b. What materials are proposed in inmate areas? Are they durable, easy to maintain, and appropriate for the population category? c. What composes the security perimeter? Are the windows, walls, ceilings, floors, doors, locks, and sallyports sufficient to keep inmates from escaping? d. Is there anything in cells or showers that inmates could use to hang themselves? e. Are windows in the right places for staff visibility? Would any of the windows allow inmates views that may compromise security or privacy? f. Are doors in locations that will work well with furniture and equipment? Should any doors be moved to enhance desired movement or control? g. Are staff stations and control rooms laid out ergonomically, so that necks, arms, and eyes are not strained? h. Is the facility fully compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), applicable building codes, and state and (where adopted) national standards, such as those of the American Correctional Association (ACA)?

2105-001\2349762.2 A-13 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

i. How will the building work in various types of emergencies? Where will inmates go in case of fire (or even fire drills) or hostage situations? j. Will staff, inmates, and visitors always feel safe? What else would make them feel safer? How will attempts at bringing in contraband— by visitors, incoming and returning inmates, staff, vendors and repair people—be stopped? k. How can structural and mechanical systems and utilities facilitate expansion? l. Are the staffing plan and design fully compatible? If not, have adjustments to either or both been made? 5.3 Design Requirements. The design of the Project shall provide the following:

5.3.1 Fire safety. The provisions of Title 19 and Title 24, Part 2 as they relate to detention facilities shall be incorporated into the facility design.

5.3.2 Suicide Hazards. Architectural plans shall be reviewed by the CSA for the purpose of reducing hazards posed by fixtures and equipment which could be used for an act of suicide by an inmate. The facility design shall avoid any surfaces, edges, fixtures or fittings that can provide an attachment for self- inflicted injury. The following features shall be incorporated in the design of temporary holding cells, temporary staging cells and any other area where an inmate may be left alone:

a. plumbing shall not be exposed. Operation of control valves shall use flush buttons or similar. The drinking fountain bubbler shall be without curved projections; b. towel holders shall be ball-in-socket or indented clasp, not pull-down hooks or bars; c. supply and return grilles shall have openings no greater than 3/16 inch or have 16-mesh per square inch; d. beds, desk surfaces and shelves shall have no sharp edges and be configured to prevent attachment; e. light fixtures shall be tamper resistant; f. fixtures such as mirrors shall be mounted using tamper-resistant fasteners; and g. fire sprinkler heads inside rooms shall be designed to prevent attachment

5.3.3 Health and sanitation. Provisions of Subchapter 4, Title 15, California Code of Regulations, and of the California Retail Food Code as they relate to detention facilities shall be incorporated into the facility design.

5.3.4 Single and/or double occupancy cells. The number of single and/or double occupancy cells shall be that number, determined by the facility/system administrator in conjunction with the Corrections Standards Authority, necessary to safely manage the population of the facility/system based on a comprehensive needs assessment which accounts for those inmates projected to be:

a. administrative segregation cases, b. persons with disabilities, c. custodial problems, and/or d. likely to need individual housing for other specific reasons as determined by the facility/system administration.

The total number of single and/or double occupancy cells shall not be less than 10 percent of the system’s Corrections Standards Authority rated capacity.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-14 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

5.3.5 Staff and inmate safety. Facilities shall be designed and/or equipped in such a manner that staff and inmates have the ability to summon immediate assistance in the event of an incident or an emergency.

5.3.5 Heating and cooling. Provision shall me made to maintain a living environment in accordance with the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning requirements of Parts 2 and 4, and the energy conservation requirements of Part 6, Title 24, California Code of Regulations.

5.3.6 Acoustics. Housing areas shall be designed and constructed so that the average noise level does not exceed 70 decibels during periods of activity and 45 decibels during sleeping hours.

5.3.7 Living Areas. Living areas shall be separated from the area for reception and booking.

5.3.8 Spaces for persons with disabilities.

a. Housing cell or room. A cell or room for an inmate with a disability using a wheelchair must have an appropriate entry and toilet, wash basin and drinking fountain which the inmate can use without personal assistance. b. Other spaces within the security perimeter such as day rooms and activity areas shall be located such that persons with disabilities will not be excluded from participating in any program for which he or she would otherwise be eligible. Accessible showers for inmates with disabilities shall be available. c. Spaces outside the security perimeter. Public areas of a local detention facility shall comply with the applicable chapters of Title 24, Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations.

5.3.9 Security. The design should facilitate security and supervision appropriate to the level of inmate custody.

5.3.10 Glazing. Internal and external facility glazing shall be appropriate to the security level of the detention area or room.

5.3.11 Hair care space. Space and suitable equipment must be provided for men’s haircutting and/or female hairdressing.

5.3.12 Floor drains shall be provided where operationally and mechanically appropriate.

5.3.13 A sewage system design capable of addressing items that could potentially impact waste water systems.

5.3.14 Medical/mental health care housing shall be designed in consultation with the health authority. Medical/mental health areas may contain other than single occupancy rooms.

5.3.15 Project facility shall be expandable to accommodate larger numbers of inmates in the future, i.e., up to 832 beds. The development of the design should be presented in phases for purposes of bidding.

5.4 Design Development Documents: Prepare Design Development Documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline specifications and written descriptions of the Project, together with no more than six (6) renderings. These Preliminary Design documents shall include, but are not limited to:

2105-001\2349762.2 A-15 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

5.4.1 Site plans, architectural, structural, mechanical and power and signal drawings, elevations; cross sections and other mutually agreed upon drawings deemed necessary to describe the developed design; single line electrical and mechanical drawings, and structural drawings with preliminary sizing of major structural elements; and

5.4.2 Specifications for each specification section, with Part 2 of each section completed, describing the size, character and quality of the entire Project in its essentials as to kinds and locations of materials; type of structural, mechanical and electrical systems; and

5.4.3 a tabulation of both gross and assignable floor areas in a comparison to the approved schematic program area requirements and to the initial program area requirements.

5.4.4 Architect shall provide to Project Executive for Owner’s approval a color and materials board, samples of textures and finishes of all materials proposed in the Services.

5.5 Design Development Phase Drawings: Provide drawings that indicate the scope of work included in the bid package with sufficient detail to enable preparation and review of an accurate cost estimate including, but not limited to, the following descriptions of minimum requirements for a design development submittal, which shall be augmented as necessary to show design intent and to prepare an accurate estimate of construction cost.

5.5.1 Architectural Drawings

5.5.1.1 Floor plans that clearly show: a. Finish schedule b. Principal dimensions c. Wall types clearly identified d. Security zones and perimeters e. Room and door numbers, and a numbering plan for the entire facility f. Sufficient sections and details to enable a reasonable material takeoff g. Contractor-furnished and Owner-furnished equipment list incorporated in layout

5.5.1.2 Roof plans that clearly show: a. Slopes b. Type of roofing c. Roof access and pathways d. Location of any mechanical equipment e. Sufficient information to determine primary and secondary means of drainage

5.5.1.3 Reflected ceiling plans that clearly show: a. Ceiling material b. Access hatches c. Room numbers d. Partitions coordinated with the floor plans e. Mechanical and electrical features coordinated with mechanical and electrical system drawings

2105-001\2349762.2 A-16 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

5.5.1.4 Elevations that clearly show: a. Types of surface materials b. Dimensions from finish floor to tops of walls, eaves and roof lines c. All openings without dimensions but coordinated with door and window schedules

5.5.1.5 Sections that clearly show: a. Any security considerations b. Firewall conditions at tops of walls c. All essential building parts and materials

5.5.1.6 All door, window, glazing and hardware schedules complete with sufficient detail to show the agreed-upon form and style

5.5.1.7 All items intended to be permanently affixed to the building.

5.5.2 Structural Drawings

5.5.2.1 Floor and foundations plans that clearly show: a. Principal dimensions b. All columns, shear walls, shafts and stairs c. Coordination of structure with architectural floor plans d. Sections cut and details to identify the proposed type of foundations e. Sufficient section and detail bubbles to show where sections and details can be found

5.5.2.2 Roof plans that clearly show: a. Principal dimensions b. All major framing members c. Sufficient sections and details to show design intent d. Coordination with architectural, mechanical and electrical floor plans e. Sufficient section and detail bubbles to show where sections and details can be found

5.5.2.3 Sections and details that clearly show: a. Design intent b. All important connections c. Coordination with other structural plans d. Logical placement to allow easy location of sections and details

5.5.3 Mechanical and Plumbing Drawings: Review design-build Mechanical and Plumbing drawings for conformance to the following:

5.5.3.1 Mechanical and Plumbing plans that clearly show: a. Room numbers b. Locations of all major pieces of equipment c. Layout and sizing of all ductwork and piping d. Symbol list coordinated with symbols on plans e. All points-of-connection including invert elevations f. Sufficient section and detail bubbles to show where sections and details can be found

2105-001\2349762.2 A-17 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

5.5.3.2 Equipment and fixture schedules that clearly show: a. All fixtures identified b. All mechanical equipment identified and sized

5.5.4 Electrical Drawings: review design-build Electrical drawings for conformance to the following:

5.5.4.1 Lighting and power plans that clearly shows: a. Room numbers b. Single line diagrams of services and systems c. Symbol list coordinated with symbols on the plans d. Lighting plans coordinated with reflected ceiling plans e. Power, telephone and computer outlets shown and coordinated with equipment layouts in other disciplines f. Sufficient section and detail bubbles to show where sections and details can be found

5.5.4.2 Equipment and fixture schedules including lighting.

5.5.4.3 Security, alarm, intercom, public address (PA), closed-circuit TV (CCTV), distress call and similar electrical and electronic systems.

5.5.5 Civil Drawings:

5.5.5.1 Site and grading plans that clearly shows: a. Site cross sections b. Site contours and drainage c. Locations of all bench marks d. Precise locations of all major elements e. Roadways, driveways and parking areas

5.5.5.2 Site utility plans that clearly show: a. All connections to off-Site utilities b. All points-of-connection including invert elevations c. All drainage systems and other utilities located and sized

5.5.7 Other Items:

5.5.7.1 Specifications describing the size, character and quality of the entire Project, including locations of materials; types of structural, and security systems.

5.5.7.2 Structural Engineering Calculations clearly presented including realistic loads, and sufficiently complete for Construction Documents to proceed.

5.5.7.3. Any other items required to address matters included in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 above.

5.6 Additional Data or Services: Advise Owner in writing if additional data or services of the following types are necessary and, as Additional Services, assist in obtaining such data and services as directed in writing by Project Executive:

2105-001\2349762.2 A-18 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

5.6.1 Data prepared by or services of others including, without limitation, borings, probings and subsurface explorations, hydrographic surveys, laboratory tests and inspections of samples, materials and equipment;

5.6.2 Appropriate professional interpretations of the foregoing;

5.6.3 Environmental assessment and impact statements, Site assessments;

5.6.4 Property, boundary, easement, right-of-way, topographic and utility surveys;

5.6.5 Property descriptions;

5.6.6 Zoning, deed and other land use restriction; and

5.6.7 Other special data or consultations necessary or useful in completion of the Project.

5.7 Report on Additional Information Required: Advise in writing if any of the following are required:

5.7.1 Governmental permits of any type;

5.76.2 Reports of any type to governmental agencies;

5.8 Revised Opinion of Probable Costs: Based on the information contained in the Design Development documents, assist the Construction Manager with information to prepare revised opinion and more detailed estimate of probable Costs and times of completion of the Project, coordinated with the Master Schedule.

5.9 Attend Required Meetings: Attend no more than two (2) meetings with the community, representatives of Owner, interested parties, governmental entities, and provide information and diagrams to fully describe the Project developed from the instruments of service for the Design Development phase. Additional meetings, for these meetings will be an additional service.

5.10 Work Phasing Recommendations: Prepare recommendations for phasing of the construction work to minimize disruptions and interferences with Owner’s operations and any concurrently proceeding construction activities. Meet and discuss phasing recommendations with Owner and Project Executive. This phasing may be incorporated into Construction Contract documents. Complete phasing recommendations as part of the Construction Documents Phase services.

6. Construction Document Phase

6.1 Period of Service: After acceptance by Owner of the Design Development Phase documents and revised opinion of probable Costs, and upon written authorization from Owner, Architect shall proceed with the performance of the services called for in the Construction Document Phase; and shall deliver required deliverables in Appendix D under this phase, within the stipulated period indicated in Appendix C, “Milestone Schedule”. Written authorization will be within a week of the submittal and the submittal review will be done in a workshop with the Architect, Construction Manager and Owner.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-19 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

6.2 Construction Documents

6.2.1 On the basis of the accepted Design Development documents and the comprehensive update on estimates of probable Total Project Costs and times of completion for the Project, coordinated with the Master Schedule, prepare for incorporation in the Contract Documents final drawings (hereinafter called “Drawings”) and Specifications to show the work to be furnished and performed by Contractor. Drawings and Specifications shall set forth in detail the requirement for construction of all work to be performed by Contractor.

6.2.2 Construction Documents shall be prepared in accordance with industry standard or care. Technical specifications shall be prepared in conformance with the thirty two division format of the Construction Specification Institute. Architect shall cooperate with Owner in coordinating the Drawings and technical specifications with the Divisions 0 and 1 standard specifications and in jointly developing Owner’s standard specifications. Architect shall provide whatever Division 1 construction contract specifications necessary for the Project.

6.2.3 Submittal to CSA / State Fire Marshal: All construction documents shall be brought to a ninety percent (90%) level of completion for CSA/State Fire Marshal submittal. Owner may conduct a peer review of the completed construction documents, including submittal of a list of revisions required to complete the documents. Architect shall complete drawings and specifications following CSA and State Fire Marshal submittal and review, including completion of all Sub- consultant services, fully coordinate drawings and specifications, and perform a quality control review. The same Architectural and Sub-consultant team (and team personnel) preparing the CSA submittal shall complete the drawings and specifications.

6.3 Compliance with Codes, Regulations and Requirements: Comply with the standard of care of a specialist in design of adult detention facilities when preparing Drawings and Specifications to comply with applicable building codes, ordinances, statutes, laws, standards, and governmental regulations, applicable to the Services including, but not limited to, environmental, energy conservation, and disabled access requirements, regulations and standards of the State Fire Marshal having jurisdiction over the Project.

6.4 Compliance with State Standards: Without limiting Paragraph 6.3 above, all plans, specifications, structural design calculations, site data, and cost estimates required by State law including without limitation, the California Corrections Standards Authority, California Penal Code and Code of Regulations, shall comply with State standards. Architect shall prepare and submit the application for approval of the plans and specifications by CSA. A “check set” shall be submitted by Architect to CSA, and any changes or corrections required by the CSA shall be made by Architect. Any other requirements of Castor any other authority with jurisdiction shall be complied with. Deliver to Owner two (2) complete sets of final CSA-approved plans and specifications. Architect shall designate a contact person for the duration of the State approval process.

6.5 Drawings and Specifications: The Drawings and Specifications must clearly identify and describe all necessary quality levels and quality control procedures such as inspections, tests, submittals or other measures that the Contractor must perform. Each specification section must include the requirements for the tests, controls, performances and certifications needed to verify the specified quality level of that section. Each work- related specification section must also dedicate a subsection to identify and list required Contractor submittals along with testing and inspection requirements.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-20 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

6.6 Revised Opinion of Probable Total Project Costs: Based on the information contained in the Drawings and Specifications, work with Construction Manager to submit, once at 50% completion and again at 90% completion, a revised opinion and more detailed estimate of probable Total Project Costs and times of completion of the Project, coordinated with the Master Schedule.

6.7 Report: Provide a written report to Owner that the final design, as expressed in the final plans and specifications, will meet the standard of care of a specialist in design of adult detention facilities, including, but not limited to, the following attributes:

6.7.1 Its constructability, workability and biddability;

6.7.2 The finished construction meeting the required levels of structural integrity, water tightness, durability, maintainability, sustainability, and security, if faithfully carried out;

6.7.3. The completed Project meeting the required levels of health and sanitation and safety of inmates, staff, and visitors,

6.7.4 The completed Project conforming to the requirements of all applicable laws, statutes, regulations and ordinances.

6.7.5 Does not call for the use of hazardous materials.

6.8 Review of the Final Design by Owner: Participate and cooperate fully in a review of the Final Design by Owner, and any consultants engaged by Owner, to assess the constructability of the final design. Respond to Owner comments and incorporate comments as necessary.

7. Bidding Phase

7.1 Bidding: See Paragraph 1.1.3 above regarding general procurement matters. After written authorization to proceed with the Bidding Phase, Architect shall:

7.1.1 Assist the Construction Manager to prepare bid packages for contractor bidding.

7.1.2 Attend Pre-Bid Conferences and Site Visits.

7.1.4 Consult with and advise Owner as to the acceptability of sub-contractors, suppliers and other persons and organizations proposed by the bidders for those portions of the work as to which such acceptability is required by the bidding documents.

7.1.5 Consult with Owner concerning, and determine the acceptability of, substitute materials and equipment proposed by bidders.

7.1.6 Answer bidder questions and/or issue written addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the bidding documents, including allowable substitutions of materials and equipment. Where appropriate, obtain CSA approval.

7.1.7 Attend the bid openings and assist Owner in evaluating bids or proposals. 7.1.8 Prepare a conformed set of drawings and specifications, reflecting the changes made and approved by the Owner during the Bidding Phase.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-21 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

7.2 Where Bids Exceed Budget: If the cumulative total of all lowest responsible, responsive bid received from all trade sub-contractors plus amounts otherwise payable to Construction Manager exceed, or if based on trade sub-contractor bids received to date, Owner reasonably determines that they will exceed, the latest approved Estimate of Probable Total Construction Costs executed by the Construction Manager at Final Construction Document (as contained within the estimate of Total Project Costs), Owner may, at its discretion:

7.2.1 Award the contracts to the lowest responsible, responsive bidders, and give written approval of an increase in Owner’s budget.

7.2.2 Reject some or all bids and rebid the applicable contracts.

7.2.3 If the cumulative bid amount is or is reasonably expected to be more than 10% greater than the Architect’s latest accepted Estimate of Probable Total Construction Cost rendered during the Construction Documents Phase, Owner may require Architect to revise the scope of work to be performed by Construction Manager and trade sub-contractors or its quality, or both, so as to reduce the Project Construction Cost for the work, while still meeting Owner’s Project objectives. Architect shall at its expense, if so directed by Owner, modify the Construction Documents in order to reduce the Project Construction Costs for the work to be performed by the Construction Manager and trade sub-contractors within the Project budget.

7.2.4 Abandon the Project and terminate this Agreement.

8. Construction Phase

8.1 Period of Service: The Construction Phase will commence with the issuance to the Construction Manager of the Notice to Proceed with Construction under the Construction Management Services Agreement, and will terminate upon written recommendation by Architect for final payment on that prime contract.

8.2 General Administration of Construction Contract

8.2.1 Architect shall work with Construction Manager to review Document 00 7200 General Conditions and Division 1 Specifications (herein called the “General Conditions”) prior to award of the Construction Agreement, and shall perform all duties therein which indicate will be performed by the “Architect” or “Architect/Engineer”.

8.2.2 Architect will have authority to act on behalf of Owner to the extent provided in the General Conditions of the Construction Contract, provided, however, that Owner may, in its sole discretion, issue instructions directly to Contractor if notice of such instructions is given to Architect as soon as practicable thereafter.

8.2.3 Architect will work with Owner, Project Executive, Construction Manager, and any Project Inspectors, testing agencies, and governmental agencies as set forth in the General Conditions and this Contract. Architect consents to Owner’s retaining of a construction manager who may perform some or all of the functions assigned to Project Executive in this Agreement.

8.2.4 For purposes of this Appendix A, words and phrases having a defined meaning under the General Conditions shall have that defined meaning in this Appendix A including, but not limited to, the terms “Site”, “defective”, “Contract Documents”, “Shop Drawings”, “Samples”, “Inspector” and “Contractor”.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-22 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

8.2.5 Architect and Resident Project Representative (if required) shall attend the Preconstruction Conference.

8.2.6 Architect shall, after approval of the plans and specifications by the CSA and State Fire Marshal, and as soon as all required construction contracts are let, but before construction is started, provide notice to CSA as required by the California Code of Regulations and California Penal Code.

8.3 Visits to Site and Observation of Construction

8.3.1 Architect shall make visits to the Site weekly in construction and as Owner deems necessary on field issues that will adversely impact the critical path in order to observe, as an experienced and qualified design professional, and sufficient to prepare the Verified Reports and any other reports or certifications required by the California Penal Code and Code of Regulations, or by any other authority, on the progress and quality of the various aspects of Contractor’s work. Architect shall provide Owner with copies of all records and reports of Site visits within forty-eight (48) hours of the Site visit.

8.3.2 Architect shall advise Owner in writing of any observations of defective work, work not in conformance with drawings and specifications, and lack of progress of work.

8.3.3 Architect shall establish and maintain to the satisfaction of Owner, a computer database. The Architect’s database shall maintain complete and accurate records regarding defective work, work not in conformance with drawings and specifications, and lack of progress of work, and shall cross reference such work to the drawings and specification sections violated. Architect shall make such database available to Owner at all reasonable times and turn over the database to Owner upon completion or termination of this Agreement. 8.3.4 Architect shall not, during visits or as a result of observations of Contractor’s work in progress, supervise, direct or have control over Contractor’s work.

8.4 Resident Project Representative: Unless agreed specifically otherwise, Architect shall not provide the services of a Resident Project Representative at the Site to assist Architect to provide continuous observation of the Project.

8.5 Defective Or Nonconforming Work: Architect shall make written recommendations to Project Executive to disapprove or reject Contractor’s work, or to accept Contractor’s work with a reduction in Contract Cost, while it is in progress if Architect believes such work is defective or will not produce a completed Project that conforms to the Contract Documents or that such work will prejudice the integrity of the design concept of the Project as reflected in the Contract Documents.

8.6 Interpretations, Clarifications and Corrections

8.6.1 Architect shall issue necessary interpretations, clarifications, Architect of Bulletins, and Request for Information (RFI)-Replies regarding the Contract Documents and in connection therewith assist Project Executive with supplemental instructions and change orders as required, with reasonable promptness (no longer than 5 (5) working days) so as to cause no delay to Contractor or the Project.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-23 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

8.6.2 Architect shall, at its own expense, make all revisions and changes to the Drawings and Specifications as directed by Owner to correct errors, omissions or conflicts.

8.6.3 On change orders, prepare the scope of work, justifications and estimate of the cost where necessary.

8.7 Verified Reports: Architect shall make the “verified reports” required by the California Penal Code and Code of Regulations, according to the form and schedule required by those codes and CSA.

8.8 Review of Submittals and Requests for Information

8.8.1 Architect shall review, approve or take other appropriate action as set forth in the General Conditions in respect of Shop Drawings, Samples and other data which Contractor is required to submit under Specification 013000 Submittals (collectively referred to herein as “Submittals”), and review and reply to RFI’s, for conformance with the design concept of the Project and the intent of and compliance with the Contract Documents, with reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay to Contractor or the Project. In no event shall Architect respond to RFI’s longer than five (5)working days after their receipt and other submittals any longer than ten (10)working days after their receipt, unless the submittal has been designated in Division 1 as a submitted requiring extended review.

8.8.2 Reviews, approvals and other actions taken shall not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction or to safety precautions and programs incident thereto, unless same has been expressly specified by Architect.

8.8.3 Architect shall, for the purpose of performing its review obligations herein, employ and engage personnel who are sufficiently qualified to conduct meaningful review of the Shop Drawings, submittals and requests for clarification.

8.8.4 Architect shall maintain to the satisfaction of Owner a computer based system to record, control and manage the review of Submittals and RFI’s, which shows the interrelationships among and between such documents and requests for changes or claims, Bulletins and/or potential and/or approved change orders, and which can be used for coordination of submittal reviews with the Project scheduling requirements, and shall make such system available to Owner at all reasonable times.

8.8.5 Architect shall provide to Project Executive for Owner approval two copies of a color schedule, samples of textures and finishes of all materials in the work at the Project.

8.9 Communications with Contractor

8.9.1 Any communications between Architect and Contractor regarding any form of change to the construction contract’s Contract Documents (including, but not limited to, changes in price), and any other party acting on behalf of either, shall be in writing, or if not made in writing, memorialized in writing, and copies of same shall be sent immediately to Project Executive. The Owner shall be copied on all communication between the Construction Manager and the Architect. The Owner, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to change this requirement, relax this requirement, or revise this requirement.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-24 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

8.9.2 As required in the General Conditions, Architect shall review all written communications from Contractor, recommend actions to be taken by Owner, and reply in writing to Project Executive regarding the following:

8.9.2.1 Applications for payment.

8.9.2.2 Requests for changes in contract costs or times of completion.

8.9.2.3 Disputes with respect to technical aspects of contract documents.

8.9.2.4 Requests for interpretation and clarification of contract documents.

8.10 Substitutions

8.10.1 Architect shall evaluate and determine the acceptability of a maximum of two (2) substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor. Should the number of substitutions submitted by the Contractor exceed two (2), Architect shall inform the Owner, who will at their discretion, authorize the Architect to proceed on Additional Services basis.

8.10.2 Architect shall review quality control submittals and complete requests for substitution from Construction Contractor within the duration allowed for submittal reviews so as to cause no delay to the Contractor or the Project and, for the purpose of performing its review obligations herein, shall employ and engage personnel who are sufficiently qualified to conduct meaningful review and make knowledgeable comparisons of proposed substitutions.

8.11 Inspections and Tests

8.11.1 Architect shall request Project Executive to require special inspection or testing of the work whenever necessary to Architect’s performance of its duties hereunder.

8.11.2 Architect shall receive and review all certificates of inspections, testings and approvals required by laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, orders or the Contract Documents (but only to determine generally that their content complies with the requirements of, and the results certified indicate compliance with, the Contract Documents).

8.11.3 Architect shall observe work to determine if work or portions of work are substantially complete, and for development of punch lists, and final completion.

8.11.4 Architect shall attend all weekly construction contract progress meetings.

8.12 Disputes Between Owner and Contractor: If requested by Owner, Architect shall act as initial interpreter of the requirements of technical aspects of the Contract.

8.13 Applications for Payment

8.13.1 Based on Architect’s on-Site observations as an experienced and qualified design professional, on information provided by the Inspector and on review of applications for payment and the accompanying data and schedules, Architect shall assist Project Executive in its determination of amounts owing to Contractor and recommend in writing payments to Contractor in such amounts.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-25 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

8.13.2 Recommendations of payment by Architect will constitute a representation to Owner that:

8.13.2.1 The work has progressed to the point indicated;

8.13.2.2 To the best of Architect’s knowledge, information and belief, the quality of the work is in accordance with the Contract Documents (subject to evaluation of such work as a functioning whole prior to or upon Substantial Completion, to the results of any subsequent tests called for in the Contract Documents and to any other qualifications stated in the recommendation).

8.13.3 In the case of unit price work, Architect’s recommendations of payment will include its determinations of quantities and classifications of such work, along with data provided by Owner and other consultants (subject to any subsequent adjustments allowed by the Contract Documents).

8.13.4 By recommending any payment Architect will not thereby be deemed to have represented that exhaustive, continuous or detailed reviews or examinations have been made by Architect to check the quality or quantity of Contractor work as it is furnished and performed, beyond the responsibilities specifically assigned to Architect in this Agreement and the General Conditions.

8.14 Contractor’s Completion Documents

8.14.1 Architect shall receive and review all maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of inspection, tests and approvals that are to be assembled by Contractor in accordance with the Contract Documents (but such review will only be to determine that their content complies with the requirements of, and in the case of certificates of inspections, tests and approvals the results certified indicate compliance with, the Contract Documents), and shall transmit them to Owner with written comments and recommendation on their conformance with Contract requirements.

8.14.2 Architect shall employ and engage personnel who are sufficiently qualified to conduct meaningful review of maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of inspection, and tests.

8.15 Final Observations: Architect shall conduct observations to determine if the work or portions of the work is substantially complete and a final observation to determine if the completed work is acceptable, and will recommend, in writing, whether final payment shall be made to Contractor and will give written notice to the Project Executive that the work either is or is not acceptable subject to any conditions therein expressed.

8.16 Post-occupancy Review: Architect and sub-consultants shall participate in one (1) “post occupancy review”.

8.16.1 Architect and sub-consultants will participate in a comprehensive walk through of the facility with the Owner, Commissioning Agent and Construction Manager no later than one month prior to the end of the warranty period 8.16.2 Architect will prepare a report based on site observations and discussion with the owner of systems and materials that are not serving their intended use, show excessive wear and tear, or are not performing as designed. A draft of this report will be provided to the owner no more than one week following the walk through.

8.17 Time of Construction Phase

2105-001\2349762.2 A-26 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

8.17.1 Any prolonged construction phase services past the construction completion date defined in the Construction Contract, due in whole or in part to Architect’s failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement, shall be included in Basic Service.

8.17.2 Prolonged construction phase services not due in whole or in part to any failure of Architect to perform under this Agreement, and which exceed by less than 30 days the actual construction duration defined in the Construction Contract, or which exceed by less than 10% of the expected construction duration in Appendix C, whichever is longer, shall be included in Basic Service.

9. Operation/Project Close-Out Phase

9.1 Operation/Project Close-Out: Transition and occupancy are anticipated to occur 1-3 months after construction completion. During the Operation/Project Close-Out Phase, Architect shall, when requested by Owner:

9.1.1 Provide assistance in connection with the refining, adjusting and correcting of any equipment or systems.

9.1.2 Assist in start-up, testing and placing in operation special equipment and systems. (For all such equipment and systems, Architect shall have specified start-up and testing procedures in the contract documents.)

9.1.3 Cooperate with Owner’s commissioning agent, if any, for specialized equipment and systems.

9.1.4 Provide assistance in connection with completion of punch list work including, but not limited to, preparing the initial comprehensive punch list and conducting no more than two follow up Site visits (with follow up punch listing if necessary) in addition to other responsibilities under this contract.

9.1.5 Assist Owner in coordination of training Owner’s staff to operate and maintain equipment and systems as necessary.

9.1.6 Assist Owner in developing systems and procedures for control of the operation and maintenance of and record keeping for the Project.

9.1.7 Together with Owner, visit the Project to observe any apparent defects in the completed construction, assist Owner in consultations and discussions with Contractor concerning correction of such deficiencies, and make recommendations as to replacement, correction, or diminished value of defective work.

9.1.8 Together with Owner and Project Executive, coordinate, prepare and submit all final required deliverables under Title 24 and anything else required by CSA for its final Project approval.

9.1.9 Prepare electronic record sets and sets of reproducible record Drawings and Specifications showing those changes made during the construction process, based on the RFI responses, Submittal reviews, and Construction Change Directives.

9.1.10 Electronic data shall conform to Owner requirements for compatibility with Owner equipment and software.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-27 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

9.1.11 Assist Owner’s transition and occupancy teams as requested by Owner.

10. Payments to Architect

10.1 Payments to Architect shall be made according to Appendix B, “Payments to Architect”.

11. Additional Services

11.1 Performance: Services required to be performed by Architect upon request by Owner, which are described hereinafter as Additional Services, must be authorized by Owner in writing prior to performance.

11.2 Compensation for Additional Services: Architect shall be compensated for Additional Services as set forth in Appendix B unless the parties agree on lump sum compensation for particular work activities.

11.3 Services: The following services shall be considered Additional Services:

11.3.1 Making revisions in reports, drawings, or other documents, if:

11.3.1.1 Such revisions are not necessary because of a deficiency in Architect’s work, and

11.3.1.2 Such revisions are inconsistent with written approvals or instructions previously given by Owner, or are required by the enactment or revision of codes, laws or regulations subsequent to the preparation of such documents, or are due to other causes not solely within the control of Architect.

11.3.2 Changes in scope, such as revisions of approved reports or design documents. Changes in schedule can be a change in scope only if Architect has fully performed its scheduling and coordination responsibilities herein required and the changes in schedule are in addition to these responsibilities.

11.3.3 Required out-of town travel beyond limits specified in Appendix B.

11.3.4 Assistance in connection with bid protests and rebidding when such assistance is required by matters unrelated to Architect’s deficient performance.

11.3.5 Property surveys or field surveys for design purposes, engineering surveys, and staking, to the extent not required by other provisions of this Agreement.

11.3.6 Preparing to serve or serving on behalf of Owner as an expert witness (but not as a percipient witness) in connection with any arbitration, administrative or other proceeding or legal proceeding.

11.3.7 Preparation of applications and supporting documents for governmental grants and permits. [However, participating in consultations and evaluation of the effect of associated requirements on the design requirements of the Project is within Architect’s contract scope.]

11.3.8 Services to verify the accuracy of geotechnical information.

11.3.9 Assisting in actual claims resolution efforts when such assistance is required by matters unrelated to Architect’s performance.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-28 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

11.3.10 Providing any other services requested by Owner that are not otherwise included in this Agreement and are not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted architectural, engineering and other professional practice.

11.3.11 All work or services required as a result of any failure by Architect to perform its obligations under this Agreement shall be performed by Architect at no additional cost as part of Basic Services and shall not be deemed Additional Services.

11.3.12 Providing additional insurance coverage requested by Owner beyond that specified in the Agreement, except that no markup will be allowed. Architect shall promptly comply with such request.

11.3.13 Substitutions

11.3.13.1 Review of substitutions beyond a maximum of two (2) per trade subcontractor package shall be an Additional Service (see Paragraph 8.10.1).

11.3.13.2 Architect shall evaluate and determine the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by Contractor.

11.3.13.3 Architect shall review quality control submittals and requests for substitution beyond the specified manufacturers from Contractor in a timely manner so as to cause no delay to the Contractor or the Project and, for the purpose of performing its review obligations herein, shall employ and engage personnel who are sufficiently qualified to conduct meaningful review and make knowledgeable comparisons of proposed substitutions.

12. Periods of Service

12.1 Milestones: Milestones for completion of Phases and tasks within each phase are given in Appendix C. Milestones shall conform to Master Schedule.

12.2 Commencement of Services: Architect shall not commence work on any succeeding phase of Services until completion of services on existing and prior phases of Service and Project Executive has provided Architect with written notice to commence the succeeding phase of Service, unless Project Executive, in its sole discretion, authorizes Architect to do so.

13. Owner’s Responsibilities

13.1 Project Executive: Owner shall designate a Project Executive, who is authorized to act on Owner’s behalf with respect to this Agreement. Owner or such authorized representative shall render required decisions promptly, to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of Architect’s services. Owner may delegate all or some of Project Executive’s role and function to a separate contractor or to a construction manager. Owner may change the individual acting as Project Executive and/or the individual or entity acting as a separate contractor or construction manager at any time with notice to Architect.

13.2 Design Requirements: Owner shall provide criteria and information concerning design objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, and budgetary limitations, when known.

2105-001\2349762.2 A-29 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

13.3 Property Information: Owner shall provide geotechnical information, environmental impact reports, and relevant information concerning property boundaries, easements, rights of way, topographic and utility surveys, property descriptions, zoning, boundary and other land use restrictions, as needed and necessary.

13.4 Documents: Owner shall make copies of available documents and drawings of existing conditions available to Architect. Architect may inspect all Owner’s surveys and records of construction. Verification of visible on-Site facilities is the responsibility of Architect.

13.5 Surveys: Owner shall provide engineering surveys to establish reference points for construction.

13.6 Hazardous Materials: Owner shall provide hazardous materials surveys and perform remediation measures to eliminate hazardous materials from Project Site.

13.7 Permits and Approvals: Architect shall assist Owner in its securing of all required approvals and permits from governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project, unless otherwise specified in this Agreement (for example, Architect’s duty to secure all required design approvals from CSA and State Fire Marshal).

13.8 Site Access: Owner shall provide Architect reasonable access to the Site provided Architect complies with all security and safety requirements, and coordination requirements.

13.9 Resident Inspector: Owner shall supply the Resident Inspector required by the Penal Code.

END OF APPENDIX A

2105-001\2349762.2 A-30 of 30 Appendix A Services to be Provided by Architect

Attachment BIM

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING

[To be Included in Both Architect Agreement and Construction Contract]

1. Architect’s Design and Initial Hosting of BIM

1.1 Architect shall develop a Building Information Model (“BIM”) based on the architectural and structural designs throughout design development, including development of the Design Development Phase Drawings, the final Drawings and any modifications approved by Owner.

1.2 Architect shall develop the BIM based on best practices within applicable architectural and engineering disciplines, including without limitation the applicable level of development (“LOD”) for each element of the Project, and shall provide Owner with a report identifying such matters and areas for further (or lesser) development. Following Owner approval, Architect shall develop the BIM as directed or approved by Owner.

1.3 Architect shall host and manage the BIM during development of the Project’s design. Architect’s hosting and managing responsibilities shall include without limitation: (i.) collecting, coordinating, and the usability of, incoming models from Project participants; (ii.) maintaining periodic record copies; (iii.) aggregating incoming models and making the BIM available for use and viewing by Project participants; (iv.) performing and assisting in performing clash detection in the model and/or with any Owner-approved modifications; (v.) issuing periodic clash detection reports; (vi.) managing access rights; and (vii.) updating the BIM to reflect current designs and revisions.

1.4 Architect shall correct and clarify any clashes, coordination or issues resulting from the BIM within Architect’s Basic Services. Coordination and design corrections and clarifications resulting from such further modeling (whether performed by Architect, Contractor or sub-contractors) shall be within Architect’s Basic Services.

2. BIM Workshop and Pre-Construction Phase BIM Activities

2.1 If directed by Owner, Contractor and all sub-contractors that will be interacting with or using BIM information will meet with Architect and its design team to develop protocols for developing, implementing, reviewing, and exchanging information through the BIM (“BIM Workshop”). Through the BIM Workshop, Contractor, major sub-contractors and Architect’s design team will discuss, coordinate, test and adjust their BIM practices, to allow information to be used, to the greatest practical extent, by all parties for their respective purposes.

3. Transfer to and Hosting of BIM by Contractor

3.1 Upon the completion of Final Construction Document, Architect will provide the BIM to Contractor who will host and manage the BIM through construction and until completion of the Project. Contractor will use the BIM to assist Contractor in its work to coordinate the design and the implementation of the design by Contractor and its sub-contractors. Contractor will manage the clash detection and coordination process during the construction phase, through preparation of all shop drawings and submittals necessary for construction. Contractor will continue to accomplish clash detection.

4. General

4.1 Architect and Contractor and each major sub-contractor must be capable of utilizing the BIM to perform the functions assigned to them in paragraph 3 above.

4.2 The BIM and any portion of the BIM is a work for hire for the benefit of Owner and will be provided to Owner as a contract deliverable that may be used by Owner without restriction for the

2105-001\2349762.2 BIM-1 of 2 Appendix A Attachment BIM

Attachment BIM

use on this Project. Architect grants to Owner a license in perpetuity to use and reproduce the BIM and any portion of the BIM for any purpose whatsoever related to this Project. Contractor and its sub-contractors shall transfer to Owner copyrights or licenses necessary for Owner to use the BIM and supporting information.

4.3 The BIM is not a Construction Document or Contract Document, and does not supplement or supersede the final permitted Drawings or Specifications.

2105-001\2349762.2 BIM-2 of 2 Appendix A Attachment BIM

APPENDIX B

PAYMENTS TO ARCHITECT

This is an Appendix attached to, and made a part of and incorporated by reference with the Agreement dated May __, 2012 between the County of San Mateo (the “Owner”), and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. (“Architect”) providing for professional services.

1. Maximum Payment

1.1 Owner shall pay Architect an agreed-upon sum for Basic Project Services. .

1.2 Excluding Additional Services only, the Maximum Payment to Architect for Services performed under this Agreement shall not exceed progress on the Project Services described in Appendix A, Services to be Performed by Architect, the stated budget for the Services, and the percentage allowances under Paragraph 2.2 below.

1.2 For purposes of this Appendix B, all work performed by Architect prior to this Agreement shall be deemed performed under this Agreement and considered in calculating Architect’s payments due under this Agreement. The Maximum Payment to Architect described above shall apply in all circumstances except Additional Services.

1.3 Architect’s fee for this Project shall not exceed $8,934,220.00.This measure shall constitute Architect’s full compensation for its work.

1.4 If Owner changes the scope of the Project referenced in Appendix A Paragraph 1.1, either increasing or decreasing the scope of Architect’s Services, then the parties shall calculate an amended lump sum fee based upon the revised Project value. If Owner changes Project scope after Architect has commenced work on the Project, then the parties shall agree upon an equitable adjustment limited by the original fee for the Project, Architect’s incurred costs and progress under Paragraph 2.2 below, and the revised scope of work and revised fee remaining.

2. Methods of Payment for Services and Expenses of Architect

2.1 For Basic Services on the Project: Owner shall pay Architect for basic services rendered under Appendix A sum not exceeding the Maximum Payment Amount for the Project identified in Paragraph 1 above, and, for the phases listed in Paragraph 2.2 below, a sum not exceeding the amount so allocated to that phase. Within each phase listed in Paragraph 2.2 below, Architect shall be paid according to its percentage completion of each phase.

2.2 Maximum Payment to Architect by Phase

PHASE AMOUNT

Programming Verification Phase 5% Schematic Design Phase 20% Design Development Phase 20% Construction Document Phase Submittal to CSA/ State Fire Marshal 15% Approval by CSA 10% Bidding Phase 5% Construction Phase 20% Operation/Project Close-Out 5%

TOTAL BASIC SERVICES 100%

2105-001\2349762.2 B-1 of 3 Appendix B – Payments to Architect

2.3 Additional Services. Owner shall pay Architect for Additional Services rendered under Appendix A as follows:

2.3.1 General. For Additional Services of Architect’s principals and professional and technical staff engaged directly on the Project and rendered pursuant to Appendix A Paragraph 11, on the basis of a lump sum negotiated between the parties, or, at Owner’s option, at the Billing Rates (as defined below).

2.3.2 Sub-consultants. For Additional Services of Sub-consultants employed by Architect to render Additional Services pursuant to Appendix A Paragraph 8, the amount billed to Architect.

2.3.3 Hourly Basis. For Additional Services on an hourly basis, Architect agrees that all Sub- consultants billing will be limited to a not-to-exceed amount upon prior written approval of the Owner.

2.3.4 Reimbursable Expenses, Allowance and Contingency. Except as set forth in Paragraph 2.3.5 below, Owner shall pay Architect the actual cost of all Reimbursable Expenses incurred only in connection with Additional Services. Allowance and Contingency shall require Owner’s prior written approval for any Owner initiated design service.

2.3.5 Other Expenses. For expenses not required by the Agreement, the Owner shall reimburse the following expenses at a rate of 1.05 times cost, whether incurred on Basic Services or Additional Services: any plotting of Drawings, Specifications and Bidding Documents in addition to the original set plus one plot; and fees paid to government agencies on behalf of the Owner.

2.3.6 Photocopying and Postage. On Basic Services, Owner shall pay Architect 1.10 times cost for expenses for plotting, photocopying and postage.

3. Times of Payments

3.1 Architect shall be paid according to actual percentage of completion of designated phases of the Basic Services as specified in Paragraph 2.2 above.

3.2 Architect shall submit monthly statements for Basic and Additional Services rendered and for Basic and Reimbursable Expenses incurred. The statements will be based on Architect’s estimate of the proportion of completion of each phase of service set forth above, utilizing the design schedule organized by task. The Owner shall promptly review Architect’s monthly statement, and provided it is acceptable, shall promptly make payment thereon.

4. Definitions

4.1 “Architect’s Billing Rates” apply to all Architects’ professional personnel (Architect’s and drafters) engaged directly on the Project listed below. Architect shall not bill for or receive compensation for other business or administrative personnel or secretarial personnel. For purposes of this Agreement, Architect’s Billing Rates are attached as Exhibit 1 to this Appendix B.

4.2 “Reimbursable Expenses” mean actual expenses incurred by Architect or Sub-consultants in connection with Basic and Additional Services, such as expenses for: transportation and subsistence incidental thereto; providing and maintaining field office facilities including firm furnishings and utilities; toll telephone calls and telegrams, mail and overnight delivery services; reproduction of reports, Drawings, Specifications, Bidding Documents and similar Project-related items; and if authorized in advance by the Owner, overtime work requiring higher than regular rates.

4.2.1 Reimbursable Expenses shall not include Local Travel.

2105-001\2349762.2 B-2 of 3 Appendix B – Payments to Architect

4.2.2 Travel expense beyond Local Travel for travel by automobile shall be reimbursed at the current rate set by the U.S. Government, and for travel by other means shall be the actual expense incurred by Architect.

4.2.3 “Local Travel” means travel between Architect’s offices and San Mateo County, and travel to any location within a fifty-mile radius of either Architect’s office or San Mateo County.

END OF APPENDIX B

2105-001\2349762.2 B-3 of 3 Appendix B – Payments to Architect

APPENDIX C

MILESTONE SCHEDULE

No. ACTIVITY MILESTONE DATE PROGRAMMING VERIFICATION/CONCEPT 1. DESIGN PHASE June 18, 2012 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2. PHASE October 1, 2012 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 3. PHASE December 31, 2012 CONSTRUCTION 4. DOCUMENT PHASE April 22, 2013 5. BIDDING PHASE July 15, 2013

6. CONSTRUCTION PHASE September 30, 2014 OPERATION/PROJECT 7. CLOSE-OUT PHASE December 30, 2014

END OF APPENDIX C

2105-001\2349762.2 C-1 Appendix C – Milestone Schedule

APPENDIX D

DELIVERABLES

[To Be Finalized Following Finalization of Appendix A]

This is an Appendix attached to, and made a part of and incorporated by reference with the Agreement dated May __, 2012between the County of San Mateo (the “Owner”), and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. (“Architect”) providing for professional services.

Architect’s deliverables under the Agreement are as follows: Architect shall submit to Owner all designs and drawings on CD or DVD or external hard drive in Revit (Rvt) [Release 2013] format, Navisworks (NWF) [Release 2013] format , Adobe Acrobat (PDF) format [version X Pro]; and specifications in Microsoft Word [version 2010] and/or Microsoft Excel [version 2010] format:

1. CSA Coordination Deliverables The deliverables required for the Corrections Standards Authority (“CSA”) coordination are defined in Paragraph 2 of Appendix A, and include, without limitation, the following:

1.1 Report on time required for review and approval of project plans and specifications (for inclusion in project master schedule).

1.2 Report on suggested methods of CSA pre-approval of change orders.

1.3 Report on all deferred approval items for which contractor must submit early its shop drawings, product samples and other submittals, necessary for CSA review and approval in time to not impact construction progress.

1.4 Recommendations on selection of Project Inspector, approval of proposed Project Inspector, and submit required application for approval to CSA.

1.5 Recommendations on choice of testing agency suitable for the contract.

2. Not Used.

3. Programming Verification Phase The deliverables required by the Programming Verification Phase are defined in Paragraph 3 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

3.1 Space schematics/flow diagrams.

4. Schematic Design Phase The deliverables required by the Schematic Design Phase are defined in Paragraph 4 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

4.1 Written recommendations on required additional information and data.

4.2 Preliminary estimates of times of completion, and alternatives.

4.3 Schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria, with supporting reports and exhibits.

4.4 Operational Program Statement.

4.5 Comparative studies for major building systems (for Lifecycle Alternates Workshop)

2105-001\2349762.2 D-1 of 3 Appendix D – Deliverables

4.6 Work phasing recommendations.

4.7 Information and diagrams for required meetings.

4.8 Report of interfacing meeting with Owner groups.

5. Design Development Phase The deliverables required by the Design Development Phase are defined in Paragraph 5 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

5.1 Reports on whether further data, information or permits or reports are needed.

5.2 Written design criteria for mechanical and electrical systems.

5.3 Updated comparative studies for major building systems (for Lifecycle Alternates Workshop).

5.4 Information and diagrams for required meetings.

5.5 Technical criteria, written descriptions and design data as needed for permits and approvals.

5.6 Preparation of supplementary conditions to the Construction Contract and additional bidding requirements.

6. Construction Document Phase The deliverables required by the Construction Document Phase are defined in Paragraph 6 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

6.1 Reports on whether further data, information or permits or reports are needed.

6.2 Written design criteria for mechanical and electrical systems.

6.3 Updated comparative studies for major building systems as needed (for Lifecycle Alternates Workshop).

6.4 Information and diagrams for required meetings.

6.5 Technical criteria, written descriptions and design data as needed for permits and approvals.

6.6 Preparation of supplementary conditions to the Construction Contract and additional bidding requirements.

7. Bidding Phase The deliverables required by the Bidding Phase are defined in Paragraph 7 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

7.1 Written addenda (where necessary).

7.2 Written determinations regarding proposed substitutes.

7.3 Conformed set of drawings and specifications.

7.4 Assist Owner for Notice of Contract to CSA.

2105-001\2349762.2 D-2 of 3 Appendix D – Deliverables

8. Construction Phase The deliverables required by the Construction Phase are defined in Paragraph 8 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

8.1 Assist Construction Manager for Notice of start of construction.

8.2 Certificates of Substantial Completion and Final Completion.

8.3 Punch lists

9. Operation/Project Close-Out Phase. The deliverables required by the Operation/Close Out Phase are defined in Paragraph 9 of Appendix A and include, without limitation, the following:

9.1 Electronic record sets and sets of reproducible record prints of drawings showing changes made during construction.

9.2 Electronic record sets and sets of prints of Technical Specifications showing changes made during construction.

10. BIM. See requirements of Attachment BIM.

END OF APPENDIX D

2105-001\2349762.2 D-3 of 3 Appendix D – Deliverables

APPENDIX E

INSURANCE

This is an Appendix attached to, and made a part of and incorporated by reference with the Agreement dated May ___, 2012 between the County of San Mateo (the “Owner”), and Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. (“Architect”) providing for professional services.

1. Architect’s Duty to Show Proof of Insurance. Prior to the execution of this Agreement, Architect shall furnish to Owner Certificates of Insurance showing satisfactory proof that Architect maintain for the entire period required by this Agreement, as further described below, the following insurance, in a form satisfactory to Owner and with an insurance carrier satisfactory to Owner, authorized to do business in California and rated by A. M. Best & Company “A” or better, financial category size IX or better, which will protect those described below from claims described below which arise or are alleged to have arisen out of or result from the acts or omissions of Architect for which Architect may be legally liable, whether performed by Architect, or by those employed directly or indirectly by it, or by anyone for whose acts Architect may be liable:

1.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance

Commercial general liability insurance, written on an “occurrence” basis, which shall provide coverage for bodily injury, death and property damage resulting from operations, products liability, liability for slander, false arrest and invasion of privacy arising out of professional services rendered hereunder, blanket contractual liability, broad form endorsement, products and completed operations, personal and advertising liability, with per location limits of not less than $2,000,000 annual general aggregate and $1,000,000 each occurrence.

1.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance Business automobile liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence including coverage for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.

1.3 Workers’ Compensation Insurance

Workers’ Compensation Employers’ Liability limits required by the laws of the State of California. Architect’s Worker’s Compensation Insurance policy shall contain a Waiver of Subrogation. In the event Architect is self-insured, it shall furnish Certificate of Permission to Self-Insure signed by Department of Industrial Relations Administration of Self-Insurance, State of California.

1.4 Professional Liability Insurance

Professional Liability Insurance, either (a) specific to this Project only, with limits not less than $2,000,000 each claim, or (b) limits of not less than $2,000,000 each claim, all with respect to negligent acts, errors or omissions in connection with services to be provided under this Agreement, with no exclusion for claims of one insured against another insured. Architect shall annually provide evidence of this coverage for at least five (5) years after the completion of the Services.

2. Insurance terms and conditions:

2.1 Additional Insureds:

2105-001\2349762.2 E-1 of 2 Appendix E – Insurance

2.1.1 Status of County of San Mateo as Additional Insured.

On Architect’s Commercial General Liability and Automobile policies, the County of San Mateo, and its Supervisors, officers, officials, representatives, employees, Architects, and agents, shall be named as additional insureds, but only with respect to liability arising out of the activities of the named insured, and there shall be a waiver of subrogation as to each named and additional insured.

2.2 The policies shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the company’s liability.

2.3 Certificates of Insurance shall include the following statement: “Written notice of cancellation, non-renewal or of any material change in policy shall be mailed to Owner in advance of the effective date thereof.”

2.4 Architect’s insurance shall be primary insurance and no other insurance or self-insured retention carried or held by any named or additional insureds other than that amount Architect shall be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by insurance for the named insured.

2.5 Nothing herein contained shall be construed as limiting in any way the extent to which Architect or any of its Sub-consultants or employees may be held responsible for payment of damages resulting from their operations.

END OF APPENDIX E

2105-001\2349762.2 E-2 of 2 Appendix E – Insurance

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility April 30, 2012 HOK Fee Proposal

SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY -FEE MATRIX 4/30/2012

Program Construction Construction Verification/Concept Schematic Design Design Development Permitting and Bidding Project Close Out/POE Documentation Administrative Services Design

Billing Rate 5 weeks + 15 weeks 12 weeks + 2 weeks HOK Team Member Project Role 13 weeks 16 weeks 78 weeks 5 weeks ($/hr) 4weeks overlap with SD (4 weeks overlap with PV) overlap with CD

# of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost # of Hours Cost

Jeff Goodale Director of Correctional Design/Project Director $280 160 $44,800 480 $134,400 368 $103,040 160 $44,800 24 $6,720 160 $44,800 24 $6,720 Alan Bright Design Principal $300 104 $31,200 304 $91,200 104 $31,200 16 $4,800 0 $0 160 $48,000 8 $2,400 Sr. Project Designer Sr. Project Designer $240 104 $24,960 480 $115,200 264 $63,360 32 $7,680 24 $5,760 160 $38,400 8 $1,920 Lynn Filar Principal-in-Charge $325 40 $13,000 120 $39,000 104 $33,800 64 $20,800 24 $7,800 160 $52,000 8 $2,600 Bill Valentine Design Review $350 8 $2,800 64 $22,400 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Catherine Chan Project Manager $220 160 $35,200 480 $105,600 416 $91,520 512 $112,640 96 $21,120 312 $68,640 40 $8,800 Justice Planner Justice Planner $240 0 $0 64 $15,360 24 $5,760 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Bob Schwartz Programming Specialist $200 104 $20,800 120 $24,000 56 $11,200 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Lou Williams Specification Writer $200 0 $0 64 $12,800 104 $20,800 256 $51,200 96 $19,200 160 $32,000 8 $1,600 Sr. Technical Architect Sr. Technical Architect $190 0 $0 0 $0 56 $10,640 256 $48,640 96 $18,240 312 $59,280 40 $7,600 David Crotty Project Architect $175 24 $4,200 240 $42,000 416 $72,800 640 $112,000 240 $42,000 2496 $436,800 160 $28,000 Int. Architect Int. Architect $130 104 $13,520 448 $58,240 416 $54,080 640 $83,200 240 $31,200 2496 $324,480 200 $26,000 Int. Architect Int. Architect $150 104 $15,600 448 $67,200 416 $62,400 640 $96,000 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Sr. Interior Designer Sr. Interior Designer $200 8 $1,600 152 $30,400 208 $41,600 128 $25,600 96 $19,200 264 $52,800 24 $4,800 Interior Designer Interior Designer $110 0 $0 152 $16,720 264 $29,040 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Interior Designer Interior Designer $120 24 $2,880 240 $28,800 416 $49,920 160 $19,200 0 $0 312 $37,440 0 $0 Int. Interiors Design Technician Int. Interiors Design Technician $150 0 $0 32 $4,800 104 $15,600 320 $48,000 192 $28,800 312 $46,800 24 $3,600 Sustainability Design Specialist Sustainability Design Specialist $220 24 $5,280 64 $14,080 104 $22,880 64 $14,080 48 $10,560 312 $68,640 24 $5,280 LEED Coordinator LEED Coordinator $90 8 $720 64 $5,760 104 $9,360 256 $23,040 48 $4,320 624 $56,160 40 $3,600 LEED QA/QC LEED QA/QC $150 0 $0 32 $4,800 24 $3,600 64 $9,600 24 $3,600 160 $24,000 8 $1,200 Director of VCD Director of Virtual Construction Services $240 64 $15,360 120 $28,800 96 $23,040 160 $38,400 24 $5,760 64 $15,360 32 $7,680 BIM Manager BIM Manager $175 48 $8,400 120 $21,000 56 $9,800 64 $11,200 8 $1,400 64 $11,200 40 $7,000 Medical Planner Medical Planner $240 24 $5,760 64 $15,360 104 $24,960 32 $7,680 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 HOK TOTAL (A)= $4,474,240 1112 $246,080 4352 $897,920 4224 $790,400 4464 $778,560 1280 $225,680 8528 $1,416,800 688 $118,800

Proposed Sub-consultants

Lump Sum Company Project Role Expenses Allowance Comments Fee (Note 1)

HOK MEP/FP Engineering (Design-Build) $606,370 Note 2 $200,000 Allowance for CA; DB Bid Package to be issued at 50%DD HOK High Performance Energy Design $138,600 Note 2 HOK Landscape Design $299,720 Note 2 $50,000 Allowance for artist (Brad Goldberg) & irrigation consultant (TBD) HOK BIM/Technology Enhancement Note 2 $157,500 See note 4 Telamon Engineering Civil Engineering $282,980 $1,000 $99,000 See attached fee proposal for tasks included in the allowance SOHA Engineers Structural Engineering $818,150 $1,000 $40,000 See attached fee proposal for tasks included in the allowance Deleted Cost Estimation (Deleted per Scope discussion on 3/26/12) Robert Glass & Associates Security Specialist $318,710 $24,480 Robert Glass & Associates Realignment Program Specialist $4,500 $60,000 Scope to be defined later Guidepost Solutions Security Electronics/Telecommunication/Technology $319,960 $20,500 TEECOM AV/Acoustical Design $148,640 $5,000 Syska Hennessy Vertical Transportation $84,510 $1,000 The Marshall Associates Food & Laundry $70,980 $6,000 The Fire Consultants Life Safety $57,330 $600 (TBD) Accessibility $42,000 To be selected on T&M as needed later (TBD) Signage $42,000 To be selected later Engler Assessment QA/QC $51,240 Barbara Owen Women Detention Specialist $21,000 $10,000 Travel expenses (for 8 trips) estimate only Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Waterproofing $50,310 $1,900 HOK Interiors Included in HOK Design Fees above HOK Medical Planning Included in HOK Design Fees above (TBD) Allowance for other Specialists (e.g. Water Quality, Erosion, etc.) $100,000 To be authorized as needed SUB-CONSULANT FEE TOTAL (B1, B2, B3)= $3,352,500 $75,980 $706,500 (B1) (B2) (B3)

DESIGN FEE TOTAL (A+B1)= $7,826,740 Reimbursable Expenses (estimates) Printing (includes only 3 sets of hardcopies at milestone printings and 2 sets of CSA/SFM $150,000 submittal. Electronics uploads in hi-res PDF at milestones typ.) Out-of-town travel expenses (includes facility tours) $150,000 Partnering Facilitator Assume 4 sessions at start of each phase $25,000 PROPROSED EXPENSES TOTAL (C)= $400,980

PROPROSED SUB-CONSULTANT ALLOWANCE TOTAL (B3) (Note 3)= $706,500

PROPROSED CONTRACT TOTAL (A+B1+C+B3)= $8,934,220

Notes 1 Fees included 5% markup for non-HOK sub-consultants 2 Included in HOK expense pool 3 Not include Commissioning 4 BIM/Technology Enhancement: Enhanced Project Collaboration Website - subscription, setup and maintenance Virtual Reality Engine (VRE) - software, progress models of selected areas at milestones and one final hi-res model Solibri Analysis - software, setup and milestone deliverables Facility Management (COBie output) - setup and milestone deliverables Peer Review - goal setting and milestone reviews LYNN FIL AR, AIA, LEED® AP Project Role: Principal-In-Charge

Lynn Filar has been with HOK for 28 years and is a long time resident of San Mateo County. She is the management principal of HOK’s San Francisco office and has led many of HOK’s most successful justice and non-justice projects – such as the award winning Richard E. Arnason Justice Center and the San Mateo Sheriff’s Forensic Lab and Coroner’s Office. As Principal-in-Charge, she will be actively engaged in all aspects of project programming, planning, design, documentation and delivery. Lynn is renowned for timely and thorough responses and effective resolution of any client concerns. She has earned a OFFICE LOCATION reputation with her clients as a thoughtful listener, trusted partner, genuine San Francisco collaborator and a true “win/win” problem solver. She is eagerly looking forward to, once again, working with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office. PHONE NUMBER 415.356.8634 REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE YEARS WITH FIRM 28 4  San Mateo County Sheriff’s  San Mateo County Forensic Lab & Coroner’s Office Detention Center EDUCATION Redwood City, California Redwood City, California Bachelor of Architecture, California 30,000 sq. ft., forensic lab, 552 beds; 60-bed licensable Polytechnic State University coroner’s office CTC; renovation of existing; direct supervision PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS 4  San Quentin State Prison Architect: California; Central Health Services Building San Mateo County ® LEED Accredited Professional San Quentin, California Office Building 130,000 sq. ft.; $100 million; Redwood City, California REFERENCES LEED Gold 128,000 sq. ft.; 5 stories; fast Ms. Pearl Freeman track; design-build Senior Project Manager, 4  Richard E. Arnason East Contra Costa Courthouse Justice Center 4 Sacramento Superior 415.865.4060 Pittsburg, California Courthouse [email protected] New 71,600 sq. ft., three- Sacramento, California story courthouse with seven 400,000 sq. ft. criminal Mr. Alex Karagianes courtrooms; LEED Silver courthouse consisting of 48 Quality Control Manager courts, judge’s chambers and San Mateo County Forensic’s  Monterey County Government administrative support space. Laboratory and Coroner’s Office Center Planned Net Zero Energy building 650.312.5309 Salinas, California and LEED Platinum [email protected] Complete remodel of existing 98,000 sq. ft. courthouse with 11 Scott M. Matheson Courthouse Mr. Dennis McCoy courtrooms; 140,000 sq. ft. new Salt Lake City, Utah Project Manager (Nova Partners, Inc.) administration building 420,000 sq. ft.; 37 courts Monterey County Government Center including state supreme and 650.324.5324 San Quentin State Prison, appellate courts [email protected] Condemned Inmate Complex 4 San Quentin, California University of California, 1,440 beds; $220 million Veterinary Medicine (Building 3B) Davis, California Four-story, 150,000 sq. ft.

4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 4 hok.com JEFF GOODALE, RA Project Role: Director of Correctional Design

Jeff Goodale is HOK’s firmwide justice director, and one of firm’s key principals for justice projects. In his role, he is committed to the firm’s highest profile and complex projects. A planner, programmer, project manager, construction specialist and AIA award-winning designer that has practiced in justice for over 25 years, Mr. Goodale is well known in the industry for leading large project teams to highly successful results. Further, as one of the firm’s specialists in project delivery, he guides clients to the best results for their projects meeting their budgetary, schedule and programmatic needs, and OFFICE LOCATION has in fact been said to ‘make projects happen’. Key attributes to successful San Francisco/Chicago projects have been close collaboration, commitment to team goals, and pushing for creative solutions to complex issues. PHONE NUMBER 415.230.4420 Within the justice field, his primary focus has been on direct supervision facilities for a variety of jurisdictions, federal, state and county. In addition, YEARS WITH FIRM he is recognized as a leader in special needs facilities, particularly 3 in medical and mental health, including intensive participation in the California Prison Receivership program in Sacramento over the last four EDUCATION years. Another emphasis is on high performance buildings, facilities that University of Illinois, achieve excellence in mission, staff satisfaction, aesthetics and energy Urbana-Champaign savings. He has been directly involved in well over one million square feet of LEED Silver justice facilities, and has written construction, security Bachelor of Science, and safety standards for federal government agencies and authored Architecture Studies over twenty articles and presentations on issues closely related to direct supervision facilities. PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS ARCHITECT: ILLINOIS REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Douglas County Adult Detention Miramar Brig Expansion* REFERENCES and Law Enforcement Center San Diego, California Mr. Richard Kirkland Douglasville, Georgia 600 male and female bed San Quentin Central Health Services 500,000 sq. ft. county detention expansion for the United States Building center and law enforcement Navy at the Miramar Naval Air Director of Construction Oversight facility on a 36-acre site. Base; Design/ Build. 916.255.2585 [email protected] Department of Homeland 4 Wake County-Hammond Road Security, Krome Detention Detention Center* Larry Chandler Facility* Raleigh, Wake County, Elliot Prison (Kentucky) Miami, Florida North Carolina Parole Board Chairperson, New 256-bed, 60,000 sq. ft. 3,000-bed, 300,000 sq. ft. 502.523.3932 multi-classification housing unit addition to a 300-bed existing jail [email protected] for the Krome Special Processing that will open in 2012. Unit for DHS/ICE. Mr. Gregory Beitel 4 South Placer Adult Former Sheriff Federal Bureau of Prisons, Correctional Center* Ogle County Sheriff’s Office Federal Correctional Institution, Roseville, Placer County, California 815.238.6461 Medium Security Male Facility* First phase of a 980-bed adult [email protected] Pekin and Greenville, Illinois correctional facility located at the 1,200-bed, medium security Bill Santucci Justice Center. facilities.

4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 5 hok.com MEMBERSHIPS JEFF GOODALE, RA American Correctional Association American Jail Association Academy of Architecture for Justice Ellis County Courthouse, Blount County Jail Planning and Detention Facility and Parking Schematic Design* PUBLICATIONS Garage* Blount County, Tennessee Jeffrey B. Goodale, Dave Menzel, Glen Waxahachie, Texas Correctional planner assisting in Hodgson, “High-Tech Prisons: Latest 240-bed jail expansion, court the planning and schematic design Technologies Drive Cost Savings and expansion and new vertical phases for this new jail. Staff Efficiencies,” Corrections parking facility. Today, 7/2005 4 Correctional/Prison California Williams County Jail Needs Prison Receivership, Co-opetition Jeffrey B. Goodale, Michael Brenchley, Assessment and Expansion* Team* “Seven Keys to Cost Cutting Through Williston, North Dakota Sacramento, California Master Planning,” American Jails, New 128-bed, 80,000 sq.ft. jail, 10,000 medical and mental 1/2005 with new sheriff’s department, health beds, overall program police headquarters, 911 EOC and site specific design/ build Jeffrey B. Goodale, “New Spaces and highway patrol. implementation at a northern for Special Needs Populations,” California site. Corrections Forum, July/ August, Woodbury County Law 7/2004 Enforcement Center Expansion* Campbell County Jail Needs Sioux City, Iowa Assessment and Expansion* Jeffrey B. Goodale, “Finding Cost 500-bed expansion and four Gillette, Wyoming Savings in Linking Design to courtroom addition at existing New 144-bed, 75,000 sq. ft. Operations,” Corrections downtown mid-rise jail addition to the existing jail, Today, June, 6/2004 in Sioux City. renovation of the sheriff’s department, new 911 EOC SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS Spartanburg County Jail Master and morgue. Jeffrey B. Goodale, “Design-Led Plan* Design Build,” American Correctional Spartanburg, South Carolina Ogle County Jail Study* Association (ACA) Congress of Facility needs analysis and Oregon, Illinois Correction, Phoenix, Arizona, 1/2005 expansion feasibility study Planned 240,000 sq. ft. , 600- for 400, 800 and 1,200-bed bed jail to house Immigration Jeffrey B. Goodale, “Design Track expansions based on 20 year and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Detention/Corrections Design,” Fifth needs requirements. detainees. International Conference on Justice Design, Chicago, Illinois, 10/2004 Cook County Department of Smith County Jail Pre-Bond, Corrections, Division 11* Planning and Programming* Jeffrey B. Goodale, “Designing and Chicago, Illinois Tyler, Texas Building State-of-the-Art Detention New 1,200-bed facility located Programming and planning of a and Corrections Facilities,” Chicago on the Cook County detention 300,000 sq. ft., 800-bed new Cultural Center, International Visitor’s campus. downtown high-rise county jail. Center of Chicago, 8/2004 York County Justice Center* 4 Washington State Penitentiary, Jeffrey B. Goodale, “Instructor, York, South Carolina North Close Custody Facility Architecture History,” Illinois Central 300,000 sq. ft., 330-bed county Expansion* College, Peoria/ East Peoria, Illinois, jail, 96-bed workcamp, intake Walla Walla, Washington 1994 center, four courtroom courthouse New 900-bed, 500,000 sq. ft. and sheriff headquarters. close custody addition to the existing historic Washington State Penitentiary; Project is LEED Silver. 4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 6 hok.com CATHERINE CHAN, AIA, HKIA, LEED® AP BD+C Project Role: Project Manager

Catherine Chan is the co-director of the Justice Group at HOK San Francisco. She has dedicated her professional career exclusively to justice architecture. Catherine’s portfolio at HOK includes courthouses, juvenile justice centers, detention centers, correctional institutes and correctional healthcare facilities. Her experience includes all phases of programming, design, construction documents and construction administration, for both new facilities and existing facility expansion. With extraordinary organizational, analytical, technical and interpersonal skills, Catherine has OFFICE LOCATION served as Project Manager and Project Architect on many of HOK’s major San Francisco justice assignments.

PHONE NUMBER REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 415.356.8535 Goose Creek Correctional Center Matanuska-Susitna Borough, 4  San Mateo County Sheriff’s YEARS WITH FIRM Alaska Forensic Lab & Coroner’s Office 16 Planning and design of housing Redwood City, California units,administration and support 30,000 sq. ft., forensic lab, EDUCATION buildings; Design-build; 1,600- coroner’s office State University of New York at bed; $205 million, 441,000 sq. ft. Buffalo, Master of Architecture 4  Alameda County Juvenile University of Hong Kong 4  Coyote Ridge Justice Center Bachelor of Arts, Architectural Study Corrections Center San Leandro, California Connell, Washingon New youth detention center and PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS Programming, Bridging and RFP court facilities; 400,000 sq. ft.; Architect: California; documents; $189 million; 2,048- $120 million; direct supervision LEED® Accredited Design Professional bed; 564,000 sq. ft. 4  San Quentin State Prison REFERENCES  Pierce County Justice Center Central Health Services Building Mr. Jack Olson, Capital Programs/ San Quentin, California Environmental Manager Tacoma, Washington Programming, planning and design 130,000 sq. ft.; $100 million; Coyote Ridge Corrections Center LEED Gold Expansion, Washington State renovation for 1,000-bed facility. Department of Corrections San Quentin State Prison, Northwest Detention Center 360.725.8342  Condemned Inmate Complex Tacoma, Washington [email protected] San Quentin, California INS detention facility; Design- 1,440 beds; $220 million Mr. Richard Kirkland Build; $35 million; 628-bed; San Quentin Central Health Services 160,000 sq. ft.  CNMI Correctional Center Building, San Quentin, California Saipan, CNMI Director of Construction Oversight 4  Claybank Adult Detention 502 beds; $22,000,000. 916.255.2585 Facility [email protected] Fairfield, California  State Office Building 512 beds; $58 million plus at Butterfield Way Mr. Jim Kachik renovation. Sacramento, California Alameda Juvenile Justice Center, San Government office; support Leandro, California facilities; parking Deputy Director, Technical Services for 4,500 cars; $218 million; Department 1,000,000 sq. ft. 510.208.9515 4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning [email protected] * experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 7 hok.com ALAN BRIGHT, AIA, LEED® AP Project Role: Design Principal

With over 28 years of architectural experience, Mr. Bright is responsible for many of HOK’s most progressive and innovative justice facility designs, including detention facilities, correctional facilities, courts, and sheriffs’ operations centers and forensic laboratories. He is highly experienced with the complexities inherent in the design of detention facilities. His collaborative and integrated design process with the client and consultants has led to some of the country’s next generation in justice facilities. The multi award winning San Mateo County Sheriff’s Forensic laboratory is one OFFICE LOCATION example where Alan’s design leadership in an integrated design process with San Francisco the client led to a very functional, affordable, sustainable, and innovative facility that represents the clients goals in a sensitive and progressive PHONE NUMBER solution. Alan has successfully and simultaneously worked with multiple 415.356.8577 agencies such as the sheriff’s department, public works, community interests groups, and environmental agencies. His designs have not only YEARS WITH FIRM been embraced by the community , but have led to the next generation of 28 functional, sustainable and aesthetic architectural design in justice facilities.

EDUCATION University of Oregon, Bachelor REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE of Architecture 4 Richard E. Arnason San Mateo County Government Southern California Institute of Justice Center Center Ofﬁ ce Building Architecture Pittsburg, California Redwood City, California New 71,600 sq. ft., three- 138,000 sq. ft. PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS story courthouse with seven Architect: California; courtrooms Scott M. Matheson Courthouse LEED® Accredited Design Salt Lake City, Utah Professional 4 San Quentin State Prison 685,000 sq. ft.; 38 courts; 200 Central Health Services Building holding cells; CM/GC, G–MP, fast REFERENCES San Quentin, California track; $62.5 million Mr. Jim Kachik 130,000 sq. ft.; $100 million; Alameda Juvenile Justice Center, LEED Gold San Leandro, California  Monterey County Government Center Deputy Director, Technical Services 4  Alameda County Juvenile Department Salinas, California Justice Center Complete remodel of existing 510.208.9515 San Leandro, California [email protected] 98,000 sq. ft. courthouse with 11 New youth detention center and courtrooms; 140,000 sq. ft. new court facilities; 400,000 sq. ft.; administration building Mr. Fred Cordano $120 million; direct supervision Director of Facility Management  King County Justice Center CDCR - State of California 4  San Mateo County Sheriff’s Kent, Washington 916.845.6730 Forensic Lab & Coroner’s Office 23 courts; 896 pre-trial cells; [email protected] Redwood City, California 30,000 sq. ft., forensic lab, 791,000 sq. ft.; midrise, $117 Mr. Alex Karagianes coroner’s office million; direct supervision Quality Control Manager San Mateo County Forensic’s Laboratory and Coroner’s Office 650.312.5309 [email protected] 4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 8 hok.comhok.com ALAN BRIGHT, AIA, LEED® AP

Phoenix Municipal Courthouse Feasibility study for the reuse of Phoenix, Arizona 100-year-old historic courthouse 380,000 sq. ft.; 40 municipal courts; fast track; midrise;  4th Avenue Jail Expansion Phoenix, Arizona downtown location; $45 million 1,360 beds; 4 courts; 650,000 sq. ft.; downtown high-rise Marin County Detention Center detention facility; central booking San Rafael, California for entire county; $104 million New facility; innovative “borrowed light,” earth-sheltered concepts  United States Penitentiary Atwater, California  Santa Clara County 960 beds; 600,000 sq. ft., Hall of Justice correctional facility; high security San Jose, California prison; minimum security camp 19 new court rooms; renovation (Phase II, 36 courts); 185,000 sq. ft.  Federal Detention Center Honolulu, Hawaii  Pierce County Justice Center 768 beds; 340,000 sq. ft., Tacoma, Washington highrise detention center; direct 1,000 bed detention center supervision programming, planning and design; structured parking; direct City of Glendale Courthouse supervision; includes renovation of Glendale, Arizona existing facility 14 coutrooms expandable to 20; preparation of bridging documents  Solano County Justice Center on fast track schedule; $28 million Fairfield, California New detention center 496 beds;  San Joaquin County Superior Sheriff’s Headquarters; renovation Court of California Renovation of existing courts; 280,000 sq. Lodi, California Retroﬁ t single courtroom into ft.; $40 million; direct supervision existing facility. 4 Claybank Adult Detention Sonoma Detention Consolidation Facility Santa Rosa, California Fairfield, California 502 beds; sheriff’s HQ; courts 362 bed, 122,307 sq. ft., $65 and coroner’s facilities; direct million maximum security facility supervision expansion Sonoma County Detention East Multnomah County Facility Master Plan Courthouse Santa Rosa, California Gresham, Oregon

4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 9 hok.com DAVID CROTTY, AIA, LEED® AP BD+C Project Role: Project Architect

Mr. Crotty has a depth of technical and design experience from over 17 years practicing architecture in the Bay Area. His body of work includes complex public and commercial buildings such as prisons, hospitals, laboratories, and transportation facilities. His projects are renowned for scrupulous attention to detail and for exacting multi-disciplinary coordination. His buildings have received widespread acclaim including multiple awards from industry associations.

OFFICE LOCATION REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE San Francisco 4  San Quentin State Prison Kings College, Cornwall House* Central Health Services Building London, England PHONE NUMBER San Quentin, California 20,000 sq. m., £30 million, 415.356.8632 130,000 sq. ft.; $100 million; adaptive reuse of historic LEED Gold warehouse into a medical research YEARS WITH FIRM and teaching center. 5 4 Claybank Adult Detention Facility Kaiser Permanente, EDUCATION Fairfield, California Santa Clara Medical Center* Tulane University, 362 bed, 122,307 sq. ft., Santa Clara, California Master of Architecture $65 million maximum security 1,200,000 sq. ft., $374 million The College of William and Mary, facility expansion Phased construction; comprehensive Bachelor of Economics, Minor in range of inpatient and outpatient Studio Art Claybank Adult Detention Facility services in three building complex, Remodel connected by pedestrian bridges. PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS Fairfield, California Architect: California; New central control and security Mercy Cancer Center* LEED® Accredited Design electronic systems upgrade. Merced, California Professional 13,000 sq. ft., $2.9 million, Sonoma Co. Detention Center includes three primary program REFERENCES Expansion Study components: radiation oncology, Lt. Mitch Mashburn Santa Rosa, California medical oncology infusion, and Solano County Sheriff’s Department 864 bed addition with new intake/ outpatient clinics, as well as 707.421.6103 release, kitchen and CTC; direct a resource center for public [email protected] supervision education and research.

Mr. Robert St Germaine 4 National Oceanic & Atmospheric University of California Davis, CDCR Facility Captain Administration (NOAA) Paciﬁ c Contained Research Facility* San Quentin Central Health Facilities: Region Davis, California 916.201.9489 Pearl Harbor, Hawaii $10.3 million, 24,000 sq. ft., [email protected] Adaptive reuse of two historic provides natural research hangars; and new 400,000 sq. conditions in a highly secure, Mr. Bobby Khaghani ft. of construction linking the two biologically contained environment: San Quentin Condemned Inmate hangars. LEED Gold anticipated Bio-Safety Level (BSL) 2 and 3 Complex labs, growth chambers. CDCR Project Director New Doha International Airport, 916.255.2882 Mosque [email protected] Doha, Qatar 588,000 sq. m. 4 LEED Certiﬁ ed  Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 19 hok.com

SCHEDULE OF STANDARD HOURLY RATES Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. January 1, 2012

Architecture Principal $325.00 Director 265.00 - 300.00 Sr. Project Manager 200.00 - 260.00 Project Manager 180.00 - 250.00 Sr. Project Designer 195.00 - 300.00 Project Designer/Planner/Programmer 180.00 - 240.00 Construction Admin/Spec 185.00 - 200.00 Sr. Project Architect 195.00 - 240.00 Project Architect 160.00 - 195.00 Job Captain 140.00 - 160.00 Designer 140.00 - 180.00 Senior Architectural Technician 120.00 - 150.00 Intermediate Arch Technician 95.00 - 140.00 Junior Architectural Technician 75.00 - 95.00

Planning Principal/Director $300.00 Sr. Project Designer/Project Manager 140.00 - 240.00 Intermediate Planner/UD/Landscape Arch 120.00 - 150.00 Junior Planner/UD/Landscape Arch 90.00 - 120.00

Interiors Principal $350.00 Director 300.00 Senior Project Designer/Manager 160.00 - 220.00 Project Manager 165.00 - 200.00 Project Designer 150.00 - 175.00 Job Captain 130.00 - 150.00 Senior Technical 120.00 - 145.00 Intermediate Technical/Designer 90.00 - 120.00 Junior Technical 75.00 - 90.00

Consulting Director $300.00 Specialist 200.00 - 250.00 Senior Consultant 140.00 - 175.00 Consultant 90.00 - 140.00 Analyst 70.00 - 90.00

Engineering Director $300.00 Chief Engineer 200.00 - 270.00 Project Engineer 150.00 - 185.00 Project Engineering Designer 125.00 - 175.00 Engineer 125.00 - 150.00 Engineering Designer 110.00 - 150.00 Sr. Engineering Technician 110.00 - 120.00 Engineering Technician 85.00 - 110.00 Drafter 75.00 - 85.00

Clerical 70.00 - 90.00

NOTE: All billing rates are subject to annual adjustment on April 1, 2013.

REPLACEMENT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

SAN MATEO COUNTY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES

Proposal | February 29, 2012 HOK February 29, 2012

Catherine Chan Project Manager HOK, Inc. One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94104

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Professional Engineering Services Proposal

Dear Selection Committee:

HOK Advance Engineering is proud to be considered forengineering services for San Mateo County. HOK Advance Engineering is a national expert in corrections facility design and our team will commit to be innovative and design robust high performance building systems for the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility. We also possess experience in integrating these systems into design build documents. This approach requires an optimum balance of systems definition and design criteria in a way that contractors can understand as they continue to develop the design.

HOK practices integrated design on a daily basis and understands how to optimize the process. We believe our collaborative approach with San Mateo County will be essential in creating a dynamic environment where Art, Science and Knowledge combine in harmony.

On behalf of the entire HOK Adfance Engineering team, thank you for considering us for this terrific opportunity. We are excited to work with you and look forward to making this project a remarkable success. If you have any questions, call me on my direct line at 415.356.8525 or email me at [email protected].

Sincerely, HOK,O, Inc. c

JJohnohn PullePulley,y, PE, LEED AP BD+CBD+ Principal Engineer Director of Engineering

HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 | San Francisco, CA 94104 USA t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415.882.7763 hok.com 1. Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design PROJECT APPROACH

Los Angeles Metro Detention Center

ADVANCE ENGINEERING Onsite Generation Strategies, and Our local staff brings energy and Advance Engineering is a creative Carbon Analysis. an earnest dedication to design and collaborative design process excellence, effective management that combines art and science The group consists of a blend and client satisfaction. We have in a creative way. Advance of architects and engineers and established a niche in the design of Engineering integrates design closely embodies the Integrated office-related facilities, corporate and Building Physics to optimize Design and BuildingSmart campuses, high-tech facilities, sustainable outcomes, ecology, initiatives and principles. laboratories, airports and justice life cycle costs and occupant facilities. Our diverse portfolio comfort. The Advance Engineering of projects means that we are Building Systems Group. positioned above our competitors HOK Advance Engineering This group enhances the traditional on the learning curve. HOK’s consists of two specialized groups. MEP approach by taking on a preeminence in the field of design more European model to building helps our clients to achieve “faster- The Advance Building Physics systems design. It looks at better-bottom line” delivery of a Group is the Research & building services from a holistic facility that meets the schedule Development, High Performance methodology and merges building and budget requirements. Strategies, and Building systems into the architecture Simulation and Modeling Group. to achieve a high performance We have expertise in the design of outcome. The group consists of HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air Samplings of services provided HVAC, Electrical, Plumbing and conditioning), automated building are: Climate Analysis and Fire Protection disciplines. Each controls, plumbing, fire protection, Context Review, Solar Radiation group is organized into a number of electrical, emergency power, Analysis, Energy Simulation teams utilizing a “studio” approach lighting, telecommunications, and Modeling, Daylighting Analysis, embedding engineering within security electronic systems for Renewable, Sources Assessment, architectural groups and project diverse building types. Virtually Thermal Analysis, Air Flow and teams. This type of structure is every member of the HOK San Computation Fluid Dynamics, very flexible and lends itself to Francisco Engineering team is a Occupant Comfort, Water develop teams to suit specific Professional Engineer and LEED Analysis, Waste Management, projects. Accredited. As a whole, the group

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 2 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

is considered among HOK’s most BUILDINGSMART knowledgeable sustainability HOK is at the forefront of resources. HOK Engineering’s adapting new technologies to award winning projects improve project delivery methods demonstrates the full range of in an industry initiative called expertise from introduction of BuildingSMART. The effort energy savings techniques to centers on the use of a Building comprehensive design efforts Information Modeling (BIM), that explore the full range of which is the development of the sustainable technology. building in a 3D model form from the beginning using new tools like SUSTAINABILITY DESIGN Autodesk’s Revit. 3D modeling of HOK is committed to preserving all of building elements (including the environment for future structural, MEP, skin, etc.) not only generations through sustainable enhances project visualization, but design. Through all levels of detects potential design issues our organization we have the prior to construction. This feature unique opportunity to promote alone is changing how buildings environmentally sensitive design. are designed and built. HOK’s Advance Engineering Group investigates sustainable design Working together, designers opportunities in energy, indoor air and contractors now have an quality, and water conservation. unprecedented level of confidence HOK is the expert in understanding in details and constructability the criteria for LEED Certification issues. Among the implications and can assist clients in applying of this advancement is that many design measures and building expensive and time consuming techniques that help achieve building elements now built on sustainability goals. site can be pre-fabricated offsite saving time and money, while INTEGRATED SERVICES improving quality. It also means Our in-house planning, building easier and earlier development architecture, interior design, of quantities for earlier and more mechanical and electrical precise cost estimating. Unlike engineering, and facilities many outside consultants that consulting groups can provide take the architects Revit model San Mateo County with and convert it to 2D CAD, HOK Top: The Green Workplace, Leigh comprehensive and fully Engineering uses and embraces Bottom: The HOK Guidebook to integrated service. Supported the same high BIM standards that Sustainable Design by our international network are used by our architect partners. of research, resources and expertise, HOK continues to lead DESIGN PHILOSOPHY in the development of strategies COST CONTROL and applications that improve Cost control continues workplace efficiency and comfort, throughout design phases, while adapting to the changing with the establishment of the nature of our economy, culture budget, and development of and society. a comprehensive cost model.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 3 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

The cost model is organized by loaded schedule for the design building components (HVAC, phases. It will be used as the etc.), and is built upon our cost basis for allocation of manpower consultant’s extensive database to the project, so that the team of actual cost information from can anticipate a plan for staff a variety of similar projects. resources over the life of the Throughout the design process, as design phases. The progress of the design is developed in greater the design versus the scheduled detail, the estimated cost of each milestones will be a regular topic component is compared against for review and discussion at the the original targets, and proposed weekly project management adjustments, if necessary, are meetings. Information and developed and reviewed with the actions needed to maintain the San Mateo County, together with schedule would be highlighted. the design team’s recommended The schedule will be computer- means to bring the total cost based in order to facilitate periodic within the budget. updates of progress against the schedule. VALUE ENGINEERING At each stage of the design CONCEPT DESIGNS process, and with the participation After the program and initial cost of the entire design team, HOK will budgets have been satisfactorily use value-engineering methods completed, the design team to evaluate alternative systems, can proceed to development of arrangements, and materials. potential solutions or concepts. This procedure will examine and Two or three MEP system evaluate not only the construction options will be explored and costs, but also the functional, evaluated by HOK Engineering Top: Los Angeles Metro Detention Center aesthetic, maintenance, energy and presented for thorough Bottom: Coyote Ridge Correctional Center costs and other considerations. discussion with the rest of the Our objective will be to identify design team. These alternatives solutions which afford the will indicate such components as greatest long-term value and durability, efficiency, ease of use, whose first costs are affordable. maintenance, and flexibility. These HOK has extensive experience in multiple design concepts will be performing such studies. presented and a final review with all parties involved in the project, SCHEDULING MANAGEMENT from which a single, clear concept REPORTING SYSTEMS is established. Approval of this The HOK team will make every concept will be required from San effort to ensure that schedule Mateo County before proceeding objectives will be met. The team with final schematic design. will develop a work plan with the entire project team to ensure that the schedule milestones will be achieved. We will also prepare a detailed manpower-

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 4 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

SCHEMATIC DESIGN the design team. At the end of The focus of Schematic Design Schematic Design, a preliminary will be to establish the basic cost analysis will be conducted to building system components. assure conformity with the budget. During this phase, system layouts and capacities will be functionally DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND tested with input from the San DESIGN BUILD BASIS OF DESIGN Mateo County team. Sustainable At this point, HOK, consultants, features will also be studied for contractor, and San Mateo their integration into the building County will have the greatest design. The BIM model will be ability to influence and shape the developed in this phase to track design and cost of the project. program elements, provide spatial The team will study the basic analysis, and introduce primary building materials and systems building components such as will be defined. Since in this structure, mechanical distribution case a Design Build project and piping. These basic building delivery process is being used blocks can be “built” to quickly HOK Engineering will develop show design opportunities. a Basis of Design in order to This BIM model will also provide define the services and systems three-dimensional information to be delivered by the design- to allow the project team to build contractors. Our detailed follow the development of the approach to the Basis of Design is design. Specific project tasks and further defined in the Approach to elements that will be conducted Design Build Section. during schematics will include: INTEGRATED PROJECT APPROACH Top: Johnson County Adult Detention n Refinement of selected MEP ASK HOK Facility, Bottom: Saipan Detention Center systems concept HOK Advance Engineering is n Preliminary code analysis committed to the process of ASK n Fully engaged consultant team HOK. As described in our architect’s n Define specialty areas with proposal, our approach and specific design criteria strategic vision is founded on the n Establish building metrics confluence of three fundamental n Preliminary LEED checklist elements of project delivery:

As Schematic Design develops, p Art… transforming space and cost implications of design experience through the power of decisions will be brought to aesthetics San Mateo County’s attention p Science… maximizing efficiency throughout the process. Any and sustainability through the budget changes will be resolved application of technology in writing before work proceeds. p Knowledge… driving program HOK strongly recommends that innovation through expertise any changes be made with the and experience full participation of HOK Advance Engineering and the rest of

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 5 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

Each of these elements informs sacrificing program features in one another throughout the favor of lower initial construction process in achieving highly costs. We believe having the successful results for our clients. right people from all disciplines We believe that each project should at the table from the beginning result in a specific and unique creates the most thoughtful and solution, the fundamental value of innovative facilities inspired by a which is evidence-based design common vision. and it’s essential relationship to aesthetics and science. Our aim ASK HOK – AN INTEGRATED is to collaborate with our clients, PROCESS consultants and building partners Employing the principals of ASK to define and implement a project HOK, we have successfully process designed to deliver the delivered large and complex most appropriate, elegant and public projects in California and effective solution. around the world. In the process we have learned that how and n We work to understand your when information is collected, issue, drivers and goals processed, integrated, shared n We work to integrate and communicated is absolutely environmentally sensitive vital to project quality and concepts into planning and success. We intend to employ an implementation strategies inclusive, consensus based and n We work to get architecture highly interactive approach. It will out of the way of change include numerous workshops, interactive web-sites, one-on- PARTNERSHIP AND one discussions, surveys, case COLLABORATION studies and presentations; all will ASK HOK is rooted in the idea that be aimed at bringing stakeholders the best projects come from a true and key decision makers into partnership among all members agreement on the parameters, of the project team in creating goals, budget, and planning a comprehensive design vision. principles that will guide project HOK advocates an integrated evolution and delivery. approach that involves the entire spectrum of participants from HOK Advance Engineering is clients, user groups, permitting focused on the “S” of ASK and agencies, engineers, utility frames the questions necessary Top: Coyote Ridge Correctional Facility providers, builders, specialty in order to make sure that high Middle: Claybank Adult Detention Facility consultants and architects. This performance is integrated into Bottom: Comprehensive Dynamic Wind process is essential in creating the design and validated by Modeling holistic designs that address engineering science. Our ability to the full range of project issues. analyze, simulate and model high The key to HOK’s success is the performance strategies and then ability of its project teams to work translate those outcomes into collaboratively toward achieving designs that are cost effective, the project’s design goals without simple, constructible and

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 6 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

maintainable gives HOK Advance STEP 3: REFINEMENT Engineering a distinct advantage. The Preferred Option from Step 2 will be refined further as a PROJECT STEPS step toward final building design. STEP 1: TEAM KICK-OFF During this phase, HOK will MEETING support the design team in making As part of the “Big Room” a number of key decisions that approach HOK Advance will essentially set the project Engineering will actively parameters. participate to establish the formal goals, objectives and scope of FINAL STEP: the project. HOK will discuss IMPLEMENTATION with San Mateo County thoughts Utilizing the BIM model, HOK concerning the factors that will will assist the CM and the contribute to and support the Design Build Contractors to success of the project. provide design reviews. Since Based upon these meetings, high performance strategies and HOK Engineering will develop a building systems are integrated schedule of activities indicating into the architecture it is essential project tasks to be performed, that the design build engineer their duration, completion dates, implement these strategies and Top: FBOP Herlong Federal Penitentiary presentations, decision milestones that value engineering take place Bottom: San Mateo County Forensics Lab and all meetings required to as part of the design process. It complete the project. would be catastrophic to value engineer these systems out at the STEP 2: DESIGN OPTIONS end of design and not achieve the From the information collected sustainable and efficiency goals of in Step 1. (Kickoff), HOK will the project. generate system options for review. Each option will be an Utilizing the CM and Design amalgam of ideas drawn from Build project delivery method, information gathered. These construction administration options will pose a range of issues, will be limited. However we feel advantages and constraints in that it is important to oversee each building. These options will the construction of the facility frame design from the outset, in order to ensure that the high where one option (or hybrid of performance integrated design options) will be selected for is implemented and the project refinement, documentation is successful. HOK’s role in and implementation. We will facilitating communications and coordinate all design work with coordination among San Mateo HOK Architecture and the rest of County’s operations staff, the the design team. design team, and contractor can greatly affect the attitude of the team in achieving a common goal of a high quality project constructed on schedule, within

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 7 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

budget and with no unresolved claims. HOK has defined the following principles, which create a positive, productive, and professional working relationship with the construction team.

HOK’s construction administration personnel are committed to these principles:

n Promotion of the team concept n All members of the team must have the same goal: successful completion of the project n Have a clear understanding of the responsibilities of all parties to the construction process. n Respect the profession, responsibilities and knowledge of the other team members. n Eradicate all pre-conceived notions or stereotypes. n Produce timely, accurate and honest communication.

The first priority is solving problems, which has been Top: Los Angeles Metro Detention Center enhanced by the use of the Bottom: Maricopa County Justice Center BIM software. HOK delivers a fair, ethical and impartial decision making process during construction with the goal of achieving a successful project. An important portion of construction administration that keys this success is the processing and control of all documents and correspondence. Timely responses and open communication between the HOK Engineering, Architect, San Mateo County, and the contractor are vital.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 8 hok.com INNOVATE MEET ANALYZE DESIGN REFINE IMPLEMENT OCCUPY

Green Climate Building and Key Place Staff

Key Massing Build Stakeholders and BIM Trust Creativity Orientation Develop SC T IENC AR E Client Representative

OPTION 2 ADVANCE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERING OPTION OPTION REVIEWS 1 3 THINK KICK OFF OPTIMIZE DESIGN PREFERRED ENGAGE TANK MEETING OUTCOMES OPTIONS OPTION Constructability Cost PEOPLE Reviews Estimating OPTION OPTION 6 4 PHYSICS DESIGNERS GROUP OPTION 5

ADMINISTRATE Sustainable Involve Inform K Education Operators Users NOW DGE Economic LE Reﬁne Viability Buildings Current Facilitate Unify Prepare Use Set Meeting Communication Goals Dates Schedule Reduced Energy Consumption Set Critical Dates Buildings Social Improved Building Current Wellbeing Condition Operations

Effective Sustainable Programs

A part of HOK’s Advance Engineering HOK Advance Engineering will As a result of the Kick-Off meeting and From the information collected in Once the design options have been Utilizing the BIM model, HOK will Employees understand all too well is the High Performance Building schedule and conduct a meeting the Big Room process, there would be the previous steps, HOK will generate reviewed, a preferred option will be conduct constructability reviews. that is much easier to keep and grow Physics Group. This group is focused with your representative(s) to establish a list of ideas and strategies that would system options for review. Each option chosen. This preferred option will Concurrently, HOK will develop cost current employees rather than hire on innovation and serves as the group’s the goals, objectives and scope of the require further analysis and validation. will be an amalgam of ideas drawn from be refined further as a step toward final estimates during the course of the new ones. We believe that the key to “think tank”. We draw from green project. Key team members will commit It would include strategies from design information gathered. These options building design. During this phase, HOK project to test concepts and analyze increasing the function of the building building design principals while to the meeting dates, client review options such as building massing, solar will pose a range of issues, advantages will support our client in making a proposed changes. During bidding, is to effectively engage people. All of understanding environmental periods, project design approval dates studies, envelope optimization, daylight- and constraints in each building. These number of key decisions that will HOK will assist our client by review- our systems, processes and protocols integrity, economic viability and social and due dates for supplying key data. ing analysis , passive strategies and options will frame the design from essentially set the project parameters. ing and analyzing the bids and making will not achieve the desired result wellbeing. We test the ideas created HOK Advance Engineering will also MEP system design. It is anticipated the outset, where one option will be recommendations. In the Construction without engaged participants. These here and optimize the best solution. indicate critical dates that must be that there would be a different synergy selected for refinement, documentation Administration phase, we will facilitate engaged participants are taught how met to ensure the completion date. between these individual strategies and implementation. communication and coordination among to use the building to meet energy and systems that would then be further the team, the client and the contractor. and sustainability needs. studied and optimized.

INTEGRATED DESIGN 2. Design Build Approach DESIGN BUILD APPROACH

An Owner may choose the design- n Identify equipment The HOK Engineering Group could build process to deliver the manufacturers that are participate in the ongoing process mechanical, electrical, plumbing, acceptable to the County, and as follows: and fire protection (MEP) systems those which may not be. for a project in order to reduce the n Prepare draft version of the construction costs or to shorten n Identify the responsibilities BOD and issue it for review the over-all design and construction of each trade in achieving the by the County and other team schedule. different LEED credits, so that members. the overall project achieves Whatever the reason, a strong and LEED certification at the level n Incorporate comments and thorough Basis of Design document desired by the County. issue final version of BOD. (or “design-build specification”) and the continued involvement by n Describe the process during n Respond to MEP bidders’ an independent engineer working design and construction that questions. on behalf of the County, can be the design-builders need to instrumental to help assure that follow, such as participation n Participate in interviews with the MEP systems are designed at meetings, submission of bidders. and installed to meet the County’s progress design drawings, and expectations for cost, quality, submission of equipment shop n Respond to design-build energy-efficiency, maintainability, drawings. engineers’ questions during durability, and occupant comfort. design. n Allow prospective contractors The MEP Basis of Design (BOD) to bid on the work in an effective n Review MEP design drawings document prepared by the HOK “apples-to-apples” manner. (such as at 50% and 90% Engineering Group would be completion) to check for intended to perform the following The project’s design-build MEP compliance with the BOD and functions: engineers will be expected to good industry practice. follow the BOD as much as n Define the services and systems possible, while at the same time n Perform site visit walk-throughs to be delivered by the design- applying professional judgment during construction to verify the build contractors. Integrate and sound engineering practice, MEP installation is consistent high performance systems and consistent with: with the BOD and contractors’ sustainable strategies into the design drawings. design n Existing conditions n Participate in commissioning n Establish a minimum level of n Applicable codes and process. quality and collaborate with regulations the design-build engineers to achieve MEP system designs n County design and construction which meet codes and the project standards requirements in an efficient and cost-effective manner n Local climate n Make it clear to the bidders n Local construction practices what is important to the County, without unduly limiting their options or reducing the responsibilities of the engineers of record.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 10 hok.com 3. Insurance Requirements INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

HOK can fulfill the insurance requirements set forth in the HOK sub-consultants insurance guidelines spreadsheet.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 11 hok.com 4. Project Experience Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience ) Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include projects that do not qualify under these criteria to facilitate our review) 1. Detention or correctional projects completed within the last 10 years only. That is, you can only include projects completed since 2002. HOK Platinum) McCarthy BIM Usage CM at Risk Gross Area State of CA

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) Design-Build Sundt-Layton part of TI project) (if not in RWC) (if not in Hensel Phelps (in square feet) No. of Storey(s)

3. Your scope of service on those detention or No. of Building(s) Construction Cost Cost Construction LEED Certification Direct Supervision Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) not in (if Redwood City (RWC) City Redwood correctional projects was full service design for a (not new facility, not a minor retrofit. (SMC) County Mateo San Direct Relevant Experience - (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or No. of Beds (Design Capacity) (Design No. of Beds (answer yes if a design model was New Facility - Full Service Design Have one or more of your proposed key personnel worked on this project? created for coordination and deliverable Silver Claybank Adult Detention Facility, CA 2014 $65M 126,756 362 Yes 1 Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes 1 + Mezz Expected San Quentin Condemned Inmate Compelx, CA 2011 $203M 600,000 1,024 No 21 4 None No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Johnson County Adult Detention Facility, KS 2009 $50.7M 160,374 554 Yes 1 5 None No Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Los Angeles Metro Detention Center, CA 2009 $75.2M 174,404 500 No 1 3 Silver No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Coyote Ridge Correctional Facility, WA 2009 $189M 564,000 2,048 Yes 21 1 + Mezz Gold No No Yes Yes Yes Arizona State Prison Florence, AZ 2006 $40M 202,000 224 No 11 1 + Mezz None No Yes No No Yes Yes Kings County Jail Addition, CA 2006 $28M 124,000 335 No 21 + MezzNone No Yes Yes No Yes Saipan Detention Center, CNMI 2005 $22M N/A 342 Yes 2 1 + Mezz None No Yes No Yes Yes INS South Texas Detention Complex, TX 2005 $33.7M 238,000 1,110 Yes 1 1 + Mezz None No Yes No Yes Yes Maricopa County Justice Center, AZ 2004 $100M 650,000 1,360 No 1 4 None No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes - Yes - Northwest Detention Center, WA 2004 $35M 160,000 800 Yes 1 1 + Mezz None No Yes Yes Electrical M&P Pierce County Jaill Addition, WA 2003 $53M N/A 1,000 Yes 1 4 None No Yes No Yes Yes Supplemental Projects San Mateo County Forensics Lab, CA 2003 12.4M $29,000 N/A N/A 1 1 Certified No Yes Yes Yes 5. Resumes JOHN W. PULLEY, PE, LEED AP BD+C Project Role: Project Principal

John has over 30 years of professional experience in engineering design, project management and management. His work emphasizes a holistic approach to design that results in elevated, integrated, and high performance building systems and sustainable design. As the high performance building systems director, Mr. Pulley is involved with many market sectors including Justice. He has a global perspective that allows him to apply innovative strategies from other sectors to his OFFICE LOCATION justice projects. In particular, he has a strong interest in applying Net San Francisco Zero Energy to corrections projects. Mr. Pulley is a member of a number of ASHRAE Technical Committees and is considered an expert on high PHONE NUMBER performance systems. A key to success, is his collaborative working 415.356.8525 style with clients, design team members and staff and his ability to simplify integrated building systems. YEARS WITH FIRM 2 REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 4 Claybank Adult Detention Confidential Correctional EDUCATION Facility Facility Expansion University of Missouri, Bachelor of Fairfield, California Southeast United States Science, Mechanical Engineering 362 bed, 126,756 sq. ft., Expansion which included Drake University maximum security facility dayrooms and additional beds Bachelor of Arts, Physics expansion Confidential New PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS 4 Sacramento Superior Correctional Facility Professional Engineer: California; Courthouse Southwest United States LEED® Accredited Design Sacramento, California New facility which includes Professional 400,000 square foot criminal dayrooms and beds courthouse consisting of 48 REFERENCES courts, judge’s chambers and 4 Dallas Performance Hall* Mr. Kevin Robins administrative support space. Dallas, Texas Project Manager Planned Net Zero Energy building A 750 seat acoustically flexible Salt Lake City International Airport, and LEED Platinum proscenium theater Modernization Program 801.575.2961 Iowa State Penitentiary 4 Inland Steel Building* [email protected] Fort Madison, Iowa Chicago, Illinois Peer review for new men’s 19 story, 325,000 sq. ft. building. Dennis Bennett maximum security prison Designed to meet LEED Platinum Iowa Infrastructure Board – Chairman standards State of Iowa Infrastructure 4 Iowa Judicial Building* 515.288.3679 Des Moines, Iowa 4 ' Moscow Embassy [email protected] 120,000 sq. ft., five-story Annex Office Building facility. Parking Garage, the Iowa Moscow, Russia Steve Huh Supreme Court Courtroom, the 15,000 sq. m.; Includes office PDI World Group Appellate Court Courtroom, a Law space for approximately 300 Lotte World (Busan, South Korea) Library and General Office Space; personnel, apartments and a 612-702-0203 LEED Silver. parking structure. Expected to [email protected] achieve LEED Platinum and be completed in 2014.

4 LEED Certiﬁed ' Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 13 hok.com DAVE TROUP, P.E., LEED® BD+C Project Role: Project Manager

Mr. Troup has more than 38 years of professional experience. He collaborates with owners, clients, consultants, building officials and contractors to develop project parameters and design criteria. His experience encompasses all phases of a project: HVAC system design, equipment selection, preparation of contract documents, and construction and start-up inspection services. Project types include corporate headquarters, computer centers, office buildings, hotels and

OFFICE LOCATION EXPERIENCE San Francisco 4 Claybank Adult Detention Santa Ana Police Administration Facility & Holding Facility PHONE NUMBER Fairfield, California Santa Ana, California 415.356.8517 362 bed, 126,756 sq. ft., 343,000 sq. ft. police station, maximum security facility holding facility, and administrative YEARS WITH FIRM expansion offices 21 4 San Mateo County Forensic 4 Los Angeles Police Department EDUCATION Laboratory and Coroner’s Office Metro Jail Master of Engineering San Mateo, California Los Angeles, California University of Detroit, 1973 Commissioning services for 500 bed facility, LEED Silver. 29,000 sq. ft. Sheriff’s forensic Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering, laboratory and Coroner’s office. CNMI Adult Correctional Facility Magna Cum Laude LEED Certified. Saipan, CNMI University of Detroit, 1973 342 beds; low rise; direct San Quentin State Prison, supervision; Includes all security PROFESSIONAL Condemned Inmate Complex levels and some INS facilities REGISTRATION San Quentin, California Registered Mechanical Engineer: 1,024 beds Johnson County Detention California & 14 other States Expansion 4 East Contra Costa County Gardner, Kansas ® LEED Accredited Professional BD+C Courthouse 160,000 sq. ft., 554 beds Pittsburg, California REFERENCES New three-story, 71,000 sq. 4 Coyote Ridge Corrections Jack A. Olson, PE ft. courthouse; 7 court rooms Center Project Director expandable to ten. LEED Silver Connell, Washington Coyote Ridge Corrections Center anticipated. Design Build bridging documents 360.725.8342 for 564,000 sq. ft., 2,048 bed [email protected] Maricopa County Jail facility, LEED Silver. Phoenix, Arizona Scott Hogman 1,360 maximum security beds; Hawaii Federal Detention Center County’s Project Manager 650,000 sq. ft.; downtown Honolulu, Hawaii (now w/ Heery International) highrise detention facility; central 750 inmate detention center, Pierce County Jail Addition and booking for entire county; 240,000 sq. ft. high rise facility Renovation including five levels of inmate 425.936.1864 Arizona State Prison housing, two levels administration [email protected] Florence, Arizona and support, warehouse, and central plant Mitch Mashburn Solano County Sheriff’s Office Claybank Adult Detention Facility 4 LEED Certified ' Award Winning 707.421.6103 * experience prior to joining HOK [email protected] San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 14 hok.com DAVE TROUP, P.E., LEED® BD+C

ICE South Texas Detention and Pierce County Justice Center Court Facility Tacoma, Washington Pearsall, Texas 1,000 bed detention center; 1,100 bed, detention facility, 4 structured parking; direct courtrooms, office space provided supervision; includes renovation of for the Correctional Services existing facility Corporation, ICE Detention and Removal, Office of Enforcement Snake River Correctional and Immigration Review, and Institution Public Health Services Ontario, Oregon 3,000 maximum security beds; ICE Northwest Detention Center fast track; GC/CM process; direct Tacoma, Washington supervision; 850,000 sq. ft. Design-Build bridging documents for new facility for the US Two Rivers Correctional Immigration and Naturalization Institution Service, beds for 500 detainees Umatilla, Oregon from minimum to maximum 1,750 beds; direct supervision; security, support functions close security; GC/CM process include medical, intake courts, administration, kitchen/laundry, Conﬁdential Correctional and visitation Facility Expansion Southeast United States Iowa State Penitentiary Expansion which included Fort Madison, Iowa dayrooms and additional beds New men’s maximum security prison Conﬁdential New Correctional Facility Kings County Jail Southwest United States Hanford, California New facility which includes 335 bed expansion facility with dayrooms and beds reception, booking area and ancillary space

Pennsylvania State Prison Graterford, Pennsyl Peer review of prison project.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 15 hok.com HARJ SIDHU, PE, LEED® AP Project Role: Electrical Engineer

Harj’s experience specifically focuses on emerging building electrical system technologies that emphasize sustainability and energy cost reduction. He has proven ability to manage multiple facilities projects and ensure all deadlines and scope are met within a given budget.

EXPERIENCE 4 Claybank Adult University of San Francisco Detention Facility Center for Science and EDUCATION Fairfield, California Innovation* California State University – 362 bed, 126,756 sq. ft., San Francisco, California Sacramento, Master of Science, maximum security facility 50,000 sq. ft. advanced Electrical Engineering – Emphasis expansion “wet” teaching laboratories Power Engineering, 2006 for biology, chemistry, physics Confidential Correctional and environment science as University of California – Davis Facility Expansion well as computational teaching Bachelor of Science, Electrical Southeast United States labs for computer science and Engineering, 2004 Expansion which included mathematics. dayrooms and additional beds PROFESSIONAL The Commons at Mount Burdell* REGISTRATIONS Confidential New Novato, California Professional Engineer: California, Correctional Facility 64-acre zero net energy Georgia Southwest United States redevelopment project. Site LEED Accredited Professional New facility which includes to house office space, hotel/ dayrooms and beds meeting center, retail, multi-family residences, child care facilities, 4 Sacramento Criminal senior care facilities, community Courthouse center and sports/health club, and Sacramento, California four parking structures. New 400,000 square foot criminal courthouse consisting of 2001 Market Street* 35 to 40 courts, judge’s chambers San Francisco, California and administrative support space. Lead electrical engineer for a The design of the courthouse will mixed-use residential seven- utilize high performance building story, high-rise building, totaling strategies and is planned to be 220,000 sq. ft. Work included a Net Zero Energy building and coordination and design of LEED Platinum. electrical systems for residential spaces and commercial space. 4 UC Davis Gallagher Hall Designed to obtain LEED Gold. Graduate School of Management* Davis, California Lead electrical engineer for the new GSM, spanning 85,000 sq. ft., LEED GOLD certified building. Project consists of smart classrooms, offices, server rooms. Work included sustainable design

4 LEED Certiﬁed ' Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 16 hok.com BEN DENKER, PE Project Role: Plumbing Engineer

For over 6 years, Ben has been a mechanical engineer designing HVAC, plumbing, and fire protection systems. His experience includes multiple renovations and new buildings in the Middle East and in most regions of the United States.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE OFFICE LOCATION New San Bernardino Courthouse* 'Burj Khalifa* San Francisco San Bernardino, California Dubai, UAE Plumbing and fire protection Fire Protection systems design for PHONE NUMBER systems design using Revit MEP the fire protection system on the 415.356.4405 (2009) for 11-story courthouse addition of the Spa Annex. Scope from Design Development through of work was to connect to existing YEARS WITH FIRM 50% Construction Documents. fire main and design a sprinkler 1 layout for the Spa Annex. Conﬁdential Correctional EDUCATION Facility Expansion New Data Center – Minneapolis/ University of Missouri, Bachelor of Southeast United States St. Paul International Airport* Science in Mechanical Engineering, Expansion which includes Minneapolis, MN 2006 dayrooms and additional beds Mechanical and plumbing systems designed to consolidate the PROFESSIONAL Conﬁdential New operations of over 100 data rooms REGISTRATIONS Correctional Facility on-site at airport. Designed a chilled Registered Engineer: Minnesota Southwest United States water system and plumbing system New facility which includes for data room, electrical room, and dayrooms and beds; Includes office areas with high efficiency innovative and sustainable equipment to reduce the electrical plumbing systems. load from the equipment.

Las Vegas Convention Center* Las Vegas, Nevada Renovation and expansion of the Las Vegas Convention Center from Design Documents through 100% Construction Documents.

Qatar Petroleum (QP) Complex* Doha, Qatar Plumbing systems design and modeling using Revit MEP (2008) for 28-story mixed-use tower and a 2-story mosque from Schematic Design through 100% Construction Documents.

4 LEED Certiﬁed ' Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 17 hok.com HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 hok.com San Francisco, CA 94104 t: 415.243.0555 f: 415.882.7763 REPLACEMENT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

SAN MATEO COUNTY PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SERVICES

Proposal | February 29, 2012 HOK February 29, 2012

Catherine Chan Project Manager HOK, Inc. One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94104

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Consulting Services for Landscape Planning & Design

Dear Selection Committee:

On behalf of the HOK Planning Group at Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) I am pleased to submit our qualifications for Landscape and Planning Design services for the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility in Redwood City, California. We believe our qualifications express our understanding of the project, regional context and our commitment to bring the best talent and experience forward to partner with HOK, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, and the selected General Contractor, as an integrated team.

The HOK Planning Group team has extensive experience working in San Mateo County and Redwood City in particular. From the San Mateo County Government Office Building, completed in 1999; to the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Replacement Hospital which is currently under construction; to the exploration of potential development sites in downtown Redwood City for a private developer; we have been, and continue to be closely involved with the county and city entities.

Our correctional facility experience is unique in the realm of large diversified landscape, planning and urban design firms, and we are proud of our work throughout the last 20 years, working with the HOK architectural team in creating successful correctional environments. We understand the particular issues of security and operations, and strive to create functional landscapes that are also sustainable and pleasing.

The HOK Planning Group is dedicated to a collaborative team approach and we are accustomed to working on complex projects with specialized teams to ensure that a high quality of expertise in all disciplines can be brought to bear on this project. As the Director of Planning and Landscape Architecture in San Francisco, I have been working to create implementable landscapes, including detention facilities, for more than 20 years. With my colleagues, principal planner Crystal Barriscale, and landscape designer David Amalong, we have a combined experience of more than 70 years creating successful and beautiful places.

We very much look forward to partnering with you as you move forward with this visionary project. Please do not hesitate to call me at 415-356-8663 if you have any questions.

Sincerely, HOK, Inc.

Katherine Doi, ASLA, LEED AP Director, Planning and Landscape Architecture

HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 | San Francisco, CA 94104 USA t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415.882.7763 hok.com 1. Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design PROJECT APPROACH

THE HOK PLANNING GROUP Landscape architecture The HOK Planning Group focuses on the spaces between has more than 50 years of the buildings to harmonize diversified experience with over architecture, infrastructure 120 professionals in planning, and open space, creating urban urban design, and landscape experiences that support our architecture throughout 17 HOK social and physical needs. locations worldwide. We help Concerns of sight lines, physical clients shape the environment that access and egress and careful connects people to each other lighting are essential parts of a and to the world around them. For well-designed site, balanced by us, performance and aesthetics the need for visual beauty and are not separate conversations. spiritual gratification. The best design solutions are as functional and sustainable as they SUSTAINABLE DESIGN are beautiful. HOK is committed to preserving the environment for future DESIGN PHILOSOPHY generations through sustainable Our design strategies employ a design. Through all levels of place-based, integrated systems our organization we have the approach that is committed to unique opportunity to promote creating quality environments environmentally sensitive design with enduring value. Good by employing materials, energy planning creates an environment and water resources efficiently, that enhances and relates to the minimizing site impacts and world around it; the essence of addressing the social and health planning is to provide a connection issues that relate to development. – to a region, community, culture At HOK sustainable design is a and natural environment. We collaborative effort, combining collaborate across disciplines to the expertise of the entire project create places that are authentic team. The HOK Planning Group and integrated with their design aesthetic is centered on surroundings, ensuring their the synergy found among the long-term economic growth and interrelationships of the local sustainability. We work closely environment, the watershed, the with clients, stakeholders and people, the construction materials, diverse project teams to set the energy inputs and the waste goals and build consensus, outputs on site. We investigate ensuring a successful process sustainable design opportunities from design conception through in stormwater management, water implementation. HOK approaches efficiency, sustainable sites and each project as an interactive renewable materials. In addition, process – this is worth repeating. through HOK’s Product Design We believe that connection and Initiative, the HOK Planning collaboration are key from project Group developed one of the first inception. HOK products, “Freno” an urban rain garden system. HOK is also the expert in understanding the

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 2 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

criteria for LEED Certification same high BIM standards that are and can assist clients in applying used by our architect partners. design measures and building techniques that help achieve INTEGRATED DESIGN sustainability goals. Our team of In an integrated design approach, landscape architects and urban team members representing designers/planners are all LEED all aspects of a project work accredited. together collaboratively to develop optimized design approaches BUILDINGSMART that address project goals. HOK is at the forefront of This format lends itself to the adapting new technologies to discovery of design synergies that improve project delivery methods multiply benefits. Capturing these in an industry initiative called multiple benefits requires a full BuildingSMART. The effort team to work together from the centers on the use of a Building project beginning to design the Information Modeling (BIM), components of the system. The which is the development of the result of such coordination can building in a 3D model form from lower initial costs as well as long- the beginning using new tools like term costs. With an integrated Autodesk’s Revit. 3D modeling of team working closely together, all of building elements (including strategies that can affect both structural, MEP, skin, etc.) not only the site and the building can be enhances project visualization, examined early and incorporated but detects potential design into an optimized design. issues prior to construction. This feature alone is changing how ASK HOK buildings are designed and built. The HOK Planning Group is Working together, designers committed to the process of and contractors now have an ASK HOK. As described in our unprecedented level of confidence architect’s proposal, our approach in details and constructability and strategic vision is founded issues. Among the implications on the confluence of three of this advancement is that many fundamental elements of project expensive and time consuming delivery: building elements now built on site can be pre-fabricated off- p Art… transforming space and site saving time and money, while experience through the power of improving quality. It also means aesthetics easier and earlier development p Science… maximizing efficiency of quantities for earlier and and sustainability through the more precise cost estimating. application of technology Unlike many outside consultants p Knowledge… driving program that take the architects Revit innovation through expertise model and convert it to 2D and experience CAD, The HOK Planning Group is at the forefront of landscape Each of these elements informs architecture firms utilizing the one another throughout the

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 3 hok.com PROJECT APPROACH

(CONTINUED)

process in achieving highly right people from all disciplines successful results for our clients. at the table from the beginning We believe that each project creates the most thoughtful and should result in a specific and innovative facilities inspired by a unique solution, the fundamental common vision. value of which is evidence- based design and it’s essential ASK HOK – An Integrated Process relationship to aesthetics and Employing the principals of ASK science. Our aim is to collaborate HOK, we have successfully with our clients, consultants and delivered large and complex building partners to define and public projects in California and implement a project process around the world. In the process designed to deliver the most we have learned that how and appropriate, elegant and effective when information is collected, solution. processed, integrated, shared and communicated is absolutely n We work to understand your vital to project quality and issue, drivers and goals success. We intend to employ an n We work to integrate inclusive, consensus based and environmentally sensitive highly interactive approach. It will concepts into planning and include numerous workshops, implementation strategies interactive web-sites, one-on- n We work to get architecture out one discussions, surveys, case of the way of change studies and presentations; all will be aimed at bringing stakeholders Partnership and Collaboration and key decision makers into ASK HOK is rooted in the idea that agreement on the parameters, the best projects come from a true goals, budget, and planning partnership among all members principles that will guide project of the project team in creating evolution and delivery. a comprehensive design vision. HOK advocates an integrated The HOK Planning Group blends approach that involves the entire the elements of art and science, spectrum of participants from backed by our depth of knowledge clients, user groups, permitting through experience, to create agencies, engineers, utility memorable, cost-effective, providers, builders, specialty constructible and maintainable consultants and architects. This landscapes. process is essential in creating holistic designs that address the full range of project issues. The key to HOK’s success is the ability of its project teams to work collaboratively toward achieving the project’s design goals without sacrificing program features in favor of lower initial construction costs. We believe having the

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 4 hok.com 2. Insurance Requirements INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

HOK can fulfill the insurance requirements set forth in the HOK sub-consultants insurance guidelines spreadsheet.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 5 hok.com 3. Project Experience Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix 2/29/2012 Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience )

Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include projects that do Comments not qualify under these criteria to facilitate our review) 1. Detention or correctional projects completed within the last 10 (include any additional key info you would like us to years only. That is, you can only include projects completed since ion and deliverable know about this project - please be brief !) 2002. HOK Platinum) McCarthy CM at Risk CM BIM Usage BIM State of CA State Gross Area

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) Design-Build Sundt-Layton part of TI project) TI of part (if not in RWC) Hensel Phelps Hensel (in square feet) No. of Storey(s) No.

3. Your scope of service on those detention or correctional projects No. of Building(s) Construction Cost Direct Supervision LEED Certification Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) in not (if Redwood City (RWC) was full service design for a new facility, not a minor retrofit. (not San Mateo County (SMC) Direct Relevant Experience - Experience Relevant Direct (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or Silver, Certified, (None, No. ofNo. Beds (Design Capacity) (answer yes if a design model was a design model (answer yes if New Facility - Full Service Design Have one or more of your proposed of Have one or more key personnel worked on this project? key personnel worked on this created for coordinat for created Silver Claybank Adult Detention Facility, CA 2014 $65M 126,756 362 Yes 1 1 + Mezz Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Expected Silver CDCR Correctional Healthcare Facilities, CA 2014 $252M 6,500,000 1,700 yes 33 1 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Expected San Quentin Central Health Services Building 2010 $108.2M 131,993 52 yes 1 5 Gold Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Supplemental Projects SRI Menlo Park Master Plan, CA Ongoing Confidental 1,055,000 N/A N/A Numerous Various None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Kaiser Redwood City, CA 2013 $220M 272,000 149 N/A 1 7 None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Bay Meadows Mixed Use Development, CA 2009 $250M 83.5 acres N/A N/A Numerous Various Varies Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes San Mateo County Forensics Lab, CA 2003 $12.4M 29,000 N/A N/A 1 1 Certified No Yes Yes Yes Yes San Mateo County Government Center, CA 1999 $14M 128,000 N.A N/A 1 5 None None Yes Yes Yes Yes Visa International Headquarters, CA 1996 Confidental 982,173 N/A N/A 4 4 None No Yes Yes Yes Yes Richard E. Arnason Justice Center 2010 $41.6M 71,600 N/A N/A 1 3 None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes CDCR

NEW CORRECTIONAL HEALTHCARE FACILITIES PHASES I AND II Stockton, California

SIZE 144 Acres

SERVICES Feasibility Study, Master Plan, Design, Landscape

COMPLETION 2014

COST $129 million (Phase I) $383 million (Phase II)

Phase I for the Correctional Health acres. Open courtyards for patients Care Facility has an estimated cost of to go to the Medical Mall from the $129 million, the first phase includes Housing blocks, a developed Medical preparation of the 144-acre site where Mall for circulating and short-term a former California Youth Authority waiting, and an entry courtyard facility is being demolished. Items through which visitors pass to include design and construction of site designated visiting zones, are all part wide grading and utilities, road re- of the open space system. alignment, central utility plant (OSHPD), perimeter guard towers, perimeter Landscape design in the correctional road and fence which includes a environment must consider low profile lethal electric fence, material services plant materials and no trees to aid center, communications and lockshop direct supervison; low maintenance (OSHPD), armory and staff/public plant materials, sustainable paving parking. materials and furniture with simple profiles to support other security Phase II consists of a master plan, concerns. Landscape interest relies study and detailed conceptual design on patterns and color of foliage and for the site which encompasses 33 mulch. In the semi-public areas, buildings, including special needs landscape swales and non-walkable inmate housing, common areas, plant materials are used to create maintenance building and worker landscape barriers to direct the flow housing, over 1,700 beds on 45 of pedestrian traffic.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 7 hok.com FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Sacramento, California

4 LEED-NC SILVER

SIZE 1,000,000 sq. ft. 80 acres

SERVICES Master Planning, Landscape Architecture, Architectural Design, Sustainable Consulting

COMPLETION 2005

The California Department of With multiple locations throughout General Services enlisted HOK and Sacramento including two existing Lionakis Beaumont Design Group buildings on the project’s 80 acre site, (LBDG) to design the new addition the FTB recognized that consolidating to the Franchise Tax Board’s (FTB) employees and sharing support existing campus. The 1,000,000 services at one site would provide sq. ft. expansion consists of a one- considerable savings. More important story 55,000 sq. ft. Town Center to the FTB, they wanted to unite their building that houses the main dining employees through communication, room, child daycare, training facility, interaction and a shared culture – auditorium and credit union; a 3-story similar to a corporate campus. To 375,000 sq. ft. and a 4-story promote this idea HOK organized 397,000 sq. ft. building that both the main pedestrian circulation for include administrative offices and the campus around a secure garden cafes; a 50,000 sq. ft. warehouse courtyard that connects all the new with an additional training room; a buildings with the existing buildings. 20,000 sq. ft. data center; a 20,000 Most of the café’s, break rooms, sq. ft. central plant and 4,500 communicating stairs and conference additional surface parking stalls. rooms are along this pedestrian street.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 8 hok.com ALFRED A. ARRAJ US DISTRICT COURTHOUSE ANNEX

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Denver, Colorado

SIZE 318,850 sq. ft.

SERVICES Architectural Design, Court Planning, Master Planning, Lighting Design

COMPLETION 2002

COST $83 million

The ten-story courthouse contains demonstrating GSA’s commitment to 10 District, four Magistrate and one environmental stewardship creating a Special Proceedings courtrooms, showcase for sustainable design. the Clerk of the Court and the U.S. Marshal Service, with potential The building is designed to remain to expand on site for additional effective for 100-years. Raised courtroom space. It is connected by access floor systems provide wire tunnel to the existing courthouse management flexibility and air across the street, and is part of a four- distribution. Materials were selected block government district. based on environmental and occupant impact, such as embodied energy, The courthouse meets the latest indoor air quality, and resource security and functional requirements depletion. Low impact landscaping of the courts, and presents an minimizes water use and reduces open and inviting image while urban heat island effect.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 9 hok.com BAY MEADOWS

MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PHASE II San Mateo, California

SIZE 12.6 acres - commercial blocks 5 hectares 750,000 sq. ft. office development - 5 office buildings, 1 parking garage

SERVICES Landscape Architecture, Architecture, Urban Design

COMPLETION 2009

COST $250 million

HOK is working with developer satisfying the Caltrain Joint Powers Wilson Meany Sullivan to create Board requirement for 500 commuter the mixed-use commercial heart parking spaces. All buildings are set for the new 83.5 acre part of the to be LEED San Mateo Rail Corridor Transit Silver or higher. The Bay Meadows Oriented Development Plan. By program includes 1.25 million square virtue of providing a compact urban feet of office use, 1,250 multi-family commercial development within a residential units, 150,000 square new five city block area, the intent feet of retail, and 15 square acres is to initiate a pedestrian friendly of public parks and open space. The environment with an active ground Delaware Street neighborhood of plane that connects train station the proposed Bay Meadows Village access, public plazas, courtyards, and is a transit-oriented development streetscapes. planned for the current site of the Bay Meadows racetrack in San Mateo, The 5 building 750,000-square- California, adjacent to the Caltrain rail foot office development scheme station. The racetrack is scheduled to addresses the need for flexible office be closed and demolished in 2008, floor plate design, retail, and the allowing for a phased development of necessary parking demand as well as the site.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 10 hok.com NORTEL SANTA CLARA Santa Clara, California

SIZE 630,000 sq. ft. 14 acres

SERVICES Architecture, Interiors, Planning, Landscape Architecture

COMPLETION 2002

COST $135 million

Following a successful track record Campus in Montreal and the Santa of significant individual projects, Clara Campus. HOK and Nortel entered into a global agreement for facility consulting HOK planned and designed this and design services in November 630,000 square foot campus. The of 1994. Implementation took new construction consisted of two place at numerous Nortel locations office buildings and two structured around the world, responding to parking facilities on a 14 acre site. the company’s ongoing needs and taking full advantage of HOK’s global reach. Some of these projects include the Brampton Centre, the Carling Campus, the Broadbands Network

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 11 hok.com CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHER’S RETIREMENT SYSTEM West Sacramento, California

4 LEED-NC GOLD

SIZE 400,000 sq. ft. (Phase 1) 5.4 acres (Phase 1)

COMPLETION 2009

SERVICES Master Planning, Landscape Architecture, Architectural Design, MEP Engineering, Interior Design, Workplace Consulting, Architectural Graphics, Display Environments; Sustainable Design

HOK’s planning study for the CalSTRS Following the master plan phase, HOK explored alternative master plan proceeded to design the first phase options for an 18-acre site along the tower, which consists of 400,000 Sacramento River. The site identifies square feet of office space over a the prime locations for several major podium parking garage. The front building components, including a door of the building and outdoor 600-room hotel, parking for 1,400 dining are oriented towards the cars, 620,000-square-feet of office riverfront, located at the top of the space in two phases, a 100-unit levee embankment, while two levels of residential tower, and approximately parking remain unseen below. 65,000 square feet of retail / commercial space. HOK created a significant landscaped view corridor adjacent to the The relationship of such elements as “promenade”, the primary pedestrian parking, vehicular, and pedestrian access to the building. The view circulation, open space and view corridor afforded an opportunity for corridors to the Sacramento River CalSTRS to meet the city’s goal of were studied to achieve the highest providing a gateway for public access and best use of the site. Adjacent to the park. land parcels were also studied to identify those parcels critical to future expansion of the project.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 12 hok.com FRENOTM URBAN RAIN GARDEN SYSTEM St. Louis, Missouri

SERVICES Freno is an innovative segmental wall and aesthetically enhancing. However, Landscape Architecture, and curbing system designed to easily these installations typically consist Architecture incorporate rain gardens in urban of cast-in-place concrete enclosures settings, helping to reduce run-off, which require extensive over-dig, COMPLETION improve water quality, and enhance formwork and labor, and are subject to October 2010 streetscapes. It was developed as an variable levels of finish quality. alternative to cast-in-place construction FrenoTM was conceived as a precast COST methods, providing a higher level of concrete “kits of parts” system that N/A quality and durability at a lower cost, in would provide high levels of finish, less time. durability and flexibility at a cost AWARD lower than that of comparable cast-in- 2010 St. Louis Cityscape Award Low Impact Development (LID) place systems. This modular system strategies are gaining popularity with is comprised of three basic shapes developers and agencies seeking new that can be arranged in a wide array ways to deal with the large volume of of configurations. Unlike a cast-in- storm water run-off generated from place basin that can take weeks to impervious surfaces associated with complete, the FrenoTM System can be public and private developments. installed quickly, minimizing excavation Traditional water treatment methods and eliminating formwork and the are expensive and energy-intensive, typical concerns of how weather and prompting many communities to turn temperature can impact the quality of to rain gardens as a decidedly low- the installation. tech, but highly effective approach to storm water detention and treatment. To test the new product, a pilot project Rain gardens improve water quality was installed in the summer of 2010 by reducing storm water flow rate, in downtown St. Louis. With the volume, temperature and pollutants. In cooperation of local agencies and recent years, rain gardens have been private contractors, the installation successfully implemented in urban exceeded expectations in terms of streetscapes as a means of addressing ease of constructability, moving from storm water runoff in a manner that demolition to finished planting in just is highly efficient, easily maintainable two and a half days.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 13 hok.com 4. Resumes KATHERINE DOI, ASLA, LEED® AP Project Role: Landscape Architect

Kathy Doi has more than 20 years of experience in a variety of design and management positions in the field of landscape architecture. Her career has focused upon project management and design implementation, assuring that an approved design concept is taken through the construction process without compromising design integrity. Her primary project experience includes commercial, corporate, and public projects. Kathy is the director of service delivery for the HOK planning group in all locations, and is also responsible for OFFICE LOCATION managing operations of the HOK planning group in San Francisco. San Francisco REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE PHONE NUMBER 4 ' Excite@Home Corporate 415.356.8663 San Mateo County Sheriff’s Forensic Lab & Coroner’s Office Campus Redwood City, California YEARS WITH FIRM Redwood City, California 11-acre facility; surface and 23 30,000 sq. ft., forensic lab, coroner’s office underground parking; outdoor assembly area and dining EDUCATION 4 terrace; athletic facilities; public University of Michigan Claybank Adult Detention streetscape improvements Ann Arbor, Michigan Facility Master of Landscape Architecture Fairfield, California 362 bed, 122,307 sq. ft., $65 Foothills Communities Law and Yale University million maximum security facility Justice Center New Haven, Connecticut expansion. San Bernardino, California Bachelor of Arts 13-acre site supporting civic 4 'Richard E. Arnason Justice administration complex. Entry PROFESSIONAL Center plaza, parking and streetscape. REGISTRATIONS Pittsburg, California Landscape Architect: California 4-acre site, three-story 4 Bay Meadows Mixed Use Nevada courthouse, entry plaza and green Development LEED Accredited Professional roof; LEED Silver San Mateo, California 1.25 million sq. ft. of mixed use REFERENCES 4 ' San Quentin State Prison development. HOK is working to Mr. Kanon Artiche Central Health Services Building design the 5-block commercial Solano County Architect San Quentin, California heart for this 83.5 acre part of the Claybank Adult Detention Facility 4.8 acre site; drought tolerant San Mateo Rail Corridor TOD Plan. 707.784.7908 landscape; LEED Gold [email protected] 4 'Franchise Tax Board San Mateo County Government Headquarters - Butterfield Way Mr. Mark Srebnik Center Ofﬁce Building Sacramento, California Project Director Redwood City, California 1 million sq. ft. of office on 42 Kaiser Redwood City 138,000 sq. ft. of building acres; transit plaza; childcare; 650.299.4919 fitness; parking for 4500 cars. [email protected] 4 Kaiser Permanente Replacement Hospital Visa USA/Visa International Mr. Chuck Noll Redwood City, California Foster City,California Administrator & Chief Clerk 15-acre campus with new 17-acre campus; 4 buildings, public Bay Meadows hospital, CUP, and parking park and plazas. 415.905.5390 [email protected] 4 LEED Certiﬁed ' Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 14 hok.com CRYSTAL BARRISCALE, AIA, AICP, LEED AP Project Role: Planning Principal

Crystal Barriscale directs the HOK Planning Group in San Francisco. With over 27 years experience, she works closely with both private institutions and public agencies in a broad range of planning, urban design and architectural projects. As both an architect and planner, she has led award-winning projects, from inception through to implementation. Her work includes corporate, research and university campus planning, transit-oriented developments, multi-modal terminal improvements, as well as urban redevelopment plans. YEARS WITH FIRM 7 EXPERIENCE Fremont Downtown Community 4 Bay Meadows Transit Oriented PHONE NUMBER Plan and Design Guidelines Development Phase ll Design + 415.356.8528 Fremont, California Implementation HOK is providing urban design San Mateo, California EDUCATION and planning services for the City 750,000 SF urban design and Columbia University of Fremont’s Downtown District, landscape architecture of 5 new Masters of Science in Architecture & located in the center of town city blocks of retail and ofﬁce Urban Design, 1984 covering approximately 110 acres. development to be integrated with the adjacent CalTrain Hillsdale New York Institute of Technology Courthouse Square station. Included detailed design Bachelor of Architecture, Magna Cum Redevelopment of a proposed relocated and Laude, 1981 Redwood City, California expanded station and commuter Located in the heart of Redwood parking facilities. Plans were PROFESSIONAL City’s Downtown, a 210,000 gsf unanimously approved by the city. REGISTRATIONS commercial redevelopment with Architect, State of California, Nevada, 630 structured parking stalls, Transbay Transit Center Site + New Jersey, New York a new Chase Bank facility and Streetscape Design Guidelines National Council of Architectural landscaped public plazas. San Francisco, California Registration Board Created Site Development American Institute of Certified Foster City Redevelopment Standards, Streetscape and Planners Area Plan Design Guidelines in planning LEED Accredited Professional Foster City, California efforts for the new and expanded Working with three major land downtown Transbay Terminal REFERENCES owners in the Pilgrim/Triton area. including, Cal Train commuter rail Mr. Mark Srebnik HOK’s scope of work included service, a bus terminal, and the Project Director development of a coordinated new California High Speed Rail Kaiser Redwood City master plan proposal to the City of service. 650.299.4919 Foster City for approval. [email protected] 4 Kaiser Medical Center Mr. Chuck Noll Master Plan Administrator & Chief Clerk Redwood City, California Bay Meadows Master plan and design for a 415.905.5390 redeveloped Redwood City [email protected] Medical Campus. Scope includes: master planning, landscape Mr. Jeff Schwob design, health care programming Community Development Director and architectural services. Fremont Downtown Community Plan 510.494.4527 4 LEED Certiﬁed [email protected] * experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 15 hok.com DAVID A. AMALONG, RLA, LEED AP Project Role: Landscape Designer

David Amalong is the Director of Planning, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design for HOK’s Denver practice. He is a registered Landscape Architect with more than 24 years of experience that include a broad range of domestic and international projects. His capabilities range from large-scale master planning to detailed design and implementation. David’s work celebrates the human spirit through social equity, quality design and ecological intelligence.

YEARS WITH FIRM EXPERIENCE 18 'Alfred A. Arraj U.S. ' Federal Reserve District Courthouse Bank of Minneapolis PHONE NUMBER Denver, Colorado Minneapolis, Minnesota 720.889.3411 318,000 sq. ft. with 15 Headquarters and operations courtrooms on a 2.5 acre site. center, 777,000 sq. ft. in a 7-story EDUCATION tower on a 9-acre riverfront site. The Pennsylvania State University, Adams County Justice Center College of Arts & Architecture Brighton, Colorado Sun Microsystems Bachelor of Science in Landscape 512 bed expansion on 40 acres Colorado Campus Architecture, 1988 Broomﬁeld, Colorado 'Robert A. Christenson Justice Regional corporate offices, PROFESSIONAL Center 562,000 sq. ft. on 74-acre REGISTRATIONS Castle Rock, Colorado campus; HOK provided Landscape Architect: Missouri & 8 courtrooms, 150 beds masterplanning and landscape Colorado architecture. LEED Accredited Professional 4 San Francisco Public Safety Building Belmar Square & Belmar AWARDS San Francisco, California Streetscape Enhancements* Merit Award, Colorado Chapter, Six-story tower housing police Lakewood, Colorado Sunnen Station, ASLA, 2008 headquarters 2-acre park and streetscape in a new urban neighborhood west of Merit Award, Colorado Chapter, 4 NOAA PRC Main Facility downtown Denver. Shanghai Pudong Bank, ASLA, 2004 Honolulu, Hawaii 350,000 sq. ft. new administrative 4 Kaiser Permenate Hospital REFERENCES and lab facility within an historic Redwood City, California Mr. Brian Levitt shell on an historic 29 acre site. 149 bed replacement hospital, President/CEO CUP, and parking on a 15-acre Glendale Riverwalk Glendale Riverwalk campus. 303.809.8887 Glendale, Colorado [email protected] 22-acre mixed use development 4 Bay Meadows Mixed on Cherry Creek, including 1 Use Development Mr. Bill Covell million SF of entertainment, retail, San Mateo, California Manager, Special Projects concert and open space. 1.25 million sq. ft. of mixed-use ConocoPhillips Colorado Campus development. HOK is working to 918.661.7488 ConocoPhillips Colorado Campus design the 5 block commercial heart [email protected] Louisville, Colorado for this 83.5-acre site within the San 2.5 million sq. ft. research & Mateo Rail Corridor TOD Plan. Tom Gougeon learning center campus on 435 President, Gates Family Foundation acres. Belmar Square and Belmar Streetscape 4 ' 303.722.1881 LEED Certiﬁed Award Winning [email protected] * experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 16 hok.com HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 hok.com San Francisco, CA 94104 t: 415.243.0555 f: 415.882.7763

%GI1 VRG77 !"#$"%&"

PROJECT APPROACH SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PROJECT APPROACH ON COLLABORATIVE INTERDISCIPLINARY DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERING

The TECI team has extensive and successful working experience/relationship with our clients, interdisciplinary design consultants, public agencies and all stakeholders on similar projects. Besides our strong technical knowledge, TECI approach has always emphasize on team spirit, being responsive and proactive in communication. Our success has been our ability to identify potential issues that the project might encounter and proactively working with the clients, design team and all stakeholders to provide “win-win” solutions to resolve issues effectively and efficiently.

Project Management Role and Objectives TECI Project Manager’s role is to successfully deliver engineering services to our client meeting or exceeding our client’s expectation, on time and within budget. To accomplish this, our project manager has the following objectives: J Develop high-quality, effective and efficient design solutions. J Accomplish work within the design schedule to avoid delay. J Control budget and avoid design cost overruns. J Control construction costs by Value Engineering and Constructability Review. J Avoid costly change orders during construction by producing quality construction documents that have been well reviewed. TECI Project Manager takes the following specific actions to achieve the above objectives: J Listen to Client early and throughout the planning / scoping phases. Reach complete understanding about the needs of the Client. J Develop clear scope, fee, schedule and deliverables. Identify any scope gap or overlap among Interdisciplinary design team members. J In-house kick off meeting to discuss Project Work Plan. J Project Work Plan shall includes the project’s key contacts, scope of work and budget breakdown, resource loaded schedule, description of milestone deliverables, document control procedures, and contract administration procedures. J Follow the in-house QA/QC plan to ensure that quality assurance is adopted and maintained as the project progresses in accordance with guidelines set out by TECI. J Develop and implement specific project Design Criteria that describe the overall project objectives, provide detailed analysis design guidance, and identify codes and standards. The criteria will be in accordance with the directives issued by the Client, other team members and public agencies. J Produce complete and clear construction contract documents. J Continue with Scope, Fee, Schedule monitoring and updates. J Develop and maintain an in-house Design Issues Action Log and Risk Assessment to provide early identification and mitigation of issues that potentially challenge the design team’s ability to meet expectations. J Implement a peer review program to include review of design criteria, reports, technical memorandums, investigations and PS&E at various stages of completion. J Provide constructability review to avoid costly delay. J Review construction cost estimates and schedule at key milestones. J Implement a design change control procedure to identify, justify, and quantify any changes to the design that have an impact on construction cost, schedule or to stakeholders. J Implement a value engineering program. J Communicate effectively and frequently with the design team, the Client, and other stakeholders throughout the project.

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Approach on Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design Civil Engineering – Telamon Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 2 of 3

Overall Approach to Change During design, changes can be triggered by client’s modified scope or unknown condition. When a change by the client has been identified, PM will meet with Client to clearly understand the nature of the change and what scope and schedule impact it may have to the overall task. PM will coordinate and meet with design team to understand the impact of the change to the current design scope, schedule and fee. Schedule and milestones will be reviewed to identify recovery plan and critical path. If the change is not on the critical path, PM will direct design team to isolate changed area and proceed in other areas of the project in order to avoid delay to the project. If the change is on the critical path, PM will direct design team to stop work until further direction is given to avoid wasting Client’s budget. PM will review and prepare scope, fee and schedule proposal for submittal to the Prime Consultant/Client. Once we received the final acceptance and approval of the revised contract modification, PM will review with design team to proceed with the revision and review the schedule recovery plan and critical path.

Design Team Coordination Upon notification of NTP, TECI will attend a project kick off meeting to introduce team members from each design discipline, to confirm and understanding project scope and schedule. During each phase of the design, TECI will be proactive in coordinating background and design information with each consultant. We will be clear on our expectation from each discipline and what is being expected from TECI in order for the project to meet delivery schedule.

TECI will coordinate with the following interdisciplinary design team member on the following areas: 5 Architect and Landscape Architect: Building and site layout concept including ADA accessibility requirements Parking Layout and Roadway Access Study Codes and Regulations related to site layout and design Background coordination Grading and drainage concept LEED requirements Bio-swale requirements and layout for stormwater runoff treatment Irrigation System coordination

5 Geotechnical and Structural Engineer: Existing Conditions: soil type, groundwater elevation, corrosivity, percolation rate Design Recommendations: settlements; building foundation design; pavements design; earthwork, slope and retaining wall criteria.

5 MEP and Utility Agencies: Building utility sizes, points of connections at 5’ outside of building. Existing, proposed and final buildout load calculation. TECI shall coordinate with Utility Agencies on available infrastructure utility sizes, points of connections from off-site to on-site. TECI shall coordinate with MEP and Architect for Central Plant location, if any.

5 Public Agencies and Private Utility Agencies: To understand the project and provide best service to our client, during our proposal phase, TECI normally perform our due diligence that is equivalent to a 10% design development to identify existing off-site condition and specific local design requirements. TECI has identified and established contact with the Redwood City's engineers to understand design requirements and obtained the Block Map from the City, identified existing City owed utilities surrounding the project site.

San Francisco, CA | 855 Folsom Street, Suite 142 | T: 415-837-1336 | F: 415-837-1354 Oakland, CA | 2201 Broadway, Suite M12 | T: 510-893-1669 | F: 415-893-1669 www.telamoninc.com San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Approach on Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design Civil Engineering – Telamon Engineering Consultants, Inc. Page 3 of 3

TECI has compiled the agencies contact list for PG&E, Comcast, AT&T Astound, etc. in order to facilitate team to obtain and identify dry utilities in the vicinity of the project site. Upon notification of the NTP, TECI will continue working with the City engineers and the private utility agencies to discuss project specific design requirements and criteria, confirm existing utilities capacity. TECI will work closely with the City, and set up coordination meeting as necessary, to obtain approval on the proposed utility design and tie-in locations, storm water treatments methods. TECI will coordinate with the City on off-site improvements of Maple Street Bridge widening, and realignment of Blomquist Street.

5 Other Agencies Coordination: TECI is familiar with working in project environments that involves the following agencies: Regional Water Quality Control Board BCDC Corp of Engineers

Specific Understanding of the Development of a Correctional Facility Project The following sections are intended to demonstrate TECI’s familiarity and in-depth understanding of the needs of the design and construction of a correctional facility and site specific concerns. This knowledge will translate into a streamlined approach and smooth completion of tasks for the benefit of the client. 1. Off-site improvements of Maple Street Bridge widening and realignment of Blomquist Street. Schedule and related cost for these improvements is under a third party control. This is identified as a risk factor for the project. 2. Need to identify with the Client if the proposed project qualifies as an Essential Facility, which may require redundancies for all or some utilities, such as the water system, power and sewer. 3. Project is located within Bay Mud. Special attention will be paid on earthwork, grading and settlement. 4. Sanitary Sewer: City of Redwood City will require the use of a SS grinder to minimize the disposal of large obstruction that clogged up the Sanitary Sewer System. TECI recommends that a fish hook system inside the correctional facility to be used in conjunction with the Muffin Monster Sanitary Sewer grinder. In some county, the SS grinder is not acceptable due to their ability to grind up material that is not bio-degradable, such as plastic. City of Redwood City also requires the project team to provide monitoring of the existing public sewer system during the dry and wet season to determine the capacity of the existing system. 5. Storm Drainage System and Storm Water Quality Management: City of Redwood City requires storm water quality control and BMP's design following the San Mateo County C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance. TECI has confirmed that the project site is not in the area subject to Hydromodification Management requirements. The project site is not within BCDC jurisdiction. The project will follow General Permit requirements for stormwater quality control during construction. 6. Security of staff’s parking. Physical and visual separation from public parking. 7. Provide oil separator for the kitchen facility if it is classified as a full cooking kitchen. 8. Identify location for Area of Refuge that is safe and secure. 9. Perimeter Security: Delivery, Sally Port Drop off, exercise area, locking device for utility structures within secured areas.

PROJECT MATRIX TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC Project Information Matrix L L Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility

Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience

Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include projects that do not qualify under these criteria to Comments

facilitate our review) ) 1. Detention or correctional projects completed (include any additional key info you would like us within the last 10 years only. That is, you can only

HOK to know about this project - please be brief !) include projects completed since 2002. Platinum) McCarthy BIM Usage CM at Risk CM at State of CA Gross Area Gross deliverable

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) Design-Build Sundt-Layton (if not in RWC) in not (if part of TI project) Hensel Phelps Hensel (in square feet) No. of Storey(s) No. of

3. Your scope of service on those detention or Building(s) No. of Construction Cost Cost Construction LEED Certification LEED Direct Supervision Direct Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) in not (if Redwood City (RWC) City Redwood correctional projects was full service design for a (not San Mateo County (SMC) County Mateo San new facility, not a minor retrofit. created for coordination and Direct Relevant Experience - (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or No. of Beds (Design Capacity) (Design Beds No. of

(answer yes if a design model was New Facility - Full Service Design Full Service - Facility New Have one or more of your proposed key personnel worked on this project?

San Bruno Jail 2006 $150M 270,000 768 Yes 2 2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center 2007 $176 M 379,000 360 Yes 3 3 Gold Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Contra Costa County Juvenile Hall 2005 $30 M 120,000 240 Yes 1 2 Yes Yes Yes

Claybank Detention Facility 2014 $89 M 495,200 362 Yes 2 2 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

San Francisco Youth Guidance Center 2006 $47 M 82,500 150 No 1 2 Yes Yes Yes

PERSONNEL RESUME TELAMONENGINEERINGCONSULTANTSINC

Mennor Chan, PE, PLS, LEED AP BD+C Principal / Project Manager

Qualifications Ms. Mennor Chan, principal and project manager, YearsofExperience has over 31 years of civil engineering and project 31 Years management experience. She has been a hands- on principal for TECI for the last 18 years. She Education stresses the importance of team coordination and B.S. Civil Engineering, San Jose State understands how to accommodate different clients’ University, Dec 1980 needs. ProfessionalAffiliations Asian American Architects & Engineers Her extensive experience ranges from Master Former Board of Director Planning study, Capital Improvements report & Ho Chi Ming Sister City Committee – recommendations, to preparation of Construction Former Board of Director Documents. Her project experience includes Credentials/Licenses design/relocation of major infrastructure utilities Professional Licensed Civil Engineer, (including wet and joint trench utilities) for many CA #C043842, 1989 public agencies and private developers; local city Professional Land Surveyor, CA street improvements to highway interchange #L8406, 2008 design for Caltrans; residential site development LEED Accredited Professional Building ranging from single lot to 600-unit subdivision; Design + Construction, ID No. 35498 public site developments including schools (K-12 Qualified SWPPP Developer / thru higher education campus), hospitals, transit Qualified SWPPP Practitioner and jail facilities; commercial and mix-use projects. (QSD/QSP), Certificate No. 20020 She has also worked on projects with challenging site condition such as: Bay Mud, waterfront and hillside condition, wetland and contaminated land.

Her public sector experience includes working with all levels of government and regulatory agencies in addition to coordinating public projects with private developers and design professionals. She is sensitive with the latest environmental requirements, such as LEED, NPDES, SWPPP, CSO Reduction, etc in association with designing the projects.

Relevant Experience San Bruno Jail, San Bruno, CA This project involves the construction of a new jail facility adjacent to and ultimately replacing the adjacent facility. Major site and infrastructure improvements were required to modernize the entire jail complex. Architect: KMD Architects, Jim Mueller (415) 398-5191 Contractor: AMEC, George Speights (currently with McCarthy) [email protected]; (415) 364-1327 Owner: City and County of San Francisco, Jim Chang (Project Manager) (415) 364-1327

MENNOR CHAN

Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center, San Leandro, CA It is the design and construction of a multi-award winning 379,000 sf building which houses a detention facility, courthouse, support building and parking lot. It is located on 18 acres of steep difficult terrain and seismically challenging site next to the existing facility. Architect: HOK, Catherine Chan, Project Manager [email protected]; (415) 356-8535 Contractor: Hensel Phelps, Owen Olson (408) 452-1800 Owner: GSA-Alameda, Ron Alameida (former Project Manager) [email protected]; (415) 695-3861

Claybank Adult Detention Facility, Fairfield, CA It is the design and construction of a new 362-bed adult detention facility for housing of individuals who are post-arraignment and pre-sentenced. Estimated completion is 2014. Architect: HOK, Catherine Chan, Project Manager [email protected]; (415) 356-8535 Owner: Solano County, Kanon R Artiche (Solano County Architect) [email protected]; (707) 784-7908

Public Safety Building, San Francisco, CA The Public Safety Building (PSB) project will provide a replacement facility for the SFPD Headquarters and the Southern District Police Station, currently located at 850 Bryant (the Hall of Justice). The project has a total area of 300,000sf, this includes Police Headquarters, Police Station, Fire Station, a Shared functional area and a Parking Structure. It is anticipated to achieve a LEED Gold certification. Architect: HOK / Cavagnero Architects, Paul Woolford (415) 243-0555 Owner: SFPUC, Charles Higueras (Project Manager) [email protected], (415) 557-4646

Doug Zuuring, PE, LEED AP BD+C Civil Engineer

Qualifications Mr. Doug Zuuring has over 10 years of civil YearsofExperience engineering and construction experience. With his 10 Years knowledge of construction he provides TECI constructability expertise in design and Education construction methodologies. As a highly motivated B.S. Civil Engineering, Montana State managerial professional he resolves project or University, May 2001 client issues and ensures that design elements are Credentials/Licenses fully coordinated. Professional Licensed Engineer -Civil, CA #C76818, 2010 He has worked on a wide variety of public works, LEED Accredited Professional Building commercial, institutional and residential site Design + Construction, ID No. development projects. His experience includes 10028319 hydrologic and hydraulic design; grading and Qualified SWPPP Developer / Qualified drainage of parking lots and arterial roadways; SWPPP Practitioner (QSD/QSP), major utility infrastructure design and relocation for Certificate No. 21445 public agencies; right-of-way design and improvements; utility design and coordination (including wet and dry utilities) and project storm water management systems. He works closely with private developers, consultants and public agencies and develops a strong working relationship with other team members. With a passion for the environment he always tries to bring sustainable practices to projects whenever possible. His activities also include surveying job sites after completion to verify that the site was built according to plan.

Mr. Zuuring poses excellent time/task management skills and prioritization due to numerous assignments and responsibilities. He excels in new challenges and has an exceptional problem-solving ability.

Relevant Experience Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center, San Leandro, CA It is the design and construction of a multi-award winning 379,000 sf building which houses a detention facility, courthouse, support building and parking lot. It is located on 18 acres of steep difficult terrain and seismically challenging site next to the existing facility. Architect: HOK, Catherine Chan, Project Manager [email protected]; (415) 356-8535 Contractor: Hensel Phelps, Owen Olson (408) 452-1800 Owner: GSA-Alameda, Ron Alameida (former Project Manager) [email protected]; (415) 695-3861

DOUG ZUURING

New SFPUC Administrative Building, San Francisco, CA This project is the construction of a new SFPUC Administrative Building. It is a 13-story, 277,000 sq ft. building that will house the SFPUC headquarters. This building aims to be the greenest office building in the country and achieve a LEED Platinum Certification from the US Green Building Council.. Architect: KMD Architects, Jim Mueller (415) 398-5191 Contractor: Webcor, Andrea Weishemer (Sr. Project Manager) [email protected]; (415) 978-1117 Owner: SFPUC, Brook Mebrahtu (Project Manager) [email protected], (415) 557-4642

Skyline College Capital Improvement Program 2, San Bruno, CA This project consists of construction of a new wellness center (B4), a new Auto Center (B11), and associated Site Improvements including a new Landscape Quad. Site works includes new parking lots and a ceremonial drop off circle, traffic safety study, update all ADA accessible paths and parking spaces to meet code, pavement repairs, grading and drainage, campus wide sewer and storm systems capacity study. Contractor: Hensel Phelps, Owen Olson (408) 452-1800 Owner: San Mateo County Community College District, Glenn Claycomb [email protected]; (650) 738-7062

INSURANCE

STATEMENT OF AVAILABLE INSURANCE

TECI has worked on many similar projects and with different developers. We are knowledgeable and have the capacity to meet the insurance requirements imposed on us for our involvement in a project.

TECI currently has a $1M Per Claim and Aggregate for Professional Liability. However, TECI have the capacity and ability to provide the insurance requirements ($5M Professional Liability) as requested by HOK.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION QCQI 5J1 :J`:JH1HQ5 VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R $`Q:R1:75 %1 V ):@C:JR5 VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R !" #$%#&$'#%# (" #$'' $))&% *+!",-+ ." /0!+!! /121 !3 - 3 00 +4 !+S 6! *44 7!3 3 8!0. 31190!3 *: :-401!4(0!+0 !1+ 03!3!!4+0 S+" P Q :6046!4410.+4+3 11 (6 : !1 !+ *44 ! : ; *:< % : 6 00!1 + ! 4+ 1 9!+ !64 (0 3 ! +44 1 3!! 1!64+!!!4!+0!(440. 00. (0 =! > + 1 !1 + +. 16!0+ 1 0!4 0. 3 !14 /121 0 0. 6 001 + 2!! 7 14 1 7!31 + 06! +4 0.1-12 1 +1!1? 4+0!40! !14(0 (0+4413!! 1!64+0!(440.!141+00061+2 7 4 114 3 6 ! 3 3 0. 1!6 !3 ! 1 1 44 :+!60!!10.-!13/! : 6 3!! 1!61 @! ! 3 ! 2 0. 0.4! 0!!1!! !!44:)$+!!4! 0 4 + 3 + 41 1 4 03! 2 3 !14 @ 7 1 2 : +41 + 3 ! !14 !! 4 1 06 ! +0 9A* > 1!6 0. $+ 1 2 148B010-4+4 :6!+!!4 9@1 7+ : 0 01 ! 11 1 !6 2 !! -!1 +!! 3!1+16+ *:141+ 13!23!3=!6 3+!2 ?4!1;?<1$/-0!8!C%/0!+ !1 30. 1 3!D1?4+1 2 62-1+ ?1$/-0.2 !9!01= TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INC :J`:JH1HQ7 QCQI 8J1 5 :J`:JH1HQ5 7^ _ R ):@C:JR7$`Q:R1:75 %1 V,5):@C:JR5 7^ _ R 1!33+!! 0-333S06+" P Q *:33+33E**?1103!1!F?GF931 8!C% *:14133101 1/=F 016622141 *:!2-49 )N0+! 22!! !!D1+S06 *:! 2-42931 /=F0+43 403!0. *:!4D10 14 *:!61!6447! 14164!2!!+++E! :6!1++1 !3+3!26616 ! I !+*44!:

9* 9E E**??J 90! +" 00!+!:3+N9.*(0

-:$VQ`

QCQI 5J1 :J`:JH1HQ5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R )`Q:R1:75%1 V +:@C:JR5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R ' ( ) :J `%JQ :1C V]C:HVIVJ !`Q=VH :J`%JQ5 ".1 ]`Q=VH 1J0QC0V .V HQJ `%H 1QJ Q` : JV1 =:1C `:H1C1 7 :R=:HVJ Q:JR%C 1I: VC7`V]C:H1J$ .V:R=:HVJ `:H1C1 784:=Q` 1 V :JR 1J``: `%H %`V 1I]`Q0VIVJ 1V`V `V_%1`VR Q IQRV`J1

:J `:JH1(HQ Q% . %1R:JHV VJ V` :J `:JH1HQ5 ".1 ]`Q=VH 1J0QC0V .V ].:VR `V]C:HVIVJ Q` I:J7 Q` .V V61 1J$ =%0VJ1CV >:CC `:H1C1 1V : .V :J `:JH1HQ Q% . <%1R:JHV VJ V`5JV:`"11J9V:@:JR4 8: `Q^::$%J: >QJR:_8 ".V ]`Q=VH 1 ]:` 1H%C:`C7 H.:CCVJ$1J$ : .V 1 V 1 CQH: VR 1J : VV] .1CC1RV V``:1J :JR V61 1J$ VH%`V `:H1C1 1V .:0V Q`VI:1JQ]V`: 1QJR%`1J$HQJ `%H 1QJ8

TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INC :J`:JH1HQ7 QCQI 8J1 5:J`:JH1HQ5 "7^ _ R +:@C:JR7)`Q:R1:75%1 V45+:@C:JR5 "7^ _ R

0VJ:C : V !`1(QJ 0VJ:C5 ".1]`Q=VH 1HQI]`1VRQ`:JV151J$CV Q`7``VVR :JR1J$ `V1J`Q`HVR I:QJ`7 GCQH@ G%1CR1J$5 1.1H. 11CC ]`Q01RV :]]`Q61I: VC7 5 $`Q _%:`V `VV Q` C1J1H:C :V 4:J:$VIVJ ]:HV :JR `VC: VR 1 V 1I]`Q0VIVJ 8 ".V G%1CR1J$ 1JHC%RV Q``1HV5 $`Q%] `QQI5 :JR Q .V` %]]Q` :`V:8 Q`HQ`:J : V9`1QJ5 Q`HQ`:J5 VJ `:C :C1`Q`J1: QIVJ;( :H1C1 7 %1CR1J$ ! %1CR1J$ .Q1H.1CC:5 ".1]`Q=VH 1HQI]`1VRQ`:JV11J$CV Q`7``VVR :JR1J$ `V1J`Q`HVR I:QJ`7 GCQH@ G%1CR1J$5 1.1H. 11CC ]`Q01RV :]]`Q61I: VC7 5 $`Q _%:`V `VV 1` :J 7J.:JHVR +% ]: 1VJ 9`Q$`:I ]:HV5 5 $`Q _%:`V `VV Q` @VHV] 1QJ VJ V` H`VVJ1J$ 70:C%: 1QJ ]:HV5 :JR `VC: VR 1 V1I]`Q0VIVJ 8

QJ `: Q( : %0VJ1CV :H1C1 7 :` 1JV<5 ".1 ]`Q=VH 8J0QC0V .V HQJ `%H 1QJ Q` : JV1 =%0VJ1CV RV VJ 1QJ `:H1C1 78 ".V `:H1C1 7 HQI]`1V V1$. `QQI IQR%C:`%J1 5V:H.11 .:I:61I%IH:]:H1 7Q`GVR5`Q`: Q :CI:61I%IH:]:H1 7Q`GVR876 V`1Q`:`V:1JHC%RV7 ]C:71J$ `1VCR5 `VH`V: 1QJ Q`:$V5 %J1 `VH`V: 1QJ5 :H 101 7 HQ%` 7:`R5]:`@1J$:JR:CC7]Q` 8

:J4: VQ Q%J 7=:1C "7 8;V VJ 1QJ:H1C1 79`Q=VH 76]V`1VJHV 9:$VQ`

QCQI 5J1 :J`:JH1HQ5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R )`Q:R1:75%1 V +:@C:JR5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R ( ) !VJ1J(%C: V11(. QII%J1 7 VJ V` Q V` 1 75 ".V 9VJ1J%C: =V11. QII%J1 7 VJ V` 1 :J VR%H: 1QJ:C `:H1C1 7 .: 1 VQJ:R:H`V1 V8".V]`Q=VH ; Q :C`CQQ`:`V:1 :]]`Q61I: VC7 5 _%:`V ` 8 8 1JHC%RV : H.QQC5 H%C %`:C HVJ V` :JR :%R1 Q`1%I5 : `1 JV HVJ V` :JR Q .V` VR%H: 1QJ:C `:H1C1 78"7 81:`V :1JVR QRV0VCQ]:I: V`]C:J Q1JHC%RV:J :HHV `Q:R1:75 ]:`@1J$5 QJR1 V % 1C1 78 + .V` V`01HV 1JHC%RV HQQ`R1J: 1QJ11 .:CC`VCV0:J :$VJH1V%H.: .V@D ):JR CQH:CH1 7:$VJH1V8

@7C1JV QCCV$V :]1 :C I]`Q0VIVJ !`Q$`:I Q8 :J`%JQ5 ".1 ]`Q=VH HQJ1 Q` HQJ `%H 1QJ Q` : JV1 1VCCJV HVJ V` ^)_5 : JV1 % Q VJ V` ^)_5 :JR :QH1: VR 1 V 8I]`Q0VIVJ 1JHC%R1J$ : JV1 ::JRH:]V D%:R8 1 V 1Q`@ 1JHC%RVJV1]:`@1J$CQ :JR:HV`VIQJ1:CR`Q]Q``H1`HCV5 `:``1H :`V 7 %R75%]R: V:CC ; :HHV1GCV]: .:JR]:`@1J$]:HV QIVV HQRV5]:0VIVJ `V]:1`5$`:R1J$:JRR`:1J:$V5H:I]% 11RVV1V`:JR Q`I7 VIH:]:H1 7 %R78

:J `%JQ :1C V]C:HVIVJ !`Q=VH :J`%JQ5 ".1 ]`Q=VH 1J0QC0V .V HQJ `%H 1QJ Q` : JV1 =:1C `:H1C1 7 :R=:HVJ Q:JR%C 1I: VC7`V]C:H1J$ .V:R=:HVJ `:H1C1 784:=Q` 1 V :JR 1J``: `%H %`V 1I]`Q0VIVJ 1V`V `V_%1`VR Q IQRV`J1

TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INC :J`:JH1HQ7 QCQI 8J1 5:J`:JH1HQ5 "7^ _ R +:@C:JR7)`Q:R1:75%1 V45+:@C:JR5 "7^ _ R V C:JR :JR :J:C %`0V7 :J`%JQ5 ".1]`Q=VH 1:]:` Q` .V:J`:JH1HQ8J V`J: 1QJ:C 1`]Q` ^8 _<@VHQ0V`7 H 1QJ9C:J8"7 8]V``QÌVRC:JR%`0V71J$ Q %]]Q` .V 7J01`QJIVJ :C QJ%C :J V``Q` 1J 1RVJ 1`71J$ CQH: 1QJ :CQJ$ .V %]1R @Q1 :J:C L Q% . :QI1 : :J:C L : V1: V`"`V: IVJ 9C:J :`V: Q`VH`V: V:_%: 1H.:G1 : 8 !QC1HV `:1J1J$ :H1C1 7 :J`%JQ5 ".1]`Q=VH 1J0QC0VHQJ `%H 1QJQ`:JV19QC1HV"`:1J1J$:H1C1 7 : .V:J`:JH1HQ8J V`J: 1QJ:C 1`]Q` 88 1JHC%RV:.QQ 1J$ `:J$V5:5_%:`V`VV 1J$CV Q`7G%1CR1J$5:`Q%`R Q`7 QJ `QCLJ1]V` "Q1V` :JR : R :CC ]:`@1J$ CQ 8 ".1 ]`Q=VH 1 %JRV`C71J$ G7 G:7 I%R8 ;V1$J I% :J 1H1]: V :J7 `% %`V R1``V`VJ 1:C V CVIVJ GV 1VVJ .V G%1CR1J$ :JR Q .V` 1 V 1I]`Q0VIVJ :JR% 1C1 1V8 JQ .V`H.:CCVJ$V1 .: .V]`Q=VH 1CQH: VRJV:` .V.Q`VC1JV:JR1 1J0QC0V]VÌ1 1J$11 .0:`1Q%:$VJH1V%H.:) ; 5@D )5:JR Q`]Q`7J$1JVV`8 : V1:7 R :( !:CQ C Q VRV0VCQ]IVJ !`Q=VH :J: VQ Q%J 7 9`Q=VH 7J$1JVV``Q` .1R:H`V`V1RVJ 1:CLHQIIV`H1:C`VRV0VCQ]IVJ ]`Q=VH 89C:JJVR5H.VR%CVR5 :JRHQQ`R1J: VR VH.J1H:C1J`QÌ: 1QJ`Q` .V7J01`QJIVJ :C8I]:H @V]Q` `Q` .V]`Q=VH 8 1J :$V :@(5 VJCQ !:`@ :J: VQ Q%J 7 9`Q=VH 7J$1JVV``Q` .1 R:H`V5R1J$CV`:I1C7`V1RVJ 1:CRV0VCQ]IVJ 89C:J5H.VR%CV5HQJR%H :JR HQQ`R1J: V RV :1CVR ].:V Q` VH.J1H:C 1Q`@ 11 . RV0VCQ]V`5 H1 7 Q``1H1:C :JR C:JRH:]V :`H.1 VH 8 9`Q=VH RV1$J:JRRV0VCQ]IVJ `Q`$`:R1J$:JR% 1C1 77 VI8;%V Q .V`V_%1`VIVJ Q]`VV`0VQ0V` +:@ `VVQJ1 V5$`:R1J$GVH:IV: VH.J1H:CH.:CCVJ$V8 1C1 77 VIRV1$J:CQGVH:IV0V`7 `V `1H 10V8 :` 1J1_%V Q0V Q V` 1 75 ;V1$J7J$1JVV``Q` .1 R%J1 1: V```QJ `V1RVJ 1:CRV0VCQ]IVJ 1J 1 7Q`Q V` 1 789V``QÌVR ]`Q=VH RV1$J :JR RV0VCQ]IVJ `Q` $`:R1J$ :JR % 1C1 7 7 VI ``QI I: V` ]C:JJ1J$ .`Q%$. HQJ `%H 1QJ5]`V]:`: 1QJQ`]VH1`1H: 1QJ5:JR`V]Q` ]`V]:`: 1QJ8 Q` .V:( 1R$V `1G:JV5 ;V1$JVR .VVJ 1`VQJR1 V QÌR`:1J:JR:J1 :`7V1V`7 VI`Q` .1R:H`V5 R%J1 .1CC1RV `V1RVJ 1:CRV0VCQ]IVJ 844]`Q$`:I1:GV1J$%VR8

:J4: VQ Q%J 7=:1C "7 8 Q%J 7Q`:J4: VQ9`Q=VH 76]V`1VJHV 9:$VQ`

TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INC :J`:JH1HQ7 QCQI 8J1 5:J`:JH1HQ5 "7^ _ R +:@C:JR7)`Q:R1:75%1 V45+:@C:JR5 "7^ _ R 1JR: 1( : :C7 1 75 ;V1$JVR .V VJ 1`V QJR1 V Q`I R`:1J 7 VI `Q` .1 R:H`V5 R%J1 .1CC1RV `V1RVJ 1:C RV0VCQ]IVJ 8 VCIQJ : V` 1( `1H VCIQJ 5 1J$: V`Q`@]`Q$`:I Q:J:C71CC : V` ;1 `1G% 1QJ 7 VI `Q` 1 7 Q` @VR1QQR 1 78 8RVJ 1`1VR ]`QGCVI :`V: :JR `VHQIIVJRVR 1I]`Q0VIVJ Q .V 1 78

:J4: VQ Q%J 7=:1C "7 8 Q%J 7Q`:J4: VQ9`Q=VH 76]V`1VJHV 9:$VQ`

QCQI 5J1 :J`:JH1HQ5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R )`Q:R1:75%1 V +:@C:JR5 "VC7^ _ R :67^ _ R '*+ ', - ( )

@7C1JV QCCV$V :]1 :C I]`Q0VIVJ !`Q$`:I Q8 :J)`%JQ5 ".1 ]`Q=VH HQJ1 Q` HQJ `%H 1QJ Q` : JV1 1VCCJV HVJ V` ^)_5 : JV1 % Q VJ V` ^)_5 :JR :QH1: VR 1 V 8I]`Q0VIVJ 1JHC%R1J$ : JV1 ::JRH:]V D%:R8 1 V 1Q`@ 1JHC%RVJV1]:`@1J$CQ :JR:HV`VIQJ1:CR`Q]Q``H1`HCV5 `:``1H :`V 7 %R75%]R: V:CC ; :HHV1GCV]: .:JR]:`@1J$]:HV QIVV HQRV5]:0VIVJ `V]:1`5$`:R1J$:JRR`:1J:$V5H:I]% 11RVV1V`:JR Q`I7 VIH:]:H1 7 %R78

QCRVJ : V T V1 ! RI1J1( `: 10V %1CR1J$ :J `:JH1HQ5 ".1]`Q=VH 1 .VHQJ `%H 1QJQ`:JV19 RI1J1 `: 10V )%1CR1J$88 1:R Q`75 5_` 8G%1CR1J$ .: 11CC.Q%V .V9 .V:R_%:` V`8".1G%1CR1J$:1I QGV .V$`VVJV Q``1HV G%1CR1J$ 1J .V HQ%J `7 :JR :H.1V0V : :77; 9C: 1J%I V` 1`1H: 1QJ``QI .V<`VVJ)%1CR1J$ Q%JH1C8"7 81 .V 101C 7J$1JVV`Q``VHQ`R`Q` .V]`Q=VH 8

TELAMON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INC :J`:JH1HQ7 QCQI 8J1 5:J`:JH1HQ5 "7^ _ R +:@C:JR7)`Q:R1:75%1 V45+:@C:JR5 "7^ _ R !1V` V1 `%1(V(.1] VÌ1J:C :J `:JH1HQ5 ".V 91V` FV1 `%1V .1] "VÌ1J:C ]`Q=VH 11CC HQJ0V` .V 5_%:`V`VV V61 1J$]1V`:JRI:`1 1IV.VR1J Q:JV1 ]`1I:`75 1J$CV GV` . H`%1V .1] VÌ1J:C8 8 :CQ 1JHC%RV .V RV0VCQ]IVJ 1`:]C:<:CQH: VR:CQJ$ .V7IG:`H:RV`QGV 1VVJ 91V` :JR :JR IQR1`1H: 1QJ Q .V `VV :JR 1RV1:C@ HQJ`1$%`: 1QJ:CQJ$ .V7IG:`H:RV`Q8 V1 !%GC1H :`V 7 %1CR1J$ :J `:JH1HQ5 ".V 9%GC1H :`V 7 )%1CR1J$ ^9)_ ]`Q=VH 11CC ]`Q01RV : `V]C:HVIVJ `:H1C1 7 `Q` .V 9; >V:R_%:` V` :JR .V Q% .V`J;1 `1H 9QC1HV : 1QJ5H%``VJ C7CQH: VR: )`7:J ^ .V>:CCQ`=% 1HV_8".V]`Q=VH .:: Q :C:`V:Q`5`5 .11JHC%RV9QC1HV>V:R_%:` V`59QC1HV : 1QJ51`V : 1QJ5: .:`VR`%JH 1QJ:C:`V::JR:9:`@1J$ `%H %`V88 1:J 1H1]: VR Q:H.1V0V::77;1$.C:JR>Q]1 :C;`Q%$.C7R:H`VH:I]%11 %: VR1J +:@C:JR; :J J QJ1Q ;1 `1H :JR 1 V 1J : `V1RVJ 1:C JV1$.GQ`.QQR8 ".1 `V]C:HVIVJ ]`Q=VH 1 `V]QJR1J$ Q .V : V Q` :C1`Q`J1:; CV$1C: 1QJ T ) 8 "7 8 ]`Q01RVR : H.VI: 1H;V1$JCV0VC %R7:JR]`V]:`VR .V;V1$J `1 V`1: `Q` .V;V1$JL)%1CR V:I8

:J4: VQ Q%J 7=:1C "7 8;V1$J)%1CRL 4: @1@9`Q=VH 76]V`1VJHV 9:$VQ`

Project Name: New Central Subway – Third Street Light Rail – Phase 2 San Francisco, California

Project Description: This project consists of the construction of the new light rail line that will connect Visitacion Valley to North Beach in 3 phases: • Phase 1 – Visitacion Valley to Fourth Street and King • Phase 2 – Fourth Street and King to Chinatown • Phase 3 – Chinatown to North Beach

Phase 2 has 7 Construction Packages (CP): • CP 1 – Utility Relocation for Moscone Station and Portal • CP 2 – Utility Relocation for Union Square/Market Street Station • CP 3 – Tunnel Construction • CP 4, 5, 6 – Union Square/Market Street Station, Chinatown Station, Moscone Station • CP 7 – Surface Track

TECI takes the lead and manages the Utilities Relocation design and coordination for 6 out of the 7 Construction Packages. Furthermore, we are the JV Partner with PB Americas for CP 1, 2 and 3. These packages are either under construction, bidding in progress or soon to be out to bid.

This project affects heavily populated areas within the City. It requires strenuous coordination with both public and private agencies. Agencies that TECI worked side by side with includes, SFWD, SFFD, AWSS, SFPUC, SFDPW, SFMTA, SFDPT, Urban Forestry, MUNI, PGE, ATT, Comcast, NRG and more. As the Package Manager for CP1 and CP2, TECI worked closely with the designers for all agencies to ensure the quality and timely submittal of the Plans, Specifications, Estimates and Quality Control Process.

Apart from that, TECI also coordinated with the businesses that will be affected to ensure that SFMTA have their cooperation and that there will be very limited disruption during construction.

Owner Name: San Francisco Municipal Transit Authority (SFMTA)

Client Name: PB/Telamon Joint Venture

Reference Name: Mr. Albert Hoe Deputy Project Manager Central Subway Project 415.701.4289

Construction Budget: $1.7 billion

Project Completion Date: 2009 – 2020

Table of Contents

Tab 1 ...... Firm Background Project Approach

Tab 2 ...... Detention Project Experience Project Information Matrix Project Experience with HOK Project Experience with CM/GC, CM at Risk, Design-Build

Tab 3 ...... BIM Project Experience Sustainable Design Experience San Mateo County Project Experience

Tab 4 ...... Personnel Resumes Client References

Tab 5 ...... Insurance Coverages Tab 1 Firm Background

Founded in 1965, SOHA Engineers is one of the leading structural engineering firms in California, with offices in San Francisco and Oakland. SOHA professionals are dedicated to implementing and maintaining a creative and cost-effective approach to project delivery and award-winning structural design in a team environment. For over four decades, SOHA has been providing a full spectrum of services, including seismic design of new buildings and structures, seismic evaluation and rehabilitation of existing structures and bridges, historical renovations, shoring and underpinning design, seismic evaluations and reports, plan checking, and peer review. We have engineered some of the most significant projects in the Bay Area, including numerous projects at the San Francisco International Airport, the new Children’s Center at Yerba Buena Gardens in San Francisco, the Chabot Observatory and Science Center in Oakland, and the new east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Services Offered: Our main focus is to provide the highest level of services to Structural Design ensure the delivery of a successful project; SOHA maintains Seismic Rehabilitation an exemplary record of completing projects on time. Meeting budget and scheduling requirements are the direct result of our Historic Renovation sustained project management, value engineering, cost control, and quality control efforts, all of which SOHA routinely Seismic Evaluation employs through each phase of every project. Peer Review SOHA has special expertise in seismic design and Plan Check rehabilitation of commercial, government, transportation, and Shoring & Underpinning institutional facilities (including housing, schools, health facilities, community centers, justice facilities and civic Construction Support buildings) in accordance with the latest codes and regulations BIM / Revit in California. We also have extensive experience as a prime consultant to lead multi-discipline consultant teams and to effectively plan, execute and manage complex, multi-faceted projects under tight budgetary constraints and demanding schedules. SOHA is a minority-owned business enterprise (and DBE Certified) dedicated to maintaining an integrated staff and providing equal opportunity for both minority and women employees. Our staff actively participates in community and professional organizations.

Contact: Stephen Lau, President T 415.989.9900 F 415.989.9909 E [email protected]

Main Office: 48 Colin P. Kelly Jr. Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 T 415 989 9900 F 415 989 9909 330 Franklin, Suite 400 Oakland CA 94607 T 510 444 5577 F 510 444 5599 www.soha.com Project Approach

Integrated Design

First and foremost, SOHA’s integrated design approach focuses on comprehensive involvement at the outset from the entire team – Sheriff’s Office, the County, architects, engineers, specialty consultants, and CM/GC. Our past success has led us to this approach that is highly integrated and collaborative, and addresses the overall needs of the project that emerges from a clear understanding of the owner’s vision, design intent, sustainability and performance goals. To achieve this high value solution, SOHA strives for an intense and early collaboration with the entire team to develop various structural design alternatives. Working together, this integrated approach facilitates the development of a building system matrix that helps the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office better understand the costs and risks associated with each alternative, and makes the most informed decisions throughout the design process.

SOHA’s extensive experience in the design of governmental and institutional facilities has evolved through our fundamental belief that good structural engineering is rooted in common sense. We are committed to designing the most practical integrated structural systems recognizing the fact that the best solution is not always the most conventional, and that it often requires implementation of creative and innovative structural systems supported by thorough code or performance based analyses. Within this framework, we strongly believe that the benefits of integrated design outweigh the conventional bid/build process.

Structural Issues

SOHA’s proposed personnel has extensive experience with designing projects in poor soil conditions and Bay Mud located in San Mateo County. SOHA has designed numerous complex projects at the San Francisco International Airport (East of Highway 101) with extremely challenging Bay Mud and liquefaction issues. With the experience and knowledge gained from working on these projects, SOHA can bring invaluable insights to the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility project. These benefits include our extensive research in selecting the most appropriate and cost effective deep foundation system for these types of soil profiles, and designing the most efficient structural ground floor slab system to support the superimposed floor loads. We understand that there will be significant loss of ground support due to severe seismic shaking at the proposed site for this project. We have dealt with this similar issue in the past, and have developed creative and effective structural solutions as well as means of properly supporting various suspended subgrade utilities and pipings. Project Approach (continued)

SOHA has extensive experience in justice and detention facilities, and understands that structural design of correctional facilities requires careful consideration of several important factors including:

Safety and Security requirements consistent with the intended uses and performances of various buildings in the facility. Simplicity and Constructability of the structural system as a part of the Architectural and other integrated building systems. Flexibility and Redundancy of the structural system for the purpose of potential future expansion and modifications. Serviceability with well-controlled vertical and horizontal framing displacements due to seismic and wind forces. Well-controlled Vibration and Sound transmission, as a result of foot traffic and building systems’ equipment operations. Sustainability. Schedule and Cost.

In the design of Inmate Housing Units in correctional facilities, we will seize the opportunities associated with the repetitive nature of the interior programmed spaces to explore various structural systems to not only provide the highest level of security and quality, but also significantly reduce the construction cost and schedule. Some of these strategies, in addition to more conventional framing systems, may include the following:

Interior Structural Framing Systems

Structural Steel Modular Cell System with Concrete Filled Metal Deck Pre-cast Concrete Modular Cell Systems with Pre-cast Concrete Plank Floors Pre-cast Concrete Post and Beam System with Pre-cast Concrete Plank Floors Structural Steel Post and Beam Pre-Manufactured Systems such as ConXtech Pre-Fabricated Metal Systems

Exterior Wall Systems

Exposed Pre-cast Concrete (tilt-up) Panels Modular Pre-cast Concrete or GFRC Panels Thin Shell Concrete on Steel Studs Structural Metal Panels on Steel Studs or Girts Tab 2 Detention Project Experience

San Francisco County Jail No. 3, San Bruno, California – SOHA Engineers is part of a design-build team selected to provide design and construction of this multi-building correctional facility to include inmate housing, administration building, multi-purpose building and central plant. As part of the design process, SOHA Engineers works in a collaborative process with the builder, the design team and the County of San Francisco Sheriff’s Department. The facility is located within 2 miles of the San Andreas fault.

San Francisco Juvenile Justice Center, San Francisco, California – A multi-services juvenile center providing a diversity of services to youth and their families at one location. San Francisco Youth Guidance Center Juvenile Hall is the replacement of an existing facility on the same site. The new facility consists of six masonry bearing wall and steel-framed buildings, as well as two additional all steel-framed buildings. The project is located in an urban environment in the City of San Francisco.

Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility, Fairfield, California – This project for Solano County Sheriff’s Department includes a new 140,000 square-foot housing facility with 512 beds and the renovation of a 380-bed existing facility. This facility is to include housing units, administration, indoor and outdoor recreation area, health services. Project also includes phasing during construction.

Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus, Fresno, California – The campus provides services to various juvenile justice facilities and functions for the County of Fresno. Phase I of the project includes a commitment section, a detention section, an institutional core building, a delinquency court building, central plant building, institutional support building and various other minor structures.

Sonoma County Male Adult Detention Facility, Santa Rosa, California – Conceptual Design of this project to include a new Phase 1 Addition of 700 beds with approximately 225,000 square- feet and a new Phase 2 Addition of 500 beds with approximately 165,00 square-feet to include housing, medical, clinic and support areas. Project also included a new Community Correctional Center with 125,000 square-feet on four floors, and renovation of 50,000 square-feet of an existing facility. Detention Project Experience (continued)

Folsom State Prison, Folsom, California – SOHA is the Prime Consultant responsible for coordinating design and construction administration activities for all disciplines including architectural, electrical and mechanical and serving as the liaison with the Folsom State Prison officials. SOHA designed the seismic retrofit for Inmate Housing 1, Inmate Housing 5, Dining Room 1 and 2. The 1800- inmate facility had to remain fully operational and secure during construction.

California Institute for Men at Chino, Chino, California – This is a Correctional Facility made out of five units. Units one to four were built in 1950 while unit five was built in 1959. The building structures occupy an area of 120,000-sf. The construction is primarily made of reinforced concrete roof slabs, floor slabs, walls and columns; the foundation is a continuous footing type. The seismic retrofit of these massive structures consisted of the verification and retrofitting of collectors, providing lateral support elements (primarily shear walls) and the appropriate transfer of the seismic forces to the ground.

Soledad State Prison, Soledad, California – The Vocational Building VS-1 was built in 1959. It is a one-story light-gauge steel framing structure of 60 x 380 feet in dimension; the floor area is 228,00-sf. Seismic forces are transversely supported by light gauge steel moment frames placed every 20 feet and longitudinally by vertical cross bracing members. The seismic retrofit scheme consists of strengthening the two lines of lateral resistance.

California Youth Authority, Preston School of Industry, Preston, California – Built in 1929, the facility is a one-story T- shaped, unreinforced masonry bearing wall building with basement. The roof is a steeply pitched gabled roof with dormers. The building has 16,300-sf on the ground floor and 7,200-sf in the basement for a total of 23,500-sf. As the prime consultant, SOHA was responsible for complete coordination with all disciplines for seismic rehabilitation of this historically significant building.

San Quentin State Prison, San Quentin, California – The East Cell Block Building is a 50-foot high one-story reinforced concrete building with plan dimensions of approximately 339’x64’. Clearspan steel trusses spaced 18-feet apart span the transverse direction and support a wood-framed roof. SOHA Engineers completed Design Development Drawings and Specifications. The analysis revealed structural deficiencies in the existing buttresses in the transverse direction, the west longitudinal wall and roof diaphragm for the design seismic forces. Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix 2/28/2012

Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience ) Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include Comments projects that do not qualify under these criteria to facilitate our review) (include any additional 1. Detention or correctional projects completed within key info you would like the last 10 years only. That is, you can only include us to know about this projects completed since 2002. HOK project - please be Platinum) McCarthy BIM Usage CM at Risk Gross Area State of CA

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) brief !) Design-Build Sundt-Layton part of TI project) (if not in RWC) (if not in Hensel Phelps (in square feet) No. of Storey(s)

3. Your scope of service on those detention or No. of Building(s) LEED Certification Construction Cost Cost Construction Direct Supervision Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) not in (if Redwood City (RWC) City Redwood correctional projects was full service design for a new (not facility, not a minor retrofit. (SMC) County Mateo San Direct Relevant Experience - (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or No. of Beds (Design Capacity) (Design No. of Beds (answer yes if a design model was New Facility - Full Service Design Have one or more of your proposed key personnel worked on this project? created for coordination and deliverable

San Francisco County Jail No. 3 2006 $100M 280,000 768 Yes 3 3 to 4 None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes San Bruno, California San Francisco Juvenile Justice Center 2007 $45M 95,000 200 Yes 3 2 None Yes Yes Yes San Francisco, California Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility 2013 $70M 140,000 512 Yes 3 2 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fairfield, California Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus 2007 $180M 655,000 1020 Yes 12 2 Silver Yes Yes Yes Fresno, California Sonoma County Male Adult Detention TBD $150M 225,000 700 Yes 3 2 to 7 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Santa Rosa, California Folsom State Prison 2002 $30M 300,000 1,800 Yes 4 4 None Yes Yes Folsom, California Project Experience with HOK

New Public Safety Building, San Francisco, California – New six-story, 300,000 square-foot building. Building program consists of police headquarters, local police station, local fire station and parking. This facility is located in the Mission Rock neighborhood of San Francisco. Design also includes progressive collapse and blast design. This project is designed to be LEED Gold certified.

National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Pacific Regional Center, Main Facility, Honolulu, HI – Using Revit software, SOHA designed a combination of concrete shear walls and braced frames system to preserve the open architectural layout for the adaptive reuse of this historical landmark, which consists of two 260,000 gross sq-ft aircraft hangars (B175 & B176) that survived the Pearl Harbor attack. Design challenges included preserving the historical integrity of the hangars while removing the existing mezzanines, adding new floors and connecting the hangars to a new 100,000 sq-ft building (Building A).

San Francisco Hall of Justice, Feasibility Study – SOHA Engineers performed a feasibility study of modifying the current San Francisco Hall of Justice located at Seventh and Bryant Streets. The existing ‘L’-configuration would be separated into two rectangular wings. The east wing would continue courtroom operations, while the west wing would be demolished, abandoned or rehabbed for office operations. It was intended to determine the feasibility of this configuration for operations in the following 20 years until a new courtroom facility would be constructed and online, potentially at an adjacent site. Project Experience with CM/GC, CM at Risk, Design-Build

New PUC Administration Building, 525 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco – This 13-story building provides 265,000 square-feet of office space and two levels of below-grade parking. Extensive utilization of sustainable design features is expected to win a LEED Platinum Rating by the U.S. Green Building Council. The structural system consists of post- tensioned slab/beam floors and post-tensioned concrete shear walls. The foundation system is comprised of a five-foot thick concrete mat. Delivery Method: CM/GC Builder: Webcor

New Public Safety Building, San Francisco – New six-story, 300,000 square-foot building. Building program consists of police headquarters, local police station, local fire station and parking. This facility is located in the Mission Rock neighborhood of San Francisco. Design also includes progressive collapse and blast design. This project is designed to be LEED Gold certified. Delivery Method: CM/GC Builder: Pankow

Center for Health Sciences & Technology, Ohlone College, Newark – Designed to accommodate approximately 2,500 full time equivalent students, SOHA designed this new LEED Platinum ranked 130,000-sq. ft. facility using a gravity and lateral system composed of steel braced frames and steel moment frames with composite floors. Project scope includes classroom buildings, student union, a gymnasium/shop building and administrative offices. Delivery Method: CM at Risk Builder: Turner

Joint-Use Building, City College of San Francisco – SOHA designed a complicated framing system, including architecturally exposed steel braced frames that would accommodate the architectural vision and MEP elements of this 103,000-sq. ft., four-story (plus basement) classroom facility. Featuring a full-height atrium that spans the length of the building, SOHA interconnected the structure’s two long wings with a series of compatible bridges. With a Green Roof and series of light monitors, this building carries a LEED Gold rating. Delivery Method: CM at Risk Builder: Bovis

New Mission Campus, City College of San Francisco – For this new 198,000-sq. ft. education facility, located in the Mission District of San Francisco, SOHA designed a four-story, steel-framed superstructure with a full basement level of cast-in-place concrete construction. The facility houses classrooms, a theater and audio/visual auditorium, administrative offices, student facility services, a library, multipurpose rooms and storage facilities. The cornerstone of the campus features a 20-ft. replica of a Mayan Aztec Calendar at the main entry. Delivery Method: CM at Risk Builder: McCarthy Project Experience with CM/GC, CM at Risk, Design-Build (continued)

University Center Building, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park – This new 133,000-sq. ft. facility will serve3 as the new university center for the campus. This facility houses a cafeteria, restaurant, kitchen areas, bookstore, administrative offices and a new theater. Structural system includes steel beams and columns with metal deck, lateral system utilizes buckling restrained braced frames to minimize the number of braced bays and foundation work. Delivery Method: CM at Risk Builder: Sundt

New Cruise Ship Terminal at Pier 27, San Francisco, California – Project is for a new cruise ship terminal to be located at the existing Pier 27 in San Francisco. Project includes a terminal building approximately 80,000 square feet, which will serve as the new main cruise ship terminal facility for San Francisco. Current design schemes include renovation and structural strengthening of the existing pier 27 building as the terminal building and design of a new terminal building. This is a Revit project. Delivery Method: CM/GC Builder: Turner

New Wellness Center, City College of San Francisco – The irregular, complex layout of this new 156,000-sq. ft. facility required a lateral structural system comprised of special concentric braced frames and reinforced concrete shear walls supported on a continuous concrete grid footing system. Project included a large gymnasium featuring architecturally exposed long-span tresses, computerized fitness center, dance theater complex, staff offices, student health services and an indoor swimming pool. Delivery Method: CM at Risk Builder: Hunt

San Francisco County Jail No. 3, San Bruno, California – SOHA Engineers is part of a design-build team selected to provide design and construction of this multi-building correctional facility to include inmate housing, administration building, multi-purpose building and central plant. As part of the design process, SOHA Engineers works in a collaborative process with the builder, the design team and the client. The facility is located within 2 miles of the San Andreas fault. Delivery Method: Design-Build Builder: AMEC

Public Safety Building, Berkeley, California – SOHA Engineers is part of a design/build team for the structural design of this new two-story (with basement) reinforced concrete shear wall, seismically isolated essential facility building. Located in close proximity to the Hayward Fault, it houses the City of Berkeley Police and Fire Department, 911 dispatch center, training operations, control center, administrative offices, and holding cells. Delivery Method: Design-Build Builder: S. J. Amoroso References for CM at Risk

1. Sarah Garcia, Project Manager Turner Construction Company 1625 Clay Street Oakland, CA 94612 Tel: (510) 407-9662 Email: [email protected]

2. Mark Bartlett, Regional Manager Hunt Construction Group 100 Pine Street, Suite 2460 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: (415) 391-3930 Email: [email protected]

3. George Speights, Director McCarthy Construction 400 Montgomery Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: (415) 364-1327 Email: [email protected]

4. Ron Deal, Employee Owner Sundt Construction, Inc. Sonoma State University Center Project 1801 East Cotati Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Tel: (775) 742-3576 Email: [email protected] Tab 3 BIM (Revit) Project Experience

SOHA Engineers has been in the forefront of the implementation of BIM (Revit) design into our projects for both our governmental and institutional clients. The staff at SOHA has extensive experience in the development and utilization of BIM (Revit) in engineering design, multi-disciplinary coordination, production of contract documents, and construction verification. Some of our recent BIM (Revit) projects include:

Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility, Fairfield, CA New Public Safety Building, San Francisco, CA New PUC Administration Building, 525 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA NOAA Pacific Regional Center, Main Facility, Honolulu, HI New Pier 27 Cruise Ship Terminal, San Francisco, CA San Francisco General Hospital Rebuild, San Francisco, CA MUNI Central Subway, San Francisco, CA Battelle Biological Sciences Facility, Richland, WA Battelle Computational Sciences Facility, Richland, WA Kaiser Medical Office Building, San Francisco, CA

Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility New PUC Administration Building

New Pier 27 Cruise Ship Terminal NOAA Pacific Regional Center Sustainable Design Experience

SOHA Engineers strive for sustainable design by working with the design team to create the most efficient design while at the same time ensuring durability in the construction. SOHA Engineers also work with the builder to find optimal ways to incorporate the use of recycled content and local materials. For structural steel buildings we specify a high percentage of recycled steel. For concrete design, the reinforcement is specified to be 90% recycled while the cementitious material is specified to be around 50% recycled materials. In some cases we will also specify recycled aggregates.

We have been involved in various levels of LEED Certified projects in recent years for our governmental and institutional clients including:

New Pier 27 Cruise Ship Terminal, San Francisco, CA (Gold) NOAA Pacific Regional Center, Honolulu, HI (Silver) New PUC Administration Building, 525 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA (Platinum) Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility, Fairfield, CA (Silver) Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus, Fresno, CA (Silver) New Public Safety Building, San Francisco, CA (Gold) East Oakland Sports Center, Oakland, CA (Silver) Wellness Center, City College of San Francisco, CA (Silver) Joint-Use Building, City College of San Francisco, CA (Gold) Performing Arts Center, City College of San Francisco, CA (Gold) Center for Health and Sciences & Technology, Ohlone Community College, Newark, CA (Platinum) University Center at Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA (Silver) University Center at University of the Pacific, Stockton, CA (Gold)

Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus CCSF Performing Arts Center San Mateo County Project Experience

San Francisco County Jail No. 3, San Bruno Skyline Community College, San Bruno South San Francisco Unified School District, South San Francisco Burlingame Intermediate School, Burlingame Millbrae Administration Building, Millbrae Boarding Area ‘A’, San Francisco International Airport, Millbrae North Terminal Buildings Seismic Upgrade, San Francisco International Airport, Millbrae AMR Combs, Fixed Based Operational Facility, San Francisco International Airport, Millbrae Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion, San Francisco International Airport, Millbrae BART/Airport Rail Transit System, San Francisco International Airport, Millbrae Peninsula YMCA, San Mateo San Andreas Outlet Structure, San Mateo Lower Crystal Springs Wall, San Mateo Upper Crystal Springs Dam Pump Station, San Mateo Lincoln Center, Foster City Foster’s Landing, Foster City Kaiser Medical Office Building, Redwood City San Mateo County Projects in Bay-Mud:

Boarding Area ‘A’, SF International Airport North Terminal Buildings, SF International Airport

Peninsula YMCA, San Mateo Lincoln Center, Foster City Tab 4 Resume

Stephen Lau, PE Project Assignment SOHA Engineers Principal-in-Charge

Education Professional Registrations BSCE, 1977, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 1981, Civil Engineer, 33225, California MSCE, 1978, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

Key Qualifications Mr. Lau is a Partner with SOHA Engineers and has been with the firm since 1981. He serves as Principal-In-Charge of major and complex projects for SOHA Engineers. Projects include seismic design and analysis and seismic rehabilitation of institutional and historically significant structures. Mr. Lau also manages prime As-Needed contracts for the Federal General Services Administration, the State of California Department of General Services and the City & County of San Francisco. These contracts include multi-discipline, multi-task management with tight budgets and demanding schedules. Mr. Lau has extensive experience in managing and designing various types of public buildings including libraries, city halls, administration/office and justice facilities.

Mr. Lau specializes in developing cost-effective, state-of-the-art design solutions for projects involving a high degree of structural complexity. He is an expert in performance-based seismic design and has developed innovative, unconventional structural systems for numerous buildings of all types – multi-family residential, commercial, office and mixed-use facilities, hotels, schools, parking structures and justice facilities. He has in-depth knowledge of the appropriate application of all major engineering materials, including steel, concrete, wood, and masonry. As Principal-In-Charge, Mr. Lau will be responsible for the overall delivery of the project including quality assurance/quality control, contracts & schedule, cost control and technical issues.

Relevant Experience San Francisco County Jail No. 3, San Bruno, California – SOHA Engineers is part of a design- build team selected to provide design and construction of this $100M multi-building correctional facility to include inmate housing, administration building, multi-purpose building and central plant. As part of the design process, SOHA Engineers works in a collaborative process with the builder, the design team and the client. The facility is isolated within 2 miles of the San Andreas fault.

San Francisco Youth Guidance Center and Juvenile Hall, San Francisco, California – A multi-services juvenile center providing a diversity of services to youth and their families at one location. San Francisco Youth Guidance Center Juvenile Hall is the replacement of an existing facility on the same site. The new facility consists of six masonry bearing wall and steel-framed buildings, as well as two additional all steel-framed buildings. The seismic load transfer system uses masonry shear walls and steel-braced components.

Fresno Juvenile Campus, Fresno, California – The campus provides services to various juvenile justice facilities and functions for the County of Fresno. Phase I of the project includes a commitment section, a detention section, an institutional core building, a delinquency court building, central plant building, institutional support building and various other minor structures.

California Institute for Men at Chino, Chino, California – This is a Correctional Facility made out of five units. The building structures occupy an area of 120,000 square-feet. The construction is primarily made of reinforced concrete roof slabs, floor slabs, walls and columns; the foundation is a continuous footing type. The seismic retrofit of these massive structures consisted of the verification and/or retrofitting of collectors, providing lateral support elements (primarily shear walls) and the appropriate transfer of the seismic forces to the ground.

Folsom State Prison, Folsom, California – SOHA Engineers is the Prime Consultant responsible for coordinating design and construction administration activities for all disciplines including architectural, electrical and mechanical and serving as a liaison with the Folsom State Prison officials. SOHA designed the seismic retrofit for Inmate Housing 1, Inmate Housing 5, Dining Room 1 and 2 to meet the requirements per FEMA 273 & 274. The 1800-inmate facility had to remain fully operational and secure during construction, therefore the retrofit work was implemented in several phases.

Soledad State Prison, Soledad, California – The Vocational Building VS-1 was built in 1959. It is a one-story light gauge steel framing structure with dimensions of 60 x 380 feet, and a floor area of 22,800 square-feet. Seismic forces are transversely supported by light gauge steel moment frames placed every 20 feet and longitudinally by vertical cross bracing members. The seismic retrofit scheme consists of strengthening these two lines of lateral resistance. The seismic retrofit consists of strengthening and/or adding shear walls, as well as interconnecting critical lines of foundation. Resume

Farshad Khodayari, SE Project Assignment SOHA Engineers Principal Engineer

Education Professional Registrations BS/Civil Engineering/1985/SFSU California, Civil Engineer, 48362, 1992 MS /Structural Engineering / 1987/SJSU California, Structural Engineer, 4323, 1999 Washington, Structural and Civil Engineer, 44588

Key Qualifications Mr. Khodayari joined SOHA in 1995. He specializes in the structural design and analysis of new and existing steel, concrete, wood and masonry buildings. He is a principal engineer responsible for all structural design phases and construction administration. Mr. Khodayari has been a key participant in the structural design of justice facilities, educational facilities, commercial facilities, office and mixed-use projects, hotels, schools, and parking structures as well as the design of various civic and community facilities. Mr. Khodayari will serve as SOHA Engineers’ primary day-to-day contact person with the design team for all technical and contractual matters. His responsibilities will include supervision and direction of SOHA’s project staff, contract management, scheduling, cost control, quality assurance and coordination with the design team. He has managed the design of many justice facilities, community centers, recreational facilities and multi-purpose facilities with various structural building types and foundation systems.

Relevant Experience Solano County Claybank Adult Detention Facility, Fairfield, California – SOHA Engineers is the structural engineer-of-record for the design of this $55M adult detention facility for Solano County Sheriff’s Department. This project includes a new 140,000 square-foot housing facility with 512 beds and the renovation of a 380-bed existing facility. This facility is to include housing units, administration, indoor and outdoor recreation area, health services. Project also includes phasing during construction.

San Francisco County Jail No. 3, San Bruno, California – SOHA Engineers is part of a design- build team selected to provide design and construction of this $100M multi-building correctional facility to include inmate housing, administration building, multi-purpose building and central plant. As part of the design process, SOHA Engineers works in a collaborative process with the builder, the design team and the client. The facility is isolated within 2 miles of the San Andreas fault.

Sonoma County Male Adult Detention Facility, Santa Rosa, California – SOHA Engineers prepared Schematic Design for this project which included a new Phase 1 Addition of 700 beds with approximately 225,000 square-feet and a new Phase 2 Addition of 500 beds with approximately 165,00 square-feet to include housing, medical, clinic and support areas. Project also included a new Community Correctional Center with 125,000 square-feet on four floors, and renovation of 50,000 square-feet of an existing facility.

For Stephen Lau

Owner: Brook Mebrahtu, Project Manager Project Management Bureau Department of Public Works City & County of San Francisco Tel: (415) 557-4642 Email: [email protected]

Architect: David Hobstetter, Principal Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Tel: (415) 398-5191 Email: [email protected]

Contractor: Sarah Garcia, Project Manager Turner Construction Company Tel: (510) 407-9662 Email: [email protected]

For Farshad Khodayari

Owner: Charles Higueras, Project Manager Project Management Bureau Department of Public Works City & County of San Francisco Tel: (415) 557-4646 Email: [email protected]

Architect: Richard Sheng, Director Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Tel: (415) 398-5191 Email: [email protected]

Contractor: Chuck Palley, President Cahill Construction Company Tel: (415) 986-0600 Email: www.cahill-sf.com Tab 5

Robert Glass and Associates, Incorporated 8625 Ashbury Court Roseville, CA 95747 Telephone 916.899.5230 www.rga-inc.com

Architecture and Justice Facility Consulting W. Robert Glass President

March 1, 2012

Catherine Chan, Vice President HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104

RE: REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION PACKAGE – SECURITY CONSULTING SAN MATEO COUNTY

Dear Catherine:

Robert Glass & Associates, Inc. is pleased to present the qualifications of our firm, to provide the required security consulting professional services for the San Mateo County Correctional Facility project. The materials on the following pages respond to your requirements in the Request For Qualifications (RFQ).

We have a long history of justice and security planning, and completed projects which brings together a unique qualification combination for this project. Our firm has a history in working on California detention facilities and site projects. Our team offers you:

National caliber detention security planning expertise A long working history of California justice projects Locations in Northern California for response to your needs

We are excited about our continued working relationship with you and the rest of the HOK staff. We hope you will look with favor upon our submittal.

Sincerely, ROBERT GLASS & ASSOCIATES, INC.

W. Robert Glass President

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION SAN MATEO COUNTY JAIL SECURITY CONSULTING March 1. 2012

COLLABORATIVE INTERDISCIPLINARY SECURITY CONSULTING San Mateo County, California

Robert Glass & Associates, Inc. 8625 Ashbury Court Roseville, CA 95747 (916) 899-5230 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION & HISTORY ...... 1

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ...... 3

DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS ...... 5

PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET...... 13

RESUMES ...... 15

PROJECT LISTING – DIRECT SUPERVISION FACILITIES ...... 24

PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES ...... 27 INTRODUCTION & HISTORY INTRODUCTION & HISTORY

Page 1 INTRODUCTION & HISTORY

ROBERT GLASS & ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED (RGA) was founded in 1986 as a consulting firm for the justice system (for planning, programming, security consulting and special studies), rather than a firm for the general practice of Architecture. Professional services were initially performed in security consulting and planning for Criminal Justice Facilities. In the mid 1990's, RGA expanded the firm's capabilities to support security consulting, operational planning, threat analysis and vulnerability assessments for all facility types. This expansion provided a balance of criminal justice and building security which supports the complex consulting services demanded on many projects.

Today, RGA has three unique, but interdependent groups. These groups are criminal justice, building security, and planning. In addition to offices in Washington state, RGA is located in Northern California, specifically, the greater Sacramento and Bay Area. RGA maintains professional relationships with specialists in the areas of security electronics design, communications engineering, operational planning and executive protection. These relationships significantly enhance the firm's capability to provide total security and consulting services.

RGA has successfully incorporated a high level of advanced technology to provide responsive information transfer to support projects on a national and global basis. RGA has completed over 395 projects in 29 States, and internationally. Projects completed have exceeded 11 billion dollars in construction costs.

Page 2 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Page 3 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Robert Glass & Associates, Inc. can provide the required insurance amounts on a project basis.

Page 4 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS DESIGN & ISP PROCESS

Page 5 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Overview

Over these 30 years of providing professional security planning services Robert Glass and Associates, Inc. (RGA) has established a multidisciplinary approach that integrates operations and budgets into the security planning process and continuously monitors the product against the approved policy directives. In order to achieve the best possible product pre-design planning is provided so that operational and policy outcomes can direct the planning process.

By providing a multidisciplinary team of proven professionals RGA is able to provide a single source of security planning talent without multiple contracts, coordination glitches, and lost efficiency. By streamlining the planning process with a concentration on strong pre-design security planning and thorough documentation of project operational and policy decisions, the project moves forward without delay. Constant updating of project information provides a strong foundation from which decision-makers can base project policy.

Integrated Security Plan

RGA created a unique planning process for their institutional client base, the Integrated Security Plan (ISP). The ISP is a planning and design process that brings project stakeholders to develop and establish security system requirements, related operational policy directives, and staffing into one integrated document.

The ISP was created in the late 1970’s as a response to poorly organized institutional planning efforts which resulted in projects that did not meet the operational and budget requirements established by the client. The heart of the problem was a fractured planning process conducted by design professionals who did not possess planning expertise in institutional and security systems. Traditionally the process ignored staffing and operational requirements and focused in on technical and design related solutions. Instead of identifying the operational and security policies early, designers relied upon physical solutions that would in-turn drive operations and security.

A client’s understanding of the project’s operational and security requirements were approved on a technical engineering and architectural basis. The operational and security requirements were often translated into engineering systems without any analysis of operational impact or compliance with policies and budgets. Inconsistencies with operational and security policies were not identified until bids were received and budgets were compromised or during construction when operations planning identified security inconsistencies.

Page 6 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

The ISP process was created to pull operational and security requirements to the forefront of the planning process. Along with the architectural program documents it provides a clear and concise directive to the architect and engineer as to the specific operational and security policies of the project. As the project develops a continuous evaluation of the operating policies and security requirements takes place. This assures that there are no surprises for the stakeholders.

The ISP process involves the project stakeholders so that operational decisions have an organizational basis and understanding by the very staff who will end up operating the facility. In addition, the ISP tracks on-going staffing and operational costs.

RGA believes strongly that people will support what they help create. This understanding of the project planning proves extremely valuable as the operational policies are implemented once occupancy takes place. Again there are no surprises for the stakeholders and policymakers.

The ISP process includes documentation of the following:

Facility security criteria and planning policy, by specific facility functional area Function narratives documenting operational decisions Workstation/staffing by shift and position, including really factors Outline specifications and detailed performance requirements of all security systems Schedules for all openings, including frame, glazing, and security performance requirements Operator interface functions for all central and satellite control positions

The final product is a security plan which combines all project components in a highly descriptive document which comprehensively defines the facilities design, in alignment with budget and operating policies. Once the ISP is complete and approved, the architect and engineers will have the functional requirements from which to interpret the technical solutions. This includes architectural, mechanical, electrical, and security disciplines. Most importantly, the ISP’s integrated development process allows the client a clear understanding of the project policies and design decisions as well as a constant evaluation of project compliance against operational and security policy requirements. This planning process supports an integrated strategy that marries operations cost and quality to assure superior facility performance.

The following is a sample of an ISP Table of Contents from a previous project:

Page 7 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Page 8 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Page 9 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Page 10 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Program/Architectural Design Synthesis

The Program/Architectural Design Synthesis phase provides a transitional bridge between the narrative and descriptive work, provided in the programming and ISP planning, into physical spaces that create the architecture. This process requires the synthesis of the programming data, the constraints generated by site conditions, and the budget needs assessment to be studied and evaluated in order to determine the best physical security concepts to meet operational needs.

Program/Architectural Design Synthesis requires a high-level of client involvement in order to test various concepts, ideas, and solutions. Many security design concepts that emerge must be investigated and operationally tested to determine the most viable options. The marriage of operations and physical spaces is accomplished in this phase. Program/Architectural Design Synthesis also provides the operational understanding for staff which will translate into policy and training of the facility as it progresses toward operations.

Once the synthesis phase is complete, detailed design can progress forward with a focus on viable solutions. This process allows for detailed design engineering for the selected solution. The owner and operator is able to move forward with a solution that is continuously operationally tested and reviewed for construction, operations, and budget compliance.

Low Voltage Security Electronic (LVSE) System Design Approach:

RGA intends to approach this project as a team effort with the Owner. Through active participation during the ISP development meetings with the Owner, RGA will provide technical guidance regarding the capabilities and limitations of various electronics systems under consideration to meet the parameters established by the ISP. Additionally, RGA will assist in writing the functional narratives required for each low voltage system control point identified in the ISP. The ISP will provide further definition in the Construction Documents each individual system component, providing wiring diagrams for each component, as well providing riser diagrams, installation details, and specifications for each system architecture.

RGA will provide input to the Owner on the capabilities of local and regional integrators wishing to bid on the specialized low voltage security electronics systems.

Page 11 DESIGN AND ISP PROCESS

Integration with Other Consultants:

Extensive coordination with other consultants for implementation of the LVSE systems will be provided. This will consist of the following:

Architectural Consultants: Door hardware coordination for electronically controlled doors (either through a Touchscreen Control Panel or Access Control System), ceiling device layouts (for fire alarm, paging speakers, CCTV cameras, personnel duress alarm system zone nodes, etc.), and minimum space requirements and locations for all low voltage security electronics rooms. Mechanical Consultants: Heat rejection loads for all low voltage security electronics rooms, interface requirements for cell and shower water system shut-offs, interface requirements for fire alarm systems to plumbing systems. Electrical Consultants: Coordination of low voltage security electronics system loads to the facility emergency power system (through dedicated UPS systems), interface to lighting systems for dayroom and cell lighting control, lighting levels for proper operation of CCTV systems, grounding systems to ensure transients, and noise from electrical systems do not interfere with the LVSE systems. Elevator Consultants: Coordination of monitoring and control of conveyance systems from specified control points. Telecommunications Consultants: Coordination of networking requirements to ensure IT systems are standardized throughout the facility.

Coordination with each discipline will include design meetings and workshops at each document submittal stage (35%, 65%, 95% design submittals, etc.) to ensure the requirements of the LVSE systems are designed by each consultant according to the necessary parameters.

Post-Occupancy Evaluation

Does it work? Is it meeting operational budget goals? Are systems efficient and performing as outlined in the engineering? Are warranties being honored?

These are all questions that need to be continuously evaluated as the facility initiates its operational life cycle. RGA has found that early attention to these operational issues through a Post-Occupancy Evaluation will instill a systematic evaluation process that will determine operational success. A continued evaluation of facility performance will provide a management environment of continuous improvement. This will create a bridge to the annual budgeting process and provide the platform to improve institutional performance.

Page 12 PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET PROJECT INFORMATION MATRIX

Page 13 Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix 2/29/2012

Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience

Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include projects that do not qualify under these criteria to Comments

facilitate our review) ) 1. Detention or correctional projects completed (include any additional key info you would like us to within the last 10 years only. That is, you can only

HOK know about this project - please be brief !) include projects completed since 2002. Platinum) McCarthy BIM Usage CM at Risk State of CA CA of State Gross Area Gross deliverable 2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) Design-Build Sundt-Layton part of TI project) of TI part (if not in RWC) Hensel Phelps Hensel (in square feet) square (in No. of Storey(s) of No.

3. Your scope of service on those detention or Building(s) of No. Construction Cost LEED Certification LEED Direct Supervision Direct Year of Completion Year of (if not in RWC/SMC) Redwood City (RWC) correctional projects was full service design for a (not San Mateo County (SMC)

new facility, not a minor retrofit. and coordination for created (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or or Gold Silver, Certified, (None, No. of Beds (Design Capacity) (answer yes if a design model was was model a design if yes (answer New Facility - Full Service Design - Facility New

Maricopa County Durango Juvenile Facility 2002 $26 264,265 220 Yes 2 2/5 Silver Yes Prime Contract: CannonDesign Benton County Justice Center 2002 $31 287,000 700 Yes 1 5 Yes Prime Contract: Ohashi-Augier Pitchess Detention Facility-New Jail Planning 2007 $80 140,000 704 Yes 3 2 Yes Yes Prime Contract: Parsons Colorado State Penitentiary Expansion 2008 $87 705,801 948 5 4 Yes Prime Contract: CSNA Washoe County Detention Center-Phase II 2008 $26 48,908 144 Yes 1 2 Yes Prime Contract: GM, LLC Men's Minimum Camp 2008 $25 112,000 626 Yes 9 1 Yes Prime Contract: GM, LLC Southern Nevada Women's Correctional Center 2008 $41 55,000 172 Yes 2 1 Yes Prime Contract: KGA Architecture Skagit Valley Community Justice Center 2009 $154 250,000 708 Yes 1 2 Yes Yes Prime Contract: Architects Rasmussen Triebelhorn Indian Springs Prison, Prison 8 2010 $200 513,525 624 Yes 17 1 Yes Yes Yes Prime Contract: KGA Architecture Clark County Regional Detention Facility 2011 $110 350,000 1,000 Yes 3 2 Yes Yes Yes Public-Private Partnership CSP-SAC Treatment Building 2012 $28 45,000 N/A 1 1 Silver Yes Yes Yes Prime Contract: CannonDesign DeWitt Nelson Conversion Project 2013 $380 252,311 1,133 Yes 21 1 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes California Health Care Facility Stockton - Criteria 2013 $907 1,230,308 1,742 Yes 36 1 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Architect California Prison Receivership 2013 $3.8B 7,950,481 10,000 Yes 1 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Page 14 RESUMES RESUMES

Page 15 RESUMES

W. ROBERT GLASS Founder and president of ROBERT GLASS Sample Projects President – Sacramento Office & ASSOCIATES, INC. Z Alhambra Reception & Bob is a nationally recognized Treatment Center, Phoenix, consultant and innovative His architectural experience started with the Arizona leader for the programming, Z Arizona State Prison Complex- firm of Walker/McGough et al. (including four conceptualization, design and Douglas; Douglas, Arizona years as principal for the firm's Justice Group), functional planning of justice Z Arizona State Prison Complex- which extended from 1979 to 1986. He has system facilities. Perryville, Security Systems been continuously involved in planning and Modifications; Goodyear, design of justice system facilities since 1979. Arizona Education This experience has covered projects in 29 Z Durango Juvenile Courts Bachelors of Architecture – states and internationally, including facilities in Building, Maricopa County; University of Idaho all degrees of custody for adult men and Phoenix, Arizona women, juveniles, and inmates with special Z Durango Juvenile Detention Professional Registrations & needs. Facility, Renovation & Affiliations Expansion, Maricopa County; Phoenix, Arizona In addition, he has obtained a national Z LaPaz County Jail, Z American Correctional reputation for operational planning, Renovation/Upgrades; Parker, Association (ACA) programming, conceptualization and functional Z Washington Correctional Arizona Z Maricopa County Estrella Jail, Association (WCA planning, design, documentation and Female & Juvenile Facility; Z American Institute of application of security systems, materials and Architects (AIA) technology used within justice system facilities. Phoenix, Arizona Z Southeast Juvenile Detention Z American Jail Association His ties to justice facilities planning, design and Facility, Renovation & (AJA) security consulting are strengthened by his Expansion, Maricopa County; Z American Society for involvement in professional organizations such Mesa, Arizona Industrial Security (ASIS) as the American Correctional Association, as Z Z Design- Build Institute of Southeast Juvenile Courts well as his active participation as a speaker for Building Renovation America (DBIA) Z Z conferences and organizations related to the Renovation & Expansion- International Corrections and justice system. Prisons Association (ICPA) Maricopa County; Mesa, Arizona Z Certificate NCARB, Licensed Z Pima County Adult Detention Architect in, Nevada and Bob has extensive experience in research Center, Medium Security Washington and design against terrorist threats, which Addition; Tucson, Arizona involves hardened materials, site selections, Z Pima County Adult Detention minimizing explosive site locations, traffic Center, Security Renovations & barriers, etc. In 2004, he received Control Upgrade; Tucson, certification of completion of the Arizona Z Government Conference on Global Pima County Juvenile Courts Center, Additions & Terrorism in Washington, D.C. Alterations; Tucson, Arizona Z Residential Juvenile Treatment Facility, Maricopa County; Phoenix, Arizona Z California Health Care Facilities, California Prison Health Care Receivership Corp., Sacramento, CA Z Nevada County Jail, Planning/Programming Assistance, Nevada City, CA

Page 16 RESUMES

W. ROBERT GLASS REFERENCES

J. Clark Kelso, Federal Receiver California Prison Receivership 501 J Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 425-1319

Michael Smith, AIA CannonDesign 1901 Avenue of the Stars; Suite 175 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 229-2700

Jeff Goodale, Senior Vice President HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 243-0555

Terence J. Melby, AIA GML Architects, LLC 1575 Delucchi Lane, Suite 120 Reno, Nevada 89502 (775) 829-8814

Page 17 RESUMES

STEVE KEETER Sample Construction & Senior Project Manager Planning Projects

Z California Prison Receivership: Education Site investigation, operation Bachelors of Arts – Management program development through St. Mary’s College, California design phase. Z San Joaquin County Sheriff – Operational Center, Jail Steve Keeter has spent the last twenty-five years in institutional Construction: Principal construction planning and management. planning, design and construction manager. Mr. Keeter’s consulting work is hands-on and his experience brings a Z San Joaquin General Hospital Replacement Program: Design breadth of knowledge for institutional planning, design, and and construction manager. construction issues. His understanding of these issues provides a Z Health Plan of San Joaquin: basis for services that includes needs assessment, analysis, planning, Principal planner, design and programming, management and problem solving. construction manager, $12 million corporate headquarters building. He has directed and managed jobs of all sizes from inception through Z San Joaquin County Mental completion. Specializing in public sector planning construction, Mr. Health Department Expansion: Keeter has developed an impressive set of job skills which has a Principal planner, design and proven record of delivering projects on time and on budget. In construction manager, $18 addition to his planning and construction skills million mental health facility. Z Clark County Nevada Courts Expansion Project Mr. Keeter has authored several successful grant applications at both Z Kings County Washington Jail the federal and state level. He possesses an excellent understanding Expansion Project of current building and development regulations as well as federal Z Mary Graham Children’s and state environmental laws. Emergency Shelter Z Lodi, California Municipal Court Expansion Z San Joaquin County California Public Health Replacement Project Z San Joaquin County California Agricultural Center Z San Joaquin County California Department of Emergency Services Z Yolo County California Jail Project

Page 18 RESUMES

STEVE KEETER REFERENCES

John Weber, AIA - Managing Partner Dreyfus and Blackford Architects 3540 Folsom Boulevard Sacramento Ca 95816 (916) 453-1234

John Tuttle, Engineering/Construction Consultant 9284 Bay Head Court Elk Grove, Ca. 95758 (916) 296-4844

Dave Runnels, Undersecretary Operations – Correctional Health Care 501 J Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 323-2901

Page 19 RESUMES

ROBERT PENNELL, P.E. For over 23 years, Robert C. Pennell has Sample Project Experience Low Voltage successfully completed challenging Z Ada County Jail, Boise, Idaho. Security Consultant assignments for new construction, Z renovations and remodels of existing Airway Heights Correction Center, Multiple Projects, Airway Heights, WA Education facilities, and studies in numerous facilities Z Anchorage Courthouse, Anchorage, AK Bachelors of Science - for educational, commercial, institutional, Z California Health Care Facility, Electrical Engineering correctional, corporate, government, and Stockton, CA University of Delaware military facilities. Z DeWitt Nelson Conversion, Stockton, CA Z Carbon County Jail, Price, UT Z Mr. Pennell has worked on numerous Chehalis Public Safety Building, Professional Registrations & Chehalis, WA Affiliations projects for city, county, and state agencies Z Chelan County Juvenile Facility, which required new, upgraded, or renovated Wenatchee, WA Z Professionally registered in electrical, lighting, or low voltage Z Donald E. Long Juvenile Detention AZ, CA, ID, MT, NV, NM, electronics systems. Facility, Phase III, Portland, OR OR, VA, WA Z Douglas County Juvenile Detention Z American Corrections Mr. Pennell is experienced in all phases of Facility, Roseburg, OR Z Association (ACA) electrical and low voltage electronics design Elmwood Correctional Facility, Z Milpitas, CA Building Industry Consulting including load analysis, medium voltage Service International (BICSI) Z Grant County Jail, Ephrata, WA Z National Council of distribution, lighting, telecommunications, Z Grant County Juvenile Facility, Ephrata, Examiners for Engineering life safety, and low voltage electronic WA and Surveying (NCEES) control systems. He has been lead engineer Z High Desert State Prison, Prison 8, and project manager of electrical and low Perimeter Security System, Indian Springs, NV voltage electronics systems for commercial, Z institutional, light industrial, military, and Kitsap County Youth Services Facility, Juvenile Detention and Administrative justice facilities. Mr. Pennell has extensive Facility, Port Orchard, WA experience in code, energy and suitability Z King County Correctional Facility, evaluations of existing electrical and Seattle, WA security electronics systems. Z Lane County Detention Facility, Eugene, OR Z Mr. Pennell has extensive experience Martin Hall Renovation, Multi-County Juvenile Detention Facility, Medical designing PLC/SCADA systems for Lake, WA correctional projects. Rob’s experience in Z Missoula County Detention Center, these facilities includes designing low Missoula, MT. voltage security electronics system Z North Idaho Juvenile Facility, Lewiston, including the following components: ID Hardwired and Touchscreen control panels; Z Okanogan County Jail, Multiple Relay logic, discreet logic, and PLC control Projects, Okanogan, WA Z Oregon Youth Authority, Multiple systems; CCTV systems including digital Projects, Statewide, OR and network video storage systems; Local Z Snohomish County Correctional Center, and Campus intercom and paging systems; Booking Area Remodel, Everett, WA Access control systems; Perimeter detection Z Southern Nevada Women’s Correctional systems; Duress alarm systems; Integration Center, Las Vegas, NV Z of field systems and devices to the Southwest Montana Multi-Jurisdictional PLC/SCADA system including Access Detention Center, Anaconda, MT Z Spokane County Jail, CCR Remodel, Control, CCTV, Intercom and Paging, Spokane, WA Perimeter Detection, Cell and Shower Z Sterling Correctional Facility, Phase Water Control, Elevator, and Lighting I/III, Sterling, CO Control Systems.

Page 20 RESUMES

CAMERON S. GLASS Cameron Glass has been with Robert Glass General Security Experience & Associates for 11 years and has served Security Consultant Z on projects in the correctional, detention, California Health Care Facility; Stockton, CA Education and public security areas. Z Legislative Building Security Bachelor of Marketing, Implementation; Olympia, WA Eastern Washington University His experience and knowledge of current Z Colorado State Penitentiary technological advances in devices and Expansion Close Custody Complex; Canon City, CO Bachelor of Business equipment used in facilities and how they Z Administration, Department of Health/Public interact with each other in facility systems Health Lab Security Study; Eastern Washington University make him a great addition to any project. Shoreline, WA Z Legislative Building Renovation Professional Registrations & His expertise is in information systems Security Consulting; Olympia, technology, project planning, strategic WA Affiliations Z Douglas County PUD #1 planning, systems analysis and Hdqrt. Building Expansion Z American Society for Industrial troubleshooting, and quality control. He is Security Study; Waterville, WA Security (ASIS) knowledgeable in software development, Z Duval County Courthouse requirements analysis, and database design. Security Planning & Cameron has served as competent liaison Consulting, Jacksonville, FL Z Eastern Washington University between management, clients, and Security Master Planning, personnel. Cheney, WA Z Psychiatric Services He has been involved in planning and design of Unit/Outpatient Services-II; justice system facilities with Robert Glass & Folsom, CA Associates since 2000. Z Pullman – Moscow Regional Airport Security Master Plan; Pullman, WA Z Pullman – Moscow Regional Airport Security Hardware & Gate Package, Pullman, WA Z State of Washington Capitol Campus Personal Services- Security Consulting, Olympia, WA Z Colorado Territorial Correctional Facility – ISP; Canon City, CO Z Colorado State Penitentiary Expansion; Canon City, CO Z State of Washington Capitol Campus Governor’s Office Relocation; Olympia, WA Z Benton County Justice Center; Kennewick, WA Z Capitol Campus Security State of Washington; Olympia, WA Z Capitol Campus Security Governor’s Mansion Security Updates; Olympia, WA Z Nez Perce County Jail; Lewiston, ID

Page 21 RESUMES

MARGRET RIGGIN, MCAS Margret Riggin has extensive experience in project administration Project Administration and project management, specializing in land development land use planning. Professional Registrations & Affiliations California Health Care Facility – Stockton, CA As part of the project management team Mrs. Riggin performed Z Microsoft Certified Application project administration support. Mrs. Riggin provided program and Specialist – Master (MCAS) construction management services for the California Health Care Z Project Management Institute Receivership Program. Mrs. Riggin assisted in the operations (PMI) management of the project Transition Activation Operations, Owners Group, Target Value Design, and Prototype Development phases of the program in addition to providing coordination support to planning, design, and construction planning teams.

Various Residential Subdivisions – Northern California As a land development project manager, Mrs. Riggin managed residential land development and forward planning projects for a Northern California development builder. Mrs. Riggin managed project consultants, subcontractors, and utility companies for project planning and approval, conducted project land use research, and coordinated with various jurisdictional agencies to ensure compliance and approval of projects.

Groundwater/Soil Remediation Project Administration – California Mrs. Riggin managed the project administration of a statewide quarterly groundwater and soil monitoring and remediation program for a major oil corporation. This program involved 24 remediation/monitoring project sites across the state, with 2 sites in Nevada.

Residential Planning Projects – South Bay Area, CA Mrs. Riggin managed residential planning projects in the greater south bay area, providing coordination with public and government agencies for project processing and approval. Mrs. Riggin also managed permit processes, subcontractors and designers.

Operations Resource Management, USAF – Tucson, AZ Mrs. Riggin served as a proud member of the United States Air Force as an Assistant Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge for a Tactical Fighter Training Squadron, assisting 250 flying personnel in weapons systems education and essential administrative flying operations.

Page 22 RESUMES

CHRISTOPHER M. SHELDON With over 20 years of industry experience, Sample Project Experience PROJECT MANAGER Christopher Sheldon utilizes his ability to Z RCDD/NTS SPECIALIST discern safety, reliability, and project California Health Care Facility; Stockton, CA schedule and design objectives to develop Z State of Alaska, Department of Education integrated telecommunications systems that Corrections, Goose Creek support a multitude of operational and Correctional Center, Design- Associates of Arts security systems. Build & Technology Business Administration Implementation Planning; Everett Community College Wasilla, Alaska In Mr. Sheldon’s approach, he addresses Z State of Washington the specific system requirements to uphold Department of Corrections International Business, various levels of security, taking into Washington State Penitentiary Accounting account the operating environment and (features 1891 construction) Western Washington University coordination requirements of a diverse South Close Expansion - LEED® Silver Certified group of stakeholders. 500-bed Campus Expansion & Professional Registrations & Kitchen Addition Affiliations Mr. Sheldon’s ability to integrate all of Z Coyote Ridge Correctional these factors into solutions that can be Complex, Medium (Custody) Z CommScope Systimax Specialist implemented in the field has led to Campus Expansion - LEED® Gold Certified RFP Bridging Consultant significant capital projects for agencies Z Building Industries Consulting Documents & Construction Service International (BICSI) throughout Washington, California and Administration Support Z Registered Communications Alaska, as well as nationwide. Z Clallam Bay Corrections Distribution Designer (RCDD) Center, (Campus-wide) Z Network Transport Systems Telecommunications Specialist (NTS) Infrastructure Replacement Project Z South Puget Sound Community College. 2006 Telecommunications Master Plan; Olympia, Washington

Page 23 PROJECT LISTING – DIRECT SUPERVISION FACILITIES PROJECT LISTING DIRECT SUPERVISION FACILITIES

Page 24 PROJECT LISTING – DIRECT SUPERVISION FACILITIES

The National Institute of Corrections has published significant documents on the philosophy, expectations and benefits of "direct management" and podular designs for detention facilities. Many new jails and prisons are using the direct management approach resulting in an emerging design history and expertise.

RGA has significant and very recent experience as a team member in the conceptualization, operational, and security planning for new direct management detention and correctional facilities. These facilities are:

Airway Heights Corrections Center; Airway Heights, WA (1,024 beds) Alaska Psychiatric Hospital; Anchorage, AK (158 beds) Benton County Justice Center; Kennewick, WA (70 beds) California Health Care Facility; Stockton, CA (1,722 beds) Clark County Detention Center Expansion & renovation (1,372 beds) Clark County Regional Jail; Las Vegas, NV (952 beds) DeWitt Nelson Conversion; Stockton, CA (1,133 beds) Estrella Jail, Maricopa County; Phoenix, AZ (400 beds) Elmwood Correctional Facility, Santa Clara County; Milpitas, CA (3,024 beds) John Zunino Operations Center and Jail Complex, San Joaquin County; French Camp, CA (1,256 beds) Lynwood Regional Justice Center, Los Angeles County; Lynwood, CA (1,124 beds) Maricopa County Durango Juvenile Facility; Phoenix, AZ (220 beds) McNeil Island Corrections Center; McNeil Island, WA (1,280 beds) Nevada Men’s Minimum Facility; Indian Springs, NV (626 beds) Nez Perce County Jail Planning; Lewiston, ID (152 beds) Northeast King County Minimum Security Facility; North Bend, WA (400 beds) Oshkosh Correctional Institution; Oshkosh, WI (400 beds) Racine Correctional Institution; Sturtevant, WI (600 beds) Substance Abuse Treatment Facility, California Department of Corrections; Corcoran, CA (1,056 beds) Washoe County Detention Expansion-Phase I; Reno, NV (256 beds) Washoe County Detention Expansion-Phase II; Reno, NV (144 beds) West County Justice Center, Contra Costa County; Richmond, CA (576 beds) Wildwood Correctional Center; Kenai, WA (500 beds) Women’s Minimum Facility; Carson City, NV (384 beds)

Bob Glass by past experience (as a Justice Group principal for Walker/McGough/Foltz/Lyerla Architects and Engineers-WMFL), was also a team member for the operational security planning of the following direct management facilities:

El Paso County Criminal Justice Center; Colorado Springs, CA (576 beds) Fairbanks Youth Facility; Fairbanks, AK (48 beds) Hennepin County Juvenile Center; Minneapolis, MN (51 beds) Housing Addition-Ohio Reformatory for Women; Marysville, OH (288 beds) Madera County Jail; Madera, CA (296 beds) Menomonee Valley Correctional Institution; Milwaukee, WI (450 beds) McLaughlin Youth Center-Closed Unit Treatment Unit; Anchorage, AK (24 beds) Portland Justice Center; Portland, Or (430 beds) Pima County Adult Detention Center-Medium Security Addition; Tucson, AZ (300 beds)

Page 25 PROJECT LISTING – DIRECT SUPERVISION FACILITIES

Santa Clara County Main Jail; San Jose, CA (720 beds) Snohomish County Detention Center; Everett, WA (337 beds) Spokane County Detention Center; Spokane, WA (420 beds)

Design and Operational Issues - The direct management, podular design facilities listed above comprise over 23,000 beds and provide a wide-range of experience in direct management planning and design. This experience indicated a number of planning issues:

1) Policy and executive leadership must exist to affect a direct management plan, including enthusiasm and understanding by the line staff. To affect this, the staff should be trained and consistently represented at the operational and security system planning meetings. This is particularly true at the sergeant level in many jurisdictions. While the consultant’s experience with direct management plans and designs can help and/or improve staff acceptance, such experience must be reinforced by Policy to be effective.

2) Direct management philosophy, though readily apparent in "inmate residence pods" must influence the total detention/correction facility design and operational plan. It is not appropriate to believe that direct management occurs only in the housing components. For instance, direct management needs to start at the intake function and carry through with the total inmate and staff service delivery systems. It's a way of life in the newest direct management facilities.

Page 26 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES PROJECT LISTING ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

Page 27 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

Alaska Lemon Creek Correctional Spring Creek Correctional Center Center Alaska Psychiatric Institute Renovation/Expansion Perimeter Security Physical Security Juneau, Alaska * Upgrades Recommendations Seward, Alaska Anchorage, Alaska McLaughlin Youth Center Master Plan Statewide Security Alaska Psychiatric Institute Anchorage, Alaska Consulting Anchorage, Alaska Department of Corrections McLaughlin Youth Center Anchorage, Alaska Cook Inlet Pretrial Facility Closed Treatment Unit CCTV System Upgrade Addition Wildwood Correctional Anchorage, Alaska Anchorage, Alaska Center Master Plan Cook Inlet Pretrial Facility McLaughlin Youth Center Kenai, Alaska Central Control Upgrade New Education Building Study Anchorage, Alaska Wildwood Pretrial Facility Anchorage, Alaska Master Plan McLaughlin Youth Center Kenai, Alaska Fairbanks Correctional Physical Security Audit Center Anchorage, Alaska Arizona Control Room Upgrades Fairbanks, Alaska Nome Youth Center Alhambra Reception & Security Upgrades Treatment Center Fairbanks Youth Facility Nome, Alaska Phoenix, Arizona * Master Plan Fairbanks, Alaska * Palmer Correctional Center Arizona State Prison Addition/Alterations Complex-Douglas Fairbanks Youth Facility Palmer, Alaska Douglas, Arizona Physical Security Audit Fairbanks, Alaska Palmer Correctional Center Arizona State Prison Perimeter Detection Complex-Perryville Hiland Mountain Replacement Security Systems Correctional Center Palmer, Alaska Modifications Electronic Upgrade Study Goodyear, Arizona * Eagle River, Alaska Seward Medical Center Security Review Durango Juvenile Courts Johnson Youth Facility Seward, Alaska Building Physical Security Audit Maricopa County Juneau, Alaska Sixth Avenue Annex Phoenix, Arizona Correctional Center Lemon Creek Correctional Security Audit Durango Juvenile Detention Center Anchorage, Alaska Facility Perimeter Security Study Renovation & Expansion Juneau, Alaska Maricopa County Phoenix, Arizona

Page 28 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Arizona continued) California California State Prison- LaPaz County Jail Corcoran Renovation/Upgrades Alameda County Jail Santa Substance Abuse Treatment Parker, Arizona Rita Facility Santa Rita, California * Corcoran, California Maricopa County Estrella Jail Alhambra Police Facility California State Prison- Female & Juvenile Facility Alhambra, California Sacramento Phoenix, Arizona PSU/EOP Services Beverly Hills Police Facility Folsom, California Southeast Juvenile Beverly Hills, California * Detention Facility California State Prison- Renovation & Expansion California Department of Sacramento Maricopa County Corrections and PSU Treatment Building Mesa, Arizona Rehabilitation Folsom, California Health Care Space Southeast Juvenile Courts Standards Update California State Prison-San Building Renovation Sacramento, California Quentin Renovation & Expansion- Condemned Inmate Maricopa County California Health Care Complex Mesa, Arizona Facilities Central Health Services California Prison Health San Quentin, California Pima County Adult Care Receivership Detention Center Corporation California State Prison-San Medium Security Addition Sacramento, California Quentin Tucson, Arizona * Joint Use Facility California Health Care San Quentin, California Pima County Adult Facility Detention Center Stockton, California California Youth Authority Security Renovations & Institution Security Entrance Control Upgrade California Mental Hospitals Study Tucson, Arizona Security Study Sacramento, California Atascadero, Patton, Napa Pima County Juvenile State Hospitals Central Juvenile Hall Courts Center Housing Expansion Additions & Alterations California Reception Los Angeles County Tucson, Arizona Center-Los Angeles Los Angeles, California Los Angeles, California Residential Juvenile Century Regional Justice Treatment Facility California State Prison- Facility Maricopa County Corcoran Los Angeles County Phoenix, Arizona Administrative Segregation Lynwood, California Unit Corcoran, California

Page 29 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(California continued) Humboldt County Jail Madera County Detention DeWitt Nelson Conversion Security Study Center California Department of Eureka, California Madera, California * Corrections and Rehabilitation John Zunino Operations Mendocino County Stockton, California Center and Jail Complex- Detention Center San Joaquin County Security Study East Facility Renovation Stockton, California Ukiah, California Pitchess Detention Center Los Angeles County John Zunino Operations Monterey County Detention Castaic, California Center and Jail Complex- Center San Joaquin County Security Electronic El Dorado Co. Post Occupancy Assistance Renovations Administration & Courts Stockton, California Salinas, California Bldg Placerville, California Lompoc Re-Entry Facility Monterey County Feasibility Study Courthouse Elmwood Correctional Lompoc, California Court Holding Renovations Facility Salinas, California Santa Clara County Lorenzo E. Patino Hall of Milpitas, California Justice Nevada County Jail Sacramento County - Planning/Programming Elmwood Correctional Security Review Assistance Facility Sacramento, California Nevada City, California Women’s Detention Division-Staffing Study Lorenzo E. Patino Hall of North Facility Expansion Santa Clara County Justice Pitchess Detention Center Milpitas, California Sacramento County Los Angeles County Electronic Security & Castaic, California Elmwood Correctional Control Upgrades Facility Sacramento, California Pitchess Detention Center Master Plan Review Expansion Feasibility Study Santa Clara County Los Angeles County Los Angeles County Milpitas, California Sheriff’s Station Castaic, California San Dimas, California Elmwood Correctional Richmond Hall of Justice Facility Los Angeles County Richmond, California CCTV Study/Upgrade Sheriff’s Station Santa Clara County Constructability Review Richmond Police Facility Milpitas, California Athens, California Temporary Facilities- Consulting Glendale Police Facility Los Angeles County Richmond, California Glendale, California Sheriff’s Station Palmdale, California Rio Honda Courthouse Renovation & Expansion El Monte, California

Page 30 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(California continued) Santa Clara County-Main Sybil Brand Institute Sacramento County Jail North Master Plan Implementation Rio Consumnes Security Upgrades Los Angeles, California Correctional Center San Jose, California Perimeter Security West County Detention Upgrades Santa Clara County-Main Facility Sacramento, California Jail North Contra Costa County Security - Physical Richmond, California San Joaquin County - Plant/Operations Report Juvenile Hall San Jose, California Colorado Security & Life Safety Study Santa Clara County-South Buena Vista Correctional Stockton, California County Detention Facility Complex Planning Locking Device Upgrades San Joaquin County - San Jose, California Buena Vista, Colorado Juvenile Hall Needs Assessment Study San Francisco-Jail Colorado Territorial Stockton, California Replacement #3 Correctional Facility Design Build Plan Review Canon City, Colorado * Santa Clara County Hall of San Bruno, California Justice Colorado Territorial Security Consulting Santa Monica Police Correctional Facility San Jose, California Facility Integrated Security Plan Santa Monica, California Canon City, Colorado Santa Clara County Main Jail North Southwest Justice Center- Colorado Correctional San Jose, California * Courts Building Institution's Murrieta, California Physical Plant Security Santa Clara County Main Audit 12 Facilities Jail Southwest Justice Center Move-In Occupancy Existing Jail Security Colorado State Penitentiary- Assistance Electronics Upgrades Phase II San Jose, California Murrieta, California Close Custody Complex Expansion Santa Clara County New Southwest Justice Center- Canon City, Colorado Courts Facility Jail Expansion Planning Study Murrieta, California Denver Women’s San Jose, California Correctional Facility Southwest Justice Center- Phase I, II & III Santa Clara County-Main Juvenile Facility Denver, Colorado Jail South Renovation Murrieta, California San Jose, California Eagle County Justice Center Sybil Brand Institute-Master Eagle, Colorado * Planning Study Los Angeles, California

Page 31 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Colorado continued) Idaho Minnesota Correctional El Paso County Criminal Facility-Stillwater Justice Center Idaho State Correctional Perimeter Security Study Colorado Springs, Institution Bayport, Minnesota Colorado* Maximum Security Unit Planning Missouri El Paso County Criminal Boise, Idaho * Justice Center Franklin County Adult Security & Physical Idaho Department of Detention Facility Assessment Corrections Union, Missouri * Colorado Springs, Colorado Private Prison Security Plan Review Potosi Correctional Center Jefferson County Detention Boise, Idaho (Lease/Purchase) Facility Mineral Point, Missouri * Golden, Colorado * Nez Perce County Detention Center Montana Limon Correctional Facility Planning Study Limon, Colorado Lewiston, Idaho Butte-Silver Bow Detention Center Park County Detention Kansas Staffing Study Center Butte, Montana Renovation & Expansion Lansing Correctional Fairplay, Colorado Facility Cascade County Jail Medium Security Addition Great Falls, Montana Sterling Correctional Lansing, Kansas * Facility Central Reception Unit- Phase I, II & III Johnson County Public Montana State Prison Sterling, Colorado Safety Building Value Engineering Study Needs Assessment Study Deer Lodge, Montana Trinidad Correctional Olathe, Kansas * Facility Flathead County Justice Phase I & II Minnesota Center Trinidad, Colorado Kalispell, Montana * Hennepin County Juvenile Florida Center Gallatin County Detention Minneapolis, Minnesota * Center New Duval Courthouse Special Consultant Complex Olmstead County Adult Bozeman, Montana Jacksonville, Florida Detention Center Rochester, Minnesota Montana Women’s Prison Hawaii Expansion Otter Tail County Detention Billings, Montana Halawa Medium Security Center Facility Fergus Falls, Minnesota Aiea, Hawaii *

Page 32 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Montana continued) Clark County Detention Proto-Typical Minimum Park County Detention Center Security Facility Center Expansion & Renovation Planning & Site Selection Criminal Justice Planning Las Vegas, Nevada Carson City, Nevada Livingston, Montana Clark County Detention Regional Medical Facility Pine Hills Juvenile Facility Expansion Northern Nevada Fencing Study & Design/Build Correctional Center Recommendations Las Vegas, Nevada Carson City, Nevada Miles City, Montana Clark County Regional Washoe County Jail Southwest Montana Multi- Justice Center Expansion Jurisdictional Security Consulting Reno, Nevada Detention Center-Facility Las Vegas, Nevada Planning Washoe County Jail Anaconda, Montana Indian Springs Correctional Expansion-Phase II Center Reno, Nevada Southwest Montana Multi- Indian Springs, Nevada Jurisdictional Washoe County Jail Detention Center-Facility Jean Conservation Camp Space Utilization Study Planning No. 2 Expansion Reno, Nevada Warm Springs, Montana Jean, Nevada Washoe County Jail Yellowstone County Locking Systems/Electronic Space Utilization Study Sheriff’s Department Upgrades Update Space Planning Consulting Nevada State Prison Reno, Nevada Billings, Montana Carson City, Nevada Washoe County Jail Nevada Locking Systems/Electronic Security Study & Audit Upgrades Reno, Nevada Carson City Public Safety Southern Desert Building Correctional Center New Hampshire Master Planning Study Indian Springs, Nevada Carson City, Nevada New Hampshire State Ely State Prison Prison For Men City of North Las Vegas- Ely, Nevada Rehabilitation Phase I Housing Expansion Concord, New Hampshire * City of North Las Vegas, Lovelock Correctional Nevada Center New Hampshire State Security Consulting Plan Prison For Men City of Reno Courts & Review Rehabilitation Phase II, III Washoe District Lovelock, Nevada & IV Attorney Facility Concord, New Hampshire * Reno, Nevada

Page 33 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(New Hampshire continued) Hillcrest Youth Facility Warm Springs Public Safety Hillsborough County Jail Perimeter Security Building Planning /Needs Study/Development Confederated Tribes of Assessment Salem, Oregon Warm Springs Manchester, New Warm Springs, Oregon * Hampshire * MacClarean Youth Facility Perimeter Security South Dakota New Mexico Study/Development Woodburn, Oregon Pennington County Western New Mexico Criminal Justice Center Correctional Center MacClarean Youth Facility Rapid City, South Dakota * Grants, New Mexico * Security Consulting-Max Unit Texas New York Woodburn, Oregon Bexar County Adult Staten Island Supreme Multnomah County Detention Center - Annex Courthouse Detention Center Security Consulting/Plan Value Analysis Study Portland, Oregon * Review New York, New York San Antonio, Texas Oregon State Correctional North Dakota Institution Bexar County Adult Visiting Room Upgrades Detention Center Burleigh County Detention Salem, Oregon* Security Consulting Center San Antonio, Texas Bismarck, North Dakota * Oregon State Correctional Institution Bexar County Correctional Mercer County Jail Maximum Security Unit Facility Stanton, North Dakota * Renovations Security Programming Salem, Oregon Consulting Ohio San Antonio, Texas Oregon State Crime Ohio Reformatory for Laboratory Bexar County Secure Women Forensic Firing Range Juvenile Correctional Housing Unit Addition Salem, Oregon Treatment Center Marysville, Ohio * Security Programming Oregon State Youth Consulting Oregon Authority San Antonio, Texas Security Consulting - 6 Douglas County Juvenile Regional Facilities Bexar County Juvenile Detention & Salem, Oregon Detention Center Sheltered Care Facility Alterations and Additions Roseburg, Oregon Wallowa County- Security Programming Design/Build Consulting Public Safety Building San Antonio, Texas Enterprise, Oregon

Page 34 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Texas continued) Lease/Purchase Women’s Utah State Prison-South Bexar County Juvenile Multi-Custody Facility Point Facilities & Courts Analysis North Point Facilities - Key Renovation & Expansion Utah Department of Control Study Security Programming Corrections Draper, Utah Consulting Salt Lake City, Utah San Antonio, Texas Utah State Prison-South Pre-Release/Parole & Point Facilities Utah Probation Violator Center Unita 5 - Locking Device Design/Build/Operate RFP Renovation Central Utah Correctional Promontory Correctional Draper, Utah Facility Facility ) Programming & Security Draper, Utah Utah State Prison-South Consultant Point Facilities Gunnison, Utah Privatization Study Security Glazing & Tower Utah Department of Improvements Central Utah Correctional Corrections Draper, Utah Facility Salt Lake City, Utah Post Construction Audit Utah State Prison-North Gunnison, Utah Utah State Prison-South Point Facilities Point Facilities Perimeter Security System Central Utah Correctional Phase I Expansion Upgrades Facility Draper, Utah Draper, Utah Keying System Study Gunnison, Utah Utah State Prison-South Utah State Prison-South Point Facilities Point Facilities Central Utah Correctional Phase I - Supplemental Perimeter Security System Facility Projects Upgrades Pre-Bid Detention Package Draper, Utah Draper, Utah Gunnison, Utah Utah State Prison-South Utah State Prison-South Central Utah Correctional Point Facilities Point Facilities Facility Minimum Visiting/B&D 144 Bed Expansion (Unita Phase I - Expansion Cellblock Remodel #4) Gunnison, Utah Draper, Utah Draper, Utah

Construction Alternative Utah State Prison-South Utah State Prison-South Analysis Point Facilities Point Facilities Utah Department of Orientation & Training 144 Bed Expansion (Unita Corrections Session - Phase I #4A) Salt Lake City, Utah Draper, Utah Draper, Utah

Davis County Law Enforcement Center Farmington, Utah

Page 35 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

Virginia Clallam Bay Corrections Clallam County Center Correctional Facility Beaumont Learning Center Clallam Bay, Washington * Master Plan for Expansion Commonwealth of Virginia & Renovation Powhatan, Virginia * Clallam Bay Corrections Port Angeles, Washington Center Washington Key Control Study Department of Corrections Clallam Bay, Washington Perimeter Security Study-8 Airway Heights Corrections Prison Sites Center Clallam County Olympia, Washington Airway Heights, Correctional Facility Washington Facility Remodel/Expansion Grant County Public Safety Study Building Asotin County Public Safety Port Angeles, Washington Ephrata, Washington * Building Needs Assessment Study Clallam County Island County Jail Asotin, Washington * Correctional Facility Coupeville, Washington* Security Controls/Control Benton County Justice Room Upgrades Juvenile Rehabilitation Center Port Angeles, Washington Administration Renovation and Expansion Camp Outlook Juvenile Kennewick, Washington Clallam County Courthouse Boot Camp Security Study & Upgrades Planning Study Benton-Franklin Juvenile Port Angeles, Washington Connell, Washington Facility Kennewick, Washington Clallam County Courthouse King County CASP Security Upgrades - Phase II Security Planning Bothell Public Safety Center Port Angeles, Washington Consulting Security Electronics Seattle, Washington Contractor-RFQ Clallam County Juvenile Bothell, Washington Detention Center King County Courthouse Security Upgrades Master Planning Security Camp Outlook Juvenile Port Angeles, Washington Consulting Boot Camp Seattle, Washington Expansion & Renovation Clallam County Connell, Washington Correctional Facility King County Courthouse Renovations-Phase I Entrance Security Chelan County Regional Port Angeles, Washington Consulting Jail Seattle, Washington Wenatchee, Washington * Clallam County Correctional Facility King County Correctional Chehalis Public Safety Renovations-Phase II Facility Building Port Angeles, Washington Security & Electronic Chehalis, Washington Controls Renovation Seattle, Washington

Page 36 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Washington continued) McNeil Island Corrections Snohomish County King County Correctional Center Detention Center Facility Master Plan Implementation Everett, Washington * Alder Unit Renovation McNeil Island, Washington Consulting Snohomish County Work Seattle, Washington Monroe Correctional Release Complex Everett, Washington * Kittitas County Corrections Reformatory Phase I Center Improvements Special Offender Center Ellensburg, Washington * Monroe, Washington * Monroe, Washington *

Lincoln County Needs Monroe Correctional Special Commitment Center Assessment Complex Value Analysis Team Sheriff’s Office & Jail Reformatory Visiting Room McNeil Island, Washington Expansion Renovations Davenport, Washington Monroe, Washington * Spokane Co. Detention/Correction Lincoln County Monroe Correctional Facility Communications Study Complex Spokane, Washington * Project 25 Interoperability Heath Care - BEST Study Consulting Monroe, Washington Stafford Creek Corrections Davenport, Washington Center Northeast King County Lawsuit Consulting Martin Hall Juvenile Minimum Security Facility Aberdeen, Washington Facility North Bend, Washington Facility Planning & Project Stevens Co. Management Okanogan County Jail Detention/Corrections Medical Lake, Washington Okanogan, Washington * Facility Needs Assessment Study Martin Hall Juvenile Okanogan County Jail Colville, Washington Facility Remodel & Expansion - Private Operator RFP & Phase I Walla Walla County Jail Selection Okanogan, Washington Walla Walla, Washington * Medical Lake, Washington Okanogan County Jail Washington Corrections Martin Hall Juvenile Remodel & Expansion - Center for Women Facility Phase II Perimeter Security Study Video Conferencing System Okanogan, Washington Gig Harbor, Washington * RFP & Selection Medical Lake, Washington Pacific County Jail Washington Corrections South Bend, Washington * Center for Women McNeil Island Corrections Master Planning & Facility Center Pullman Police Facility Program Analysis Master Plan / Facility Pullman, Washington * Gig Harbor, Washington Program Analysis McNeil Island, Washington

Page 37 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Washington continued) Western State Hospital- Milwaukee County Washington Corrections Legal Offender Unit Jail/Criminal Justice Center Center for Women Security Planning Milwaukee, Wisconsin Central Health Care Facility Consulting Value Analysis Study Tacoma, Washington Oshkosh Correctional Gig Harbor, Washington Institution Western State Hospital- Oshkosh, Wisconsin Washington-Population & Legal Offender Unit Facilities Plan Value Engineering Study Oshkosh Correctional Olympia, Washington Tacoma, Washington Institution Housing Unit Addition Washington Correction Whatcom County Detention Oshkosh, Wisconsin Center Perimeter Security Center Study Bellingham, Washington * Oshkosh Correctional Shelton, Washington * Institution Whitman County Orientation & Training Washington State Courthouse Session Penitentiary Master Planning & Oshkosh, Wisconsin Rehabilitation Phases I, II, Improvements & III Colfax, Washington Racine Correctional Walla Walla, Washington * Institution Yakima County Detention Sturtevant, Wisconsin Washington State Center Penitentiary Yakima, Washington * Wisconsin 10 Year Master Intensive Management Unit Plan Walla Walla, Washington * Wisconsin Department of Corrections Madison, Wisconsin Washington State Green Bay Correctional Penitentiary Institution Federal Emergency Sallyport Rehabilitation Study Consulting Green Bay, Wisconsin Waukesha County Jail Walla Walla, Washington Planning Study Kettle Moraine Correctional Waukesha, Wisconsin Washington State Institution Penitentiary Perimeter Security Lloyd D. George Federal Key Control Study Report/Implementation Courthouse Walla Walla, Washington * Plymouth, Wisconsin Las Vegas, Nevada

Washington State LaCrosse Law Enforcement Federal Courthouse Penitentiary Center CM Security Consulting Medium Security Facility LaCrosse, Wisconsin Phoenix, Arizona Housing Additions- Design/Build Menomonee Valley Walla Walla, Washington * Correctional Institution Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Page 38 PROJECT LISTING – ALL JUSTICE FACILITIES

(Federal continued) United States Penitentiary- Leavenworth Renovation of Cell Houses A,C,D, Leavenworth, Kansas *

United States Penitentiary- Leavenworth Specialized Housing Unit- Planning & Design Leavenworth, Kansas *

U.S. Army National Guard Readiness Center-Phase 3 Barrigada, Guam

U.S. Courts Design Guide - Work Plan Washington D.C.

Yellowstone Justice Center Constructability & Cost Review Yellowstone National Park Mammoth, Wyoming

International

New Extension for Central Jail and Deportation Department Sulaybiyah, Kuwait

Page 39

Security/Low Voltage Systems Statement of Qualifications for New San Mateo County Jail

Presented To | Catherine Chan, AIA, HKIA, LEED AP BD+C Vice President, Justice Group Director HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104 415.356.8535 [email protected]

Presented By | Michelle Geckler Regional Director, Project Development

388 17th Street, Suite 230 Oakland, CA 94612 510.250.6243 [email protected]

Issue Date | February 29, 2012

February 29, 2012

Catherine Chan, AIA, HKIA, LEED AP BD+C Vice President, Justice Group Director HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104 415.365.8535 [email protected]

Re: San Mateo County Jail Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications

Dear Ms. Chan,

Guidepost Solutions LLC’s Technology Design Consulting (TDC) division, formerly known as SafirRosetti, is pleased to provide you with our qualifications to provide security and low voltage systems consulting and design services for the new construction of the San Mateo County Jail to be located in Redwood City, California.

Guidepost Solutions TDC specializes in security, fire alarm, audiovisual, and communications infrastructure consulting and design. We provide innovative consulting, design, and management services that balance realistic business needs with industry-best, cost-effective solutions.

We understand that HOK and San Mateo County are in the process of evaluation a number of subconsultants to identify the ones that that will best meet the requirements of this project. We have assembled a team of experienced and knowledgeable design professionals to assist HOK and the County with designing an appropriate and effective security, fire alarm, audiovisual, telecommunications, and acoustical program for the new San Mateo County Jail. Our team offers the following advantages:

Experience with Detention Facilities Guidepost Solutions TDC has completed over 120 new and retrofit correctional facility projects, representing over $670 million in construction value. Besides our firm’s wealth of experience, another advantage of working with the Guidepost Solutions TDC team is Ray Kolodzieczak, our Detention Team Leader’s wealth of experience working in the detention environment. His knowledge of the needs and challenges of detention facilities comes not only from working on detention projects throughout California and Washington, but he also grew up in this environment. His father, Ron Kolodzieczak, is a retired sergeant of 27 years with the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department who helped with the opening of both the Santa Rita Jail and the North County Jail facilities.

Experience Working Locally Guidepost Solutions TDC team members have worked on detention and public safety facility projects throughout the Bay Area, and our firm is currently working in Redwood City, the jail project site, on Kaiser Permanente’s new medical center.

Close Proximity to Project Site Our office is less than one hour away from the Sherriff Department and the project site. This means we are able to easily schedule and attend meetings at the Sherriff’s offices, the project site, or with any other agencies involved in this project.

388 17TH Street, Suite 230 Oakland, CA 94612 T: 510.268.8373 F: 510.839.4791 WWW.GUIDEPOSTSOLUTIONS.COM/TDC Experience Working with HOK We have worked with HOK for a number of years and are currently working with them on two projects – Solano County Jail’s Claybank Facility and Kaiser Permanente’s Redwood City Medical Center.

Experience Working with Shortlisted Construction Management Firms We have worked with Sundt Construction and Hensel Phelps on numerous projects. Our Oakland office has worked with McCarthy for over 25 years.

BIM Experience Guidepost Solutions TDC has Building Information Modeling (BIM) specialists in our Oakland office, one of our firm’s two major design centers. We are currently engaged on three large local projects – CPMC Cathedral Hill Medical Center, Kaiser Redwood City Medical Center, and Solano County Jail – where our security and low voltage systems are being designed using Revit. We recently completed the Construction Documents for the UCSF Mission Bay Medical Center where our security system designs were completed in Revit.

LEED Experience We have completed 16 LEED Certified projects representing over 7,000,000 square feet of space and over $ 700 million of construction dollars. In addition, we have a LEED Accredited Professional on staff in the Oakland office.

Thank you again for your consideration of Guidepost Solutions TDC for your security and low voltage systems consulting needs. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments regarding our qualifications package.

Sincerely,

Michelle Geckler Regional Director, Project Development Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting

388 17TH Street, Suite 230 Oakland, CA 94612 T: 510.268.8373 F: 510.839.4791 WWW.GUIDEPOSTSOLUTIONS.COM/TDC

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I – PROJECT APPROACH ...... 1

SECTION II – INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ...... 4

SECTION III – PROJECT EXPERIENCE ...... 6

ADDITIONAL RELEVANT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY EXPERIENCE ...... 10

PROJECT EXPERIENCE WITH HOK ...... 11

PROJECT EXPERIENCE WITH SHORTLISTED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FIRMS... 11

SECTION IV – PROJECT PERSONNEL...... 12

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Table of Contents

SECTION I – PROJECT APPROACH

OUR APPROACH TO SECURITY/LOW VOLTAGE SYSTEMS DESIGN The Guidepost Solutions TDC project managers and designers committed to this project have designed and implemented projects of similar scope for detention, public safety, civic, and justice facilities throughout the Bay Area and the State of California. Our underlying approach is to represent the Owner's best interest by establishing designs and construction packages that leverage best suited products and contractors for the application.

Guidepost Solutions TDC’s approach is to provide consulting services in a proactive and holistic manner in order to ensure that a comprehensive solution is ultimately achieved. Rather than simply focusing only on technology, our approach addresses all three primary elements of a building program:

Architectural issues such as space planning, exiting pathing, CPTED, NFPA, barriers and locks Operational and regulatory issues such as policies and procedures, staffing, training, and emergency preparedness Electronic systems and technology solutions such as card access control, closed circuit television and intercom communications. This process is then layered with the type of facilities within the client’s portfolio and existing technology investment to support various new technologies. At the start of a project we also identify critical infrastructure needs including power, door hardware, technology wall space, and network capacity and latency.

Once we have discovered the level of need for the technology solution and the ability of the client’s facility to support new technologies, we embark upon a process to stratify the level of control, monitoring and accountability that will deliver the optimum return on the technology investment.

OUR APPROACH TO COLLABORATIVE DESIGN At Guidepost Solutions TDC we believe that good relationships and teamwork are the first priority. From the very beginning of the project we make sure that all the team members work collaboratively to establish the project’s mission and strategic goals and every risk is managed by the team in the best interest of the project. If a conflict arises we motivate our team to take a positive approach to conflict resolution, to have a clear understanding of the problem, to see the conflict from another person’s perspective and to collaboratively look for a solution to the conflict.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 1

We Identify and involve key security stakeholders early in the planning and design process, and keep them informed as the project progresses. As a client-focused firm, we have learned that the key to achieving successful on time and on budget project completion is the involvement of representatives from all stakeholders groups that the project touches. This results in fewer project surprises and protects the project schedule and budget. This approach plus our dedication to always keeping sight of the “big picture” (i.e., standards/best practices, cost, documentation, and maintainability) have been the formula for successful projects.

We Work Closely with the Consultant Team. Our contribution has been measurable in improving the quality of the projects through value engineering such as shared technology infrastructure thus reducing costs and shortening project schedules. The goal is to integrate security and low voltage systems technology with a shared building technology infrastructure. This saves money and also helps “future-proof” buildings by preparing for future change in building technology systems.

OUR PROJECT WORK PLAN It is our understanding that the project is to provide preliminary design through construction administration services for a detention security electronics system, telecommunication systems, audiovisual systems, and acoustics at the new San Mateo County Jail. T

It is anticipated the Project will include the following phases: Schematic Design, Design Development and Final Design, and Construction Administration. Work included is shown in the following scope-of-work: A. Schematic Design We will meet with the Sheriff’s Department staff, County ITS and Public Works Departments, and other required County Departments to review and verify design concepts and intent. From these meetings, we will develop and submit schematic design level narrative drawings, including alternative design methods, for Owner review. Off-site visits to other facilities may be arranged to allow staff to view how similar control rooms to those proposed in schematic design function in a real world environment. A preliminary design and construction schedule will be developed, including a project cost estimate. B. Design Development and Construction Documents Guidepost Solutions will produce systems drawings showing control panel layouts, system block diagrams, and written specifications. All drafting/engineering work will be completed using the Revit model to coordinate low voltage systems space requirements with other design disciplines. Systems drawings will be submitted to the County, as progress printings, for review and approval. Guidepost Solutions TDC will attend coordination meetings during the Design Development and Construction Documents Phase.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 2

We will coordinate our drawings and equipment locations with Architectural, Mechanical, and Electrical disciplines to accommodate the work required for construction of the facility. This project will be in compliance with the 2010 edition of California Building Code, and Title 15 and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations.

Specifications will identify the material, equipment, and installation requirements for the security and low voltage systems and other required work. Specifications will be developed for each system. The specification sections will be coordinated with Division 0 and 1 of the Bid Documents.

At each progress submittal, the construction cost estimate and the project schedule will be revised to reflect the most current system design. As the system design becomes more refined, it is anticipated that the construction cost estimate will more accurately reflect the actual project cost at the time of bid. C. Construction Administration/Construction Management As part of our Construction Administration services, Guidepost Solutions will participate in a pre-bid conference. We will assist in evaluating bid proposals. During construction, we will also review contractor shop drawings and equipment submittals, respond to contractor questions during construction, and attend site meetings during construction and assist in final system acceptance. Upon completion of the project, we will review, reassemble, and resubmit to the county electronic as-built drawings.

Our Construction Administration services will include attending jobsite construction coordination meetings and spot check of as-built drawings for accuracy. Non-technical inspections (safety and health, security, labor compliance, etc.) are not included in our scope. Guidepost Solutions will attend periodic construction progress meetings. Guidepost Solutions will assist in Commissioning of Systems to assure that all equipment is fully operational.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 3

SECTION II – INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Guidepost Solutions TDC meets HOK’s insurance requirements, as listed in the table below, for the security and low voltage systems services we propose to provide for the San Mateo County Jail project.

Professional Liability HOK Sub-consultants Requirement Acoustics/AV 1M Special Systems (incl. security, communications, 2M building controls, IT)

NOTE: ALL Consultants are also required to carry the following additional insurance: Commercial General Liability 2M each/aggregate Employer Liability 1M / 1M / 1M Auto 1M Umbrella 1M

Guidepost Solutions TDC has the following insurance coverage: General Liability - $1 million per $2 million aggregate Automobile Liability - $1 million Worker’s Compensation/Employer Liability - $1 million Professional Liability - $3 million limit Umbrella Liability - $10 million

Please find a sample Certificate of Insurance specimen on the following page.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 4

SanSan Mateo CCountyounty Jail Februar Februaryy 29,29, 20120122 GuidepostGuGuididepeposo t SoSolutionslutions TDTDCC – Security/Lowcurity/Low VVoltageoltage SSystemsystems QualificationsQualifificicatationons PaP Pageagege 5 SECTION III – PROJECT EXPERIENCE

Guidepost Solutions TDC specializes in the planning and design of new and retrofit detention facilities. Our firm has completed over 120 correctional facility projects, representing over 5 million square feet of space and $670 million of construction value. Below are descriptions of some of our relevant project experience.

Fresno County Juvenile Justice Campus COMPLETED DATE Fresno, California 2004 CONSTRUCTION COST Guidepost Solutions TDC provided security design services for the largest state-of-the-art juvenile justice facility in the State of California. $180 million Systems designed include: site security, access control, door control PROJECT SIZE and alarm monitoring, CCTV surveillance systems, and intercom system 655,030 sq. ft.

Project Team Member(s) Involved: Ray Kolodzieczak 1,020 beds 6 buildings 2-storeys PROJECT DELIVERY Design-Build

Ventura County Juvenile Justice Center COMPLETED DATE Ventura, California 2004 CONSTRUCTION COST Planning and design for a new juvenile courts and detention facility. Security design included door control and door monitoring in detention $40.5 million holding portion of building, card access door control, closed circuit PROJECT SIZE television including recording of all cameras with digital video recorders, 205,327 sq. ft. building intrusion alarm, wireless help alarm system, cable TV distribution, intercom and public address, and courts audio/video. 420 beds 4 buildings Project Team Member(s) Involved: Ray Kolodzieczak 2-storeys PROJECT DELIVERY

Design-Build

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 6 Washoe County Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Center Reno, Nevada COMPLETED DATE

Guidepost Solutions TDC provided planning and design for a new 2005 juvenile detention facility, including educational and probation wings, CONSTRUCTION COST with support facilities for expansion of additional 36-bed pod. Design $25 million work included door control and door monitoring, intercom and public address, closed circuit television with digital video recorders, PROJECT SIZE programmable logic controllers, control panels (touchscreen in central 83,860 sq. ft. control and graphic in pods), cable TV distribution, card access control 108 beds for doors in non-detention areas, and audio/video in courtroom. 1 building Project Team Member(s) Involved: Stan Hultgren 2-storeys

San Francisco Jail #3 Replacement COMPLETED DATE San Francisco, California 2006 CONSTRUCTION COST As a subconsultant to the Bridging Documents Architect, Guidepost Solutions TDC was originally contracted to develop a security program $113.5 million for the new jail. Our assignment began with the assessment of several PROJECT SIZE existing San Francisco Jail facilities. From this review we were able to 400,000 sq. ft. develop recommendations regarding the appropriate security equipment and Central Control requirements for this new facility. 768 beds Guidepost Solutions TDC was then contracted by the Design-Build Team 3 buildings to fully develop the security systems designs and provide construction 2-storeys administration on this project. Systems designed included Central Control room and control panels, Housing Control stations, door control PROJECT DELIVERY systems, intercom, CCTV, alarm monitoring, public address, and fence- Design-Build line video motion detection.

Project Team Member(s) Involved: Stan Hultgren

King County Correctional Facility COMPLETED DATE Seattle, Washington 2006 Working on a special consulting team for the King County Office of CONSTRUCTION COST Management and Budget, Guidepost Solutions TDC provided an expert $113.5 million analysis of security electronic systems and $50 million upgrade project PROJECT SIZE at the KCCF. 400,000 sq. ft. As subject-matter expert, Guidepost Solutions TDC provided the basis of 768 beds design for the security upgrade, including programmable logic 3 buildings controllers, door control, control locations, intercom and emergency systems, and CCTV, as well as operational and staffing elements. We 2-storeys also provided technical expertise and recommendations to the owner PROJECT DELIVERY and project team, performed cost estimates, and conducted quality Design-Build assurance inspections.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 7 Solano County Claybank Jail COMPLETED DATE Fairfield, California Ongoing CONSTRUCTION COST Guidepost Solutions TDC is providing security electronics and fire alarm Est. $93 million systems consulting services as a member of HOK’s team for the Claybank Adult Detention Facility Expansion Project located in Fairfield, PROJECT SIZE California. Our scope of work includes an assessment of the existing 65,150 sq. ft. facility fire alarm, security electronics equipment, and tel/data 365 beds infrastructure; and design and construction management of the new facility-wide fire alarm, security electronics, and tel/data systems. The 1 building original 512-bed project was placed on hold in 2008 after construction 2-storeys documents were completed. It was restarted after a change in scope to PROJECT DELIVERY a 365-bed project, and is currently in progress. Design-Build Project Team Member(s) Involved: Ray Kolodzieczak, David Rickerson TEAMING EXPERIENCE HOK

Please find the Detention Project Matrix with these projects on the following page.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 8 Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix 2/29/2012

Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience ) Project Name

(Note the following project criteria. Do not include projects that do not qualify under these criteria to Comments facilitate our review) 1. Detention or correctional projects completed (include any additional key info you would like us to within the last 10 years only. That is, you can only know about this project - please be brief !) include projects completed since 2002. HOK McCarthy CM at Risk BIM Usage BIM Gross Area Gross State of CA State

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) Design-Build Sundt-Layton part of TI project) TI of part (if not in RWC) not (if Hensel Phelps Hensel (in square feet) (in square No. of Storey(s) of No.

3. Your scope of service on those detention or No. of Building(s) Construction Cost LEED Certification Direct Supervision Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) not (if Redwood City (RWC) City Redwood correctional projects was full service design for a (not new facility, not a minor retrofit. MateoSan County (SMC) Direct Relevant Experience - Experience Relevant Direct No. of BedsNo. (Design Capacity) (answer yes if a design model was (answer yes if New Facility - Full Service Design Have one or more of your proposed proposed your one or more of Have key personnel worked on this project? on this worked personnel key (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or Platinum) Gold Silver, Certified, (None, created for coordination and deliverable coordination for created Facility is the largest state-of-the-art juvenile justice Fresno County Juvenile Justice Campus 2004 $180M 655,030 1,020 Yes 6 2 None No Yes Yes Yes Yes facility in the State of California. Ventura County Juvenile Justice Center 2004 $40.5M 205,327 420 Yes 4 2 None No Yes Yes Yes Yes Designed door control and monitoring, intercom, public address, CCTV, PLC, control panels, cable TV Washoe County Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Center 2005 $25M 83,860 108 Yes 1 2 None No Yes Yes distribution, access control, and audio/video in courtroom. Completed bridging documents, final design, and San Francisco Jail #3 Replacement 2006 $113.5M 400,000 768 Yes 3 2 None No Yes Yes Yes Yes construction administration.

King County Correctional Facility 2006 $55M 230,000 1,100 Yes 1 9 None No Served as owner's technical representative for total replacement of security and fire alarm systems. Not Construction documents were completed, but project Solano County Claybank Jail (512-bed design) 2008 $58M 512 Yes 1 2 None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes available was halted during bidding phase. In Solano County Claybank Jail $93M 65,150 365 Yes 1 2 None Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Progress ADDITIONAL RELEVANT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY EXPERIENCE

Santa Clara County Juvenile Hall Complex New COMPLETED DATE Housing Facility Phase II 2004 Santa Clara, California CONSTRUCTION COST $20 million Guidepost Solutions TDC provided the Security Electronics design as a subconsultant to the Architect for a major remodel of the Santa Clara PROJECT SIZE County Juvenile Hall. Five of the eight existing housing units were 110,000 sq. ft. demolished and seven new housing units were constructed in this 210 beds occupied facility. A PLC-based security electronics system was installed to control the new housing units and interface with devices in the 3 buildings existing housing units. The Central Control Room was remodeled as a 4-storeys separate project during this construction to provide a more ergonomic PROJECT DELIVERY control environment for control operators and a single control panel for control and monitoring of new and existing equipment in the facility. Design-Build Guidepost Solutions TDC worked with the County directly on the Construction Administration portion of this project. Total construction cost was $20 million for this 210-bed project. Total Security Electronics for this project was $800,000.

Project Team Member(s) Involved: Ray Kolodzieczak

Whatcom County Adult Detention Facility and Juvenile COMPLETED DATE Detention Facility, Fire Alarm and Security Electronics In Progress Systems Upgrade CONSTRUCTION COST Bellingham, Washington $2.4 million Guidepost Solutions TDC is performing design and construction PROJECT SIZE administration services as the prime design consultant for an upgrade 212 beds of existing proprietary security electronics systems in the Adult Detention Facility and the Juvenile Hall Facility to SecurePlex proprietary 2 buildings control-based systems with ergonomic, touch-screen-based operator 2-storeys control of facility movement from the Central Control location. Housing

unit controls in each building will be updated to be compatible with the new SecurePlex system. The Closed Circuit Television System in each building will be interfaced with the new SecurePlex system to provide Central Control operators with automatic camera call-up upon activation of an associated intercom station. The existing fire alarm system in the adult detention facility will be replaced with a new code-compliant system. Guidepost Solutions TDC is managing the Architect (Freeman Fong Architects), Mechanical Engineer, Structural Engineer, and Electrical Engineer subconsultants who are assisting in the design of a new Central Control Room and structural improvements also included in this project. Estimated construction budget: $2.4 million. Project is currently in the construction phase.

Project Team Member(s) Involved: Ray Kolodzieczak

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 10

PROJECT EXPERIENCE WITH HOK 100 First Street Console Remodel Highland Hospital Acute Tower Replacement – Bridging Documents Highland Hospital Acute Tower Replacement – Master Plan Kaiser Redwood City Replacement Hospital* Paris Regional Medical Center* Solano County Jail - Claybank Facility* Solano County Jail Upgrade

PROJECT EXPERIENCE WITH SHORTLISTED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FIRMS

Projects with McCarthy Guidepost Solutions TDC has worked with McCarthy for over 25 years.

Kaiser Downey Medical Center Kaiser Oakland Hospital MOB Kaiser Oakland Medical Center Kaiser Stockton MOB Kaiser Vallejo Medical Center The Cannery UCSF Telemedicine Teaching and Learning Center VA Palo Alto Psychiatric Facility Woodland Police Facility

Projects with Hensel Phelps Capitol Area East End Complex Kaiser Anaheim Medical Center San Joaquin County Administration Building – 12th & I Street

Projects with Sundt Construction Porterville Courthouse* Sierra Vista Hospital

*Project in progress

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 11

SECTION IV – PROJECT PERSONNEL

Guidepost Solutions TDC assembles a project team of experienced professionals to lead each engagement. Our team members are selected based on their relevant professional experience and are assigned to the project from conception to completion.

Key personnel assigned to this engagement are:

Ray Kolodzieczak References Project Manager Captain Thomas Ferrara Solano County Sheriff’s Department As Project Manager, Mr. Kolodzieczak will be 707.438.1713 responsible for the day-to-day management [email protected] of this engagement, including staff Project: Solano County Jail assignments and the production of all deliverable products. Mr. Kolodzieczak will Tom Forbish also serve as the primary Guidepost Shasta County Facilities Solutions TDC interface with the HOK project Manager team. 530.225.3719 [email protected] Project: Shasta County Jail

Nancy Gordon County of Santa Cruz General Services Director 831.454.2714 [email protected] Project: Santa Cruz County Main Jail

Kevin Fitzgerald County of Santa Cruz Human Services Department Facilities Manager 831.454.4001 [email protected] cruz.ca.us Project: Santa Cruz County Health Department

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 12

David Rickerson, CDT, CCCA, PSP, References CPP Michael Cadrecha Detention Door Hardware, Equipment, Alameda County & Furnishings Consultant GSA-TSD 510.208.9589 Mr. Rickerson will work with the Project [email protected] Manager to develop detention door Project: Santa Rita Jail hardware, detention sliding door locking hardware, and detention equipment and Sgt. Suzanne Culbertson furnishings specifications and schedules. County of Solano 707.784.1165 [email protected] Project: Solano County Jail Claybank - 362 Bed Facility

Todd Winslow Project Manager; Electrical Contractor 707.689.3638 [email protected] Project: Kaiser Permanente Redwood City Medical Center Security Upgrades

Stan Hultgren References Security, Fire Alarm, and Nurse Call Jim Le Senior Designer Sacramento County Architectural Services Division Mr. Hultgren will work with the Project 916.876.6321, [email protected] Manager to develop security, fire alarm, and Projects: Sacramento Main Jail Fire nurse call design concepts; be responsible Alarm System Replacement, for the management and production of Sacramento County Rio Cosumnes technical system design drawings and Correctional Center Fire Alarm specifications; and provide oversight during System Upgrade the design and construction phases of work.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 13

Kyle Wilson, RCDD, PMP, PSP References Teledata Infrastructure Designer Ed Avila HMC Architects Mr. Wilson will work with the Project Principal Manager to develop telecommunications 909.989.9979 infrastructure design concepts; be [email protected] responsible for the management and Project: Martin Luther King Jr. Los production of technical system design Angeles County Hospital drawings and specifications; and provide oversight during the design and Carol Hayes construction phases of work. University of Southern California Director of Administrative Operations 213.821.2695 [email protected] Projects: USC Department of Public Safety, USC Basis of Design Project

Andrew Wheeler gkkworks Principal 949.250.1500 ext.1500 [email protected] Project: VA San Diego Spinal Cord Injury / Community Living Center

Kelly Miller References Audiovisual Systems Designer Malvin Whang Project Architect Mr. Miller will work with the Project Manager Harley Ellis Devereaux to develop audiovisual systems design 858.245.7497 concepts; be responsible for the Project: UC San Francisco Telemedicine management and production of technical and Learning Center system design drawings and specifications; and provide oversight during the design and Nasser Salomon construction phases of work. Director - Learning Technologies- UC Riverside 951.827.2483 Project: UC Riverside School of Medicine Learning Center and Medical Simulation

Michael Cadrecha Architect/PM Alameda County GSA 510.208.9589 Project: Alameda County Emergency Operations Center

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 14

Chris Papadimos References Acoustics Consultant – Principal Geoff Sears Partner Mr. Papadimos, from our strategic partner Wareham Properties Papadimos Group, will work with the Project 415.457.4964 Manager to provide acoustics consulting [email protected] services for this project. Project: Wareham Properties at Emerystation

Jessie Hudgins, MBA Vice President of Facilities 559.353.5020 [email protected] Gasper Sciacca, RA Project: Children’s Hospital Central Acoustics Consultant – Senior California

Associate Heideh Fattaey Ph.D. Exec Director of Operations and Mr. Sciacca, from our strategic partner Programs Papadimos Group, will work with the Project James H. Clark Center at Stanford Manager and the Acoustics Consultant University Principal to provide acoustics consulting 650.725.7882 services for this project. [email protected] Project: New Stanford Hospital

Keith Lundquist President Lundquist Construction Management 408.280.2081 [email protected] Project: Amgen/Tularik/Nektar/Scout Capital

Dennis McCoy Principal Nova Partners 650.324.5304 [email protected] Project: UCSF Parnassus

Please find our proposed team’s resumes on the following pages.

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 15 Ray Kolodzieczak Education Cal State Hayward - Bachelor of Senior Project Manager Arts, History, September 2006 Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting Ohlone College - Associates Degree, Mr. Kolodzieczak has been with Guidepost Solutions TDC over 12 years. Liberal Arts, 2001 His experience entails over 17 years of work on major fire and security Areas of Expertise system projects, specializing in Detention facilities. Fire Alarm Systems Design During his career Mr. Kolodzieczak has served in the design and project Security Systems Design management roles for many complex and diverse projects including the Project Management design and implementation of security electronics and fire alarm systems Value Engineering in new detention facilities and existing detention facility system retrofits. Project Scheduling &Coordination Mr. Kolodzieczak has prepared numerous detention facility systems Clients Interface needs assessments and master plans to provide clients clear direction Field surveys & meetings for the upgrade of their facilities. Code Requirements & Compliance At Guidepost Solutions TDC Mr. Kolodzieczak is responsible for system Commissioning design and programming, site surveys, existing system assessment, Peer Reviews production of Drawings and Specifications, coordination with Project Documentation architectural/engineering disciplines, bid evaluation, project AutoCAD management, and supervision of acceptance testing for Fire Alarm, Life Project Experience Safety, Security, Card Access, and CCTV Systems. CDC Salinas Valley 64 Bed Selected Experience Expansion Contra Costa County Juvenile Hall Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus CDCR El Paso de Robles Juvenile Fresno, California Facility Security Design $146 million; largest state-of-the-art juvenile justice facility in the State of Fresno Juvenile Justice Campus California; preliminary security design, final security design, and bidding Kern County Juvenile Hall Security work on this project. Security work includes: site security, access control, Design door control and alarm monitoring, CCTV surveillance systems, and Santa Clara County Juvenile Hall intercom system Design Santa Clara County Juvenile Shasta County Main Jail Housing Redding, California Santa Clara County Jail South Elevator 115,035 sq. ft.; 11-story jail wing attached to a two-story County Santa Clara County Work Furlough administrative wing that houses courtrooms and offices Santa Clara County Jail Siskiyou County Jail Fire Alarm and Security Electronics Upgrade Sacramento County Courts Yreka, California Santa Cruz County Main Jail Security Electronics A Security Electronics and Fire Alarm System design was produced as a Santa Cruz County Jail Rountree subconsultant to the Architect for this existing occupied facility to Fire Alarm upgrade the existing, proprietary security electronics equipment to an Shasta County Jail Fire Alarm industry standard programmable logic controller-based system. Controls Upgrade and casework in Central Control and Housing Control were designed to Shasta County Jail Security provide the operator a comfortable and flexible ergonomic working Electronics Upgrade environment. The hard-wired fire alarm system was demolished and a Siskiyou County Juvenile Fire Alarm new code-compliant, addressable system was installed. The budget and & Security Upgrade construction cost for this upgrade as provided by Guidepost Solutions Solano County Juvenile Hall TDC was $900,000 for this 40,000 sq. ft., 80-bed, occupied facility. Stanislaus Sheriff Emergency Dispatch Vacaville Police Department Ventura County Juvenile Hall Walnut Creek Police & Dispatch

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 16 Education David Rickerson, CDT, Humboldt State University: B.S., Computer Information CCCA, PSP, CPP Systems Minors, Business and Philosophy Project Manager Western Career College: Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting A.S., Architectural Design Drafting Mr. Rickerson has 10 years’ experience in the design, installation, and Certifications project management of a diverse array of technology solutions, Construction Specifications including security, architectural door hardware, data network, and low Institute: Construction Documents voltage communications. At Guidepost Solutions TDC he is responsible Technologist (CDT); Certified for security and low-voltage systems engineering and design, site Construction Contract Administrator surveys, existing system assessment, review and production of (CCCA) Drawings and Specifications, bid evaluation, construction American Society for Industrial administration, and project management. Security: Physical Security Professional (PSP); Certified Selected Experience Protection Professional (CPP) Alameda County Jail – Santa Rita Affiliations Dublin, California American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS) Mr. Rickerson provided project support during Guidepost Solutions TDC Construction Specifications engagement to perform a comprehensive survey of existing conditions Institute (CSI) at the facility, assess and evaluate the effectiveness and viability of International Association for existing systems, and develop a master plan for a phased upgrade of Healthcare Security and Safety the entire facility including backbone infrastructure, security and (IAHSS) intrusion detection systems, and operational policies and procedures. Areas of Expertise Solano County Jail Claybank Adult Detention Facility Expansion Access Control Systems Fairfield, California Analog and IP CCTV Systems Analog and IP Intercom Guidepost Solutions TDC is providing security electronics and fire alarm Biometric Access Systems systems consulting services for the Claybank Adult Detention Facility Card Access Systems Expansion Project located in Fairfield, California. Our scope of work Electrified Door Hardware includes an assessment of the existing facility fire alarm, security Guard Tour Systems electronics equipment, and tel/data infrastructure; and design and Infant Tagging Systems construction management of the new facility-wide fire alarm, security Intrusion Detection Systems electronics, and tel/data systems. Mr. Rickerson is providing project Key Control Systems support services for this project. Perimeter Detection Systems Sierra Vista Hospital Psychiatric Facility Expansion Personal Duress Systems Sacramento, California Power over Ethernet (PoE) Programmable Logic Controller Guidepost Solutions TDC provided security consulting services for the (PLC) expansion of Sierra Vista Hospital, a private acute care psychiatric Security Electronics hospital that provides inpatient and outpatient services. The expansion Specifications project added approximately 20,467 sq. ft. of space to the existing TeleData and Ethernet LAN hospital. Our scope of work included designing new security systems Systems for the expansion area as well as integrating those systems with the Video Analytics systems in the existing hospital. Project Experience Alameda County Santa Rita Jail San Joaquin County Juvenile Hall Solano County Claybank Adult Facility UC Irvine Medical Center Master Plan

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 17 Stan Hultgren Education Sacramento State University: Project Manager BSEE, 1971 Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting Merritt College: Financial Accounting 1985 Mr. Hultgren has over 37 years’ experience in designing, managing, Keller Graduate School: Project and overseeing minor and major projects in the Western United States. Management 2005 His expertise includes Fire Alarm, Life Safety, Prison Security, Intrusion Security, Access Control, Nurse Call, Audio, Sound Masking, MATV, Certifications CATV, CCTV, Telephone, Clocks, School Intercom, and Broadband LAN Professional Audio, Altec Lansing systems. He has, on numerous projects, been responsible for overall Health Care, Jeron system design, coordination with architectural / engineering MATV, Blonder-Tongue disciplines, Code compliance, cost estimating, and value engineering. Professional Audio, Bose His responsibilities have included system design and programming, Professional Audio, Electrovoice site surveys, existing system assessments, production of drawings and Audio Design, University specifications, bid evaluation, project management, contract Health Care/Audio, Rauland Borg administration, and acceptance testing for all systems. CCTV, Vicon Prior to joining Guidepost Solutions TDC, Mr. Hultgren spent 29 years Professional Audio, Syn-Aud-Con in the Low Voltage construction industry as a project manager, Fire Alarm, EST estimator, and project engineer. Concurrently, between 1988 and 2001 he worked as a cost consultant. He has served as an expert Areas of Expertise witness in cases involving barking dogs, construction deficiencies, and Systems Design cost overruns. Master Planning Project Management Selected Experience Contract Administration City and County of San Francisco, Jail #3 Replacement Value Engineering San Bruno, California Commissioning Life Safety System Design We initially worked with the Bridging Documents team to develop a Nurse Call security program that includes a new Central Control, door control MATV systems, intercom, CCTV, alarm monitoring, and video motion Sound Masking detection. As part of that scope of work, we visited and assessed Professional Audio several existing San Francisco Jail facilities to develop Public Address recommendations regarding appropriate security equipment and Intercom Central Control requirements. Our work continued with the Design- Access Control Build team from bridging documents through construction CCTV administration. Construction value - $113.5 million Control Panels Expert Witness Washoe County Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Facility Reno, Nevada Project Experience Planning and design for a new 83,860 sq. ft., 108-bed juvenile Pelican Bay State Prison detention facility, including educational and probation wings, with Folsom State Prison support facilities for expansion of additional 36-bed pod. Security Denver Health Detention design included door control and door monitoring, intercom and public East Hawaii Police Detention address, closed circuit television with digital video recorders, Facility programmable logic controllers, control panels (touchscreen in central Fresno County Juvenile Facility control and graphic in pods), cable TV distribution, card access control Highland Hospital for doors in non-detention areas, and audio/video in courtroom. Jan Evans Juvenile Justice Facility Construction Vale - $25 million. Systems costs- approx. $1.2 million. San Francisco Juvenile Hall San Francisco County Jail San Joaquin County Jail San Joaquin County Mental Health Snohomish County Jail Santa Clara County Jails Ventura County Juvenile Facility San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 18 Kyle C. Wilson, RCDD, PMP, Affiliations BICSI Project Management Institute PSP (PMI) Project Manager American Society of Industrial Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting Security (ASIS) International Association for Mr. Wilson is an experienced and industry certified project manager with a Healthcare Security & Safety proven track record of managing client’s needs to ensure project profitability (IAHSS) through the application of technical expertise, strategic planning, and team TSA Transportation Worker supervision. Identification Credential (TWIC) Prior to joining Guidepost Solutions TDC, Mr. Wilson served as a project Certifications manager for IT integrator companies. In his previous roles he successfully managed the design and deployment of multi-million dollar integrated BICSI Registered systems projects consisting of digital surveillance, wireless, access control Communications Distribution networks, and data applications for Fortune 500 and federal clients. Mr. Designer (RCDD) – Registration Wilson is a certified BICSI Registered Communications Distribution Designer # 11996 (RCDD) and has vast experience engineering bids and proposals across PMI Project Management multiple low voltage infrastructure disciplines including structured cabling, Professional (PMP) – PMP# outside plant (OSP), CCTV, and integrated security networks. 1336581 Physical Security Professional Mr. Wilson’s project management experience and formal training has (PSP); ASIS International allowed him to recently achieve board certification as a Project Management Professional (PMP) through the globally-recognized PMI organization. He Project Planning, Analysis, and also holds a Physical Security Professional (PSP) certification from the Control Certification; ESI American Society of Industrial Security. International State of California and Fiber Selected Experience Optic Association licensed instructor for Postsecondary and Martin Luther King, Jr. Medical Center Upgrade Vocational Education in Fiber Los Angeles, California Optics DvTel Latitude NVMS 5.0 & 3.5 Guidepost Solutions TDC is providing low voltage systems design services for Lenel: CR1000R VAR-Hardware the renovation of the existing hospital, the construction of a new 20,000 sq. Course & CR2000R VAR-Access ft. administrative building and a new 130,000 sq. ft. ambulatory care Control Essentials building. We are also redesigning the inter-building low voltage connectivity Engineer Equipment Mechanic (outside plant communications) which includes conduit pathways but also School, USMC the relocation of the MPOE, coordination with service providers and various Interior Wiring, Solid State LA County stakeholders. Construction cost is estimated as $355 million. Devices, and Construction Department of Veteran Affairs San Diego Medical Center Spinal Blueprint Reading, USMC (ACE accredited) Cord Injury/Community Living Center & PS San Diego, California Project Experience Guidepost Solutions TDC is providing security and low voltage consulting and Coca-Cola design services for a facility on the VA San Diego Medical Center campus Federal Aviation Administration that will house a 50-bed Spinal Cord Injury department, a 43-bed HSBC Community Living Center, and a new 800-car parking structure. Scope Marine Corps Air Ground Combat includes full design of Security & CCTV, Tel/Data Infrastructure & Wireless Center Twentynine Palms LAN, Fire Alarm, Nurse Call/Code Blue, Public Address, and Patient Northrop Grumman Entertainment Television (CATV/MATV). Robins Air Force Base Scripps Health Sempra Energy UCI Medical Center UCSD Health System VA West Los Angeles San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 19 Kelly Miller Project Manager Guidepost Solutions Technology Design Consulting Education Mr. Miller has more than 20 years unique experience in designing Bachelor of Arts complex audiovisual systems, including large-scale videoconference California State University at networks. He has extensive skills in technology consulting and planning Fullerton for standardization of communication systems in the large institutional Fullerton, California, June 1988 and corporate environments. Affiliations Selected Experience B.I.C.S.I. State of California – Dept. Of Justice DNA Crime Lab* Project Management Institute Richmond, California Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers Project manager and principal consultant for audiovisual and distance American Telemedicine Association education technology for $10 million expansion of the state DNA crime lab. Oversaw design and technology installation for lab training facilities. Areas of Expertise University of California, San Francisco-Medical Simulation and Systems Design Telemedicine Training Center Value Engineering San Francisco, California Project Management Master Planning Project manager and principal consultant for audiovisual, telemedicine Peer Review and distance education technology for new $16 million medical Commissioning simulation and telemedicine training center. Oversaw design and MATV and CCTV technology installation for control and review rooms, simulation rooms Videoconferencing Networks and distance education classrooms. PA and Background Audio Presentation Technology UC Riverside PRIME Telemedicine Teaching and Learning Center Media Storage and Servers Riverside, California Digital Signage Control Systems Guidepost Solutions TDC is the audiovisual systems design consultant for Observation and Surveillance the remodel of approximately 8,290 sq. ft. of existing space within the Systems Statistics/Computer building on the UC Riverside campus that will house Telemedicine Networks and Medical Simulation, Clinical Skills and Telemedicine training. The project Devices also includes a gross anatomy lab, smart classrooms and problem-based learning spaces. In addition to audiovisual and telemedicine systems, Project Experience design services include a LAN VPN for video and audio traffic and videoconferencing systems for connection to facilities on the campus of Kaiser Permanente – Oakland UCLA, Charles Drew University of Medicine and Science, as well as other Medical Center facilities within the greater Los Angeles area that will be part of the PRIME Jeppesen Boeing- Command and US Telemedicine program. Control Center Kaiser Permanente- Kaiser Permanente- Napa Data Center Command and Control* Videoconferencing Network Napa Valley, California Nissan America- CATV City of Beverly Hills- Council Project manager and principal consultant for audiovisual, technology for Chambers new $100 million data center. Oversaw design and technology installation Kaiser Permanente- Autism Labs for facility command and control center and meeting spaces.

*Project with previous firm

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 20 Chris Papadimos Principal Papadimos Group Education Mr. Papadimos is responsible for the overall management of the firm and Bachelor of Science in Mechanical all major project assignments. He has been consulting in acoustics and Engineering, University of vibration continuously since 1989 for projects throughout the country. California at Los Angeles, 1989 Magna cum Laude Chris favors a practical, hands-on approach of integrating acoustical requirements into the project design from the onset of each project. His Affiliations experience ranges from conducting feasibility studies, developing programming requirements, setting appropriate design criteria, carrying ASHRAE National, Technical out site and building characterizations, developing and implementing Committee on Sound and acoustic design options, and controlling noise and vibration due to building Vibration – Programs Chair mechanical, electrical, plumbing and vertical transportation systems. Institute of Noise Control Mr. Papadimos is an experienced project manager and has consulted on Engineering (INCE) – Member some of the largest building construction projects in the world. He has also published technical papers, participated in the development of Project Experience acoustic standards and guidelines, and provided technical presentations to architects, engineers and building owners. James H Clark Center at Stanford Los Esteros Critical Facility – San Jose, CA Netflix Facilities – several projects Macae Energy Center - Brazil Millennium Sciences Complex at PSU Plaquemines Parish Detention Facility Portola Valley Town Hall Complex San Jose Civic Center – San Jose, CA Sequoia Union School District Admin Solano County Government Center Spartan Energy Center The New Stanford Hospital UC San Diego Jacobs Medical Center UC Santa Cruz – Biomedical Research UCSF at Mission Bay – Several Research Buildings and Medical Center Master Plan UCSF at Parnassus - IRM Institute University of Chicago Hospital Pavilion UPENN Translational Research Facility USDA Phase II Complex – Ames, IA Van Andel Institute, Phase II Wareham Properties at Emerystation Wallingford Energy Center

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 21 Gasper Sciacca, RA Senior Associate Papadimos Group Education Mr. Sciacca brings a wealth of practical experience in many project Degree in Architecture - categories. His responsibilities include providing consultation in University of Illinois at Urbana architectural acoustics and noise control for all aspects of building design. Registrations Mr. Sciacca began his acoustical consulting career in the Chicago office of Bolt Beranek and Newman, considered in many ways as the firm that Registered Architect, Illinois developed most aspects of building acoustics into a science. Registered Architect, Wisconsin Registered Architect, California Gasper is experienced in providing acoustical consulting for the design of a wide variety of projects from justice to detention facilities to convention Affiliations centers and hospitality facilities. He also consults on the design of performing spaces, corporate centers and educational auditoriums, lecture American Institute of Architects halls and training centers. His work includes corporate headquarters and Acoustical Society of America office buildings, as well as extensive work in multi-family residential American Institute of Physics projects. Construction Specifications Institute Because he is an architect, he maintains an active interest in the integration and coordination of acoustics, electro-acoustics and Project Experience audiovisual systems with architectural design and construction requirements towards achieving imaginative and technically successful Auburn Justice Center projects. City of Auburn Justice Center CSU Science Building at Stanislaus Berkeley Art Museum & Film Archive Dharma Realm Buddhist Campus Los Angeles Federal Courthouse Merritt College for Science & Health Morgan Hill Courthouse Moscone Convention Center Pasadena City Hall Renovations Sacramento City Hall Expansion San Diego Federal Courthouse San Francisco County Jail San Joaquin County Superior Courts San Mateo Youth Service Center Shasta County Admin Center Solano County Admin Building Stanislaus County Animal Shelter Terra Linda High School Modernization Tracy City Hall

San Mateo County Jail February 29, 2012 Guidepost Solutions TDC – Security/Low Voltage Systems Qualifications Page 22 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING SERVICES SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

HOK

29 February 2012

South Placer Justice Center 29 FEBRUARY 2012 Catherine, On behalf of TEECOM I wanted to thank you for giving us the op- CATHERINE CHAN, portunity to propose our services on this most important project. VICE PRESIDENT HOK We have included in the following pages the information you have requested and would welcome the opportunity to present our qualiﬁ- ONE BUSH ST STE 200 cations in person at a time that is convenient for you and your client. SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104 Before you review the detailed information that follows, I wanted to invite you to consider the following points in making the difﬁcult decision that is selecting the best consultant for your team:

t TEECOM is the largest ﬁrm of its kind in the nation. We are focused solely on the design, integration, and project management of technology (telecommunications, audiovisual, acoustics, security, data, network, and controls) during the facilities development process, backed by research and innovation. The latter is, in our humble opinion, a tremendous advantage and edge over our competition for architects and owners alike to prepare facilities FOR the future. We provide the most effective solutions available at the most appropriate level of client investment. Your client, our client’s goals are our number one priority, not only the day the facility opens, but for years to come.

t TEECOM has the local resources and depth to provide HOK and San Mateo County with the peace of mind that every expert should provide. We will continue to demonstrate our dedication to your success and that of your team and the project. Our pledge of excellence to you and San Mateo County is not only to provide the best technology engineering design services, but the best consultant experience possible. The success of your client, and your success is our pride. Our team is committed, excellence is our pledge to you, our purpose.

t Since its inception in 1997, TEECOM has created the vision for, designed, or managed over 1,000 technology systems for leading organizations, public and private. We are proud to say to this date that we have never been engaged in any lawsuits or claims, nor have we ever been ﬁred from a job. Our business is built upon a strong following of repeat clients and architects who realize the value that TEECOM brings to each and every project. To conclude Catherine, what we propose to you is a promise, a commitment to the successful completion of the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional facility.

Delivering excellence is at the core of TEECOM’s philosophy, not only as a consultant to you, but to ourselves internally. We strive in every aspect of our business to go above and beyond. Allow us to fulﬁll that promise and demonstrate our commitment to your success.

Regards,

Samuel J. Fajner, Associate Principal RVP, Client Relations & Development CONTENTS

PROJECT APPROACH 0 Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design 1 INSURANCE REQUIREMENT 0 Insurance Requirement 2 Certiﬁcate of Liability Insurance

SAN MATEO PROJECT 0 MATRIX 3 Detention/Correctional Projects Completed within the last 10 years, Construction Cost $25M or above, Full Service Design

PROJECT PERSONNEL 0 The TEECOM Commitment 4 Telecom, Audiovisual and Acoustics Resumes Client References 01 APPROACHBIGWORD

45 Fremont - ©Thomas Hawk

San Francisco County Jail #3 Replacement PROJECT APPROACH Collaborative Interdisciplinary Design AS A TRUSTED ADVISOR, WE MUST FIRST EARN THE TRUST AND RESPECT OF THE CLIENT. We believe trust is built upon consistency. Consistency of exceptional, devoted attention, from a highly reliable and credible source, yielding a superb experience and outcome. That is precisely the commitment we extend to HOK and the San Mateo County Jail: an exceptional experience and outcome.

Please allow us begin to present our capabilities, project approach, and formula for success:

TEECOM is the largest ﬁrm of its kind in the world. We offer a global reach, yet with a local touch. In fact, the Bay Area is our home, and we offer more registered and credentialed professionals that focus purely on technology than every other ﬁrm in the entire San Francisco Bay Area combined. This concentration of dedicated technology professionals offers a think tank, production house, and execution arm unparalleled in the industry.

We are focused solely on the design, integration, and project management of technology during the facilities development process. Speciﬁcally, our strongest disciplines include telecommunications, audiovisual, acoustics, security, data, network, and controls. Our largest technology departments internally exists within our telecommunications and audiovisual (including acoustics) group, which boasts a collective staff of 23 engineers. In fact, organization wide we offer the following credentials:

Professional Engineers (PE) - 5 Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) - BICSI - 11 Certified Protection Professionals (CPP) - ASIS - 2 Certified Technology Specialist (CTS) - infoComm - 2 Certified Technology Specialist- Design (CTS-D) - infoComm - 1 Construction Documents Technologist (CDT) - Construction Specifica- tions Institute - 9 The services requested by the us to authentically serve as a rooms on the project. This key San Mateo County Jail and HOK trusted advisor and effectively information is needed so the are at the core of what TEECOM champion the expectations of architect and engineers can plan does every day: design/ the client. Thus, we build trust in space and systems to support engineering, backed by research the initial stages of our engage- the technology spaces. We will and innovation. Because we ment protected and cultivated also develop project responsi- attract the very top talent of well beyond the delivery of the bilities and establish a decision those obsessed with all things desired result and conclusion of log so all the key stakeholders technology, we have assembled the project. understand key responsibilities a group of the finest and most and decisions that are made Once we fully discern the col- competent professionals you throughout the project. Again, lective client’s requirements, will ever work with, who are we develop these initial docu- TEECOM realizes the critical passionate about what they do ments from information gathered nature of not only managing and the firm they work for. In during our visioning sessions and the design process, but also the fact, TEECOM employees have user group meetings. Our goal need to drive key technology voted TEECOM as the best firm is to ensure that the technology decisions throughout the project, to work for in our industry for systems meet the requirements while also documenting and the last five consecutive years. of the owners technology capturing the decisions made, We think passionate employees vision and budget and that the and the context behind the translate into employees who are technology systems are well conclusions and/or resolutions passionate about YOUR success. coordinated with the rest of the reached. In order to appro- design team from the start. PROJECT priately manage the decision- APPROACH making process, and capture the The following is a brief descrip- data supporting such decisions, tion of the comprehensive tools As a result our extensive we have developed a number of we will be using on this project: robust, proprietary tracking tools experience, delivering over 1,000 BUDGET successful projects to date, we that allow TEECOM to deliver a consistent, highly predictable, have developed a finely tuned We use Microsoft Excel to and methodical process, void of methodical approach, and prepare our Opinions of Prob- surprises. corresponding tools, to deliver able Construction Cost (OPCC), a highly predictable process and After first listening to and using the detailed, hands-on outcome. understanding the requirement’s knowledge of our engineers who come from contracting Our central focus at the begin- of the project, we shift our backgrounds. Updated OPCCs ning of this effort will be to central focus to efforts required are prepared as the project engage in an intensive study of to establish a project budget moves through the design the project to truly grasp the and basis of design for the actual and implementation phases, mission, vision, and more prag- systems: telecommunications, to ensure it stays within your matic needs of the project. This audiovisual systems, as well as budget. During construction, the intimate understanding of the the acoustical requirements, OPCC is also used to track any collective client (HOK and the to establish space and load change order costs against the San Mateo County Jail) allows requirements for the technology budget contingency. TEECOM has an excellent track record of project. This document allows sharing them with the entire very low to no change orders proactive thinking about not only project team so that everyone is when managing the design and where a project is today but what on the same page. implementation process. We future task the PM may start to believe all the details must be resolve today to avoid future risk MECHANICAL, ELECTRI- worked out during design, not or task failure. CAL, FIRE PROTECTION, left as change order opportuni- ARCHITECTURAL MA- ties for the contractor during BASIS OF DESIGN TRIX (MEFPA MATRIX) construction. NARRATIVE (BOD) This is a matrix that locates RESPONSIBILITY This document is a program all architectural, mechanical, MATRIX narrative that details and cap- electrical, and fire protection tures all technology systems and requirements for all IT spaces. It This document vets out the how they relate to the building is used as a single coordination project needs, deliverables and construction. The BOD is one tool to assist the other design responsible parties before pen is of the first documents created team members with the design set to paper and is a living docu- on a project so the owner can of their systems to meet the ment throughout the project. sign off on the design intent. It requirements for IT spaces. This This is document has become is used as a coordination tool is a single sheet with all values a standard practice on every with the design team, and all listed in a table and is updated TEECOM project, large or small, future construction documents throughout the design phase. Its as we tend to find lots of scope (drawings and specifications) are main purpose is to reduce the gap and team members who created from this information. amount of individual correspon- don’t realize what their true role Specifically, this document dence and provide all pertinent is on a project and what they are details: IT space requirements, information in one consolidated really responsible for. This one equipment loads (Mechanical/ place. document can reduce change Electrical), cabling needs, orders on a project by 10% just pathways, audiovisual design/ DESIGN DECISION LOG by finding scope gaps. strategy, etc. It is also used as a starting point to develop the Another unique quality control CRITICAL DECISION initial OPCC (budget). Like the tool is our Design Decision Log. MATRIX Critical Decision Matrix this It is a living document where document helps keep the design we capture the various design This document is coordinated team aligned to the client goals decisions that are made during with the project schedule to not throughout the entirety of the a project. As completion of CD only list present and future tasks project. approaches, or once the project but when they must occur in is under construction, if ques- order to stay off the critical path. NEWFORMA tions arise regarding any aspect This enables both the design of the design, we have a clear team and client the ability to This is a software management record of when, who and why a understand how the technology tool for tracking e-mails, project specific decision was made. It design and implementation documentation (drawings and is also used as a QA/QC tool to process fits into the overall specifications), file transfers, backcheck our and the design tasks, RFI’s and submittals, and team’s documents. 02 INSURANCE

South Placer Justice Center INSURANCE REQUIREMENT Insurance Requirement Certiﬁcate of Liability Insurance Insurance Requirement

TEECOM’s insurance coverage carries $2M per occurrence/$4M aggregate of professional liability. This satisﬁes HOK’s requirement for Acoustics/AV, Special Systems, Commercial General Liability, Employer Liability, Auto, and Umbrella.

Please refer to TEECOM’s Insurance Certiﬁcate for additional details.

03 MATRIX

Mammoth Lakes Courthouse SAN MATEO PROJECT MATRIX Detention/Correctional Projects Completed within the last 10 years, Construction Cost $25M or above, Full Service Design San Mateo Jail Project Matrix Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience

Comments HOK McCarthy BIM Usage Gross Area Area Gross CM At Risk State of CA Design-Build (In $Millions) Sundt-Layton Hensel Phelps No. of Storey(s) (In Square Feet) (In Square No. of Building(s) Construction Cost Direct Supervision Direct LEED Certification Year of Completion Year Redwood City (RWC) San Mateo County (SMC) Direct Relevant Experience Direct (Answer Yes If a Design Model Was If a Design Model Was (Answer Yes No. of Beds (Design Capacity) New Facility - Full Service Design (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or Platinum) (None, Certified, Silver, Project Name And Deliverable) For Coordination Created

384 cells, Telecom, Network, San Francisco County Jail #3 Replacement 2004 $95M 283,000 Yes 4 4 - No Yes - - Yes Yes - Yes - - - - 768 beds and PBX

Alameda County Juvenile Detention Facility 2006 $176 379,000 360 Yes 3 3 Gold No Yes - - Yes - Yes Yes Yes Yes - - Telecom

Telecom, Security, South Placer Justice Center 2008 $36M 110,000 18 Yes 1 2 - No Yes - - Yes - Yes Yes - - - - and AV

Telecom, Security, and AV Mammoth Lakes Courthouse 2011 $21.5M 20,300 6 Yes 1 2 Silver* No Yes - - Yes Yes - Yes - - - Yes *LEED Silver Certiﬁ- cation Pending

San Francisco County Jail #3 Replacement Alameda County Juvenile Detention Facility South Placer Justice Center Mammoth Lakes Courthouse 04 PERSONNEL

Alameda County Juvenile Detention Facility PROJECT PERSONNEL The TEECOM Commitment Telecom, Audiovisual and Acoustics Resumes Client References The TEECOM Commitment

Here at TEECOM, we are committed to the success at the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facilty. We seek to exceed all client expectations by demonstrating the utmost professionalism, interacting proactively on their behalf, and developing innovative solutions. Our method results in fewer change orders, projects that ﬂow smoother, and carefully planned systems that can grow with out clients’ organization. Today, our highest priority remains the same; TEECOM continues to approach every aspect of a project as an opportunity to create the best possible solution for both San Mateo County and HOK.

My Personal Obsession: technology and acoustics are coordinated internally,ally, anandd wwithith ththee resrestt ooff ththee ddesignesign tteam, maximizing integration, andnd eleliminatingimminating errors.

Larry AAnderson,nded rsono , PE RCDD CDTCDT,, PrinciPrincipalpal iin Charge

My Personal Obsession: designing and coordinating pathways and devices before the ﬂoors and walls are built which saves the owner both time and momoneyonen y from reduced chachange orders.

Markk LLatz,attz,z RCDD CDT, ProProjectject MManageranager & Lead Engineer

My Personal Obsession: designing additional boxes and conduits to supportpp future technologies g which saves the owner from costly retroﬁtsoﬁts in the ffuture.uture.

Arnelel AvAvila,ila PPEE CTCTSS CDCDT,T LLeadead AuAudiovisualdiovo isual EngineerEn

My Personal Obsession: acoustics and the quality of design that provides comfortable and safe environments for its occupants.

Tim Schmidt, LEED GA, Lead Acoustical Consultant Larry Anderson PE RCDD CDT Principal in Charge

With more than 15 years of experience in the consulting engineering field, Larry contributes to the TEECOM team effort with a high degree of professionalism and an understanding of how to identify and meet client needs. Before joining TEECOM, he worked with a national TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE consulting firm that worked with large newspapers throughout the 15 Country, helping them improve operational and organizational EDUCATION & TRAINING efficiencies through technology-based solutions. Larry is highly con- B.S., Mechanical Engineering versant in computer technology and has a strong, practical knowledge of the facility construction process. California State University, Sacramento

REGISTRATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Registered Electrical Engineer, California #17587 South Placer Justice Center Registered Electrical Engineer, South Placer, CA Washington #46212 AOC Hollister Courthouse Registered Electrical Engineer, Hollister, CA Texas #105666 AOC Porterville Courthouse Registered Electrical Engineer, Porterville, CA Oklahoma #25358 Emeryville Police Department Remodel Registered Communication Emeryville, CA Distribution Designer (RCDD), #092282 Highland Hospital Oakland, CA Construction Document Technology Certiﬁcation (CDT) Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Palo Alto, CA PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Parkland Hospital Building Industry Consulting Dallas, Texas Services International Construction Speciﬁcation San Francisco General Hospital San Francisco, CA Institute UCSF Mission Bay Medical Center REFERENCES San Francisco, CA Parkland Hospital and Jail UCSF Medical Sciences Building Seismic Upgrade Alan Greenslade, CTO San Francisco, CA 5000 Harry Hines Blvd, Support Bldg A, 1st Flr Dallas, TX 75235 T: (214) 590-0903 E: [email protected] Mark Latz RCDD CDT Project Manager & Lead Engineer

Mark has significant experience in communications system design and project planning, and maintains an extensive working knowledge of telecommunications systems and the construction process. Mark’s system designs are based on industry standards while accounting for TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE current market trends, the newest products, and interface with active 24 equipment. Thus, he is able to provide services that support client’s EDUCATION & TRAINING current requirements and anticipate future communications opportu- B.S., Electrical Engineering nities. Prior to joining TEECOM, he worked at Anixter Inc., where he developed a detailed and practical knowledge of telecom products Purdue University, Lafayette, IN and systems. REGISTRATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS Registered Communication SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Distribution Designer (RCDD), #041229 San Francisco Jail #3 Construction Document Technol- San Bruno, CA ogy Certification (CDT) Alameda County Juvenile Detention Facility Alameda, CA PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Building Industry Consulting AOC Hollister Courthouse Services International (BICSI) Hollister, CA Construction Specification Santa Clara Family Justice Center Feasibility Study Institute (CSI) Santa Clara, CA GSA 50 UN Plaza REFERENCES San Francisco, CA San Francisco County Jail #3R Michael Wang, Director College of San Mateo Building 35 “Regional Public Safety Center” KMD Justice San Mateo, CA 222 Vallejo Street Snohomish City Public Works Maintenance Center San Francisco, CA 94111 Everett, WA T: (415) 398-5191 E: [email protected] State Compensation Insurance Fund Data Center Vacaville, CA California Academy of Sciences Alameda County Juvenile San Francisco, CA Justice Center Steve Slosek, AIA, LEED® AP, SLAC Research Support Building Vice President Palo Alto, CA HOK One Bush St Ste 200 San Francisco CA 94104 T: 415 356 8581 E: [email protected] Arnel Avila PE CTS CDT Lead Audiovisual Engineer

Arnel brings a background in mechanical engineering to TEECOM. He began his career as a systems engineer for a local BMS integrator where he designed controls for mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems to provide an overall building energy management system. TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE As buildings strive to become more ‘green’, these systems interface 6 with security and audiovisual systems more than ever. This gives Arnel EDUCATION & TRAINING the knowledge to think of these systems outside their traditional use. B.S., Mechanical Engineering Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo

REGISTRATIONS & SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATIONS South Placer Justice Center Registered Electrical Engineer, South Placer, CA California E18352 Registered Electrical Engineer, AOC Mammoth Lakes Courthouse Mammoth Lakes, CA Texas E105641 Registered Electrical Engineer, AOC Porterville Courthouse Oklahoma E25359 Porterville, CA Construction Documents CalPERS Headquarters Technologist (CDT) Sacramento, CA Certiﬁed Technology Specialist Lincoln City Hall (CTS) Lincoln, CA

REFERENCES Snohomish City Public Works Maintenance Center Everett, WA AOC Courts Jennifer H Willard, Supervising Madera County Government Center AV/Video Systems Technical Madera, CA Analyst Cal Academy of Sciences Judicial Council of California San Francisco, CA Administrative Ofﬁce of the Courts Palo Alto Medical Foundation T: (415) 865-7755 Palo Alto, CA E: [email protected] San Diego Children’s Hospital San Diego, CA University of Nevada, Reno Library Greg Gardella, Instructional Technology Manager University of Nevada, Reno M: (775) 691-4844 E: [email protected] Tim Schmidt Lead Acoustical Consultant

Tim brings over 12 years of experience in acoustics and noise control design for buildings and human exposure. Tim’s experience in acoustics covers a spectrum of project types and includes numerous large scale corporate, multi-family, healthcare, research, mixed use, and TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE education projects. With a background in architecture, engineering, 12 and building construction, Tim brings an understanding of building EDUCATION & TRAINING systems, and applies efﬁciency and synergy in working with the design B.S., Architecture, Georgia team, clients, user groups, and installers. Tim’s specialties are acous- Institute of Technology, Atlanta, tic comfort for the work place, speech intelligibility for presentations, GA and optimizing rooms for performance and listening. He has particular Extended Study in Architecture, ability to develop acoustic solutions for high performance buildings, Universität Stuttgart high capacity building systems, and projects with complex programmatic needs. He has guided the acoustic design of auditoria, multi- REGISTRATIONS & media presentation rooms, and facilities that that feature innovative CERTIFICATIONS approaches to natural ventilation, day lighting interior spaces, and LEED Green Associate low energy/low noise HVAC systems. Tim’s experience also includes on-site evaluations of appropriate acoustic performance parameters PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS including an array of room acoustics and sound isolation metrics, and Acoustical Society of America measuring noise/vibration emissions from various sources related to Institute of Noise Control noise codes and stringent design standards. Engineering, Associate Member

REFERENCES Barclays Global Investors (Now SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Blackrock) Sonoma County Main Adult Detention Facility Jason McCarthy, Architect, AIA, Santa Rosa, CA STUDIOS T: (415) 732-5315 Clark County Regional Justice Center E: [email protected] Las Vegas, NV AOC Fresno Courthouse Intuit Corporate Headquarters Fresno, CA Matt Castor, Facilities Specialist, Workplace Solutions AOC Willows Courthouse Willows, CA T: (650) 944-3550 Main Adult Detention Center Netﬂix Call Center, Hillsboro, Santa Rosa, CA Oregon Vernon Jubilee Hospital Diagnostic and Treatment Building Jim Leibold, Facilities Project Vernon, British Columbia Manager T: (408) 540-3731 UC Davis Medical Center Sacramento, CA Client References “TEECOM over- SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY JAIL #3R saw the court- Michael Wang, Director KMD Justice house’s audiovi- 222 Vallejo Street sual, broadcast, San Francisco, CA 94111 T: (415) 398-5191 telecommunica- E: [email protected] tions, and security systems. Their ALAMEDA COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE CENTER expertise in tech- Steve Slosek, AIA, LEED® AP, Vice President nology made them HOK One Bush St Ste 200 a good ﬁt for this San Francisco CA 94104 responsibility.” T: 415 356 8581 E: [email protected]

Dennis Salter, SOUTH PLACER JUSTICE CENTER Placer Department Dennis Salter of Facility Services Placer County’s Department of Facility Services 11476 C Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 T: 530 886 4981 E: [email protected]

MAMMOTH LAKES COURTHOUSE

Paul Davison RIBA, Intermediate Architect Mark Cavagnero Associates Architects 1045 Sansome St # 200 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415 398 6944 E: [email protected] 1333 Broadway Suite 601 Oakland, CA 94612 510 337 2800 www.teecom.com Project Team

A member company of SH Group, Inc.

John R. Moran, III, QEI Principal-In-Charge

John is responsible for the operation of Syska Hennessy Group’s Vertical Transportation Group (VTG), including project management and design of elevator, escalators and automated people moving systems; solid waste management; materials handling systems; and related surveys, studies, costs, designs, specification, economic justification studies, and field observations. He has over 34 years experience in the elevator industry. His experience includes the design and project management of numerous elevator and materials handling systems throughout the United States and Far East. His understanding of elevator analysis and the techniques in applying available elevator technology to specific design applications has resulted in cost-effective solutions, providing superior elevator service and economical use of building space.

Project Experience San Mateo County Jail, San Mateo, CA Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center, Vertical Transportation, LEED® Gold, San Leandro, California Marin County Correctional Center, Marin, CA Pierce County Correctional Center, Tacoma, WA Shasta County Jail, Redding, CA San Quentin Central Health Services Building, San Quentin, CA York County Courthouse, Elevator Design and Construction Management, York County, PA State of California, Long Beach Courthouse, VT Design Guidelines, Long Beach, CA San Quentin Housing, San Quentin, CA Maricopa County, New High-Rise Court Tower, Registered LEED NC Silver, Phoenix, AZ East Contra Costa County Courthouse, Pittsburg, CA Clark Street Federal Office Building, Chicago, IL U.S. Courthouse and Federal Office Building, Sacramento, CA Salt Lake City Courts Complex, Salt Lake City, UT Santa Clara County Court House, San Jose, CA Phoenix Courthouse, Phoenix, AZ West Virginia Federal Courts and Office Building, Charleston, WV Bay Meadows Mixed Use Project, San Mateo, CA

Education MBA Management, Golden Gate University, 1984 B.S. Economics/Business Administration, Saint Mary’s College of California, 1977

Professional Licenses and Certifications NAESA Certified Elevator Safety Inspector

Professional Activities and Affiliations International Association of Elevator Engineers National Association of Elevator Safety Authorities Advisor to OSHPD Ad Hoc Committee on Hospital Elevators Instructor: American Institute of Architects (AIA) Certified Courses –‘Elevator and Escalator Safety Course’ Project Team

A member company of SH Group, Inc.

Jeff Sena Vertical Transportation

Jeff has more than 9 years of experience in the elevator industry. His experience includes the design of numerous elevators, equipment specification and control system design. His understanding of specific elevator equipment and various configurations for optimum performance assists him in specifying elevator systems that best fit the unique needs of each project. Additionally, Jeff’s experience in client and project management help make projects successful, both in design and in client satisfaction.

Project Experience San Francisco Public Utility Commission, San Francisco, CA Department of Veteran Affairs, Palo Alto Medical Center New Parking Garage and Polytrauma Clinic Elevator Design, Palo Alto, CA California Pacific Medical Center, New Cathedral Hill Hospital Elevator Design, San Francisco, CA Los Angeles International Airport, Tom Bradley International Terminal Expansion, Los Angeles, CA Department of Veteran Affairs, New Las Vegas Medical Center Elevator Design, Las Vegas, NV Department of Veteran Affairs, San Francisco Medical Center Elevator Assessment, San Francisco, CA San Diego Airport, Terminal 2 West Expansion, San Diego, CA SCVMC Bed Building I, Santa Clara, CA Kaiser Medical Center Elevator Modernization, Hayward, CA State University New York, Campus Renovations, Multiple locations, New York City of Denver, Denver Club Elevator Controls Design, Denver, CO Bureau of Engraving Offices Elevator Controls Design, Washington, DC New York Transit Authority Various Elevator Control Projects, New York, NY New York Housing Authority Various Elevator Control Projects, New York, NY Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, Santa Clara, CA Arcas-Stratcom Military Base, Nebraska United Nations Building, New York, NY Boston University Student Services Center, Boston, MA Hotel Monaco, Philadelphia, PA Rose Bowl, Pasadena, CA

Education Bachelor of Science, Electrical Engineering, California State University, Sacramento, CA

The Marshall Associates, Inc.

Steven W. Marshall Principal-in-Charge

Education: College of San Mateo

Professional Associations/Affiliations: Foodservice Consultants Society International (Past President) Society of Foodservice Management

Awards: Foodservice Equipment and Supplies Specialist Magazine, Foodservice consultant of the Year, Restaurants & Institutions Awards Program, Award for Food Facilities Design – Hotels, Restaurants, Universities

Registration: Foodservice Consultants Society International (FCSI), Professional Member Since 1975 Past International President

Professional Experience: 1964 - Present Principal, The Marshall Associates, Inc.

Steve has been with The Marshall Associates, Inc. for the past 48 years and president for 36 years. The majority of his work involves the programming and designing of each corporate foodservice facility. He has an extremely active and progressive national and international practice. His experience with project development, design and operational analysis has proven successful for over 2000 hospitality, education and community projects. Steve is past international president of the Food Service Consultant’s International Society (FCSI), which represents a majority of the professional Foodservice Consultants in the world. He is frequently quoted in industry publications and has twice been named Foodservice Consultant of the Year by Foodservice Equipment and Supplies Specialist Magazine, and recently Top Ten Hospitality Designers in North America by “Food Arts” Magazine.

The Marshall Associates, Inc.

References:

Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center Hellmuth Obata + Kassabaum Architects Catherine Chan, Project Manager 415-243-0555 Hensel Phelps Construction Jeff Bennett, Project Manager 408-452-1800

San Mateo County Youth Services Center Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects Robert Fierro, Project Manager 415.398.5191 Turner Construction Craig T. Jones 415-705-8900

SVP Coalinga California Dept of Mental Health Jack Streigel, Owner Representative 916-654-3890 Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects John MacAllister, Senior Manager 415.398.5191 Hensel Phelps Construction Jeff Bennett, Project Manager 408-452-1800

Mendota Federal Prison AW/HSMM/QUAD Joint Venture Arrington Watkins Architects Lynn Arrington, Project Manager 602.279.4373 Federal Bureau of Prisons Diane Vaughn 202-514-5942

CSP Kern County at Delano Candy Roberts, State of CA Project Manager 916-648-6545 Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects Ivan Romero, Project Manager 415-398-5191 Kitchell, Capital Expenditure Managers 916-442-6996 The Marshall Associates, Inc.

Jonathan N. Marshall Project Manager

Education: College of San Mateo

Professional Associations/Affiliations: Foodservice Consultants Society International

Registration: Foodservice Consultants Society International, 1984

Professional Experience: 1968 - Present Principal, The Marshall Associates, Inc.

Jonathan has been with The Marshall Associates for the past 44 years. Jonathan Marshall and Steve Marshall are partners in the firm and bring together over 80 years of Foodservice consulting experience. Jonathan has been the Principal-In-Charge of various projects including corporate cafeterias, hospitals, restaurants, clubs, health care projects, community centers, hotels, schools and correctional projects. His specialty is in the management of Construction Documents, Preparation and Construction Administration. He is also in charge of Project Design, Specifications, Cost Estimating, Field Supervision, Client Liaison and is the firm’s Financial Manager. The majority of his work is in the Construction Administration for all projects. This method has been proven successful for over 2,000 projects. He oversees a full time staff of designers, technical assistants and construction staff. The Marshall Associates, Inc.

References:

Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center Hellmuth Obata + Kassabaum Architects Catherine Chan, Project Manager 415-243-0555 Hensel Phelps Construction Jeff Bennett, Project Manager 408-452-1800

San Mateo County Youth Services Center Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects Robert Fierro, Project Manager 415.398.5191 Turner Construction Craig T. Jones 415-705-8900

Mendota Federal Prison AW/HSMM/QUAD Joint Venture Arrington Watkins Architects Lynn Arrington, Project Manager 602.279.4373 Federal Bureau of Prisons Diane Vaughn 202-514-5942

Mark Walsh

Vice President Construction Documents, AutoCAD/Project Manager

Education: Denver Technical College, AA/1979/Architecture

Professional Associations/Affiliations: Foodservice Consultants Society International

Registration: Foodservice Consultants Society International, 1998

Professional Experience: 1988 - Present, The Marshall Associates, Inc.

Mark has been with The Marshall Associates for the past 24 years. Mark also has an additional 6 years experience he brings to us. He provides project direction for all of the projects including corporate cafeterias universities and colleges, restaurants, clubs, health care projects, community centers, hotels, schools and hospitals. Mark manages the firm's AutoCAD and design systems. The majority of his work is in the preparation and programming of Construction Documents for all projects. The Marshall Associates, Inc.

References:

Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center Hellmuth Obata + Kassabaum Architects Catherine Chan, Project Manager 415-243-0555 Hensel Phelps Construction Jeff Bennett, Project Manager 408-452-1800

San Mateo County Youth Services Center Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects Robert Fierro, Project Manager 415.398.5191 Turner Construction Craig T. Jones 415-705-8900

Mendota Federal Prison AW/HSMM/QUAD Joint Venture Arrington Watkins Architects Lynn Arrington, Project Manager 602.279.4373 Federal Bureau of Prisons Diane Vaughn 202-514-5942

Jeffrey A. Maddox is a Principal of The Fire Consultants Inc. and is a registered fire protection engineer with over 20 years of experience in fire protection, building code consulting and system design. He is registered as a Fire Protection Engineer in California and as a Professional Engineer in Oregon and Colorado. Mr. Maddox holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Fire Protection Engineering from the University of Maryland, College Park, 1986.

Mr. Maddox has worked with architects, developers, owners and authorities having jurisdiction to determine code compliance. He has been involved with the review of architectural projects through the design phase and during construction. He has prepared due diligence and fire protection evaluation reports and is familiar with state, local and federal accessibility requirements. He has extensive experience with detention/correctional, justice, and high rise buildings. He also has experience with hotels, atria, educational, renovated, and mixed-use facilities in the U.S. and abroad.

Mr. Maddox has used timed exiting, fire resistance heat transfer principles, smoke development, and fire growth models as part of the justification for approval of modifications to fire protection requirements. He has been involved with projects utilizing base isolation systems and has developed fire protection concepts for these systems. He has developed operational and testing criteria for smoke control systems in detention/correctional facilities, high rise buildings, malls, atriums, and large industrial facilities.

Mr. Maddox has current or previous professional affiliations with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), Salamander Honorary Fire Protection Engineering Society, ASHRAE Technical Committee 5.6, Smoke Management and NFPA Safety to Life Project Assembly, Fire Protection Features Committees. Mr. Maddox is a member of the California State Fire Marshal’s Task Group on code changes for Group I-3 occupancies.

Mr. Maddox’s detention/correctional and justice experience includes:

Numerous Federal Detention and Correctional Facilities in California, Nevada, Hawaii, Arizona, Guam, and Washington.

Numerous State Prisons in San Quentin and Modesto, California; Lovelock, Nevada; Umatilla and Hillsboro Oregon, and Matanuska Susitna Alaska. Numerous Local Jails and Detention Facilities in Phoenix Arizona, Alameda County and San Francisco California.

Numerous Federal Courthouses in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle, Portland and Phoenix and Denver.

Numerous State and Local Courthouses in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle.

The following are Technical Papers, Publications, and Speeches that Mr. Maddox has contributed:

“Fire Protection for Asymmetric Atria,” two case studies, Society of Fire Protection Engineers, Rocky Mountain Chapter, 1991.

“Smoke Control System Design for Atria,” National Fire Protection Association Annual Meeting, 1994.

“Smoke Control and High Rise Office buildings with Operable Windows: Two Case Studies,” ASHRAE Winter Meeting 2004.

“Computer Modeling and Fire Tests Used to Verify Fire Resistance of Various Wall Assemblies,” Interflam 2004, Edinburgh, Scotland.

“Smoke Control in Buildings with Operable Windows,” Pacific Energy Center Seminar, 2005.

“An FDS Analysis of Sprinkler and Draft Stops at Floor Openings,” International Conference on Performance-Based Codes and Fire Safety Design Methods, Tokyo, Japan, 2006.

References:

Mr. Steve Guarino, Office of the State Fire Marshal (916) 341-6641 Mr. Royal Field, Neeser Construction (907) 276-1058 Mr. Steve Taylor, Taylor Engineering (510) 749-9135 Mr. Giyan Senaratne, City of Emeryville and WC3 Consultants (925) 275-1700

Page 2

Richard L. Engler, AIA Role: Principal Richard Engler is a licensed Architect with a specialization in the area of expert witness services Education: related to architecture, engineering, programming Bachelor of Architecture, University of and a variety of comparative elements within the Nebraska- Architecture-1963 A/E/C industry. Since the mid 1980's Richard has Registered Architect-California-C 9875 served as an expert witness for issues regarding standard of care, construction defects, personal injury and wrongful death resulting from design and Professional Affiliations: construction claims This service has been provided for criminal justice projects, health care American Institute of Architects facilities, arenas, research facilities, office buildings, Architecture for Justice condominium projects and a wide variety of other projects types. Society of Forensic Engineers and

Scientists Relevant Experience: American Correctional Association Northern California Reentry Facility

CDCR-CIW- 45 Bed Acute/Intermediate Care Facility Years of Experience California Men’s Colony 35+ Years Salinas Valley State Prison 10+ As Principal and Owner of EAMI 25+ With other Firms Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Detention Facility

Highlights: CDCR-DJJ-Karl Holton-Northern California Core Richard Engler has been a Consultant to Treatment Facility the Receiver since 2006. Mr. Engler’s role as the Receivers Consultant consists of the CDCR-DJJ-Juvenile Master-Plan Statewide Crime review of all budget approval documents Study for the building upgrades to the 33 California State Prisons. Additionally, CDCR-Kern Valley State Prison Infill beds Richard is an active member of the Society CDCR-Kern Valley State Prison-Infill Housing & of Forensic Engineers & Scientists and the American Institute of Architects. Mr. Program Space-500 bed level II Facility Engler carries an architectural license in the State of California CDCR-CMF Mental Health Crisis Facility Sacramento County Juvenile Justice Center RCC - Roger Bauman Facility Ventura-CYA Mental Health Clinic

John L. Moreno Role: Chief Estimator/Project Manager John Moreno, Principal and Chief Estimator of Education: Engler Assessment Management International- College credits equivalent to an AA degree (EAMI), leads the cost estimating efforts for EAMI. with emphasis in Construction-Butte C.C, Chico, CA He works closely with the entire Team through each RS Means Electrical Estimating phase of the project to provide a series of RS Means Mechanical Estimating successively refined estimates as the project scope UC-Davis, CSUS & ARC-Estimating & is clarified to assure that the project remains within Construction Management the budget.

Professional Affiliations: Mr. Moreno offers a diverse range of Construction Specification Institute, construction expertise. He brings with him over 18 Professional Member, (CSI) years of experience in construction and estimating. Associated General Contractors, Associate Specializing in mechanical and electrical work, his Member, (AGC) American Society of Professional Estimators, participation ranges from the conceptual planning (ASPE) Member phase through design and final construction His Construction Management Association of experience includes cost/risk analysis; life cycle America, Member, (CMAA) cost; cost benefit analysis; value engineering & variance comparison reports in addition to his Years of Experience: actual “hands on” work experience. 19+ years

Demonstrated Accomplishments: Associate Editor- Saylor Construction Cost Relevant Experience: Books Associate Editor- LSI Cost Index- ENR Magazine Northern California Reentry Facility CDCR-CIW- 45 Bed Acute/Intermediate Care Facility

Professional Lectures & Speaking California Men’s Colony Engagements: Salinas Valley State Prison Construction Management Association of America Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Detention Sacramento & Oakland, CA Chapters- Facility Construction Inflation- April 2007- Construction Inflation- July 2007 CDCR-DJJ-Karl Holton-Northern California Core Concrete Masonry Association of California & Treatment Facility Nevada- Masonry Comparison and Inflationary Trends- CDCR-DJJ-Juvenile Master-Plan Statewide Crime Study May 2008 CDCR-Kern Valley State Prison Infill beds Western Council of Construction Consumers- Northern & Southern, CA CDCR-Kern Valley State Prison-Infill Housing & Program Lease Lease-Back –Construction Delivery- Space-500 bed level II Facility June 2008 Lease Lease-Back-Advantages/ Disadvantages, CDCR-CMF Mental Health Crisis Facility Legal Ramifications & Sacramento County Juvenile Justice Center Program Implementation Considerations- September 2008 RCC - Roger Bauman Facility Ventura-CYA Mental Health Clinic

BARBARA OWEN Project Role: Women’s Detention Specialist

Barbara Owen is a nationally-known expert in the areas of girls, women and crime, women-centered policy and women’s prison culture. A Professor of Criminology at California State University, Fresno, she received her Ph.D. in Sociology from UC Berkeley in 1984. The author of 20 articles and chapters, numerous technical reports, her books include In the Mix: Struggle and Survival in a Women’s Prison (SUNY Press, 1998). Along with Barbara Bloom and Stephanie Covington, OFFICE LOCATION she has co-authored a major report, Gender-Responsive Strategies: San Francisco Research, Practice, and Guiding Principles for Women Offenders (2003). Recent projects include an analysis of women’s recidivism and PHONE NUMBER an NIJ-sponsored four-state study that investigated the context of 559.222.7793 sexual assault in women’s prisons and jails. She is currently developing research and policy on women’s issues in an international and human YEARS WITH FIRM rights context. Barbara has prior experience working with HOK. 22 Years REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH EXPERIENCE EDUCATION 2006 - 2008 1995-present Ph.D. Sociology, University Principal Investigator, Gendered Consultant, Barbara Bloom & of California, Berkeley Violence and Safety, NIJ Grant Associates Master of Arts Sociology, San Francisco State University 2004-2006 1995 Principal Investigator, Recidivism Adjunct Research Professor, UC Bachelor of Arts, Sociology, among Female Prisoners: Riverside (CDC Female Inmate University of California, Davis Secondary Analysis of the 1994 Project) BJS Recidivism Data Set, NIJ Grant MEMBERSHIPS 1991-1993 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences 2003-present Researcher, Drug Abuse Research American Society of Criminology Researcher, The Prison Rape Group, UCLA The Western Society of Criminology Elimination Act, The Moss Group, Association of California Criminal Inc., NIC Grant 1986-1990 Justice Researchers Research Analyst, Federal Bureau 1999-2003 of Prisons REFERENCES Co-Principal Investigator, Gender- Ms. Wendy Still, Chief Probation Responsive Strategies, NIC Grant 1985-1986 Officer, San Francisco Post-Doctoral Fellow, Alcohol 415-309-9132 1997-2002 Research Group Wendy. [email protected] Principal Investigator, Repeat Offender Prevention Project, OCJP 1983-1984 Dr. Kay Hickman, Coordinator, Fresno grant Field Researcher, Alcohol Research County Community Corrections Group Partnership 1997-1998 599 476 0495 Principal Investigator, OCJP 1981-1983 [email protected] Gender-Specific Project Senior Researcher, Institute for Law and Policy Planning Mr. Alex Busansky, President, 1996-1997 National Council on Crime and Principal Investigator, CYA Female Delinquency Ward Project, NIC grant 510 208 0504 [email protected] 4 LEED Certiﬁ ed ' Award Winning

* experience prior to joining HOK

San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility | Page 21 hok.com San Mateo Replacement Correctional Facility San Mateo, CA

Building Envelope Design Consultant

29 February 2012 SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

PREPARED FOR:

Ms. Catherine Chan Vice President Justice Group Director HOK One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94104 [email protected]

PREPARED BY:

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. TheLandmark@OneMarket#600 San Francisco, CA 94105 Tel: 415.495.3700 Fax: 415.495.3550 www.sgh.com SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

Table of Contents

1...... General Information / Capabilities 2...... Matrix & Supporting Projects 3...... Resumes & References 4...... InsuranceSummary SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

GENERAL INFORMATION | CAPABILITIES Simpson Gumpertz & Heger (SGH) is a national engineering ﬁ rm that designs, investigates, and rehabilitates structures and building enclosures. Our award-winning work encompasses building, transportation, nuclear, water/wastewater, and science/defense projects throughout the United States and in more than thirty other countries. Clients choose to work with us because • We collaborate with clients and project team members.

• We engage our extensive expertise. CORPORATE OVERVIEW • We focus on delivering successful results. • We respond to project challenges.

Our goals are simple: earn the lasting trust of our clients, gain the respect of our most capable peers, and further the standards of practice in all areas of our profession.

Engineering of Structures and Building Enclosures SGH’s services are supported by technical capabilities including: • Building Envelope Engineering • Engineering for Extreme Environments • Structural Engineering • Preservation Technology • Engineering Mechanics • Materials Science and Engineering • Building Science • Field and Laboratory Testing • Construction Engineering

Our People Our diverse team members include engineers, architects, scientists, and many other technical professionals. Most importantly, our highly qualiﬁ ed staﬀ members are led by principals and project managers who average twenty years of employment with SGH. Th ese leaders provide quality of service and team continuity to support our long term client relationships.

Company Facts and Figures • Recipient of over 300 awards and recognitions • More than 400 employees in ﬁ ve oﬃ ces: Boston, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Washington, DC • Member of the Global Design Alliance

www.sgh.com SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH) Founded in 1956, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH) is ranked in the top ENR 500 of consulting engineering firm specializing in the design, investigation, and retrofit of buildings and structures of all types. SGH has played an important role in the development and advancement of building technology for the application of engineering principles to analyze roofing, wall cladding, and waterproofing behavior. In addition, SGH has served the architecture and building construction community in the Bay Area for over 30 years and is a recognized leader in building envelope systems and building WATERPmaterialsROO. FING DESIGN

Keeping the inside of a building protected from the elements requires a combination of tried-and- true methods and appropriate materials. Making sure this combination results in a working system is critical as more structures are built underground, renovated for change of use, or rehabilitated to extend their useful life.

Our Approach SGH applies decades of building technology, design experience, and proven methods of investigation to avoid or resolve roofing and waterproofing problems. Our client base is diverse and includes building owners, attorneys, contractors, and architects, who look to SGH to provide well-articulated and technically sound solutions. Our strengths include:

Mastery of individual roofing and waterproofing components, systems and materials, and a complete understanding of how these integrate to create a “waterproofing system.” The ability to work within the parameters of the client’s risk tolerance and budget to provide the most appropriate and effective waterproofing solution. Design and material understanding combined with solid structural expertise that allows architects and owners to implement unique designs. Unparalleled investigative capabilities in building technology, including in-house lab analysis and in-situ testing that uncovers the sources, not just the symptoms, of leakage. Leadership roles in education and industry organizations such as ASTM International to help shape the evolution of waterproofing practices.

SGH Design SGH is practical, responsive, and focused on helping the entire project team, including owners/developers, architects, and contractors, succeed in realizing their visions and goals. SGH has achieved this through its national and international practice. Clients look to SGH to provide efficient and cost-effective designs for all types of buildings and structures. Our strengths include:

Commitment to reduce project costs, ease construction, improve serviceability, and otherwise produce a better project. Flexibility in meeting project timeline requirements that can include fast-track, design-build, or the conventional iterative process of traditional methods. Broad experience with structural systems and materials including those that are effective in withstanding wind, seismic, and blast loads. Knowledge of construction material availability, contractor capability, and code requirements throughout the United States and abroad. Access to in-house advanced technologies that make even the most challenging project possible. Demonstrated ability to deliver quality project documents to assure bid clarity and to avoid change orders, claims, and project delays. Building Envelope Engineering CAPABILITY Building envelopes are complex systems with components that must work in unison to shield building occupants and contents from the weather, eﬀectively retain conditioned air, manage moisture migration, remain stable and durable, and do all this while being aesthetically pleasing.

Understanding how various components of a building envelope system From top left clockwise: Aquarium of the Pacific, Long Beach, CA; Grand Central interact is vital to successful performance. SGH has extensive experience Terminal, New York, NY; Copley Square with all elements of the building envelope including roofs, walls, plaza Fountain, Boston, MA; Ronald Reagan decks, and below-grade waterproofing. Our expertise encompasses a International Airport, Washington, DC. wide range of issues including waterproofing transitions and detailing, durability, and energy efficiency.

Our Approach We use our accumulated knowledge from our project work, standards development, and product reviews to help clients achieve the most appropriate, durable, and cost-eﬀective building envelope solution that meets their objectives. SGH brings together practical design and ﬁeld expertise in the following areas: • New designs and peer reviews • Failure investigations and dispute resolution • Renovation and restoration • Construction monitoring and contract administration of construction

www.sgh.com Rooﬁ ng and Waterprooﬁ ng CAPABILITY PARTIAL LIST OF PROJECTS Arterra, San Francisco, CA 499 Illinois, San Francisco, CA Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA California Pacifi c Medical Center, Cathedral Hill, San Francisco, CA Intercontinental Hotel, San Francisco, CA Letterman Digital Arts Center, Lucas Film Ltd., San Francisco, CA Richmond Memorial Civic Center, Richmond, CA Santana Row, San Jose, CA San Francisco General Hospital Rebuild, Ssan Francisco, CA Th e Brannan, San Francisco, CA Our Approach SGH applies decades of building technology, design experience, Clockwise from top left: Th e Brannan, San Francisco, CA; University of California, and proven methods of investigation to avoid or resolve roofi ng and Berkeley, Doe/Moffi tt Library Annex, waterproofi ng problems. Our client base is diverse and includes building Berkeley, CA; Palace of the Legion of Honor, San Francisco, CA; de Young owners, attorneys, contractors, and architects, who look to SGH to Museum, San Francisco, CA provide well articulated and technically sound solutions. SGH strengths Keeping the inside of a building include: • Mastery of individual roofi ng and waterproofi ng components, systems protected from the elements and materials, and a complete understanding of how these integrate to requires a combination of create a “waterproofi ng system.” • Th e ability to work within the parameters of the client’s risk tried-and-true methods and tolerance and budget to provide the most appropriate and eff ective appropriate materials. Making waterproofi ng solution. • Design and material understanding combined with solid structural sure this combination results expertise that allows architects and owners to implement unique in a working system is critical designs. • Unparalleled investigative capabilities in building technology, including as more structures are built in-house lab analysis and in-situ testing that uncovers the sources, not underground, renovated for just the symptoms, of leakage. • Leadership roles in education and industry organizations such as change of use, or rehabilitated ASTM International to help shape the evolution of waterproofi ng to extend their useful life. practices.

www.sgh.com Building Science CAPABILITY Th e systems used to protect the exterior of structures from the environment and to provide an appropriate interior climate should be designed to address air fl ow, heat exchange, and vapor drive. Air fl ows, heat loads, and moisture loads vary regionally and from location to location within a single structure. Indications of poor building performance include condensation, mold growth, excessive energy utilization, and uncomfortable interiors. SGH identifi es and resolves building science issues and their eff ects through our understanding of building systems, interior and exterior environmental conditions, regional climates, air and vapor pressures, and control systems. Our knowledge of building technologies, understanding of mold and mildew, and use of advanced computer modeling software, material analysis, and mechanical engineering are applied in a variety of settings: • Specialty Building Design • Envelope Investigation and Repair • Mechanical Systems • Mold and Mildew Remediation

Our Approach SGH oﬀ ers a bridge between architects and mechanical engineers by being able to evaluate the building envelope with the HVAC control system. We work extensively with architects, contractors, building Top photo: Beinecke Rare Book Library, Yale University, New Haven, CT; Bottom owners, and mechanical engineers to provide lasting solutions to air, heat, photo: New Museum of Contemporary and moisture-related problems. Art, New York, NY

www.sgh.com Below-grade Waterprooﬁng CAPABILITY PARTIAL LIST OF CLIENTS

Cross Campus Library, Yale University Beinecke Rare Book Library, Yale University Center for African, Near Eastern and Asian Cultures, Smithsonian Institution Philip Morris Cabarrus Plant Expansion Pentagon Logistical Support Extension and West Parade Ground Mullins Arena, University of Massachusetts Mercy Medical Plaza, Mercy Healthcare Doe/Moffit Library, University of California, Berkeley Below-grade waterproofing protects buildings, buried structures, and The Moscone Center, San their contents from moisture, hydrostatic ponding, and soil-borne Francisco Redevelopment Agency chemicals. Providing this protection requires close coordination with construction of heavy structured elements and management of subsurface groundwater. Additionally, once construction is complete, access to the waterproofing exterior is severely limited, and repair efforts result in considerable disruption and cost.

Our Approach For over three decades, SGH has been at the forefront of below-grade waterproofing system development. Through our knowledge in materials, foundation and below-ground construction, and waterproofing, SGH has helped to define the industry and continues to play a key role in its development. In addition to helping building owners through the intricacies of underground design options, we guide other structural engineers and architects through design and construction phase decisions that are critical to achieving successful below-ground waterproofing projects. We also provide field supervision and troubleshooting during construction, especially when construction sequence and coordination problems develop.

www.sgh.com Sustainable Design CAPABILITY Sustainable development, as defi ned in the United Nations World Commission on the Environment and Development’s Brundtland Report, is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Design that minimizes the use of natural resources and maintains a healthy environment both inside and outside the building helps achieve this goal. Building products and materials need to be considered in relation to their context within a building. A low-embodied-energy material that Structural and envelope doesn’t last becomes a high turnover material and, therefore, may be engineers are important an environmentally unsound choice. By examining the life-cycle of a building, and its component sub-systems, we make a critical step in members of any project team achieving the promise of sustainability. Our studies, commissioned by building material manufacturers, provide a basis for comparing long-term where the reduction of negative environmental value of these building components. environmental impacts is a Our Approach goal. Clockwise from top left: Sidwell Friends SGH integrates sustainability practices in its design, investigation, and School, Washington, DC, LEED Platinum- rehabilitation projects. Our green practices focus on energy effi ciency, rating; Macallen Building Condominiums, indoor environmental quality (IEQ), and durability, and include: Boston, MA, LEED Gold-rating; Folsom + Dore Apartments, San Francisco, CA, LEED Silver-rating; California Academy • Building energy modeling with an emphasis on building envelope of Sciences, San Francisco, CA, LEED performance. Platinum rating; Lawrence Berkeley • Heat, air and moisture migration studies (i.e. building science) with National Laboratory, Molecular Foundry, Berkeley CA, LEED Gold-rating. extensive analytical experience (e.g. WUFI, computational fl uid dynamics, and Energy Plus software). • Envelope commissioning, peer review, and post-occupancy assessment. • Daylight modeling and shading studies. • Design of green roofs, building enclosures, and structures. • Building component, system durability, and forensic studies.

www.sgh.com SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

PROJECTS Proposed San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project Information Matrix 2/29/2012

Project Information Location Delivery Teaming Experience ) Project Name

HOK to know about this project - please be brief !) include projects completed since 2002. Platinum) McCarthy BIM Usage CM at Risk Gross Area State of CA

2. Construction cost of $25M or above. (in $Millions) partofTIproject) Design-Build Sundt-Layton (if not in RWC) Hensel Phelps (in square feet) No. of Storey(s)

3. Your scope of service on those detention or No. of Building(s) Construction Cost LEED Certification Direct Supervision Year of Completion (if not in RWC/SMC) Redwood City (RWC) correctional projects was full service design for a (not new facility, not a minor retrofit. San Mateo County (SMC) Direct Relevant Experience - (None, Certified, Silver, Gold or No. of Beds (Design Capacity) (answer yes if a design model was Have one or more of your proposed New Facility - Full Service Design key personnel worked on this project? created for coordination and deliverable Example: ABC Detention Facility 2011 $110M 350,000 400 Yes 1 3 Silver Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

San Mateo County Youth Services Center 2007 $130M 300,000 180 No 1 2 Silver No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Decareau supervised hygrothermal, waterproofing consultation; BIM not required for scope.

San Quentin Central Health Services Building 2009 $136M 135,000 54 No 1 5 Gold No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Decareau supervised hygrothermal, waterproofing consultation; BIM not required for scope. Decareau supervised hygrothermal, waterproofing San Diego Women's Detention Facility est. 2015 $221M 513,000 1216 No 34 2 Gold Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No consultation. California Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation est. 2013 $906M 1.2M 1722 No 32 2 None No Yes Yes Yes No Decareau supervised hygrothermal consultation; Housing and Health Care Facilities, Stockton, CA BIM not required for scope. SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

SUPPORTING PROJECT LIST SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER INC.

SELECTED PROJECTS | CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES | FIRM EXPERIENCE

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and California Health Care Services, Stockton Housing & Health Care Project, Stockton, CA SGH is the waterproofing design consultant for this design-build fast track project comprising of housing and health care facilities for 1,722 patient inmates. Facilities will include a diagnostics and treatment center, program spaces, and administrative support spaces. The project totals 1.2 million sq ft and will cost an estimated $906 million. The project is LEED Silver certified.

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, San Quentin State Prison, San Quentin, CA SGH holds and Indefinite Delivery Order Contract with the State of California, Department of Corrections, to perform peer reviews and plan checks of high-security buildings and buildings essential to serving these buildings at State Correctional institutions. Under this contract, SGH performed peer review of a new condemned Inmate complex at San Quentin. The complex included a new cell block structure, new execution chamber, dining facilities, visitors’ reception center, laundry, infirmary, laundry and guard stations. SGH provided review of the design at 50% and 100% Design Development states, prior to cancellation of the project by the Governor.

Highlights: • Review criteria was in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 24 • Buildings were founded on a complex mix of near-surface rock, alluvial fills and deep bay muds requiring a variety of foundation systems.

SGH's scope of work was to ensure that the facilities meet State of California Building Code Requirements for essential structures.

D. Ray James Prison, Folkston, GA SGH investigated a condition in which new quarry tile was lifting in a kitchen floor application. SGH determined that constant ponding of water on the kitchen floor caused the clay tile to swell. There were no soft joints in the floor, and in turn, the swelling created stress that eventually lifted the tiles.

Federal Correctional Institution, Medium-High Security Facility, Roofing Investigation and Engineering Consulting Services, Butner, NC SGH completed a roofing investigation at the Federal Corrections Institute (FCI) Medium-High Security Facility in Butner, NC. The project involved an initial investigation of the existing TPO roofing assembly and components. The facility includes three four-story General Housing Units (GHUs) and a two-story Special Housing Unit (SHU) in addition to other buildings. These four buildings consist of precast concrete exterior walls, cast-in-place concrete interior walls, and precast concrete roof planks with a concrete topping slab. All four buildings are covered with a fully-adhered single-ply TPO roofing membrane. SGH made sample openings in the roofing assembly on all four buildings, documented concealed conditions, and provided a report with recommendations for roofing replacement. SGH also consulted on the design of the new roofing assembly and provided suggestions for alternative roofing assemblies.

Federal Correctional Institution, Pleasanton, CA The scope of work involved structural engineering for a single-story, 22,000 sq ft case goods factory building constructed with glulam beams and open web joist roof and a 15,000 sq ft steel frame warehouse with loading docks and ramps.

The “Hotel California,” NORCO, CA After years of extensive water damage and general neglect, the facility had experienced significant deterioration. In response to the State of California’s need to satisfy a federal oversight panel to condemn the facility, SGH worked with the Department of Corrections and Kitchell CEM to perform a condition survey of the historic Hotel California, now the Norco California Rehabilitation Center. This 200,000 sq ft Mission Revival style building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Hotel was built in 1929 as a luxury resort hotel. During World War II, the 700 acre site was taken by the U.S. Navy. In 1942, The Navy constructed Building 107, which includes the structures: “Wards A, B, and C” and “Connecting Wards 1 and 2” in 1942 as part of this conversation. Each of the structures is long and narrow in plan shape and are cast- in-place, reinforced concrete bearing wall construction. Each vary in height from 4 to 5-stories. At the close of World War II, the site was turned over to the California Department of Corrections, who now operates the property as an in-custody substance abuse program. SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER INC.

SELECTED PROJECTS | CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES | FIRM EXPERIENCE

Highlights: SGH performed the following on the Building 107 structures: • Reviewed available original drawings for the structures • Performed on-site surveys to observe physical condition • Conducted a preliminary seismic evaluation, using a web-based application provided by the United States Geologic Survey • Prepared an engineering report indicating that although the building sustained structural damage and did not conform to modern standards of seismic resistance; it did not represent a severe seismic risk and conformed to criteria adopted by the State of CA for existing buildings that remain in service.

Joint Regional Correctional Facility South, Miramar Brigade, Marine Corps, Air Station, Miramar, CA SGH’s current design consultation includes recommending roofing systems, providing product data, sketching special roofing details, and reviewing the Architect’s final roofing drawings and specifications. SGH will provide a letter verifying that the roofing design is in accordance with the current edition of NRCA Roofing and Waterproofing Manual, the Client’s latest published Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) and Request for Proposal (RFP), and standard industry practices and building codes. SGH will also provide Quality Control as a Registered Roof Observer per the Client’s Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS) Section 01 45 00.05 20, Design and Construction Quality Control. The Joint Regional Correctional Facility Southwest project will be a 100,000 sq ft multi-story concrete masonry unit (CMU) and poured-in- place concrete correctional facility housing 200 prisoners and supporting facilities.

Massachusetts State Correctional Institution, Bridgewater, MA SGH investigated curling and excessive shrinkage of vinyl composition tile installed in the common areas.

Massachusetts State Correctional Institution, Norfolk, MA The Norfolk Prison, constructed in the 1930s, once housed a tuberculosis ward with roof top gardens and penthouses. Dormitory buildings with ashlar stone walls, steep sloped slate roofs, and shed dormers are arranged on two sides of a long quadrangle that includes a two-story school building at one end and a brick masonry hospital, receiving, and administrative building complex at the other. The school building is an impressive Greek revival structure with red brick and ashlar stone walls and a mottled purple slate, hip roof. Many of the original built-up and slate roofs, and the copper eaves, gutters, down spouts, and valley flashings throughout the institution were at the end of their useful life. SGH specified repairs and reconstruction, provided contract administration services, and monitored the work including reconstruction of built-up and slate roofs on the hospital, receiving, and administration buildings. We also provided reconstruction and repairs of slate roofing, red copper flashing and trim on dormitories and the school building; reconstruction of shed dormers, gutters, downspouts, and low slope roofs with EPDM roofing and red copper; and wall repair and reconstruction of brick masonry, cast stone and red copper flashing.

San Joaquin County Jail Addition, Stockton, CA The scope of work involved structural engineering for a one-story 24,000 sq ft minimum-security facility, of wood-frame construction.

Suffolk County House of Correction and Nashua Street Jail, Boston, MA The Suffolk House of Correction and Jail consists of seven buildings ranging in height from three to fifteen floors. The buildings demonstrated leakage of several building envelope systems. The Commonwealth asked us to determine the root causes of the leakage and develop functional repairs. We investigated leakage through roofing, roof top equipment, precast cladding, sloped glazing, metal roofing, curtain walls, and plazas, and developed remedial design and contract documents, and also provided construction administration. SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

HEALTH CARE PROJECTS in California

California Pacific Medical Center, Cathedral Hill Hospital, San Francisco, CA Building Envelope Design and Peer Review of Structural Design

Catholic Healthcare West, Mercy Medical Center, Merced Replacement Hospital, Merced, CA Building Envelope Design

Highland Hospital, Oakland, CA Building Envelope Design

Kaiser Vallejo Medical Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Newport Beach, CA Center, Hospital Building, Building Envelope Design Vallejo, CA John Muir Medical Center Expansion, Walnut Creek, CA Building Envelope Design

Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA Building Envelope Design

Kaiser Roseville Women’s + Children’s Medical Center, Roseville, CA Building Envelope Design

Kaiser Santa Rosa Medical Center, Hospital Expansion, Santa Rosa, CA Building Envelope Design

Mills Peninsula Hospital, San Mateo, CA California Pacific Medical Building Envelope Design Center, San Francisco, CA Mission Hospital New Acute Care Tower, Mission Vallejo, CA Building Envelope Design

Mount Zion Hospital, San Francisco, CA Building Envelope Design

Palomar Medical Center West, Escondido, CA Building Envelope Design

Kaiser Permanente Los San Francisco General Hospital Rebuild, San Francisco, CA Angeles Medical Center, Los Building Envelope Design Angeles, CA St. Joseph's Medical Center, Women and Children's Pavilion, Stockton, CA Building Envelope Design BUILDING EVNELOPE DESIGN DESIGN BUILDING EVNELOPE Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, Valley Specialty Center, Sunnyvale, CA Building Envelope Design

Stanford University, Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital, Palo Alto, CA Building Envelope Design Palomar Medical Center West, Escondido, CA UCLA Medical Center Replacement Hospital, Santa Monica, CA Building Envelope Design

UCSF Medical Center Children’s Hospital, San Francisco, CA Building Envelope Design

Washington Hospital Replacement Hospital Fremont, CA Building Envelope Design

White Memorial Hospital, Los Angeles, CA Building Envelope Design Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, Sunnyvale, CA Women's and Children's Center, Sutter Medical Center, Sacramento, CA Building Envelope Design SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER INC.

SELECTED PROJECTS | VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HEALTHCARE |FIRMEXPERIENCE

State Veterans Home, West Los Angeles, CA. Primary: SmithGroup Architects. Waterproofing design consultation. . VA Hospital Palo Alto – Psychiatric Facility, Palo Alto, CA. Primary: McCarthy Building Companies. Building envelope peer review design consultation.

Long Beach Veterans Administration Medical Center, Long Beach, CA. Primary: GLHN Architects & Engineers. Structural Engineering services.

Clovis Veterans Memorial Building, Clovis, CA. Roof Replacement Design. Primary: Zumwalt Construction.

Veterans’ Memorial Building, Suisun City, CA. Design and Construction Documents, Roofing Replacement and Repairs.

VA Hospital Mather Air Force Base. Primary: Jacobsen & McElory. Building Envelope investigation consultation

Charlotte Veteran's Administration Medical Center, Charlotte, NC. Structural Peer Review, Contract with BBIX. SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

1100 Broadway, Oakland, CA Structural design of new twenty-story pre-certified LEED Platinum building and preservation of connected seven-story national historic landmark building 245 Summer Street, Boston, MA Design and construction monitoring for roofing and below-grade waterproofi ng systems including a new green roofi ng system for LEED Silver certifi ed building 525 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA California Academy of Building envelope design of a new fourteen-story offi ce building, seeking LEED Silver Sciences at Golden Gate certifi cation Park, San Francisco, CA Big Blue Bus Maintenance Facility Expansion, Santa Monica, CA Building envelope and waterproofing consulting for new 66,000 sq ft facility featuring rooftop photovoltaic panels and many other sustainable features. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Headquarters Building, Hingham, MA Building envelope consulting and building science engineering, LEED Silver certifi ed Boston University Medical Center, BioSquare Discovery and Innovation Center, Research Building D, Boston, MA Big Blue Bus Facility, Building envelope design peer review of new biomedical research facility, LEED Santa Monica, CA Certifi ed California Academy of Sciences at Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, CA Building envelope design consultant for project with a three-acre green roof, LEED Platinum certifi ed David Brower Center, Berkeley, CA Building envelope consulting and below-grade waterproofing for a new offi ce building made of 53% recycled material and seeking LEED Platinum certifi cation Letterman Digital Arts Center, San Francisco, CA De Anza College, Mediated Learning Center, Cupertino, CA Roofing and waterproofi ng consulting for new 65,000 sf classroom addition seeking LEED Platinum certifi cation Folsom + Dore Apartments, San Francisco, CA Building envelope design peer review of $26.5 million first multifamily housing project in Northern California to receive LEED Silver certifi cation Harvard Business School, Gallatin Hall Renovations, Boston, MA Structural engineer for comprehensive building renovations, LEED Gold certifi ed

Sidwell Friends School, Harvard University, University Commons, Cowperthwaite Hall, Cambridge, MA Washington, DC Building envelope design consulting, including roofing and waterproofi ng, for new six-story residence hall, LEED Gold certifi ed Internal Revenue Service, Andover, MA Structural analysis and rehabilitation for renovation to 11-acre building seeking LEED Certifi cation Jet Propulsion Laboratory, New Administration Building, Sacramento, CA Structural design for new 96,000 sf high-performance office building seeking LEED Silver certifi cation Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Molecular Foundry, Berkeley, CA Macallen Building Building envelope design for roofing and waterproofi ng of new nanotechnology Condominiums, Boston, MA research facility, the fi rst LEED Gold certifi ed building in the City of Berkeley Letterman Digital Arts Center, LucasFilm Ltd., San Francisco, CA Building envelope design of four interconnected buildings with three- and four- story subterranean parking garages built ten feet into the water table on George Lucas’ 23-acre Lucasfilm campus — LEED Gold certifi ed Macallen Building Condominiums, Boston, MA Structural and building envelope design of a 140-unit building and the fi rst multiunit housing in Boston with LEED Gold certifi cation Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Molecular Foundry, Berkeley, CA SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

New Hope Community/Woodland Terrace Revitalization, Pleasantville, NJ Structural engineering of 163 housing units using “Optimum Value Engineering (OVE),” a wood framing approach that minimizes the quantity of wood used NGA New Campus East, Fort Belvoir, VA Building enclosure consulting including peer review and construction monitoring for new $1.3 billion campus seeking LEED Silver certifi cation Northeastern University, International Village (Parcel 18), Boston, MA 1100 Broadway, Oakland, Building envelope design for two tower, 1200 room dormitory for Kyu Sung Woo CA Architects, project is seeking LEED Gold certifi cation Pier 2, Fort Mason Center, San Francisco, CA Building enclosure rehabilitation for historic 53,500 sf shed building, including consultation on installation of photovoltaic panel system. Project is seeking LEED Gold certifi cation Plaza Apartments, San Francisco, CA Building envelope design of 106 units of housing and recipient of 2006 National AIA “Show You’re Green” Affordable Green Housing Project award USMC Camp Pendleton Richard Bolling Federal Building Modernization, Kansas City, MO Bachelor Enlisted Quarters, Building enclosure consulting including thermal analysis to improve building Camp Pendleton, CA envelope efficiency, seeking LEED Silver certifi cation Richmond Memorial Civic Center, Richmond, CA Building envelope rehabilitation for auditorium, city hall, and hall of justice experiencing water infiltration problems. Project received LEED Gold certifi cation San Luis Obispo County Government Center, San Luis Obispo, CA Structural design of 160,000 sq ft building designed to meet city standards for sustainable practice Sidwell Friends School, Zavitz Middle School Addition, Washington, DC Building enclosure commissioning for LEED Platinum certifi ed building University of Rhode Island, Center for Biotechnology & South Station Tower, Boston, MA Life Sciences, Kingston, RI Waterproofing design consulting for new 49-story mixed-use that is pre-certifi ed LEED Silver USMC Camp Pendleton Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ), Camp Pendleton, CA Structural engineer-of-record for new BEQ housing for over 1,400 marines in 43 three- to five- story reinforced masonry buildings, encompassing over 700,000 sq ft. The project is seeking LEED Gold certifi cation

University of Michigan, S.T. Dana Building, School of Natural Resources, Ann Arbor, MI 245 Summer Street, Building envelope investigation and upgrades, LEED Gold certifi ed Boston, MA University of Rhode Island, Center for Biotechnology and Life Science, Kingston, RI Structural and building envelope design of a 135,000 sq ft teaching and research building, LEED NC 2.2 Gold certifi ed Walker Jones Educational and Community Center, Washington, DC Structural engineer for 125,000 sq ft building applying for LEED Silver certifi cation Wesleyan University, Molecular and Life Sciences Building, Middletown, CT Structural design of 221,000 sq ft building, seeking LEED Silver certifi cation Internal Revenue Service, Williams-Sonoma Flagship Store, San Francisco, CA Andover, MA Structural modification to 18,000 sq ft cast-in-place, concrete, historic building upgraded to current seismic standards and incorporating sustainable design elements Yale University, Kroon Hall, New Haven, CT Building envelope consulting for new, four-story, LEED Platinum rated academic building with exterior stone masonry wall system

Yale University, Kroon Hall, New Haven, CT SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER INC.

SELECTED PROJECTS | DESIGN BUILD |FIRMEXPERIENCE

California Pacific Medical Center Cathedral Hill, San Francisco, CA. Waterproofing design consultation and seismic peer review of 14-story replacement hospital comprising of 1.2 million gross sq ft. The structure uses steel moment frames and viscous wall dampers. Designed to Certified LEED for Healthcare.

City of Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Expansion Project, Santa Monica, CA. Building envelope and waterproofing design consultation on expansion of local bus network. The project comprised the demolishing of existing structures, construction of new buildings including the new maintenance building to replace the existing, and re-grading and surfacing of the campus site. SGH was hired by the Architect to assist in the design and coordination efforts with the Contractor. SGH reviewed drawings and specifications, provided details and recommendations, and attended regular design meetings in the preconstruction phase. We reviewed mockup construction to help ensure that the project requirements were met and that non-specified issues were addressed and resolved. SGH worked closely with the Architect and Contractor to respond to RFIs, review submittals, and ensure coordination between subcontractors through meetings and mockup review sessions. Our scope of work for this project included review of fieldwork, continued coordination with the design team, and observation of water testing required by the Contractor.

Maricopa County Courthouse Tower, Phoenix, AZ. The design-build courthouse project is a new sixteen-story building, including two underground floors, encompassing 682,000 sq ft. Designed by Gould Evans and designed as a “100 year” building, the facility features exterior wall assemblies with copper rain screen panels, precast concrete, and adhered stone veneer. SGH provided waterproofing design consultation, including: under-slab systems; below-grade wall and tunnel waterproofing; wall enclosure and window/curtain wall systems; building roofing, flashing, and drainage systems; penetration details at roofs and walls; shop drawing and submittal reviews; and part-time construction monitoring. Designed for LEED Silver certification.

Palomar Medical Center West, Escondido, CA. The Palomar Medical Center West consists of two buildings: a hospital and a central plant. The hospital is separated into two sections: a low rise portion (three stories high) and a 12-story tower. The exterior cladding of both sections includes the following systems: storefront, curtain wall, skylights, window wall, aluminum panels, and FRC panels. The transition between the systems stated above and other building components such as roofing, balconies, and structural elements requires careful detailing and coordination. The new medical building features multiple custom-fabricated curtain wall, window wall, and long-span cladding systems and a 250,000 sq ft façade. SGH served as a consultant to the architect for below-grade and above-grade waterproofing, roofing and exterior cladding during the design phase and provided construction phase services for the below-grade waterproofing work. SGH was later retained by the owner, Palomar Pomerado Health, to provide inspection services during construction for the above-grade waterproofing and roof.

Richmond Memorial Civic Center, Richmond, CA. Building envelope investigation and design of three historic red brick-clad buildings comprising the 180,000 sq ft Richmond Memorial Civic Center. SGH assisted with developing comprehensive repair solutions to mitigate moisture SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER INC.

SELECTED PROJECTS | DESIGN BUILD |FIRMEXPERIENCE

related issues as an underpinning to the project’s modernization. The project included: Complete reroofing of all three building: Masonry repair of brick facades and concrete trim; Replacement of existing below grade waterproofing systems on two of the buildings and design consultation for installation of photovoltaic roof. The project is LEED Gold certified.

Sutter Medical Center, Eden Valley Hospital Replacement Project, Castro Valley, CA. The Sutter Medical Center Castro Valley (SMCCV) is an innovative 7-story, 130-bed replacement hospital totaling 230,000 sq ft. The building is a composite steel Construction of new facility is taking place adjacent to existing Eden Medical Center, which will remain in full operation until the new medical center is complete (est. 2013). SGH is providing waterproofing design consultation to the architect, to include the following: Below-Grade Waterproofing, Low Slope Roof, Vegetative Roof, Curtain Wall and Window Systems and Exterior Wall Cladding.

The Project is breaking new ground in health care construction by integrating an 11-party Integrated Form of Agreement (IFOA) contract. In previous cases, only the owner, architect and general contractor have signed the agreement and formed the core IPD team. The Project is also utilizing Building Information Modeling (BIM) and California OSHPD phased plan review system: This is one of the first projects to use the OSHPD system, resulting in an overall schedule savings of nearly 12 months.

University of California San Francisco, Mt. Zion Medical Office Building. The project was captured through a design competition with a maximum construction budget limitation. SGH served as structural engineer of record and provided a peer review of the horizontal waterproofing systems. The structure is five-stories tall with a roof garden at the fourth level. The building was designed with perimeter steel moment frames to provide optimum unobstructed views to the exterior. The building is supported on a mat foundation at grade. Since all construction subcontractors were engaged during the design-build process, design decisions were able to be confirmed well in advance of construction. The building is built for LEED Silver Certification.

US Coast Guard, Headquarters Building, St. Elizabeth’s West Campus, Washington, D.C. Redevelopment of the St. Elizabeth’s campus will include a new 1,300,000 sq ft headquarters building for the U.S. Coast Guard and associated support facilities. SGH is providing building enclosure consulting services to the Clark Construction/WDG Architecture design-build team as a result of Clark’s recommendation for the architect to engage us to consult on their enclosure design. The headquarters Building will be a complex array of interconnected building areas primarily clad with a combination of stone and brick masonry with unitized curtain wall assemblies in horizontal ribbon window and continuous curtain wall configurations. The building will include a number of specialty glazing elements, including cable and point supported curtain wall systems, a glass-enclosed pedestrian bridge, and a glass-enclosed elevator. The roof areas will be a combination of courtyard spaces and vegetative building expansion joint configurations. Our services to the architect include both design and construction phase consulting services, including peer review of the building enclosure systems, assisting with detail development, and site visits to observe construction of building enclosure systems. SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

RESUMES & REFERENCES Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Principal 415-343-3010 [email protected]

Christopher Decareau has over twenty years of experience in the design, investigation, and rehabilitation of contemporary and historic buildings. Mr. Decareau consults with building owners, contractors, architects, and other consultants on water intrusion, air/vapor migration, energy loss/conservation, and life safety code compliance. He routinely resolves designs for prevention of water, air, vapor, and heat loss in exterior walls, windows, curtain walls, roofing, podium, and below-grade assemblies.

Experience Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH), San Francisco, CA, from 1998 to present. Rosenberg McGinnis AIA, Inc. (RMAIA), San Francisco, CA, Project Architect from 1991 to 1998. Registrations Robinson Mills + Williams (RMW), San Francisco, CA, Drafter/3-D Modeler from Architect 1989 to 1991. California Representative Assignments Other Unless otherwise specified, all projects listed below are with SGH. LEED Accredited Professional, 2004, US Green Building Council Building Science Education San Diego Women's Detention Facility, Santee, CA. (Principal for condensation analysis and waterproofing of building envelope. Consultant to KMD.) City College of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA Housing and Health Care Facilities, Stockton, CA. (Principal for condensation Certification in Air Conditioning and analysis of building envelope.) Refrigeration, 2003 San Mateo County Youth Services Center, San Mateo, CA. (Principal for condensation analysis of building envelope.) University of California, Berkeley, CA Broad Art Museum, Los Angeles, CA. (Principal for condensation analysis and B.A. in Architecture, 1989 waterproofing of building envelope. Consultant to Gensler/Diller Scofidio + Renfro.) Pixar Phase 2, Emeryville, CA. (Principal for condensation analysis and waterproofing of building envelope. Consultant to Allied Works Architecture/Perkins + Will.) Clyfford Still Museum, Denver, CO. (Principal for condensation analysis of walls and building elements with humidity-controlled galleries and waterproofing of building envelope. Consultant to Allied Works Architecture.) Hall Winery, Napa, CA. (Thermal and moisture modeling to eliminate condensation inside wine cask aging warehouse. Waterproofing design of building envelope. Consultant to Frank Gehry/Lail Design Group. Unbuilt.) Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Broad Contemporary Art Museum and Resnick Exhibition Hall, Los Angeles, CA. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls and building elements with humidity-controlled galleries. Consultant to Gensler/Renzo Piano Building Workshop.) Contemporary Jewish Museum, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls and building elements with humidity-controlled galleries. Consultant to WRNS Studio/Studio Daniel Libeskind.) Sam Fox Arts Center, University of Washington, St. Louis, MO. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls and building elements with humidity-controlled galleries. Consultant to Shah Kawasaki Architects/Fumihiko Maki and Associates.) Pulte Glashaus, Emeryville, CA. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls and windows for multi-family residential property.) Avalon Mission Bay Phase 2, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls with passive outdoor ventilation on a seventeen-story multi-family residential building.) Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Page 2

Custom Residence, Windsor, CA. (Principal for floor coating failure analysis of clear-glazed stained-concrete slab.) Kaiser Campus, Vallejo, CA. (Project Manager for condensation analysis of walls where HVAC uses 100% outdoor air.) AIMCO Apartments, Northern CA. (Project Manager for investigation and analysis of mold-supporting conditions at multiple properties.) Archstone Apartments, Southern CA. (Project Manager for investigation and analysis of construction moisture, paint quality, and apparent biological growth at multiple properties with more than 200 units each constructed in 2003 and 2004.) Plaza at Arboretum, Santa Monica, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, computer analysis, and repair documents to mitigate mold-supporting conditions at 350 apartment units constructed in 2001.) Main Library, Rohnert Park, CA. (Project Manager for investigation of carpet tile failure over vapor control coating.) 1889 Rice Avenue, Oxnard, CA. (Project Architect for investigation and recommendations to mitigate slab-on-grade moisture emissions.) KLA/Tencor, Livermore, CA. (Project Architect for investigation of epoxy flooring failure due to chemical incompatibilities in vapor control coating.) Mt. View/Los Altos School District, Mt. View, CA. (Project Architect for investigation and recommendations to mitigate mold-supporting conditions in five newly constructed high school buildings.)

Waterproofing Broad Art Museum, Los Angeles, CA. (Principal for waterproofing design and construction administration of the building envelope with Gensler/Diller Scofidio + Renfro.) Casino and Hotel (Confidential), Northern CA. (Principal for repair documents for passive fire protection construction, fireproofing, metal-panel re-clad, EIFS repairs, replacement windows, miscellaneous flashings, and roofing.) State Compensation Insurance Fund, multiple locations, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for investigation and rehabilitation recommendations for water intrusion issues at multi-story office buildings throughout California.) ProjectFROG, multiple locations, CA. (Waterproofing and air barrier consultation for prefabricated unitized school buildings.) Hewlett-Packard Buildings 4A, 6A and 20. (Principal-in-Charge for below grade, podium, wall and roofing waterproofing. Consultant to Gensler Architecture.) Avalon Cedar Ridge, Daly City, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for window replacement, and wall flashing rehabilitation on a 500-unit three-story Type V construction. In coordination with seismic and wood decay repairs by SGH structural group.) 525 Golden Gate, San Francisco, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for below-grade foundation waterproofing for a fifteen-story commercial building seeking LEED Platinum certification. Consultant to KMD Architects.) Hall Winery, St. Helena, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for below-grade and podium waterproofing of wine cask aging cellar. Consultant to Frank Gehry/Lail Design Group.) 499 Illinois Street, San Francisco, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for building enclosure waterproofing of a six-story, biotechnology office building. Assemblies included below-grade foundation, exterior walls, curtain walls, podium deck, and roofs. Consultant to DGA/SKS Investments.) Avalon Mission Bay Phase Three, San Francisco, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for building enclosure waterproofing of Arquitectonica-designed fifteen-story high-rise residential and mixed-use development. Assemblies included below-grade foundation, exterior walls, curtain walls, podium deck, and roofs.) Avalon Mission Bay Phase Two, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for building Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Page 3

enclosure waterproofing of a seventeen-story high-rise residential and mixed-use development. Assemblies included below-grade foundation, exterior walls, curtain walls, podium deck, and roofs.) Genentech Campus, South San Francisco, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for multiple building roofing replacements and wall in coordination with SGH structural group seismic retrofits.) San Quentin Central Health Services Building, San Quentin, CA. (Project Manager for waterproofing consultation for building envelope.) Marketplace Tower, Emeryville, CA. (Project Management of an eight-story commercial building remedial waterproofing, which included window wet sealing and elastomeric coating over EIFS.) Valley Specialty Center, Santa Clara, CA. (Peer review services to architect for waterproofing of roof, curtain wall, precast, and below-grade at medical services building. Services included condensation modeling of parapet and curtain wall.) Mandela Gateway, Oakland, CA. (Peer review services to architect for waterproofing of roof, walls, windows, and terraces at a new mixed-use affordable housing development.) Library Court, Los Angeles, CA. (Peer review services to architect for waterproofing of roof, walls, windows, terraces, and storefronts of a mixed-use residential rehabilitation.) New San Luis Obispo County Government Building, San Luis Obispo, CA. (Project Manager for below-grade waterproofing selection, specification, and detailing for architect of record of a new institutional office building.) Kaiser Permanente Campus, Santa Rosa, CA. (Project Manager for investigation of mold supporting water intrusion through EIFS and repair documents for recladding of hospital and three associated medical office buildings.) Kaiser Permanente MOB4, Santa Rosa, CA. (Project Manager for selection, specification, and detailing of building enclosure waterproofing for architect of record of a new institutional office building.) Kaiser Permanente Main and French Campuses, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, analysis, and recommendations for leaking expansion joints and windows.) Malibu Meadows, Calabasas, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, litigation support, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration for roofing, windows, and balcony decks at this 600-unit apartment complex.) Peters Residence, Corona Del Mar, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, litigation support, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration for waterproofing balcony decks over living space.) Casino and Hotel (Confidential), Las Vegas, NV. (Project Manager for investigation, litigation support, specifications, and repair documents for passive fire protection construction, fireproofing, EIFS resealing, windows, and miscellaneous flashings at this fifteen-story 273-room hotel tower built in 1997.) 388 Market Street, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, repair documents, and contract administration for plaza deck leakage and parking ramp waterproofing.) GM Vehicle Engineering Center Tower, Warren, MI. (Project Architect for below-grade waterproofing selection, specification, and detailing for architect of record. New construction.) Hill Plaza, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration for seventh-floor terrace. With RMAIA.) Golden Gateway Commons, Blocks One and Two, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration for wall flashings and balcony decks. With RMAIA.) Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Page 4

Historic Preservation First Presbyterian Church, Oakland, CA. (Principal-in-Charge consulting on cast stone and sandstone repointing.) Presidio Archaeology Center, San Francisco, CA. (Principal-in-Charge for waterproofing consulting on building conversion to laboratories and offices.) 785 Market Street, San Francisco, CA. (Investigate and administrate emergency coating of terra-cotta dome.) 225 Bush Street, San Francisco, CA. (Conducted rope access investigation on the twenty-one-story, former Standard Oil Headquarters. A terra-cotta and stone facade with hollow metal windows.) Southwest Museum, Los Angeles, CA. (Conducted rope access investigation of Caracol Tower to investigate Northridge Earthquake and water intrusion damage.) Old Federal Reserve Bank, Los Angeles, CA. (Project Manager for investigation and recommendations for repairs to a 1931, six-story concrete structure that sustained fire damage to exterior granite cladding, cast bronze grillage, steel windows, and interior travertine.) 222 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA. (Project Architect for investigation and recommendations for repairs to a 1907 terra-cotta clad nine-story building.) Handlery Union Square Hotel, San Francisco, CA. Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, repair documents, and contract administration for exterior wall waterproofing and restoration of a 1930s era six-story brick-masonry hotel.) Hills Plaza, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, repair documents, and contract administration of a multi-phase, partial restoration and repointing of a six-story 1923 transitional brick-masonry office building. With RMAIA.) The Francesca at 850 Powell Street, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, repair documents, and contract administration for plaster repairs and brick repointing of a nine-story, 1928 transitional masonry residential building on Nob Hill. With RMAIA.)

Contemporary Curtain Walls One Kearny Office Building, San Francisco, CA. (Consultant to contractor for peer reviewing designer and their consultant for a ten-story curtain wall.) Peninsula Office Buildings, multiple sites in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, CA. (Project Manager for eight buildings with curtain wall remediation, such as sealant replacement, coatings, spall repair, and wet glazing.) East Bay Municipal Utility District Headquarters, Oakland, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendation, and repair documentation for waterproofing of a ten-story mid rise. Repair strategy utilizes three-dimensional, molded-silicone weather seals.) Kaiser Center, Oakland, CA. (Project Architect for repair documents and contract administration for cleaning and sealing exposed aggregate precast-concrete panels on a twenty-nine-story high rise.) 601 Montgomery, San Francisco, CA. (Project Architect for investigation and recommendations for mitigating water leakage through precast-concrete panels and aluminum-framed windows on a twenty-story high rise.) 333 Market Street, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration to stop water leakage through thirty-four stories of glazed curtain wall. Repair strategy utilized three-dimensional, molded-silicone weather seals. With RMAIA.) 50 CA Street, San Francisco, CA. (Project Manager for investigation, recommendations, specifications, repair documents, and contract administration to stop water leakage through thirty-seven stories of glazed curtain wall. Repair Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Page 5

strategy utilized custom-extruded, silicone tapes. With RMAIA.)

Building Code/Fire Safety Consultation Casino and Hotel (Confidential), Northern CA. (Lead Expert/Consultant on investigation, analysis, and recommendations for allowable area, building separation, fireproofing, and passive fire protection defects.) Casino and Hotel (Confidential), Las Vegas, NV. (Lead Expert/Consultant on investigation, analysis, and recommendations for fireproofing and passive fire protection defects.)

Professional Activities National Institute of Building Sciences, Building Enclosure Council, San Francisco: Chair (fall 2010 to present). American Institute of Architects: Mock Oral Exam Committee. University of California, Berkeley: Professional Mentor. American Society of Testing and Materials: Task Group Chair, Molded Silicone Weather Seals.

Presentations and Publications Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Four Barriers for Sustainable Building Envelopes,” AECOM, Los Angeles, CA, 18 January 2011. Coats, P.W., and C. Decareau, Paper and Presentation, “Thermal Boundary Conditions for Museum Skylights,” International Conference on Building Envelope Systems and Technologies, Vancouver, BC, 28 June 2010. Kan, L., and C. Decareau, Paper, “Case Studies in Estimating Air-Drying Times of Small-Diameter Softwood Lumber Comparing Multiple Regression Methods and Hygrothermal Analysis,” International Conference on Building Envelope Systems and Technologies, Vancouver, BC, 28 June 2010. Decareau, C.P., Article, “Durable, Sustainable Exteriors,” Archi-Tech Magazine, March 2008. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Flooring Failures: Causes and Prevention,” Construction Specifications Institute, East Bay Chapter, Berkeley, 20 March 2007. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Four Barriers for Sustainable Building Envelopes,” Anshen + Allen Architects, San Francisco, 6 March 2007. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Preventing Mold Growth in Your Architecture,” Carter & Burgess Inc., Oakland, CA, 15 November 2006. Decareau, C.P., L. Kan and J. Pinon, Paper and Presentation, “Inputs and Analyses: An End User’s Perspective of Heat-Air-Moisture Data,” ASTM International,Toronto, 24 April 2006. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Building Science: Case Studies for Western Climates,” SGH Symposium on Building Science and Technology, San Francisco, 10 March 2006. Decareau, C.P. and R. Luft, Presentation, “Flooring Failures: Causes and Prevention,” Construction Specifications Institute, Redwood Empire Chapter, Santa Rosa, 2 March 2006. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Sealing The Building: Design Guidelines For Controlling Moisture Migration And Practical Applications with Case Studies,” Hellmuth Obata + Kassabaum (HOK), Los Angeles, CA, 22 October 2005. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Moisture Control and The Building Envelope for Architects,” Anderson Brule Architects, San Jose, CA, 13 September 2005. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Moisture Migration in The Building Envelope,” Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz (KMD), San Francisco, CA, 14 June 2005. Decareau, C.P. and E. Lyon, Presentation, “Get the Mold Out! Preventing Mold Growth in Your Architecture,” AIA National Convention, Las Vegas, NV, Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED( Page 6

19 May 2005. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Moisture Control and The Building Envelope for Contractors,” McCarthy Construction, Berkeley, CA, 13 May 2005. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Building Science: Case Studies for Western Climates,” SGH Symposium on Building Science and Technology, Los Angeles, CA, 8 April 2005. Decareau, C.P., Presentations, “Preventing Mold In Architecture” and “Flashing Fundamentals for Architects,” AIA East Bay “Procrastinators Series,” Oakland, CA, 21 December 2004. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Flashing Fundamentals for Architects,” SGH/AIA CES Seminar, KMD Architects, San Francisco, CA, 26 February 2004. Decareau, C.P., Paper and Presentation, “Using Forced Ventilation To Mitigate Mold Growth In Existing Multi-Family Housing,” AIVC/BETEC, 13 October 2003. Decareau, C.P., and R. Luft, Presentation, “Water Vapor Control in Buildings,” BuildEx/San Francisco, CA, 19 November 2002. Decareau, C.P., Luft, R., Presentation, “Water Vapor Control in Buildings,” Construction Specifications Institute/San Francisco, CA, 14 August 2002. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Rehabilitation of Windows” Late Nineteenth/Early Twentieth-Century Masonry Buildings, SGH/AIA CES Seminar, 5 June 2001. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Investigation and Diagnosis of Transitional Masonry Facades,” Late Nineteenth/Early Twentieth-Century Masonry Buildings, SGH/AIA CES Seminar, 4 June 2001. Decareau, C.P., Presentation, “Renovation and Major Maintenance of High-Rise Condominium Exteriors,” Executive Council of Home Owners, 27 October 1999. Andrea B. Bono, P.E., LEED AP BD+C Staff II – Building Technology 415-343-3097 [email protected]

Andrea Bono has more than four years of experience in the design, investigation, and Registrations rehabilitation of commercial, healthcare, civic, and residential buildings related to Civil Engineer below-grade spaces, podium decks, exterior components and cladding, and roofs. Ms. California Bono has collaborated with architects, contractors, building owners, homeowners, and sustainable design consultants to design, analyze, and repair aspects of the building Other envelope. Fundamentals of Engineering (Engineering- In-Training), Experience LEED AP BD+C Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH), San Francisco, CA, from 2007 to present. Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc., San Francisco, CA, Intern – Building Technology, Education summer 2006. UC Berkeley Extension Professional Rudolph and Sletten (R&S), Redwood City, CA, Project Engineer Intern, summers Program in Sustainable Design, 2009-2011 2004 and 2005. California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc. (OCJ), Berkeley, CA, Engineering Intern, summers 2002 B.S. in Civil Engineering, 2006 and 2003.

Professional Activities Representative Projects Safety Assessment Program (ATC-20 and Unless otherwise specified, all projects listed below are with SGH. ATC-45), California Emergency Management Agency Disaster Services Worker – Building-Envelope Investigation Volunteer Service and Medical Office Building, Kaiser Permanente, Petaluma, CA. Spark Bay Area Youth Apprenticeship (Investigation of thin brick cracking and water intrusion.) Program – Apprentice Teacher Bank of the West Building, Walnut Creek, CA. (Building envelope and structural investigation at third-floor deck.) Private Residence, San Francisco, CA. (Basement Leak Investigation and Remediation.) Private Residence, Windsor, CA. Slab-on-grade analysis.) Kensington Place, Sunnyvale, CA. (Consultation regarding alleged construction issues.) Bay Street, Emeryville, CA. (Consultation regarding podium leaks.)

Repair and Rehabilitation Design Oakland Noodle Factory, Oakland, CA. (Waterproofing consultation.) Lincoln Court, CA. (Waterproofing and structural assessment.) Ballena Bay Condominiums, Alameda, CA. (Construction administration and waterproofing consultation.) Private Residence, San Francisco, CA. (Design repairs and construction administration.) Richmond Civic Center, Richmond, CA. (Building-envelope consultation.) Sutro Tower DTV Conversion, San Francisco, CA. (Engineering services.)

Building-Envelope Design San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Building, 525 Golden Gate, San Francisco, CA. (Below-grade waterproofing consultation.) Rosewood Sand Hill Office Complex, Menlo Park, CA. (Waterproofing peer review.) Presidio Archaeology Center, Presidio of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA. (Envelope waterproofing and vapor retarder consultation.) Palladio Retail Center, Folsom, CA. (Building enclosure design consultation Andrea B. Bono Page 2

services.) Willis Residence, Palo Alto, CA. (Waterproofing peer review.) Clyfford Still Museum, Denver, CO. (Building enclosure consultation.) Pixar Production Building – Phase II, Emeryville, CA. (Waterproofing, Roofing, and Building-Envelope Consultation.)

Seismic Evaluations and Rehabilitations 650 California Street, San Francisco, CA. (Structural and seismic engineering review.)

Structural Investigations Tolleson, AZ. (Investigation of water damaged roof-framing system.) Milbrae, CA. (Ruptured tendon in a post-tensioned slab-on-grade.)

Construction Management Kaiser Santa Clara, Santa Clara, CA. (Phases I and II. With R&S.) Napa/Solano Counties, CA. (Highway 80 Rehabilitation Project. With OCJ.) Santa Rosa, CA. (Highway 101 Freeway Widening Project. With OCJ.) Liyen Kan, P.E. Senior Staff II – Building Technology 415-343-3072 [email protected]

Liyen Kan has over ten years of experience in building-envelope design, consultation, Registrations and investigation. He is specialized in moisture-migration issues and computer Professional Engineer modeling. His expertise has been demonstrated by papers and publications on ASTM British Columbia, Canada and ASHRAE. His projects have included moisture analysis and waterproofing services for museums, commercial, educational, and residential buildings. He has consulted with Professional Activities architects, contractors, and building owners to analyze design concepts, evaluate design ASHRAE Member defects, and develop repairs for water intrusion issues. Mr. Kan has lead more than fifty Canadian Association for Civil Engineering building-envelope design/investigation/retrofit projects involving more than 500 buildings Member in the United States and Canada. Ontario Building Envelope Council Member Experience Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. (SGH), San Francisco, CA, from 2004 to present. Education University of Toronto, Department of Civil E.R.A Architects (ERAA), Toronto, Canada, Building Envelope Project Consultant Engineering, Toronto, Canada (Architecture and Building Rehabilitation) from 1999 to 2004. M.S. in Applied Science, 1999 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL Representative Assignments Master of Architecture, 1996 Unless otherwise specified, all projects listed below are with SGH. National Cheng Kung University B.S. in Physics, 1991 Curtain Wall Investigation and Repair 44 Montgomery St., San Francisco, CA. (Curtain wall investigation and repair.) State Fund Headquarters, San Francisco, CA. (Curtain wall investigation and repair.) State Fund Campus, Pleasanton, CA. (Curtain wall investigation and repair.)

Building-Envelope Investigation and Repair Avalon Cedar Ridge, Daly City, CA. (Building-envelope investigation and repair.) CityTV Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Building-envelope assessment and repair.) Massey Estate, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Building-envelope assessment and repair.)

Building-Envelope Design and Construction Administration Contemporary Jewish Museum, San Francisco, CA. (Building-envelope design consultation.) Avalon Mission Bay III, San Francisco, CA. (Building-envelope design consultation and waterproofing.) Avalon Mission Bay II, San Francisco, CA. (Building-envelope design consultation and waterproofing.) Genentech Building 5 and 9, South San Francisco, CA. (Roofing consultation.) Hall Winery, St. Helena, CA. (Building-envelope design consultation and design.)

Building Science W Hotel and Residence, Hollywood, CA. (Hygrothermal analysis.) Hollywood & Wine Condominium, Hollywood, CA. (Hygrothermal analysis.) Avenue of the Stars Condominium, Century City, CA. (Hygrothermal analysis.) Thomason Hospital, El Paso, TX. (Hygrothermal analysis.) Pulte Homes, Emeryville, CA. (Moisture and thermal study.) Liyen Kan, P.E. Page 2

170 King St., San Francisco, CA. (Waterproofing design consultation services for building-envelope waterproofing.) Union Mine High School, Placerville, CA. (Hygrothermal analysis.)

Publications Kan, L., and C. Decareau, “Case Studies in Estimating Air-Drying Times of Small-Diameter Softwood Lumber Comparing Multiple Regression Methods and Hygrothermal Analysis,” International Building Conference on Building-Envelope Systems and Technologies (ICBEST) 2010. Kan, L., and J. Pinon, “Predicting the Effect of Wall Cladding on Ventilation on Condensation Due to Sun-Driven Moisture – Comparison of Hygrothermal Simulation with Laboratory Testing,” ASHRAE Building X 2007. Kan, L., C.P. Decareau, and J. Pinon, “Input and Analysis: An End User’s Perspective of Heat-Air-Moisture Data,” ASTM Symposium 2006. Kan, L., and J. Pinon, “Predicting and Modeling the Effects of Wall Cladding Ventilation on Sun-Driven Condensation,” International Building Physics Conference 2005. Pressnail, K., J. Timusk, L. Kan, and B. Dong, “In Search of a Wall for All Season,” Ninth Canadian Conference on Building Science and Technology 2003. TEAM REFERENCES

Christopher P. Decareau, AIA, LEED AP

Melanie McArtor Gensler Architecture Design & Planning 213.327.3600 [email protected]

Brian Wright TLCD Architecture 707.525.5600 [email protected]

Duane Carlson Avalon Bay Director of Construction 408.551.5537 [email protected]

Andrea B. Bono, P.E., LEED AP

Eric Gregg KMD Architects Architect 415.398.5191 [email protected]

Luis Ramos-Jurado Clark Construction 510.430.1700 [email protected] Liyen Kan, P.E.

Matthew Keil AvalonBay Communities Portfolio Maintenance Director [email protected] 408.551.5502

Matthew Bokar Pyatok Architects 510.465.7010 ext 135 [email protected] SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

INSURANCE SUMMARY SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER

SGH Liability Insurance Summary

BEST TYPE CARRIER LIMITS EXPIRES RATING Architects & Engineers Lexington Insurance $10,000,000 each claim Professional Liability Company $10,000,000 annual aggregate Policy (includes Pollution) A/XV 07/02/12 Deductible: $300,000 Commercial General Travelers Insurance: $2,000,000 general aggregate Liability Charter Oak Fire Insurance, Inc. A+/XV 01/01/13 $2,000,000 Products - Comp/OP Aggregate $1,000,000 Personal & Adv Injury $1,000,000 each occurrence $10,000 Medical Exp.(any one person) $1,000,000 Damages to Rented Property

Automobile Liability Travelers Insurance: $1,000,000 combined single (hired autos, non- Travelers Indemnity Co. limit owned autos) A+/XV 01/01/13 Umbrella Travelers Insurance: $5,000,000 each occurrence Travelers Prop Casualty Co of America A+/XV 01/01/13 $5,000,000 aggregate Excess Fireman’s Fund Insurance $11,000,000 each occurrence Co A+/XV 01/01/13 $11,000,000 aggregate Worker's Travelers Insurance: $1,000,000 each accident Compensation and Travelers Casualty & Surety Employer's Liability Co. A+/XV 01/01/13 $1,000,000 disease-policy limit $1,000,000 disease-each employee COVER PHOTO: © ANDY RYAN

www.sgh.com COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence Sheriff's Office

Date: April 23, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: 4/5ths To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Sheriff Greg Munks

Subject: Construction Management Services and Project Delivery Method for the Replacement Jail Project

RECOMMENDATION: A. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the County Manager or his/her designee to execute:

1. An Agreement for Construction Management Services with Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, for managing the construction of the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $7,387,929; and

2. Contract amendments which incr ease the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $100,000 in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of the construction of the Replacement Jail to exceed th e current or revised fiscal provisions.

B. Approve a project allowance account established in the FY 2012 -13 budget of $3 million in Capital Projects to be used as needed for items that are to be paid by the County over the course of the Project.

C. Approve an Appropriation Transfer Request in the amount of $960,100 from Non - Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Projects for construction management services for FY 2011-12. Costs for FY 2012 -13 are estimated to be $40 million, not including the $1.1 million of remaining unspent funds from site acquisition .

D. Approve the use of the design -build delivery method, as permitted by Public Contracts Code § 20133, with certain trade contractors performing work on the Replacement Jail Project.

BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, by Resolution No. 071202, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City, just east of Highway 101 on Maple Street at Blomquist Street, for the express purpose of constructing a Replacement Jail (the “Project”). Additionally, the Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the Project on the Chemical Way location. On October 4, 2011, by Resolution No. 071672, the Board approved the scope and size of the Project, clearing way for the Project to enter the design phase. The next steps in the Project were the selection of a Construction Manager to oversee the construction of the Project, and an architect to oversee the design of the Project.

Selection of the Construction Manager On December 21, 2011, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office issued a Request for Statements of Qualifications (RFSOQ) seeking qualified construction management firms throughout the United States. RFSOQ advertising and outreach included ads placed in local newspapers, posting on the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning website, and postings on the Jail Planning Facebook and Twitter pages. Nine firms responded to the RFSOQ. Representatives from the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit (the JPU), along with a Deputy County Counsel, and a representative of the County Manager’s Office, carefully reviewed all RFSOQ submittals. The group then recommended that the top three ranked firms be moved into the Request for Proposal (RFP) stage of the process. The recommended firms were: Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture (“Sundt Layton”), Hensel Phelps Construction Company and McCarthy Building Companies, Inc.

On February 6, 2012, the Sheriff’s Office issued an RFP to the top three firms and received responses from those firms on February 22, 2012. On February 28, 2012, a selection panel consisting of members of the JPU, together with a Deputy County Counsel and a representative of the County Manager’s Office conducted interviews with the top three firms.

After receiving input from the selection panel, the Sheriff recommends that the County Manager execute an agreement with Sundt Layton to serve as construction manager for the Project. Pending approval of the proposed Agreement with Sundt Layton to provide construction management services, Sundt Layton has been working with the JPU at no charge to develop a Project schedule and to select a trade contractor to provide abatement, demolition and remediation services as described below.

Anticipated Selection of the Trade Contractor to Provide Abatement and Remediation Services In February, 2012, by Resolution No. 071829, the Board approved phase one of the Project when it approved a contract with WEST Environmental Services to oversee and coordinate the Site Management Plan (SMP) that was approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). WEST has begun their SMP coordination and plan development for demolition, abatement, and remediation services.

On March 30, 2012, the Sheriff’s Office issued a Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSOQ) to prequalify potential bidders as the first step of the County’s selection process for Demolition, Asbestos and Lead Abatement, and Soil Remediation services for Chemical Way. RFSOQ advertising and outreach included ads placed in local newspapers and posting on the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning website. Thirteen firms responded to the RFSOQ. After a review of each firm’s Statement of Qualifications, five firms were selected for prequalification: Miller Environmental, Inc., Environmental Business Solutions, Inc., Silverado Contractors Inc., LVI Services Inc., and FERMA Corporation. On April 19, 2012, Requests for Bids were sent to each of the pre-qualified firms.

It is anticipated that prequalified firms will submit bids on May 8, 2012 and the Board of Supervisors will consider awarding the bid for the demolition at its May 22, 2012, meeting. If the Board approves the award to the identified lowest, responsive and responsible bidder, the County will enter into a trade contract with that firm. Upon execution of the trade contract it will be assigned to the Construction Manager (described below) who will oversee the performance of the trade contract.

DISCUSSION: Agreement for Construction Management Services The Construction Manager’s primary duty will be to supervise and manage the trade contractors who will be performing the construction work on the Project. The scope of work covered by the Agreement includes, but is not limited to:

1. Pre-construction Phase In compliance with County policies and the Public Contracts Code, the JPU and the Construction Manager will conduct a systematic, impartial pre-qualification process with potential sub-contractors for the Project. The JPU and the Construction Manager will prepare and place notices and advertisements to solicit bids and conduct walk throughs, and develop the most logical, competitive, and distinct trade contractor bid packages with clearly identified scopes of work. The JPU and the Construction Manager will include bid alternatives (deductive or additive) in each trade contractor bid package to optimize the value of the Project budget. After completion of the public bidding process for each trade package, the JPU will recommend that the Board enter into a trade contract with the successful bidder. When the Board accepts the recommendation and upon execution of each trade contract and an assignment agreement, the trade contract will be assigned to the Construction Manager who will oversee the performance of each trade contract.

In addition, the Construction Manager will prepare and evaluate a cost estimate for each trade package and evaluate the estimate against the Project. The Construction Manager will recommend, if necessary, the appropriate action to correct and/or avoid potential budget overruns. The Construction Manager shall provide a budgetary cost estimate at the beginning of the pre-construction phase after the kick off meeting with architect and the JPU to factor in the Sheriff’s needs as well as all locality related requirements; and provide full and complete estimates at 100% conceptual, 100% schematic design, and 100% design development.

2. Construction Phase The Construction Manager shall provide construction administration and management services to construct the Project in an efficient and cost-effective fashion consistent with the Public Contracts Code and with the best interests of the County. Those services will include updating the Project schedule on a monthly basis. In order to provide a comprehensive schedule, the Construction Manager shall coordinate and receive input from the County, the Architect and the trade contractors for compliance with the individual requirements of each portion of the Project and the overall Project schedule. The Construction Manager shall review and approve the trade contractors’ proposed construction schedule for logic, reasonableness, and conformance to the requirements of the contract documents. The Construction Manager shall conduct a daily review of the trade contractors’ progress and conformance with monthly updated construction schedules.

In conjunction with the Architect, the Construction Manager shall review and approve trade contractors’ monthly progress payment requests and compare the requested payments to actual work completed in accordance with the pre-approved schedule of values presented by the trade contractors at the beginning of construction. The Construction Manager will combine trade contractors’ payment requests, prepare a current overall schedule of values, and submit one invoice in duplicate to the Project Executive (currently Lt. Deborah Bazan) for approval and payment.

The Construction Manager shall maintain the Building Information Model (BIM) up to date with changes to the contract documents from pertinent Request For Information (RFI) or owner and architect initiated changes. The Construction Manager shall ensure those changes are reflected in the BIM and integrated into the construction models to look for conflicts and/or make changes as necessary to coordinate the changes.

The Construction Manager shall attend weekly meetings between the County and the Architect. As required by the stage of construction, Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) subcontractors may also be required to attend. The meetings will be held at the job site in a trailer provided by the Construction Manager. The Construction Manager shall provide a weekly construction progress report, summarizing the progress of construction and key issues currently pending. The report will indicate each trade contractor’s progress and summarize the current cash flow projections.

Throughout construction, the Construction Manager will schedule, chair and record minutes for all regular meetings with the trade contractors, County, and the Architect on a weekly basis. The Construction Manager will ensure the trade contractors are maintaining as-built drawings and coordinating the construction schedule with the Sheriff, contractors and vendors to ensure that any owner provided items are installed at the appropriate time to minimize damage to previously installed work and to coordinate with space availability.

The Construction Manager will compile the as-built drawings and submit them at the end of the Project to the Architect for review, approval and further processing. The Construction Manager will prepare a recommendation for final acceptance of the Project after the trade contractors have corrected deficient work and satisfied all contract conditions. The Construction Manager shall provide a complete set of contract files to the JPU Project Executive. This shall include, but not be limited to, as-built drawings, operation and maintenance manuals, additional materials, and warranties.

3. Close-Out Phase The Construction Manager will prepare an ongoing punch list specifying the work to be completed and/or corrected on an ongoing basis, and then correct all work listed on the consolidated punch-list generated by the County and the Architect.

The Construction Manager will obtain, review, coordinate and submit all operations and maintenance manuals from all trade contractors. In addition, the Construction Manager shall provide on-site training and instruction on the proper use and maintenance of all new, renovated, or relocated building systems. Within 30 days of substantial completion, the Construction Manager will train County and/or Sheriff personnel on the operation, use and maintenance of all equipment provided as part of their work, and provide warranty/guarantee letters from all trade contractors for one year after substantial completion of the Project.

Design-Build Delivery Method The option of utilizing the design-build delivery method for the trade contractors affords the Sheriff or Sheriff’s designee the benefit of bringing trades on early to assist with cost control and value engineering at every step in the process. The JPU is considering using the design-build delivery method for the Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing trade contract work. Use of this method is permitted by Public Contracts Code § 20133 upon approval of the Board for its use.

Approval of this contract for Construction Management Services and Project Delivery Method contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring a safe and cost effective Replacement Jail Facility.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the resolution and agreement as to format.

Performance Measure(s): Measure FY 2011 -12 FY 2012 -13 Projected Projected Construction management services performed and/or 100% 100% completed within industry standard time guidelines.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of this construction management services contract is $7,387,929. This not-to- exceed contract amount is based on $250,000 for pre-construction services, $3,842,478 million for general conditions (to be paid based on actual auditable costs), and $3,295,451 million based on a contract fee of 3.29% of the anticipated $100,000,000 hard construction costs. The 3.29% includes the construction manager’s overhead, profit (fee), bond and contractor controlled insurance plan. The project allowance account of $3 million will be kept in Capital Projects and established in the FY 2012-13 budget. It is anticipated that $960,100 in costs will be incurred during FY 2011-12 and $40 million in FY 2012-13, not including the $1.1 million of remaining unspent funds from site acquisition. The above costs will be funded from Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves. Future Project costs will be included in future fiscal year budgets and funded by either Non-Departmental ERAF Reserves or bond proceeds for the Replacement Jail Construction Project.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL PROCESS MATRIX

1. General description of RFP The Sheriff’s Office is seeking a firm for construction management services for San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility 2. List key evaluation criteria Proposals were evaluated based on the following: 1. Completeness of proposal 2. Team Experience, Qualifications, and Capabilities 3. Depth and Quality of Respondent’s performance 4. Technical/Project Management Approach 5. Value 6. Availability 7. Financial Stability 8. Sustainable Practices 3. Where advertised San Francisco Examiner Posted on the Sheriff’s Office web page 4. In addition to Sent to all those enrolled to receive automatic notifications and advertisement, list others announcements on the Sheriff’s web page, Facebook, and Twitter to whom the RFP announcement was sent. 5. Total number of RFP’s sent None directly to prospective proposers 6. Number of proposals Nine received 7. Who evaluated the Lieutenant Deborah Bazan proposal Sgt. Dave Titus Project Manager Sam Lin Eugene Whitlock, County Counsel Paul Scannell, representing the County Manager’s Office 8. In alphabetical order, Clark Construction Group, LLC names of proposers (or 7677 Oakport Street, Suite 1040 finalists, if applicable) and Oakland, California 94621 location Hensel Phelps Construction Co. 226 Airport Parkway, Suite 150 San Jose, California 95110

McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. 343 Sansome Street, 14 th Floor San Francisco, California 94104

Rudolph and Sletten, Inc 1600 Seaport Boulevard, Suite 350 Redwood City, California 94063

Skanska 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1950 Oakland, CA 94612 Sundt Layton 2860 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95833

Turner Construction Company 1111 Broadway, Suite 2100 Oakland, California 94607

Walsh Construction Company 1777 Oakland Boulevard, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, California 94596

Webcor/Kitchell 207 King Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 94107-5451

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Sheriff’s Office

DATE: April 23, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: 4/5 vote

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Sheriff Greg Munks

SUBJECT: Executive Summary: Construction Management Services and Project Delivery Method for the Replacement Jail Project

RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the County Manager or his/her designee to execute:

A. An Agreement for Construction Management Services with Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, for managing the construction of the San Mateo County Replacement Jail on Chemical Way in Redwood City, in the amount of $7,387,929; and

B. Contract amendments which increase the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $100,000 in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of the construction of the Replacement Jail to exceed the current or revised fiscal provisions.

2. Approve a project allowance account established in the FY 2012-13 budget of $3 million in Capital Projects to be used as needed for items that are to be paid by the County over the course of the Project.

3. Approve an Appropriation Transfer Request in the amount of $960,100 from Non- Departmental ERAF Reserves to Capital Project for construction management service for FY 2011-12. Costs for FY 2012-13 are estimated to be $40 million.

4. Approve the use of the design-build delivery method, as permitted by Public Contracts Code § 20133, with certain trade contractors performing work on the Replacement Jail Project.

BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City for the express purpose of constructing a Replacement Jail (the Project) and approved a mitigated negative declaration. On October 4, 2011, the Board approved the scope and size of the Project, clearing way for the Project to enter the design phase.

DISCUSSION: Selection of the Construction Manager On December 21, 2011, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office issued a Request for Statements of Qualifications (RFSOQ) seeking qualified construction management firms. RFSOQ advertising and outreach included ads placed in local newspapers, posting on the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning website, and postings on the Jail Planning Facebook and Twitter pages. Nine firms responded to the RFSOQ. Representatives from the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit (the JPU), along with a Deputy County Counsel and a representative of the County Manager’s Office, carefully reviewed all RFSOQ submittals. The group then recommended that the top three ranked firms be moved into the Request for Proposal (RFP) stage of the process. The recommended firms were: Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, Hensel Phelps Construction Company and McCarthy Building Companies, Inc. On February 6, 2012, the Sheriff’s Office issued an RFP to the top three firms. On February 28, 2012, a selection panel conducted interviews with the top three firms.

After receiving input from the selection panel, the Sheriff recommends that the County Manager enter into an agreement with Sundt Layton to serve as construction manager for the Project.

Design-Build Delivery Method The option of utilizing the design-build delivery method for some of the sub-trade contractors affords the County the benefit of bringing trades on early to assist with cost control and value engineering. Use of this method is permitted by Public Contracts Code § 20133 upon approval of the Board.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the resolution and agreement as to form.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE: A.) AN AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES WITH SUNDT LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE, FOR MANAGING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT JAIL ON CHEMICAL WAY IN REDWOOD CITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,387,929; B.) CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH INCREASE THE COUNTY’S MAXIMUM FISCAL OBLIGATION BY NO MORE THAN $100,000 IN AGGREGATE, AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES DO NOT CAUSE THE TOTAL COST OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE REPLACEMENT JAIL TO EXCEED THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS.

RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , in December, 2010, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land

in Redwood City east of Highway 101 for the purpose of constructing a replacement jail and the

Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the replacement jail on that location; and

WHEREAS , a Site Management Plan (SMP) and a Mitigated Negative Declaration have been approved by the Board of Supervisors for the Replacement Jail location; and

WHEREAS , the County desires to retain a qualified construction manager with the requisite experience and technical qualifications necessary to oversee the construction of the replacement jail; and

WHEREAS , the Sheriff issued a Request for Proposals in February, 2012 seeking responses from three pre-qualified construction management firms to serve as the construction manager for the construction of the Replacement Jail; and WHEREAS , a selection committee comprised of members of the Sheriff’s Jail Planning

Unit, the County Counsel’s Office and the County Manager’s Office reviewed and carefully evaluated the proposals submitted in response to the Request for Proposals; and

WHEREAS , said selection committee is recommending the retention of Sundt Layton,

A Joint Venture, to provide construction management services for the Replacement Jail project for the amount of $7,387,929; and

WHEREAS, this Board has been presented with an Agreement for Construction

Management Services, and has examined and approved it as to both form and content and desires to enter into the same.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Board of

Supervisors authorizes and directs the County Manager or his/her designee to execute:

1. The Construction Management Services agreement with Sundt Layton, A Joint

Venture, in the amount of $7,387,929; and

2. Contract amendments which increase the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by

no more than $100,000, in aggregate, and/or modify the contract term and/or

services so long as the modified term or services do not cause the total cost of

the construction of the Repalcement Jail to exceed the current or revised fiscal

provisions.

CONTRACT AGREEMENT

between

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

and

Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture

for

Construction Management Services

San Mateo County Replacement Jail Project

DOCUMENTS BOUND HEREWITH

Exhibit A: Owner Assignment and Novation Agreement Exhibit B: Project Not to Exceed Cost Exhibit C: Schedule of Rates for Personnel Costs Exhibit D: Allowable Reimbursable Expenses Exhibit E: Project Basic Schedule Exhibit F: RFP, RFSOQ and Answers to submitted questions

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 1 of 42

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO REPLACEMENT JAIL PROJECT

Construction Management Services Agreement

This Construction Management Services Agreement (Agreement) is made and entered into this 9th day of May, 2012, by and between the County of San Mateo (Owner) and Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture (Construction Manager or CM) for Construction Management Services relating to the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility Project (Project).

Recitals

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 4526 through 4528, Owner wishes to retain Construction Manager to provide professional Construction Management Services for its Replacement Correctional Facility Project; NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, stipulated and agreed, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS 1.1 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER (the CM): Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, appointed by the Owner to provide professional Construction Management Services in connection with the Project. 1.2 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: The Contract Documents consist of this Agreement and Exhibits hereto, Project Plans (including all drawings and details), the Project Manual (including bidding instructions, bid form, Trade contracts, general conditions, special provisions, Trade Bid Package descriptions, procedural manual, exhibits and technical specifications), as approved by Owner. 1.3 COST OF THE WORK: The term “Cost of the Work” shall mean those costs necessarily and actually incurred by Construction Manager in the proper performance of the Work as expressly set forth in Section 1.1 of Exhibit D, but excluding all costs specified in Section 1.2 of Exhibit D, and further excluding all costs otherwise excluded by the Contract Documents or expressly required by the Contract Documents to be provided by Construction Manager at no additional cost to Owner. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Contract Documents, Construction Manager shall provide the costs in Section 1.1 of Exhibit D at rates that are not higher than those customarily paid at the place of the Project except with the specific and express prior written consent of Owner and any costs exceeding such rates shall not be part of the Cost of the Work. 1.4 DESIGN-BUILD TRADE CONTRACT: A Trade Contract awarded for both design and construction services for a specified scope of work on the Project within a particular trade. Design-Build Trade Contracts will be awarded on a "best value" basis pursuant to Public Contract Code section 20133, after development of design criteria (not bridging documents) by the A-E. It is

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 2 of 42

anticipated that the mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and security Trade Contracts will be awarded on a design-build basis. 1.5 DESIGN ERRORS: Design errors, as used in this Agreement, include only those items that require specific design related engineering calculations necessary to support code compliance or items specified based solely on the professional judgment of the Architect or engineer or code interpretations or regulatory requirements. 1.6 DESIGN PROFESSIONAL (A-E): The Architects of Record, Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc., for the Project, the organization providing those professional design services associated with construction, alteration, or repair of real property for the Owner. 1.7 FORCE MAJEURE EVENT: An act of God as defined under Public Contract Code section 7105, civil disobedience, an act of terror, or unavoidable casualties beyond the Construction Manager and Trade Contactors' control, and not due to any act or omission of the Construction Manager or any Trade Contractor, that necessarily extends the Substantial Completion date of the Project. 1.8 GENERAL CONDITIONS. Those reimbursable expenses for Construction manager's personnel assigned to the Project based on the Staffing Plan and the Fixed Rates established in Exhibit C to this Agreement. 1.9 OWNER: County of San Mateo. 1.10 ELIGIBLE and NON-ELIGIBLE CHANGE ORDERS: For the purposes of determining compensation for Change Orders to Trade Contracts, Eligible Change Orders are those attributed to Unforeseen Site Conditions, Force Majeure Events, Owner Requested Changes, Design Errors and omissions. Non-Eligible Change Orders are those attributed to any other reason including but not limited to acceleration to meet Master Construction Schedule unless delays are caused by the Owner or its consultants, 1.11 MASTER CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE: Detailed timeline indicating start, finish and durations of each portion of work, for each Trade Bid Package, by building, depicting the relationships of activities and inclusive of milestone completing dates tied to liquidated damages applicable to individual Trade Contractors. 1.12 PROJECT EXECUTIVE (PE): The Project Executive appointed by the Owner as the Owner’s representative to provide planning and program management services in connection with the Project. 1.13 PROJECT: The construction of the San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility. 1.14 PROJECT BUDGET: The total available funding as set forth by the Owner for the implementation of the Project. It is the intent of the Owner that the Project Budget include all costs for design, engineering, construction, inspection, technical consultants, surveys, testing, project management, project

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 3 of 42

contingencies, and such administrative costs of the Owner as shall be deemed appropriate. 1.15 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS: Project Construction Costs, as used in this Agreement, means the total cost to the Owner of all work designed or specified by A-E, including work covered by approved change orders and/or alternates and all Construction Manager costs, fees and expenses. Project Construction Costs exclude the following: any payments to A-E or other design consultants; any Owner costs for inspections, surveys, testing, entitlement, program management or fees. 1.16 PROJECT TEAM: The Owner, the Design Professional (A-E), the Construction Manager, each Trade Contractor involved in the Project. 1.17 SERVICES. All services to be provided by Construction Manager under this Agreement as described in Article 2 of this Agreement, and the Scope of Work set forth in the Request for Proposals attached hereto as Exhibit F (RFP) and incorporated by reference into this Agreement. 1.18 TERM. All work comprising the Work shall be deemed performed under this Agreement. This Agreement shall conclude upon the completion of the Project. 1.19 TRADE BID PACKAGES: Separation of all work indicated in the Project Construction Documents into separate bid packages for purposes of bidding and constructing Project. Some Trade Bid Packages will be awarded on a design- build basis. The remainder of the Trade Bid Packages will be awarded to the lowest bidder. 1.20 TRADE CONTRACTOR: Contractors that are awarded individual construction contracts for specific scopes of work on the Project within their particular trade. Trade Contracts for construction work only will be awarded on a lump sum basis, while Trade Contracts for design-build services will be awarded on a "best value" basis pursuant to Public Contract Code section 20133. 1.21 UNFORESEEN SITE CONDITIONS: When a Trade Contractor or the Construction Manager discovers an unknown, unforeseen or differing site condition, as defined in Public Contract Code section 7104, including any unknown existing conditions on the Project site. ARTICLE 2REPRESENTATIONS, SERVICES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 2.1 REPRESENTATIONS 2.1.1 Construction Manager represents that it has reviewed this Article 2 and the Scope of Work set forth in the Request for Proposals attached hereto as Exhibit F (RFP), and that in its professional judgment the Work to be performed under this Agreement can be performed for no more than the Not to Exceed Amount set forth in the Compensation Schedule established in Exhibit B, and in accordance with the Master Construction Schedule.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 4 of 42

2.1.2 Fundamental to the success of this Project is the willingness and ability of Owner, the Architect and its consultants, Construction Manager and the Trade Contractors to participate reliably throughout the preconstruction and construction phases by providing dependable commitments, promises, and information in the best interest of the Project. Construction Manager commits to full engagement of its Project staff to provide the necessary resources to timely and effectively collaborate with other Project Team members and meet its commitments throughout the design and construction process. 2.1.3 Construction Manager represents that it is qualified to perform the Work and that it possesses, and will continue to possess at its sole cost and expense, the necessary licenses and/or permits required to perform the Work or will obtain such licenses and/or permits prior to time such licenses and/or permits are required. Construction Manager also represents that it has knowledge of, and will comply with, all applicable building codes, laws, regulations and ordinances. 2.1.4 Construction Manager represents that it has specialized expertise in the construction of facilities similar to those intended for the Project. Construction Manager agrees that the Work shall be performed in a manner that conforms to the standards of professional practice by a specialist in performing services pertaining to adult detention facilities of similar type and size to the similar to the Project (“Standard of Care”). Construction Manager represents to Owner that it has expertise and experience in pre-construction review, constructability analysis, estimating, management of construction mobilization by multiple Trade Contractors, and supervision; Trade Bid Package preparation and scoping; trade bid evaluation; project scheduling; cost benefit analysis; claims review and negotiation; and general management and administration of construction projects to complete the Project built entirely by Trade Contractors. 2.1.5 The granting of any progress payment by Owner, or the receipt thereof by Construction Manager, or any inspection, review, approval or oral statement by any representative of Owner or any other governmental entity, shall in no way waive or limit the obligations in this Article 2 or lessen the liability of Construction Manager for unsatisfactory Work. 2.1.6 Construction Manager covenants to provide all reasonable skill and judgment in furthering the interests of Owner in the management of the construction of the Project. Construction Manager agrees to furnish efficient business administration and management services and to perform in an expeditious and economical manner consistent with the interests of Owner. Construction Manager shall be responsible, to the extent described in this Agreement, for ensuring that the Project is properly completed in a competent and professional manner to completion within the Project Construction Costs and within the time frames established in

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 5 of 42

the Master Construction Schedule. Construction Manager shall use commercially reasonable efforts to incorporate materials and products made in America into the Project. 2.1.7 Work under this Agreement shall be performed only by qualified, competent personnel under the supervision of and/or in the employment of Construction Manager. Construction Manager shall conform to Owner’s reasonable requests regarding assignment of personnel, but all personnel, including those assigned at Owner’s request, and shall be supervised by Construction Manager. 2.1.8 Construction Manager agrees that all professional personnel assigned to the Project will be those listed in its proposal, Exhibit C (Proposal) to this Agreement, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and that the listed personnel will continue their assignments on the Project during the entire term of this Agreement. It is recognized that the listed personnel may in the future cease to be employed by Construction Manager and because of the termination of such employment no longer able to provide Work. However, Construction Manager agrees that replacement of any of the listed personnel during the Agreement period shall only be with other professional personnel who have equivalent experience and shall require the prior written approval of Owner. Any costs associated with replacement of personnel shall be borne exclusively by Construction Manager. Resumes for all listed professional personnel are attached in Exhibit C (Proposal), and by this reference incorporated herein. Owner may condition its approval of substitution personnel upon a reasonable transition period wherein new personnel will learn the Project and get up to speed at Construction Manager’s cost. 2.1.9 The Construction Manager shall not, nor shall it permit Sundt Construction, Inc. or Layton Construction Co., Inc. to, submit any bid or self-perform any construction work on the Project, including any work involved in any of the Trade Bid Packages (Trade Contracts). Construction Manager shall comply with any and all applicable prevailing wage laws, and Chapter 1 of Part 7, of Division 2, of the California Labor Code. 2.2 PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES 2.2.1 Cost Review. Work shall include preparation of change order estimates, budget assessment and cost containment advice, and contract-bid recommendations. 2.2.2 Construction Contingency: Contingency established in the Project Construction Cost use by the Construction Manager to cover errors and omissions in the Construction Documents that fall within the ordinary standard of care; scope gaps in the Trade Bid Packages due to early bidding and phasing of design; gaps due to early procurement of materials; and coordination of the Work. The Construction Contingency

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 6 of 42

shall be funded in an amount stipulated in Exhibit B. The Construction Contingency shall be available to Construction Manager upon prior written approval from the Owner. Construction Manager shall not apply the Construction Contingency to any cost, expense or service which Construction Manager is to provide to Owner, or for which Construction Manager has received compensation. Unused amounts of any Construction Contingency or Trade Contract Allowance shall be returned to the Owner. 2.2.3 Owner's Project Contingency: A contingency established within the Owner's separate budget for use exclusively by the Owner to make alterations during design and construction of the Project. The Owner's Project Contingency is not included in the Target Cost. 2.2.4 Trade Contract Allowances: A Trade Contract Allowance is necessary in certain circumstances because the item, components and/or systems are anticipated but undefined at the time that the Trade Contract is entered into, and may require further development by the Architect or other design professionals. Amounts included in Trade Contract Allowances may be expended at the recommendation of Construction Manager, subject to Owner’s prior authorization. In the event that any portion of the Trade Contract Allowance is exceeded by approved eligible change orders, the Owner shall increase the allowance to meet the obligation. Any funds that remain after Final Completion of the Project, the remaining amount shall revert 100% to the Owner. 2.2.5 Master Construction Schedule. The Construction Manager shall develop a Master Construction Schedule for the Project, subject to approval by Owner, which shall contain key milestones to be accomplished by the Trade Contractors. The schedule will be incorporated into the bid documents and subsequent trade contracts with successful bidders. 2.2.6 Construction Management Coordination, Constructability, and Cost Review. The Construction Manager shall perform constructability and cost reviews and shall provide input to the Owner relative to means and methods of construction, duration of construction, and constructability of Project Construction Documents. In its review of the contract documents and making any recommendations regarding such documents pursuant to this Agreement, Construction Manager does not assume any responsibility for any of the A-E’s Design Errors. 2.3 BID AND AWARD PHASE SERVICES. The Construction Manager will develop procedures for procuring the Trade Contracts in accordance with the applicable public contracting requirements, including those in the Public Contract Code, Labor Code (prevailing wage requirements), Civil Code (payment bond), Health and Safety Code, and Government Code. 2.3.1 Preparation of Trade Bid Packages. The Construction Manager shall assume

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 7 of 42

responsibility for the separation of scopes of work for Trade Contractors that will collectively comprise 100% of the construction work on the Project. The Construction Manager shall advise on the methods to be used for selecting Trade Contractors and awarding individual Trade Contracts, including awarding Design-Build Trade Contracts on a "best value" basis pursuant to Public Contractor Code section 20133 for the mechanical, electrical, plumbing and security scopes of work, and low bid construction contracts for the remainder of the Trade Contracts. .The Construction Manager shall review the drawings and specifications prepared by the A-E, as well as the design criteria for Design-Build Trade Contracts, to ensure that: (1) the Architect has given all necessary and appropriate recommendations for coordination of bidding documents to facilitate Construction Manager’s preparation of clearly defined and segregated scopes of work to ensure completeness and to avoid duplication of scopes, (2) the work of the separate Trade Contractors is coordinated, (3) all requirements for the Project have been assigned to the appropriate Trade Contractor, (4) the likelihood of jurisdictional disputes has been reduced, and (5) Trade coordination has been provided for phased construction. 2.3.2 Trade Bid Package Document Preparation. Construction Manager shall assume responsibility for development of Trade Bid Packages to ensure appropriate and complete coverage between bid packages for all work necessary to complete the Project, and avoid duplication of any scope or portion thereof, or gaps between scopes that would leave work undone. Construction Manager shall inspect, review, provide a preliminary evaluation and assure proper assembly of the Contract Documents in coordination with the Owner and Architect prior to bidding. Construction Manager shall represent to Owner before bidding the work that Trade Bid Packages include the full scope of work required by the Contract Documents and necessary to complete the Project, and will be required to guarantee completeness within the context of the Not to Exceed Cost (Exhibit B) and coordination of the scopes of work between all Trade Bid Packages. The Contract Documents shall be the basis of each Trade Contract and shall not be changed without Owner’s prior written approval. 2.3.3 Contract Award Procedures. The Construction Manager shall develop and expedite bidding procedures for bid document issuance, bid tracking and receipt of proposals with regard to each of the Trade Contracts. Construction Manager shall provide Bid Packages for soliciting bids. Bid packages shall divide the Construction Documents into categories consistent with common industry trade practice and in the interest of obtaining the lowest bids. For construction-only Trade Contracts, Bid Packages shall include, but are not limited to: Notice to Trade Contractors, Instructions to Bidders, General Conditions, Special Provisions, Supplementary General Conditions, Guarantee Form, Specifications, Drawings, Addenda, Form of Agreement, Non Collusion Affidavit, Sub Contractor Listing Form, and Owner Assignment and Novation Agreement. For Design-Build Trade Contracts, Bid Packages shall include, but not be limited to, a Prequalification

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 8 of 42

Questionnaire and Scoring Methodology, an RFP based on design criteria developed by the A-E, all in compliance with Public Contract Code section 20133. Construction Manager shall prepare all documents required for the Bid Packages with input from the Owner. 2.3.4 Bid Inclusions for Construction-Only Trade Contracts. Construction Manager shall ensure that the following requirements are included in all proposed bid and contract documents: (a) That each Trade Contractor possesses a valid California state specialty contractor's license at the time of award of a contract for the proposed work. (b) That applicable requirements for equal employment opportunity programs are existent in the documents. (c) That all construction work shall be performed by Trade Contractors under agreements bid by the Owner, with the assistance of Construction Manager, as required by the Public Contract Code. Bidding will include pre-qualification for each Trade Contractor unless omission of pre-qualification is approved in writing by the Owner. After the bidding process, Construction Manager will assist the Owner with analysis of bids to determine the lowest responsive, responsible bidder. Following award, Owner will assign the individual contracts to Construction Manager per the Assignment and Novation Agreement included to this Agreement as Exhibit A. (d) That each Trade Contractor shall provide a separate bid bond for 10% of its bid, plus performance bond, and labor and material payment bond at 100% of that Trade Contractor’s contract amount. All sureties must be California admitted sureties. Construction Manager shall review and determine the validity of the bonds and shall forward them to Owner with Construction Manager's comments. (e) That each Trade Contractor shall comply with the California Labor Code requirements governing public work projects including, but not limited to, the payment of prevailing wages, compliance with apprenticeship standards, overtime pay and certified payroll obligations as well as the provision of workers compensation and employers liability insurance to full statutory limits. (f) That each Trade Contractor shall comply with the California Public Contract Code requirements governing public work projects. (g) That each Trade Contractor shall comply with all other applicable state, federal and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances,

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 9 of 42

including applicable finger printing and Department of Justice clearance requirements. 2.3.5 Requirements for Design-Build Trade Contracts. Construction Manager shall ensure that the following requirements are followed in conjunction with all proposed Design-Build Trade Contracts. (a) Construction Manager shall assist Owner with the advertising, pre-qualification, RFP process, proposal review and contract award for Design-Build Trade Contracts for the mechanical, electrical, plumbing and security components of the Project. (b) The Pre-Qualification Questionnaire used to pre-qualify all interested design-build entities shall comply in all respects with Public Contractor Code section 20133(d)(3), and shall be based on the model Questionnaire developed by the California Department of Industrial Relations for design-build projects. Specifically, the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire shall: (i) Require a summary of the design-build entity's structure, including a list of all team members and partners; (ii) Require evidence of experience to perform the required scope of work; (iii) Require evidence that the design-build entity possesses licenses, registration, and credentials required to design and construct the project; (iv) Require evidence of ability to obtain all bonding and insurance; and (v) Establish a process for scoring each submission. (c) After conclusion of the pre-qualification process, Construction Manager shall assist with a competitive proposal process to award separate Design-Build Trade Contracts for the mechanical, electrical, plumbing and security components of the Project. The competitive proposal process shall comply in all respects with Public Contract Code section 20133(d)(4)(B). Specifically, the competitive proposal process shall: (i) Be awarded on a "best value" basis; (ii) Apply the evaluation criteria set forth in the RFP; (iii) Include the following evaluation criteria, each receiving a minimum of 10% of the total weight: (a) price; (b) technical design and construction expertise;

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 10 of 42

(c) life cycle costs over 15 years or more; (d) skilled labor force availability; and (e) acceptable safety record (d) Construction Manager will assist the Owner with evaluating and ranking proposals submitted in order to determine the proposal that presents the "best value" to Owner, considering all evaluation criteria. Following award, Owner will assign the individual contracts to Construction Manager per the Assignment and Novation Agreement included to this Agreement as Exhibit A. (e) Construction Manager will assist Owner with the preparation of a Design-Build Trade Contract that incorporates the terms of the RFP, and complies in all respects with Public Contract Code section 20133. Specifically, the Design-Build Trade Contract shall: (i) Require a payment bond in the amount of the construction work, and errors and omissions insurance to cover the design work; (ii) Require compliance with Owner's Labor Compliance Program; and (iii) Require compliance with all other applicable state, federal and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances. 2.3.6 Bid Conference(s). In conjunction with the Architect and Owner, the Construction Manager shall conduct the pre-bid conference(s) as required by Owner. These conferences will familiarize bidders with the Project, bid documents, the specific contracting method and sequence to be used to complete the Project, and any systems, materials, or methods. 2.3.6 Bid Evaluation. The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in all bid openings, evaluation of the bids for completeness, full responsiveness and price, including alternate prices and unit prices (if applicable), and shall make a formal report to the Owner with regard to the potential award of all trade contracts. Construction Manager will provide the proposed contract, subject to prior review and approval by Owner, for each successful bidder. Within ten (10) calendar days after Owner’s acceptance of a bid for a Trade Contract, Construction Manager shall update the Project Construction Costs as a result of the accepted bid and provide the update to Owner. 2.3.7 Guarantee. The Construction Manager shall certify in writing to the Owner that the Trade Contracts represent all the contracts and associated scopes of work, required to perform all the work set forth in the 100% complete, bid plans and specifications for the Project, and that no additional contracts or work are foreseen to complete the necessary work for the Project. If after

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 11 of 42

commencement of the Project, the Owner reduces or expands the scope, Project Budget, and or Master Schedule of the Project requiring additional services by Construction Manager, Construction Manager may request additional compensation. 2.3.8 Re-Bid. In the event a bid exceeds the amount estimated as part of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.2.1 or there are less than three bidders for a Trade Bid Package and the Owner authorizes re-bidding of all or portions of the Project, the Construction Manager shall cooperate in revising the scope and the quality of work as required to reduce the Project Construction Costs. Construction Manager, without additional compensation, shall cooperate with the Project Executive, Owner and Architect as necessary to reduce Project Construction Costs. 2.3.9 Contract Issuance. With the assistance of Owner, and upon assignment of Trade Contracts, Construction Manager shall prepare and issue the appropriate notice-to-proceed letters and contracts for each separate Trade Contractor performing work on the Project The Construction Manager shall ensure that as part of the Trade Contractor bids to the Owner, the Trade Contractors each include a completed Trade Contract, on a form approved by the Owner and the Construction Manager, which has a payment provision that requires all Trade Contractors to make payment to their suppliers, vendors and subcontractors or be in jeopardy of default of the Trade Contract. The Construction Manager shall ensure that each Trade Contractor provides a payment and performance bonds in the amount of 100% of the construction work required under the particular Trade Contract. 2.3.10 Purchase, Delivery and Storage of Materials and Equipment The Construction Manager shall investigate and recommend a schedule for the Owner’s purchase of Owner supplied materials and equipment which are a part of the Project and require long lead time procurement, and coordinate the schedule with the early preparation of portions of the contract documents. The Construction Manager shall expedite and coordinate delivery of all purchases. The Construction Manager shall arrange for delivery and storage, protection and security for Owner-purchased materials, systems and equipment, which are a part of the Project, until such items are incorporated into the Project. The Construction Manager shall coordinate with or assign these activities to the appropriate Trade Contractor who is responsible for the installation of such materials, systems, and equipment. 2.3.11 Analysis of Labor. The Construction Manager shall provide an analysis of the types and quantities of labor required for the Project and review the availability of appropriate categories of labor required for critical phases. The Construction Manager shall make recommendations to minimize adverse effects of labor shortages.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 12 of 42

2.3.12 Contract Administration. It is the intent of the Owner to delegate responsibility for administration of each Trade Contract to Construction Manager through assignment of each Trade Contract. Construction Manager shall make payments appropriate under the Trade Contract terms and applicable law, taking into account factors such as prevailing wage requirements, material supplies release, fingerprinting requirements, and other relevant criteria. Construction Manager will manage the Trade Contracts in accordance with contract General Conditions in which all references to Owner shall mean Construction Manager. The Owner will be informed and has the right of approval of all changes to the Contract Documents, but the Owner will not be involved in the administration of or be responsible for reimbursement or payment of Change Orders, except for Eligible Changes as described in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. Any entitlement to an increase in the Contract Amount or Contract Time on the part of any Trade Contractor other than pursuant to an Eligible Change shall be the financial responsibility of Construction Manager. 2.4 CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES 2.4.1 Pre-Construction Conference(s). The Construction Manager shall conduct, in conjunction with the Owner, Architect and inspection staff, preconstruction orientation conference(s) for the benefit of the successful Trade Contractors and shall serve to orient the Trade Contractors to the various reporting procedures and site rules prior to the commencement of actual construction. The Construction Manager shall obtain the certificates of insurance and bonds from the Trade Contractors as required and forward such documents to the Owner after review and confirmation of authenticity by the Construction Manager. 2.4.2 Coordination of Trade Contractors. Construction Manager shall be responsible for coordinating performance of the Trade Contractors so as to complete the Project in accordance with the Contract Documents and within the Contract Time. Construction Manager shall be responsible for coordinating all Trade Contracts with this Agreement so the duties, obligations and responsibilities of Owner, Construction Manager and each Trade Contractor are consistent. 2.4.3 Contract Administration. The Construction Manager shall be responsible for coordinating the work for the Project pursuant to the Master Construction Schedule. The Construction Manager shall maintain communication with the Owner throughout the construction phase and shall provide responsible, thorough written daily reports and documentation issued on a weekly basis. The Construction Manager shall be solely responsible for coordinating the site construction services provisions (general conditions items) including general construction supervision (dedicated field supervision) and administration of the Project, conducting weekly construction progress meetings, providing progress reports, processing Trade Contractors’ requests for information (RFI’s and submittals), reviewing and recommending with

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 13 of 42

the Architect the approval or disapproval of change orders and payments to the Trade Contractors, and resolving disputes with claims made by the Trade Contractors except when such resolution would result in an extra cost to the Owner. The Construction Manager, in cooperation with the Architect and at the direction of Owner, shall administer the construction contracts as set forth herein and as provided in the general conditions of the contracts for construction in accordance with the schedule and staffing proposed. The Construction Manager shall coordinate and prepare construction staging areas on-site for the Project and shall coordinate and prepare the site for construction, including, but not limited to fencing, barricades, access parking or other items reasonably necessary for efficient construction work. The Construction Manager shall also coordinate the mobilization of all Trade Contractors and shall coordinate sequencing of all elements of phases of construction for the Project. In addition, the Construction Manager shall provide all management (project management, field management, support personnel, etc.) and related services as required to coordinate work of the Trade Contractors with each other and the activities and responsibilities of the Architect and Owner in order to complete the Project. The Construction Manager shall provide sufficient qualified and experienced personnel. The Construction Manager shall maintain competent, full-time staff at the Project site for the purpose of coordinating and providing general construction supervision for the work and progress of the Trade Contractors. Construction Manager shall have a representative on site and available to coordinate Trade Contractors and to receive deliveries at all times Trades are scheduled to work and deliveries are scheduled to be made. 2.4.5 Submittal Procedures. The Construction Manager shall implement the submittal procedures as set forth in the Contract Documents. The Construction Manager shall coordinate and review shop drawing submittals, requests for information, samples, product data, change orders, payment requests, material delivery dates, and other procedures, and maintain logs, files, and other necessary documentation. Construction Manager shall coordinate the dissemination of any information regarding submittals and consult with the Architect, the Architect's consultants and the Owner if any Trade Contractor requests interpretations of the meaning and intent of the contract documents, and assist in the resolution of questions which may arise. 2.4.6 Meetings. Construction Manager shall coordinate and conduct weekly jobsite progress meetings and other meetings specified in the RFP with the Owner, Architect, and Trade Contractors. The CM shall provide written meeting minutes and issue to the Owner, Architect, and Trade Contractors within 2-working days of meeting. The CM shall also coordinate and conduct special meetings as necessary and working through the Architect,

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 14 of 42

assist in the resolution of any technical construction issues. Construction Manager will also attend Board, and other meetings if requested by the Owner, at no additional cost, including meetings involving any contract-related disputes that the CM is assisting the Owner to resolve. 2.4.7 Personnel Changes at Owner’s Request. Owner may request (in writing, by electronic mail or telephonically) the replacement of any of Construction Manager’s personnel working on the Project. Within one business day of such a request, Owner and Construction Manager shall meet, telephonically or in person, to discuss the request. If after such meeting Owner still desires replacement of such personnel, such personnel shall be replaced by Construction Manager. Construction Manager agrees that replacement of any personnel shall only be with other professional personnel who have equivalent experience and shall require the prior written approval of Owner. Any costs associated with replacement of personnel shall be borne exclusively by Construction Manager. Owner may condition its approval of substitute personnel upon a reasonable transition period wherein new personnel will learn the Project and get up to speed at Construction Manager’s cost. 2.4.8 Coordination of Technical Inspection and Testing. The Construction Manager shall coordinate all testing required by Owner. If requested, the Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in selecting any special consultants or testing laboratories. Owner shall hire and pay for such consultants. 2.4.9 Implementation of Master Construction Schedule. The Construction Manager shall implement the Master Construction Schedule and shall regularly update and maintain the Master Construction Schedule incorporating the activities of Trade Contractors on the Project, including activity sequences and durations, allocation of labor and materials, processing of shop drawings, product data and samples, and delivery of products requiring long lead time procurement. The Construction Manager shall update, reissue and distribute the Master Construction Schedule as required by Owner to show current conditions and revisions. 2.4.10 Safety Programs. To the extent required by OSHA or any other public agency, Construction Manager shall provide the safety incident prevention program for Owner’s acceptance. Construction Manager shall be the controlling employer on the Project, and all Trade Contractors shall comply with Construction Manager’s safety program. Construction Manager shall monitor each Trade Contractor's compliance with the safety program and implement any necessary safety meetings. 2.4.11 Construction Observation. Construction Manager will provide on-site personnel during construction in accordance with the Staffing Plan in Exhibit C. Construction Manager will inspect the progress and quality of the construction work completed by the Trade Contractors and determine, in

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 15 of 42

conjunction with the Architect and Owner, if the work is being completed in accordance with the contract documents. Construction Manager shall observe that the materials and equipment being incorporated into the work are handled, stored and installed properly and adequately and are in compliance with the contract documents for the Project. Construction Manager shall report to the Owner regarding the status of such activity. Construction Manager shall guard against defects and deficiencies and shall advise the Owner of any deviations, defects or deficiencies the Construction Manager observes in the work. Construction Manager’s observation duties shall include the identification of work that is not in compliance with the contract documents. Construction Manager shall guarantee that all work will be performed according to Contract Documents and approved change orders. Construction Manager will not directly control the Trade Contractors' construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, because these are solely the Trade Contractors' responsibility under the Trade Contracts and the Construction Documents. Notwithstanding the above, the Construction Manager acknowledges and agrees that Owner has retained Construction Manager for its expertise in managing the preconstruction and construction process and the Construction Manager will supervise, oversee, direct, manage, schedule, coordinate, and administrate the work as provided in this Agreement. 2.4.12 Non-Conforming Work. Construction Manager shall review Trade Contractor’s recommendations for corrective action on observed nonconforming work. Construction Manager shall make recommendations to the Owner in instances where the Construction Manager observes work that, in its opinion, is defective or not in conformance with the Contract Documents. Construction Manager shall ultimately verify and ensure that all authorized changes are properly incorporated in the Project. Construction Manager shall report to the Owner regarding the status of such activity and provide a written record of the same. 2.4.13 Exercise of Contract Prerogatives. Construction Manager shall exercise the Owner’s Contract prerogatives, such as giving the Trade Contractor notice to accelerate the progress when the schedule goals are in jeopardy due to Trade Contractor failings, advising the Owner to withhold payment for cause and other prerogatives when required in an effort to achieve Contract compliance. 2.4.14 Certificates of Insurance from Trade Contractors. Construction Manager shall receive and review Certificates of Insurance from each Trade Contractor and forward to the Owner with a copy to the A-E prior to commencement of any work by any Trade Contractor. Forwarding such documents to the Owner will indicate the Construction Manager’s opinion that the certificates of insurance comply with all contractual requirements for insurance coverage. The Owner and Construction Manager shall be listed as a primary additionally insureds on all insurance policies provided by Trade

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 16 of 42

Contractors. 2.4.15 Maintain On-Site Records. Construction Manager shall develop and implement a comprehensive document management program. The Construction Manager shall maintain at the Project site, on a current basis: a record copy of all contracts, drawings, specification, addenda, change orders, architectural issued revisions, and other modifications, in good order and marked to record all changes made during construction; shop drawings; product data; samples; submittals; purchases; materials; equipment; applicable handbooks; the California Building Code; maintenance and operating manuals and instructions; daily field reports, weekly meeting notes, other related correspondence, and revisions which arise out of the contracts. Construction Manager shall make all records available to the Owner. At the completion of the Project, the Construction Manager shall deliver all such records to the Owner. 2.4.16 Schedule of Values and Processing of Payments. Construction Manager, in coordination with the Architect, shall review and approve each Trade Contractor’s schedule of values for each of the activities included in that Trade Contractor’s schedule of activities. The CM shall develop and maintain a master schedule of values. The schedule of values is to include a line item for the value of monthly schedule updates from the Trade Contractors. The CM shall review with the Architect and make recommendations to the Owner pertaining to payments to the Trade Contractors. The CM shall develop and implement procedures requiring monthly schedule updates, record drawing updates and lien releases with pay applications by Trade Contractors for progress and final payments. The CM will present the Owner with monthly fully itemized invoices, which incorporate all pay applications of the Trade Contractors, and CM. The CM shall certify accuracy and recommend payment of each Trade Contractor when submitting to the Owner for payment. 2.4.17 Evaluate Change Orders and Time Extensions. Construction Manager shall evaluate Trade Contractors’ change order proposals including any schedule impacts or request for time extensions and make a formal recommendation to Owner regarding the acceptance of any proposal for a change order. Credits shall be paid to Owner except for credits used to offset reassigned work. Additive changes for Non-Eligible Change Orders shall be paid by the Construction Manager, without expense to Owner and will not be a reimbursable expense. The CM shall notify the Owner of all change order resolution 2.4.18 As-Built Documents. The Construction Manager shall review and perform coordination, supervisory and expediting functions in connection with each Trade Contractor’s obligation to provide and update “progressive as-built” documents on a monthly basis as a condition to process pay application, and make recommendations to Owner and Architect for adequate withholding of retention in the event that a Trade Contractor fails to provide acceptable “as-

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 17 of 42

built” documents upon completion of work. Each Trade Contractor must submit final “as-built” documents with thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of its work. 2.4.19 Initial Start-up and Testing. With the Architect, Engineers, and the Owner’s maintenance personnel, Construction Manager shall observe the Trade Contractors’ proper installation of utilities, operational systems and equipment for readiness, and observe their initial start-up for the Project. 2.4.20 Training Sessions. Construction Manager shall coordinate and schedule training sessions performed by Trade Contractors for the Owner’s personnel, and shall require that Trade Contractors' training obligations are fulfilled before final payment and release of retention to Trade Contractors. 2.4.21 Accounting Records. Construction Manager shall establish and administer an appropriate project system in conjunction with the Project Executive and shall maintain cost accounting records on authorized work performed under unit costs, additional work performed on the basis of actual costs of labor and materials, or other work requiring accounting records. 2.4.22 Utilities/Permits. Construction Manager shall identify the need for and assist the Architect, and Owner in obtaining all necessary permits and utility installation for the Project, including but not limited to, building/utility, grading, and occupancy permits. This task may encompass accompanying governmental officials during inspections, assisting in preparing and submitting proper documentation to the appropriate approving agencies, assisting in final testing and other necessary and reasonable activities. 2.4.23 Identification/Drug Testing. Construction Manager will assist in the issuance of identification badges as required by the Owner. Construction Manager will also maintain a drug-testing program in conjunction with the safety plan for the job site in accordance with local agreements and California law. 2.4.24 Time Extensions. Construction Manager shall only be entitled to time extensions of the periods of time indicated on Exhibit E (Master Construction Schedule) due to Unforeseen Site Conditions, Force Majeure Events, rain delays and Owner-initiated changes that impact the critical path of the Master Project Schedule. Time extensions will be documented by a Change Order to this Agreement issued by Owner. Time extensions based on rain delays shall only be authorized if rainfall exceeds 0.1” of an inch of rain on any calendar day. Should the schedule for the Project be extended, Construction Manager’s agreement may be extended by Amendment and CM may negotiate for additional compensation. If CM and Owner are unable to reach agreement within a reasonable time as to the amount of additional compensation to be paid, CM nevertheless shall continue performance of this Agreement and Owner shall pay CM on a reasonable and necessary Time and Materials

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 18 of 42

basis, as additional compensation. By accepting such payment, CM shall not be deemed to have waived any rights to seek further compensation under the provisions of this Agreement or applicable law. 2.4.25 Liquidated Damages. The parties understand and agree that time is of the essence. Owner and Construction Manager agree because of the nature of the Project, it would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix the amount of actual damages incurred by Owner because of a delay in a completion of all or any part of the Project. Accordingly, Owner and Construction Manager agree that in the event the construction time requirements set forth in Exhibit E are exceeded without an approved amendment to this Agreement, Construction Manager’s fee shall be reduced as follows:  A delay of 15 days or less shall incur a liquidated damages charge of $10,000 per day;  On days 16 to 30 of a delay, the liquidated damages charge shall increase to $20,000 per day;  On days 31 or more of a delay, the liquidated damages charge shall increase to $35,000 per day; Any such liquidated damages shall not exceed the Construction Manager’s total fees under this Agreement, including the general conditions and contingency fees. 2.5 GUARANTEES AND WARRANTY 2.5.1 The Construction Manager will collect all Trade Contractors' and manufacturers' warranties required under the Trade Contracts and by the Construction Documents on behalf of the Owner. Although the Construction Manager will endeavor to guard Owner against construction deficiencies, Construction Manager does not warrant the Work because the Trade Contractors are responsible for all construction warranties. 2.5.2 Unless noted otherwise, Trade Contractor warranties will begin upon Substantial Completion of the Project. All warranties shall remain effective until at least one year after Substantial Completion except where a longer period is specified in the Contract Documents. 2.5.3 During the one year period following the date of Substantial Completion, the CM shall manage the Trade Contractors to remedy at the expense of Trade Contractors any failure of the Project to conform to the requirements of the Contract Document. In addition, the CM shall manage Trade Contractors to remedy at the expense of Trade Contractors any damage to Owner-owned or controlled real or personal property, when that damage is the result of either (a) any Trade Contractor’s failure to conform to the Contract Documents or (b) any defect of equipment, material or workmanship. Owner shall take reasonable steps to mitigate its damages.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 19 of 42

2.5.4 Trade Contractor warranties with respect to the portion of the Project repaired or replaced will run for one year from the completion of the repair or replacement. 2.5.5 Owner shall notify the CM in writing within a reasonable time after the discovery of any failure, defect or damage. The CM further agrees that within ten (10) calendar days after being notified in writing by Owner of any portion of Project not in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents or any defects in the Project, the CM will take all necessary action to arrange for appropriate and properly licensed Trade Contractors to commence and prosecute with due diligence all work necessary to fulfill the terms of this warranty and to complete the work within a reasonable period of time. As with all original Project work, Construction Manager shall not self-perform work. 2.5.6 If CM fails to have Trade Contractor(s) remedy any failure of or defect in the Project, or damage resulting therefrom and such failure, defect or damage is covered by Trade Contractor(s) warranty, within a reasonable time after receipt of notice, Owner shall have the right to take reasonable actions to replace, repair, or otherwise remedy the failure, defect, or damage at CM’s expense. 2.5.7 With respect to all warranties, express or implied, from Trade Contractors, manufacturers, or suppliers for work performed and materials furnished under this Agreement, CM shall (a) Obtain all warranties that would be given in normal commercial practice; (b) Require all warranties to be executed, in writing, for the benefit of Owner, unless directed otherwise by Owner; and (c) During CM’s warranty period, enforce all warranties for the benefit of Owner, unless otherwise directed by Owner. 2.5.8 All guarantees must be submitted in triplicate to Owner on the Trade Contractor’s own letterhead. The CM shall assemble and bind three sets of all guarantees, certificates, warranties, operating instructions and maintenance manuals into clearly organized files with an index, a list of Trade Contractors and suppliers including their names, addresses, and phone numbers and present to Owner at the completion of the Project. 2.5.9 One year after substantial completion of the Project, Construction Manager shall assign all warranties longer than one year to the Owner 2.5.10 Unless a defect is caused by the negligence of CM, CM shall not be liable for the repair of any defects of material or design furnished by Owner, nor for the repair of any damage that results from a defect in Owner furnished material or design. 2.5.11 The Trade Contractor warranties shall not limit the Owner’s rights against the Construction Manager with respect to latent defects or fraud. 2.5.12 Punch List/Warranty. Construction Manager will be the single point of contact for all punch list and Trade Contractor warranty items and be

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 20 of 42

responsible for all Trade Contractor warranty items for a period of one year from substantial completion or the life of the warranty period, whichever is longer. Construction Manager shall prepare for the Architect and Owner a list of incomplete or unsatisfactory items (“punch-list”). Construction Manager shall coordinate the correction and completion of the work. Construction Manager shall assist the Architect in determining when the Project or a designated portion thereof is complete. Construction Manager shall prepare a summary of the status of the work of each Trade Contractor, list changes in the previously issued punch-list and recommend the time frame which Trade Contractors shall complete the uncompleted items on the punch-list. ARTICLE 3.COMPENSATION 3.1 3.1.1 The Not to Exceed Cost. The Project Construction Costs shall not exceed the total of: 1) the sums of all separate contracts of Trade Contractors for the Project as estimated by the Construction Manager in the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.2.5; 2) General Conditions agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.1.2; 3) Reimbursable Expenses agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.1.3; 4) Construction Contingency agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.1.4; and 5) Construction Manager’s Fee agreed upon pursuant to Paragraph 3.1.5. 3.1.2 General Conditions. The CM’s General Conditions are defined in RFP attachment A1, B1, C1 and Exhibit B & D and are expensed on a time and material basis, based on labor rates agreed to in Exhibit C, with total costs not to exceed $3,842,478.00. Owner must give written preauthorization to Construction Manager to proceed with spending from each category of costs in Exhibit C1. With such approval, Owner may limit the amount that Construction Manager may spend in each category. Such limits may be increased by Owner in writing after the initial authorization has been given. 3.1.3 Reimbursable Expenses. The allowable reimbursable expenses are listed in RFP attachment B1 and Exhibit D. 3.1.4 Construction Contingency. The Construction Contingency is defined in article 2.2.2 and Budgeted in Exhibit B and remains with the Owner. All expenditures from the contingency fund must be approved by Owner in writing in advance with documentation provided by CM and all remaining funds, if any, remain with the Owner. 3.1.5 Construction Manager’s Fee. The CM’s fee is determined as set forth in Exhibit B. The Construction Manager’s Fee includes the cost if the Construction Manager’s Payment and Performance Bonds, and the cost of Contractor Controlled Insurance Program (CCIP). The Construction Manager’s Fee is not based on a profit for the Trade Contract work to be performed by the Trade Contractors.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 21 of 42

3.2.1 Not to Exceed Cost Proposal. Within ten (10) calendar days after 80% of the design phase is completed pursuant to this Agreement, the Construction Manager shall deliver a “Not to Exceed Cost Proposal” for the Project in accordance with the Project Construction Costs set forth in Paragraph 3.1.1. The Construction Manager shall include as part of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal a written statement of its basis, which shall include: (a) A list of the drawings and specifications for the Project including all addenda thereto and the conditions of the Trade Contracts which were used in preparation of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal (“Drawings and Specifications”). (b) A detailed list of allowances and a statement of their basis. (c) A detailed list of the clarifications and assumptions made by the Construction Manager in the preparation of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal to supplement the information contained in the Drawings and Specifications. (d) The proposed Not to Exceed Cost, including a statement of the estimated costs organized by trade categories, allowances, contingencies, and other items, and the fee, that comprise the Not to Exceed Cost as set forth in Exhibit B of this Agreement. (e) The date of final completion upon which the proposed Not to Exceed Cost is based, which includes the Construction Management Plan and an updated Master Project Schedule, upon which the date of final completion is based. (f) An updated Project Budget based upon the Not to Exceed Cost. (g) The Not to Exceed Cost shall include a Construction Contingency as set forth in Exhibit B. (h) The Construction Manager’s Fee and General Conditions Cost 3.2.2 Review of Proposal. Within ten (10) calendar days of Construction Manager’s submittal of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal, the Construction Manager shall meet with Owner and Project Executive to review the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal. At such meeting, Owner shall discuss with Construction Manager any inconsistencies or inaccuracies with respect to the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal and both parties shall endeavor to reconcile such inconsistencies or inaccuracies to the satisfaction of both parties. 3.2.3 Compensation Prior to Acceptance of Proposal. Except as provided for in Section 3.4.1 of this Agreement, Construction Manager shall not be entitled to any compensation or reimbursement until the Owner accepts the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal. 3.2.4 Non-acceptance of Proposal. Unless the Owner accepts the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal in writing within fifteen (15) calendar days of the Owner’s

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 22 of 42

receipt of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal, the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal shall not be effective and this Agreement shall automatically terminate and Construction Manager shall not be entitled to any compensation except as provided for in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. 3.2.5 Acceptance of Proposal. Upon acceptance by the Owner of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal, Owner and Construction Manager agree to the following: (a) The Not to Exceed Cost and its basis shall be set forth as Amendment No. 1 to this Agreement. (b) The Owner shall authorize and cause the Architect to revise the Drawings and Specifications to the extent necessary to reflect the agreed-upon assumptions and clarifications contained in Amendment No. 1. Such revised Drawings and Specifications shall be furnished to Construction Manager in accordance with schedules agreed to by the Owner, Architect and Construction Manager. Construction Manager shall promptly notify the Architect and Owner if such revised Drawings and Specifications are inconsistent with the agreed-upon assumptions and clarifications. (c) Construction Manager’s failure to so notify Architect and Owner shall constitute a waiver of future challenge to inconsistencies between the revised Drawings and Specifications and the agreed upon assumptions and clarifications (d) The Project Construction Costs shall not exceed the Not to Exceed Cost as adjusted by change orders in accordance with Section 3.3 of this Agreement. In the event that the Project Construction Costs exceed the Not to Exceed Cost, as adjusted by change orders in accordance with Section 3.3 of this Agreement, Construction Manager shall immediately pay such costs to whomever such costs are due without reimbursement by Owner. In the event that the Project Construction Costs exceed the Not to Exceed Cost as adjusted by change orders in accordance with Section 3.3 of this Agreement and Owner has paid any costs in excess of the Not to Exceed Cost, as adjusted by change orders in accordance with Section 3.3 of this Agreement, Construction Manager shall reimburse Owner, within thirty (30) calendar days of invoice by Owner, for any amounts paid by Owner in excess of the Not to Exceed Cost. If Owner is not so reimbursed, Owner may deduct such amounts from any payment due from Owner to Construction Manager. (e) If the Project Construction Costs exceed the Not to Exceed Cost, the Construction Manager shall be responsible for the excess cost without reimbursement by the County. If the Project Construction Costs are less than the previously established Not to Exceed Cost, then County shall be credited for/retain the cost savings.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 23 of 42

3.3 Change Orders. 3.3.1 Construction Manager shall not be responsible for any costs relating to any of the following types of change orders and such costs shall not be factored into the Not to Exceed Cost as long as such change orders are not the result of Construction Manager’s negligence, error or omission with respect to Construction Manager’s duties related to the Project: (a) Change orders initiated by the Owner; (b) Change orders relating to Unforeseen Site Conditions as long as Construction Manager gives the Owner five calendar days written notice from the discovery of the unknown physical condition and prior to any additional work relating to the previously unknown physical condition. (c) Force Majeure Event. 3.4 INVOICING 3.4.1 Pre-Construction Invoicing. Construction Manager shall invoice monthly for the services set forth and performed in the Bid and Award Phase from the time the Construction Manager begins work on the Project to the commencement of the construction phase at which time contracts are awarded by the Owner. 3.4.2 Construction Invoices. Construction Manager shall invoice monthly for the services set forth and performed in the Construction Phase in accordance with Exhibits C and D. The Reimbursable Expenses (including both General Conditions and General Requirements) shall be substantiated with timecards, payroll records, invoices, receipts and other such records as deemed necessary. The CM Fee shall be included on same monthly invoice in proportion to the percentage of the work certified as completed less the retention amount. 3.4.3 Project Retention. Construction Manager shall invoice 5% of the total fixed basic services fee 35 calendar days after the Owner files the last Notice of Completion for the Project. Such release of retention does not absolve the Construction Manager of any of its responsibilities under this Agreement including those lasting throughout the warranty periods of the work. 3.4.4 Invoicing of Payments. Upon completion of the Project the Owner shall make payment of any withheld amounts owing to the Construction Manager as long as such amounts are within the Not to Exceed Cost. 3.4.5 Owner shall make payments to Construction Manager within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the appropriate and approved invoice from Construction Manager. 3.4.6 Payment - Construction Manager's Construction Contingency. Construction

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 24 of 42

Manager shall invoice Owner for any costs which Construction Manager recommends and Owner approves to be funded from the Construction Contingency and shall so specify, including the reasons for accessing the Construction Contingency. Owner shall approve and pay within 45 calendar days all such invoices which Owner reasonably decides are appropriate and not the result of Construction Manager’s negligence or willful misconduct. Any unexpended funds in the Construction Contingency shall remain the Owner’s. 3.4.7 Additional Compensation. Construction Manager shall not be entitled to additional compensation beyond the CM fee, used portions of contract allowances and allowable mark-up on reimbursable items unless there are unusual and unanticipated circumstances, and only when approved in writing by Owner in advance of such services being provided. If Construction Manager shall claim compensation for any damage sustained by reason of the acts of the Owner or its agents, Construction Manager shall, within five (5) work calendar days after sustaining of such damage, make to the Owner a written statement of the damage sustained. On or before the 15th day of the month succeeding that in which such damage shall have been sustained, Construction Manager shall file with the Owner an itemized statement of the details and amount of such damage in accordance with this Article, and unless both such statements are submitted, Construction Manager agrees that any claims by Construction Manager shall be forfeited and invalidated and Construction Manager shall not be entitled to consideration for payment on account of any such damage. In the event extra compensation is approved, extra compensation shall be computed at cost plus 3.295 percent (3.295%) of billings and for other cost incurred by Construction Manager and at the rates identified in Exhibit B. 3.4.8 The Owner may withhold reasonable amounts from any payment to be made under this Agreement, to such extent as may be necessary to protect the Owner from loss on account of: A. Material failure of Construction Manager to perform in accordance with this Agreement. B. Defective Construction Work or Construction Manager’s work under this Agreement not remedied by Construction Manager. C. Owner’s cost of correcting deficiencies in the Project or undertaking Construction Work provided Construction Manager has failed to make arrangements for such corrections by appropriate Trade Contractor’s after written notice. D. Damage to Owner property which is not covered by builder’s risk insurance. E. Failure of Construction Manager to make payments properly to Consultants, Trade Contractors, or for material, labor, or equipment in accordance with the terms of the relevant documents.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 25 of 42

F. Third party claims filed or reasonable evidence indicating probable filing of claims until tender of the claim is accepted by Construction Manager. G. Liquidated damages or anticipated liquidated and actual damages if Construction Manager has not submitted an acceptable schedule recovery plan. H. Payments made by owner towards Project Construct Costs that exceed the Not to Exceed Cost. I. Any amount owed by Construction Manager to Owner. ARTICLE 4. BID/PAYMENT/PERFORMANCE BONDS 4.1 Each Trade Contractor shall provide a bid bond, of 10%, on all open bids and a separate Performance and Labor/Material Payment Bonds, each in the amount of 100% of their Trade Contract, naming Construction Manager and the Owner as Obligees under the terms of the bond, and that the bonds shall be issued by "California admitted surety insurers with an AM best financial size rating of at least VII and a financial strength rating of at least A-. ARTICLE 5. INSURANCE 5.1 Builder’s Risk Insurance. 5.1.1 Construction Manager shall procure Builder’s Risk insurance per the proposed General Conditions and Fees specified in RFP attachment B in a manner that it deems appropriate and consistent with the California State Code. The Owner acknowledges that reimbursement of costs to CM, as provided in this Agreement, shall include reimbursement of the cost of such Builder’s Risk insurance coverage but not any deductibles that may become payable in connection with the Builder’s Risk coverage,. Should such Builder’s Risk insurance not include terrorism coverage, Owner acknowledges that it is accepting the risk of terrorist related matters, and Owner waives all rights as against Contractor and the other parties to be insured under the builder’s risk policy for terrorist related matters and agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend Contractor from all costs, expenses (including legal fees and disbursements), claims, suits, liabilities and judgments arising out of a terrorist act to the fullest extent permitted by law. Owner also acknowledges that any increases to the Contract Sum, by Change Order or otherwise, shall include an agreed amount of such adjustment to cover additional Builder’s Risk insurance costs, which may be invoiced by and shall be paid to Contractor in the payment cycle immediately following the adjustment. Owner further acknowledges extensions of time, as permitted by this Agreement, may result in additional Builder’s Risk insurance costs for which Contractor shall be reimbursed and entitled to a Change Order and that such additional costs shall be invoiced and payable, without retention or retainage of any kind, at the time the first application for payment after such cost is incurred.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 26 of 42

The named insured should be in the names of the Owner, CM, Contractor and subcontractor of any tier. A waiver of subrogation shall apply.

Waivers of Subrogation. The Owner and Construction Manager waive all rights against (1) each other and any of their subcontractors, sub- subcontractors, agents and employees, each of the other, and (2) the Architect, Architect’s consultants, separate contractors, if any, and any of their subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents and employees, for damages caused by fire or other causes of loss to the extent covered by property insurance obtained pursuant to this Section or other property insurance applicable to the Work, except such rights as they have to proceeds of such insurance held by the Owner as fiduciary. The Owner or Construction Manager, as appropriate, shall require of the Architect, Architect’s consultants, separate contractors, if any, and the subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, agents and employees of any of them, by appropriate agreements, written where legally required for validity, similar waivers each in favor of other parties enumerated herein. The policies shall provide such waivers of subrogation by endorsement or otherwise. A waiver of subrogation shall be effective as to a person or entity even though that person or entity would otherwise have a duty of indemnification, contractual or otherwise, did not pay the insurance premium directly or indirectly, and whether or not the person or entity had an insurable interest in the property damaged. 5.2 Contractor Controlled Insurance Program. 5.2.1 The Construction Manager shall purchase a Contractor Controlled Insurance Program [CCIP] and maintain insurance noted in (a) and (b) below with an insurer or insurers, qualified to do business in the State of California and acceptable to Owner which will protect Construction Manager, Trade Contractors working on-site and Owner from claims which may arise out of or result from Construction Manager’s actions or inactions relating to the Project and Construction Manager Agreement, whether such actions or inactions be by themselves or by a Trade Contractor or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or by anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. The aforementioned insurance shall include coverage for: (a) Comprehensive general liability and umbrella/excess liability insurance with limits of not less than One Hundred Million Dollars [$100,000,000] combined single limit, bodily injury and property damage liability per occurrence, including: 1. Blanket contractual 2. All Risk form property damage 3. Products/completed operations with coverage extended 10

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 27 of 42

years after project completion 4. Personal injury (b) Workers' compensation in accordance with statutory limits in accordance with the laws of the State of California and employers liability insurance in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000). (c) Each policy of insurance required above shall name Owner and its officers, Board, agents and employees as Additional Insureds, and shall state that, with respect to the operations of Construction Manager hereunder, such policy is primary and any insurance carried by Owner is excess and non-contributory with such primary insurance; shall state that no less than thirty (30) calendar days written notice shall be given to Owner prior to cancellation; and, shall waive all rights of subrogation. Construction Manager shall notify Owner in the event of material change in, or failure to renew, each policy. Prior to commencing work, Construction Manager shall deliver to Owner certificates of insurance and endorsements as evidence of compliance with the requirements herein. In the event Construction Manager fails to secure or maintain any policy of insurance required hereby, Owner may, at its sole discretion consider such failure a material breach of this Agreement and terminate the same or secure such policy of insurance in the name of and for the account of Construction Manager, and in such event Construction Manager shall reimburse Owner upon demand for the costs thereof. 5.3 Non-Contractor Controlled Insurance Coverages 5.3.1 Comprehensive auto liability insurance with limits of not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) combined single limit, bodily injury and property damage liability per occurrence. 5.3.2 General Liability and Umbrella/Excess Insurance for off-site operations only with limits not less than Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) bodily injury and property damage liability per occurrence including: 1. Blanket Contractual 2. All risk Form Property Damage 3. Products/Completed Operations 4. Personal Injury 5.3.3 Workers’ Compensation for off-site operations only in accordance with statutory limits in accordance with the laws of the State of California and Employers Liability insurance in an amount not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000). 5.4 Proof of Insurance. Upon execution of this Agreement, Construction Manager

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 28 of 42

shall furnish to Owner Certificates of Insurance showing satisfactory proof that it maintains the insurance required by this Agreement. Construction Manager shall maintain all required insurance throughout the term of this Agreement. In the event Construction Manager fails to maintain any required insurance, Owner may (but is not obligated to) purchase such insurance and deduct or retain premium amounts from any sums due Construction Manager under this Agreement (or Construction Manager shall promptly reimburse Owner for such expense). ARTICLE 6. GENERAL CONDITIONS 6.1 General Conditions of the Project are defined as those generic support activities which must be in place to support all construction aspects of the Project. These include, but are not limited to, such items as mobilization, the Construction Manager’s employee expenses, consultant costs, insurance costs, temporary utilities, temporary structures, fences, material, handling equipment, trucks, safety, fuel, tools, site office, equipment, supplies, phone, phone services, fax, fax services, copy machine, site vehicles, travel, mobile communication on site (two way radio), cellular phone(s), cellular phone(s) service, all site office supplies and equipment, and miscellaneous labor as defined in Exhibits B, C & D. 6.2 Construction Manager shall submit a specific list of all General Conditions to Owner as part of the Not to Exceed Cost Proposal. ARTICLE 7. THE OWNER’S RESPONSIBILITIES 7.1 The Owner shall provide full information regarding the requirements of the Project including the Owner’s objectives, constraints and criteria. 7.2 The Owner shall designate a representative (“Project Executive”) to act on the Owner’s behalf with respect to the Project. The Project Executive shall render decisions promptly to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of Construction Manager’s services. 7.3 The Owner shall furnish tests, inspections, and reports as required by law or the contract documents. 7.4 If the Owner observes or otherwise becomes aware of any fault or defect in the Project or nonconformance with the contract documents, prompt notice thereof shall be given by the Owner to Construction Manager. 7.5 The Owner reserves the right to perform work related to the Project with Owner’s own forces and/or to award separate contracts in connection with the Project. 7.6 The Owner shall retain an Architect whose services, duties and responsibilities are described in the Agreement between the Owner and Architect. 7.7 The Owner shall make payments in a timely manner as outlined in this Agreement. 7.8 [BLANK] 7.9 Except as provided in Article 2 and Exhibit B to this Agreement, Owner’s

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 29 of 42

obligations under this Agreement shall be limited to the payment of the compensation provided for in Article 3 of this Agreement. 7.10 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall Owner be liable, regardless of whether any claim is based on contract, tort or otherwise, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, lost profits or revenue, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the Work, or the Project. In the event Owner makes a claim for such any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, lost profits or revenue arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the Work, or the Project, against Construction Manager, Owner’s recovery shall be limited to $1,000,000. 7.11 Owner shall not be responsible for any damage to persons or property as a result of the use, misuse or failure of any equipment used by Construction Manager, or by any of its employees, even though such equipment be furnished, rented or loaned to Construction Manager by Owner. The acceptance or use of such equipment by Construction Manager or any of its employees shall be construed to mean that Construction Manager accepts full responsibility for and shall exonerate, indemnify, defend and save harmless Owner from and against any and all claims for any damage or injury of any type, including attorneys’ fees, arising from the use, misuse or failure of such equipment, whether such damage be to the Construction Manager, its employees, Owner employees or third parties, or to property belonging to any of the above. 7.12 Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver or limitation of any right or remedy, whether in equity or at law, which Owner or Construction Manager may have under this Agreement or any applicable law. All rights and remedies of Owner or Construction Manager, whether under this Agreement or other applicable law, shall be cumulative. ARTICLE 8. SUSPENSION, TERMINATION, OR ABANDONMENT OF WORK 8.1 Suspension of Construction Manager Services. Owner may, without cause, order Construction Manager to suspend, delay or interrupt Work pursuant to this Agreement, in whole or in part, for such periods of time as Owner may determine in its sole discretion. Owner shall deliver to Construction Manager written notice of the extent of the suspension at least seven (7) calendar days before the commencement thereof. 8.2 Termination for Convenience Owner may terminate this Agreement in whole, or from time to time in part, whenever Owner shall determine that termination is in the Owner’s best interests. Termination shall be effected by Owner delivering to Construction Manager, at least seven (7) calendar days prior to the effective date of the termination, a Notice of Termination (“Notice of Termination”) specifying the effective date and extent to which performance of the Work under the Agreement is terminated. 8.3 Termination by Construction Manager for Cause

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 30 of 42

The Construction Manager may terminate this Agreement upon 15 days' written notice and an additional 15 days opportunity to cure, if Owner fails to make payment of undisputed funds to the Construction Manager in accordance with this Agreement, and cannot provide evidence substantiating that financial arrangements have been made to make payment, or if the Project is suspended and all labor is ceased for more than 90 days. 8.4 Continuance of Work. In the event of a dispute between the parties as to performance of the work or the interpretation of this Agreement, or payment or nonpayment for work performed or not performed, the parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute. Pending resolution of this dispute, Construction Manager agrees to continue the work diligently to completion. If the dispute is not resolved, Construction Manager agrees it shall neither rescind the agreement nor stop the progress of the work. Construction Manager’s sole remedy shall be first to go through mediation with the Owner with a mutually acceptable mediator. Should mediation fail, jurisdiction shall lie in Superior Court in the County of San Mateo. 8.3 Abandonment of a Project. The Owner has the absolute discretion to suspend or abandon all or any portion of the work on the Project and will endeavor to provide a fourteen (14) day written notice to Construction Manager. Upon notice of suspension or abandonment, Construction Manager shall immediately discontinue any further action on the Project. If the entire work to be performed on the Project is abandoned, the parties shall each be relieved of the remaining executory obligations of the Construction Manager agreement, as it relates to the Project, but shall not be relieved of any obligations arising prior to said abandonment. 8.4 Compensation in the Event of Termination, Abandonment or Suspension. In the event the Owner terminates, abandons or suspends the work on the Project, there shall be due and payable within thirty (30) calendar days following such termination, abandonment or suspension a sum of money sufficient to increase the total amount paid to Construction Manager to an amount which bears the same proportion to the total fee as the amount of Work performed by Construction Manager prior to the time of such termination, suspension or abandonment to the entire services Construction Manager is required to perform or provide for the Project. In the event of termination due to a breach of this agreement by Construction Manager, Construction Manager shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the Project is finished. If the unpaid balance of the Contract Amount shall exceed the expense of finishing the Project, including compensation for additional managerial and administrative services, the amount of such excess shall be paid to Construction Manager for work performed. If the expense of finishing the Project shall exceed the unpaid balance, Construction Manager shall pay the difference to the Owner. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Article 8, no compensation shall be made to the extent that performance is, was or would have been so suspended, delayed or interrupted by a cause for which Construction

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 31 of 42

Manager is responsible. 8.5 Delivery of Documents. Upon termination, abandonment or suspension, Construction Manager shall deliver to Owner all documents and matters related to the Project. ARTICLE 9. INDEMNIFICATION 9.1 Indemnification and Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation, California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), Construction Manager shall defend (including providing legal counsel reasonably acceptable to Owner at no cost to Owner), indemnify and hold harmless Owner and its Supervisors, officers, agents, departments, officials, representatives and employees (collectively “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, suit, action, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, economic harm, injury to or death of an employee of Construction Manager), expense and liability of every kind, nature and description, at law or equity, including those of Trade Contractors, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to (including, without limitation, incidental and consequential damages, court costs, attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith and costs of investigation) a breach of this Agreement, or any actual or alleged negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Construction Manager or its employees, or anyone for whom it is responsible, regardless of whether the acts or omissions are negligent, (collectively “Liabilities”). Such obligations to defend, hold harmless and indemnify any Indemnitee shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in whole or in part by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of such Indemnitee, but shall apply to all other Liabilities. The terms of this paragraph shall survive any termination of this Agreement. 9.2 Construction Manager shall defend (including providing legal counsel reasonably acceptable to Owner at no cost to Owner), indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnitees from all loss, cost, damage, expense, suit, liability or claims, in law or in equity, including attorneys’ fees, court costs, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultants or expert witnesses, that may at any time arise for any infringement of the patent rights, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, service mark or any other proprietary right of any person or persons in consequence of the use by Owner, or any of the other Indemnitees, of articles or Work to be supplied in the performance of this Agreement. ARTICLE 10. ASSIGNMENT OF TRADE CONTRACTS 10.1 Assignment. It is the intent of Owner to award multiple trade contracts, each to a separate Trade Contractor. The Owner may delegate responsibility for administration of such contracts to Construction Manager. The agreements awarded the Trade Contractors may, upon award and at the Owner’s sole discretion, be assigned to Construction Manager. Regardless of any such assignment, Construction Manager shall manage the work of and payments to the Trade Contractors. Construction Manager explicitly agrees to accept the

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 32 of 42

assignment of any Trade Contract which Owner elects to assign. With respect to any Trade Contract assigned by Owner to Construction Manager, Construction Manager shall be solely responsible for making payments due under the Trade Contract in accordance with applicable law, taking into account factors such as prevailing wage requirements, statutory lien releases, fingerprinting requirements, and other relevant criteria, as provided in the Contract documents, or established in the Trade Contracts. Each assignment to Construction Manager of a Trade Contract shall be effective upon execution of Owner’s Assignment and Novation Agreement by Construction Manager, Owner, the applicable Trade Contractor, and such Trade Contractor’s surety (“Assignment and Novation Agreement”). The language of the Assignment and Novation Agreement shall be attached hereto as Exhibit A. This Agreement shall prevail over the Assignment and Novation Agreement to the extent that there are any inconsistencies. 10.2 Construction Manager’s obligation to manage the work of each Trade Contract shall not be affected in any way by Owner’s decision to assign or not assign a Trade Contract. 10.3 Retained Rights. (1) Notwithstanding the above, upon the non-performance of Construction Manager of its obligations and notice by Owner of such non-performance and failure to cure within the time periods set forth in this Agreement, Owner shall retain all rights under the Trade Contracts, including without limitation, the right to demand performance under such Trade Contracts, and any rights related to patent and latent defects as well as any rights related to performance bonds, payment bonds or insurance which are required pursuant to such Trade Contracts. Owner shall retain the benefits that derive from the Trade Contracts (i.e., the Project). (2) After assignment of any Trade Contract, Owner shall retain the right to revoke and cancel the assignment in case of any legal ruling which determines assignment of Trade Contracts or use of the Construction Management Services Project delivery method to be illegal or unenforceable. In such case, Owner shall resume all rights, duties and obligations under any previously assigned Trade Contract, and Construction Manager shall continue to perform all duties and obligations of a Construction Manager, for the benefit and protection of Owner, to complete the Project as scheduled and otherwise required. In such case, Owner and Construction Manager shall reform their contractual relationship to achieve the purpose and intent of this Agreement and complete the Project in accordance with California law. 10.5 Assignability. It is further agreed that each of the Trade Contracts shall include provisions which provide that Owner’s rights and duties under such Trade Contracts are freely assignable to Construction Manager, and that Owner retains all rights specified in subparagraph 3 of this Article. 10.6 Statutory Requirements. Construction Manager acknowledges that the Trade

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 33 of 42

Contracts are subject to statutory payment provisions with respect to public works; therefore, Construction Manager agrees to abide by such statutory payment provisions as well as any payment procedures which are set forth in the Trade Contracts. Construction Manager shall not be obligated to pay a Trade Contractor for work performed under a Trade Contract which has not been assigned to Construction Manager, unless Construction Manager has received payment for the associated work performed by Trade Contractor from Owner. 10.7 Indemnification. After Construction Manager accepts the Assignments provided for herein, Construction Manager agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Owner, its officers, Board of Supervisors, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, liabilities, causes of action, damages, and expenses of any kind, arising out of or related to any payments to Trade Contractors under any of the Trade Contracts, including without limitation any stop notice action as long as Owner makes all of the payments required by Owner pursuant to subparagraph .2 of this Article, excepting any funds which relate to disputed work which may be withheld according to law, or which have been encumbered by stop notices or court order. Construction Manager’s agreement to indemnify herein includes all costs in defending Owner including without limitation, attorney’s fees, expert fees, or other expenses associated with such defense by Owner. ARTICLE 11. SEVERABILITY 11.1 If any part of this Agreement is determined to be illegal or unenforceable, all other parts shall remain in effect. ARTICLE 12. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 12.1 Continuance of Work. In the event of a dispute between the parties as to performance of the work or the interpretation of this Agreement, or payment or nonpayment for work performed or not performed, the parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute by direct negotiation as set forth below. Pending resolution of the dispute, Construction Manager agrees that it will not rescind this Agreement or delay or stop the progress of the work; Construction Manager shall continue the work diligently to completion. If the dispute is not resolved pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Article, Construction Manager or Owner shall submit such controversy for determination by the Superior Court of San Mateo County after completion of the Project and not before. Pending resolution of payment disputes, Construction Manager shall continue the work and Owner shall pay undisputed amounts. 12.2 Claims (demands for monetary compensation, damages or time extensions) arising from or relating to this Agreement shall be decided by the parties in accordance with this section. Initially, and promptly after identification of a claim, Construction Manager’s project manager and Owner’s Representative shall meet face-to-face to review and consider the claim. This meeting shall occur at the earliest practicable date and shall be for the express purposes of: (1) exchanging and reviewing all pertinent documents and information relating to the matters and issues in dispute; (2) freely and candidly discussing each party’s

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 34 of 42

position; and (3) reaching agreement upon a reasonable, compromise resolution of the claim. 12.3 If the Project representatives are unable to resolve the claim within ten (10) calendar days, or a mutually agreed upon extension, a senior representative from Construction Manager and a senior representative from Owner shall review the claim in detail and then meet face-to-face to discuss and resolve the matter. This meeting of senior management representatives shall occur no later than fifteen (15) calendar days after the meeting of the Project representatives, unless the parties both agree upon a longer period of time. Each party shall promptly designate a senior representative for purposes of this section. Any party may, if necessary, designate a different senior representative at any time during the course of the Project. 12.4 If any claim remains unresolved after the meeting of the senior management representatives, Construction Manager and Owner agree in the event of claims exceeding [$50,000], as a precondition to commencing litigation, the parties shall first participate in non-binding mediation pursuant to the construction mediation procedures of JAMS, in San Francisco, California, before a mediator mutually agreeable to the parties (and such mediator need not be employed by or affiliated with JAMS), and in the event the parties are unable to agree, selected by a judge of the San Mateo County Superior Court. Unless the parties both agree upon a longer period of time, the mediation shall be held no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the meeting of the senior management representatives. No later than ten (10) calendar days prior to mediation, the parties shall exchange in a cooperative and forthright manner all documents, data and information relating to the claim, excepting only those items protected by the attorney/client or other applicable privilege. The parties may initially agree to engage in discovery prior to mediation. Should parties proceed with discovery, they shall follow the procedures prescribed in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 2019, et. seq., and discovery so conducted shall apply in any subsequent litigation as if conducted in that litigation. The parties shall share equally the mediator’s fee for the mediation. 12.5 Should mediation fail, jurisdiction shall lie in Superior Court in the County of San Mateo. ARTICLE 13. NOTICES 13.1 Any notice may be served upon Owner or Construction Manager by delivering it in writing, by overnight delivery service or by depositing it in a United States mail deposit box with the postage thereon fully prepaid and addressed to the party to be noticed at the address set forth below or by facsimile transmission as evidenced by a facsimile confirmation or acknowledged by telephone by the addressee and followed by depositing it in a United States mail deposit box with the postage thereon fully prepaid and addressed to the party to be noticed at the address set forth in Article 15. Either party may change the address for notice by delivering notice of such change as provided above.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 35 of 42

ARTICLE 14 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST/OTHER AGREEMENTS 14.1 Construction Manager represents that it is familiar with Section 1090 and Section 87100, et seq., of the Government Code of the State of California, and that it does not know of any facts that constitute a violation of those sections. 14.2 Construction Manager represents that it has completely disclosed to Owner all facts bearing upon any possible interests, direct or indirect, which Construction Manager believes any member of Owner, or other officer, agent or employee of Owner or any department presently has, or will have, in this Agreement, or in the performance thereof, or in any portion of the profits thereunder. Willful failure to make such disclosure, if any, shall constitute ground for termination of this Agreement by Owner. Construction Manager shall comply with the Owner’s conflict of interest codes and their reporting requirements. 14.3 Construction Manager covenants that it presently has no interest, and during the term of this Agreement shall not have any interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner with the performance of Work required under this Agreement. Without limitation, Construction Manager represents to and agrees with the Owner that Construction Manager has no present, and in the future during the term of this Agreement will not have any, conflict of interest between providing the Owner the Work hereunder and any interest Construction Manager may presently have, or will have in the future, with respect to any other person or entity (including, but not limited to, any federal or state wildlife, environmental or regulatory agency) that has any interest adverse or potentially adverse to the Owner, as determined in the reasonable judgment of the Owner. ARTICLE 15.PROPRIETARY OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION OF OWNER 15.1 Construction Manager acknowledges and agrees that, in the performance of the Work under this Agreement or in the contemplation thereof, Construction Manager may have access to private or confidential information that may be owned or controlled by Owner and that such information may contain proprietary or confidential details, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to Owner. Construction Manager agrees that all private, confidential, or proprietary information disclosed by Owner to or discovered by Construction Manager in the performance of it Work shall be held in strict confidence and used only in performance of the Agreement. Construction Manager shall exercise the same standard of care to protect such information as a reasonably prudent Construction Manager would use to protect its own proprietary data, and shall not accept employment adverse to the Owner’s interests where such confidential information could be used adversely to the Owner’s interests. Construction Manager shall notify the Owner immediately in writing if it is requested to disclose any information made known to or discovered by Construction Manager during the performance of or in connection with the Work pursuant to this Agreement. 15.2 Any publicity or press releases with respect to the Project or Work shall be under the Owner’s sole discretion and control. Construction Manager shall not discuss the Work, the Project, or matters pertaining thereto, with the public press,

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 36 of 42

representatives of the public media, public bodies or representatives of public bodies, without Owner’s prior written consent. Construction Manager shall have the right, however, without Owner’s further consent, to include representations of Work among Construction Manager’s promotional and professional material, and to communicate with persons or public bodies where necessary to perform under this Agreement. 15.3 The provisions of this Article shall remain fully effective indefinitely after termination of Work to the Owner hereunder. ARTICLE 16.SUBCONTRACTING/ASSIGNMENT/OWNER EMPLOYEES 16.1 Construction Manager and Owner agree that Construction Manager’s unique talents, knowledge and experience form a basis for this Agreement and that the Work to be performed by Construction Manager under this Agreement are personal in character. Therefore, Construction Manager shall not subcontract, assign or delegate any portion of this Agreement or any duties or obligations hereunder unless approved by Owner in a written instrument executed and approved by the Owner in writing. Neither party shall, on the basis of this Agreement, contract on behalf of or in the name of the other party. Any agreement that violates this Paragraph shall confer no rights on any party and shall be null and void. 16.2 To the extent Construction Manager is permitted by Owner in writing to subcontract or assign any portion of this Agreement or any duties or obligations hereunder, Construction Manager shall comply with all applicable prompt payment laws and regulations (including, without limitation, California Civil Code, Section 3321). Construction Manager shall remain fully liable and responsible for all acts and omissions of its subcontractees or assignees in connection with the Work or the Project, as if it engaged it the acts and omissions directly. 16.3 Construction Manager shall not employ or engage, or attempt to employ or engage, any person who is or was employed by Owner or any department thereof at any time that this Agreement is in effect, and for a period of two years after the termination of this Agreement or the completion of the Work, without the written consent of Owner. ARTICLE 17.OTHER OBLIGATIONS 17.1 Discrimination, Equal Employment Opportunity and Business Practices. Construction Manager shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment, nor against any applicant for a subcontract, because of race, color, religious creed, age, sex, actual or perceived sexual orientation, national origin, disability as defined by the ADA (as defined below) or veteran’s status. To the extent applicable, Construction Manager shall comply with all federal, state and local laws (including, without limitation, Owner ordinances, rules and regulations) regarding non-discrimination, equal employment opportunity, affirmative action and occupational-safety-health concerns, shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations thereunder, and shall comply with same as each

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 37 of 42

may be amended from time to time. With respect to the provision of employee benefits, Construction Manager shall comply with San Mateo County Ordinance Code which prohibits contractors (as defined in that ordinance) from discriminating in the provision of employee benefits between an employee with a domestic partner and an employee with a spouse. 17.2 Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Construction Manager acknowledges that pursuant to the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1989, the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited on Owner premises. Architect agrees that any violation of this prohibition by Construction Manager, its employees, agents or assigns shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. 17.3 Compliance with Americans with Disabilities and Rehabilitation Act. Construction Manager acknowledges that, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to the public, whether directly or through a contractor, must be accessible to the disabled public. Construction Manager shall provide the Work specified in this Agreement in a manner that complies with the standard of care established under this Agreement regarding the ADA and any and all other applicable federal, state and local disability rights legislation. Construction Manager agrees not to discriminate against disabled persons in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under this Agreement and further agrees that any violation of this prohibition on the part of Construction Manager, its employees, agents or assigns shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. Construction Manager shall comply with § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which provides that no otherwise qualified handicapped individual shall, solely by reason of a disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination in the performance of this Agreement. 17.4 Employee Jury Service Ordinance. Construction Manager shall comply with San Mateo County Ordinance Code with respect to provision of jury duty pay to employees and have and adhere to a written policy that provides that its employees shall receive from the Architect, on an annual basis, no less than five days of regular pay for actual jury service in San Mateo County. The policy may provide that employees deposit any fees received for such jury service with Construction Manager or that Construction Manager deduct from the employees’ regular pay the fees received for jury service. 17.5 Violation of Non-discrimination Provisions. Violation of the non-discrimination provisions of this Agreement shall be considered a breach of this Agreement and subject the Construction Manager to penalties, to be determined by Owner’s County Manager, including but not limited to: (a) termination of this Agreement; (b) disqualification of the Construction Manager from bidding on or being awarded a County contract for a period of up to 3 years; (c) liquidated damages of $2,500 per violation; and/or (d) imposition of other appropriate contractual and civil remedies and sanctions, as determined by the County Manager. To effectuate the provisions of this section, the County Manager shall have the

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 38 of 42

authority to examine Construction Manager’s employment records with respect to compliance with this paragraph and/or to set off all or any portion of the amount described in this paragraph against amounts due to Construction Manager under this Agreement or any other agreement between Construction Manager and Owner. Construction Manager shall report to the County Manager the filing by any person in any court of any complaint of discrimination or the filing by any person of any and all charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission or any other entity charged with the investigation of allegations within 30 days of such filing, provided that within such 30 days such entity has not notified Construction Manager that such charges are dismissed or otherwise unfounded. Such notification shall include the name of the complainant, a copy of such complaint, and a description of the circumstance. Construction Manager shall provide Owner with a copy of Construction Manager’s response to the complaint when filed. ARTICLE 18.MISCELLANEOUS 18.1 Successors and Assigns. The Construction Manager agreement is binding upon and inures to the benefit of the successor, executors, administrators, and assigns of each party to this agreement, provided, however, that the Construction Manager shall not assign or transfer by operation of law or otherwise any or all rights, burdens, duties, or obligations without prior written consent of the Owner. Any attempted assignment without such consent shall be invalid 18.2 Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed in the City of Redwood City, County of San Mateo. The formation, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflict of laws rules. The exclusive venue for all disputes or litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo unless the parties agree otherwise in a written amendment to this Agreement. 18.3 Independent Contractor; Payment of Taxes and Other Expenses. While engaged in, carrying out, and complying with the terms and conditions of the Construction Manager Agreement, the Construction Manager is an independent contractor and not an officer, agent, or employee of the Owner. Construction Manager shall be fully liable for the acts and omissions of its employees and its agents. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as creating an employment, agency or joint venture relationship between Owner and Construction Manager. Construction Manager acknowledges that neither it nor any of its employees or agents shall, for any purpose whatsoever, be deemed to be Owner employees, and shall not be entitled to receive any benefits conferred on Owner employees, including without limitation workers’ compensation, pension, health, insurance or other benefits. Construction Manager shall be solely responsible for payment of any required taxes, including California sales and use taxes, city business taxes and United

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 39 of 42

States income tax withholding and social security taxes, levied upon this Agreement, the transaction, or the Work delivered pursuant hereto. Construction Manager shall make its designated representative available as much as reasonably possible to Owner staff during the Owner’s normal working hours or as otherwise requested by Owner. Terms in this Agreement referring to direction from Owner shall be construed as providing for direction as to policy and the result of Architect’s services only and not as to the means by which such a result is obtained. 18.4 Ownership of Construction Documents. All documents prepared or obtained in connection with this Agreement are the property of the Owner and subject to copyright by Owner. Construction Manager may retain one record set of the Construction Documents for the limited purpose of defense of any subsequent Claims or Disputes involving this Project. Construction Manager will not own or claim a copyright in the Construction Documents and other documents prepared by the Architect or other design consultants. All copies of the Construction Documents, except the Construction Manager's record set, will be returned or suitably accounted for to Owner upon completion of the Project. The Construction Documents and other documents prepared by the Architect are furnished to Construction Manager for use solely with respect to this Project. They are not to be used by the Construction Manager on other projects or for additions to this Project outside the Scope of Work without the specific written consent of Owner. The Construction Manager is granted a limited, non-exclusive, license to use and reproduce applicable portions of the Construction Documents and other documents prepared by the Architect for use in the performance of the Construction Manager's Services under this Agreement. 18.5 Records. Records of Construction Manager’s personnel costs, Consultant costs, and reimbursable expenses pertaining to their services shall be kept on a generally recognized accounting basis, and shall be available to the Owner upon request at reasonable times and places. Construction Manager shall not destroy any Project records. All records are to be turned over to the Owner. 18.6 Construction Manager shall make its designated representatives available as much as reasonably possible to Owner staff during the Owner’s normal working hours or as otherwise requested by Owner. Terms in this Agreement referring to direction from Owner shall be construed as providing for direction as to policy and the result of Construction Manager’s Services only and not as to the means by which such a result is obtained. 18.7 As between the parties to this Agreement: as to all acts or failures to act by either party to this Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations shall commence to run on the date of issuance by Owner of the final Certificate for Payment, or termination of this Agreement, whichever is earlier. This Paragraph shall not apply to latent defects as defined by California law or negligence claims, as to which the statute of limitations shall commence to run on discovery of the defect and its cause. However, the applicable statutes of repose, California Code of Civil

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 40 of 42

Procedure, Sections 337.1 and 337.15, shall continue to apply. 18.8 Either party’s waiver of any breach, or the omission or failure of either party, at any time, to enforce any right reserved to it, or to require performance of any of the terms, covenants, conditions or other provisions of this Agreement, including the timing of any such performance, shall not be a waiver of any other right to which any party is entitled, and shall not in any way affect, limit, modify or waive that party’s right thereafter to enforce or compel strict compliance with every term, covenant, condition or other provision hereof, any course of dealing or custom of the trade or oral representations notwithstanding. 18.9 Entire Agreement. The Agreement, and any written modification to the Agreement, shall represent the entire and integrated Agreement between the parties hereto regarding the subject matter of this Agreement and shall constitute the exclusive statement of the terms of the parties’ Agreement. The Agreement, and any written modification to the Agreement, shall supersede any and all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral, express or implied, that relate in any way to the subject matter of this Agreement or written modification, and the parties represent and agree that they are entering into this Agreement and any subsequent written modification in sole reliance upon the information set forth in the Agreement or written modification and the parties are not and will not rely on any other information. All prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral, express or implied, that relate in any way to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall not be admissible or referred to hereafter in the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. To the extent this Agreement conflicts with the terms of any proposal, invoice, or other document submitted to or by either party, the terms of this Agreement shall control. 18.10 Modifications. This Agreement may not be modified, nor may compliance with any of its terms be waived, except by written instrument executed and approved by a fully authorized representative of both Owner and Architect expressing such an intention in the case of a modification or by the party waiving in the case of a waiver. ARTICLE 19.INTENDED BENEFICIARIES The Agreement and all rights and obligations set forth herein are intended for the sole benefit of CM and Owner and are not intended to create any third party rights or benefits.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 41 of 42

Construction Manager: County of San Mateo Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture By: By:

(Signature) (Signature)

2860 Gateway Oaks Drive 400 County Center Suite 300 Redwood City, CA 94063 Sacramento, CA 95833

Tel.: (916) 830-8000 Tel. :(650) 342-5193 Fax: (916) 830-8015 Fax: (650) 342-6964

Tax ID# 86-0366154

Date: Date:

Date Received: Board Approval Date:

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Page 42 of 42

Exhibit A OWNER ASSIGNMENT AND NOVATION AGREEMENT Agreement

Between COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, Owner

And Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture, Construction Manager For Construction Management Services

This Assignment and Novation Agreement is valid as of ______, 2013 (the "Effective Date"), between the County of San Mateo (“OWNER”), Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture (CONSTRUCTION MANAGER”), and ______(“TRADE CONTRACTOR”), collectively the “parties.” This Assignment and Novation Agreement amends, restates, replaces and supplements certain aspects of the TRADE CONTRACT entered into by and between the OWNER and TRADE CONTRACTOR for work on the San Mateo County Replacement Jail Project (“Project”).

WHEREAS, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and the OWNER entered into a Construction Management Services Agreement for construction management services for the Project;

WHEREAS, the OWNER has entered into a TRADE CONTRACT with TRADE CONTRACTOR;

WHEREAS, the OWNER and the TRADE CONTRACTOR desire to modify the TRADE CONTRACT, as set forth herein;

WHEREAS, the OWNER desires to assign to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, and CONSTRUCTION MANAGER desires to accept the assignment of the TRADE CONTRACT, the rights and benefits associated therewith, and TRADE CONTRACTOR agrees with and does not object to the assignment;

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

ARTICLE I AGREEMENT

1.1. The parties mutually agree to and do hereby modify the TRADE CONTRACT as of the Effective Date. The parties acknowledge and agree that:

A. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Construction Management Services Agreement between OWNER and CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, OWNER’s Agreement with TRADE CONTRACTOR is assigned by OWNER to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER and CONSTRUCTION MANAGER accepts the assignment of the TRADE CONTRACT.

B. All rights and obligations the OWNER has under the TRADE CONTRACT are hereby transferred to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER as of the Effective Date.

C. All references to and meaning of the word “Owner” in the TRADE CONTRACT shall remain the same and, therefore, “Owner” shall refer to the OWNER, with all of the corresponding rights, obligations and benefits thereof.

D. All references to the word "OWNER" in the TRADE CONTRACT shall be replaced with the word “Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture [Construction Manager]” with all of the respective rights, obligations and benefits resulting therefrom.

E. TRADE CONTRACTOR acknowledges and accepts all of the terms of this Assignment and Novation Agreement and agrees to be bound accordingly.

1.2. Said assignment contemplated herein notwithstanding, the OWNER and CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall continue to be bound by and agree to comply fully with their obligations under the Construction Management Services Agreement, and with any other term or provision imposing an obligation on the parties.

1.3. Notwithstanding the parties’ desire, intent and agreement to modify the TRADE CONTRACT through this Assignment and Novation Agreement, should the OWNER, at its sole discretion, wish to cancel, void and/or terminate this Assignment and Novation Agreement at any future time, the OWNER may do so by providing written notice to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. In such an event, simultaneously upon communication of written notice, this Assignment and Novation Agreement shall be deemed canceled, voided and/or terminated and the OWNER and CONSTRUCTION MANAGER shall look solely to and be bound by the original terms of the Construction Management Services Agreement and OWNER and TRADE CONTRACTOR shall look solely to and be bound by the TRADE CONTRACT. If this Assignment and Novation Agreement is determined by a court, administrative agency or arbitrator to be invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced by any rule of law or public policy, the Construction Management Services Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect.

ARTICLE II REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES

2.1. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER represents and warrants to the OWNER that it is a corporation duly organized, in good standing and validly existing under the laws of the State of California. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by CONSTRUCTION MANAGER has been duly authorized.

2.2. The OWNER represents and warrants to CONSTRUCTION MANAGER that the OWNER is duly organized and in good standing and validly existing under the laws of the State of California. The execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by the OWNER has been duly authorized.

ARTICLE III MISCELLANEOUS

3.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the Exhibits attached hereto constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and shall supersede all prior written and oral and all contemporaneous oral agreements and understandings with respect to the subject matter hereof.

3.2. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California.

3.3. Notices. Notices, offers, requests or other communications required to be given by either party pursuant to the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing to the respective parties.

3.4. Counterparts. This Agreement and the other documents referred to herein or therein, may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same agreement.

3.5. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective legal representatives and successors, and nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer upon any other Person any rights or remedies of any nature whatsoever under or by reason of this Agreement. Neither party may assign this Agreement or any rights or obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any such assignment shall be void; provided, however, either party may assign this Agreement to a successor entity in conjunction with such party's reincorporation.

3.6. Severability. If any term or other provision of this Agreement is determined by a court, administrative agency or arbitrator to be invalid, illegal or incapable of being enforced by any rule of law or public policy, all other conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect.

3.7. Authority. Each of the parties hereto represents to the other that (a) it has the corporate or other requisite power and authority to execute, deliver and perform this Agreement, (b) the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by it have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate or other actions, (c) it has duly and validly executed and delivered this Agreement, and (d) this Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation, enforceable against it in accordance with its terms.

3.8. Interpretation. The headings contained in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. Any capitalized term used but not otherwise defined therein, shall have the meaning assigned to such term in this Agreement.

3.9. Attorneys’ Fees. Should either party initiate any action at law or in equity to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and necessary disbursements in addition to any other appropriate relief. WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Assignment and Novation Agreement effective as of the date first set forth above.

Construction Manager : County of San Mateo – Owner: Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture

By: By:

______(Signature) (Signature)

2860 Gateway Oaks Drive 400 County Center Suite 300 Redwood City, CA 94063 Sacramento, CA 95833

Tel.: (916) 830-8000 Tel.: (650) 342-5193 Fax: (916) 830-8015 Fax: (650) 342-6964

Date: Date:

Trade Contractor for Bid Package:______.

By: ______Title: ______

______(Signature)

Address:______

Tel.:______Fax: ______

Exhibit B PROJECT NOT TO EXCEED COST Agreement Between County of San Mateo, Owner And Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture For Construction Management Services

Each Amount listed below is a Not to Exceed Amount:

The total amount is based on the following components:

1) Trade Contract Base Bid Amounts: $0 - Amendment to be issued to adjust to actual bid amounts.

2) Provisional Bid Allowances: $0 - Amount to be included in the trade bids

3) Construction Contingencies: $0 - Based on 3% of estimated trade bid amounts less bid allowances - Amendment to be issued to adjust to actual bid amounts.

4) Construction Manager’s Fee: $3,295,451.00 - Based on 3.295% of estimates trade bids less allowances - Amendment to be issued to adjust to actual bid amounts.

5) General Conditions: $3,842,478.00 - Construction Manager’s personnel hourly payment and line items identified in RFP attachments - this amount is exclusive of amounts that will be paid by Construction Manager for items set forth in Exhibit D --1.1.5(b), which will be reimbursed by Owner

6) Preconstruction fee $250,000.00

Following is a breakdown of the above summary:

Bid Package Discipline Estimate Allowances Totals 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TOTALS:

Construction Contingency: (3.295% of trade estimates) $* * To be adjusted after trade bids are accepted.

General Conditions: Hourly rates invoiced as indicated in Exhibit C Supervision & Clerical

Reimbursable Expenses: Reimbursable expenses invoiced T&M cost with a 0% mark up. Refer to Exhibit D for allowable reimbursable items which will be paid from General Conditions.

Exhibit C SCHEDULE OF RATES Agreement Between County of San Mateo, Owner And Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture For Construction Management Services

SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR PERSONNEL COSTS

Position Person Cost per hr.

Principal in Charge Bruce McDonough $101.13 Project Director Steve Blaylock $95.17 Operations Manager Steve Humphreys $122.81 Preconstruction Project Manager Ron Ecker $114.58 Preconstruction Project Manager Brent Walton $74.73 Sr. Estimator Tim Blood $65.97 dProfiler Estimator Brian Parker $43.88 BIM Manager Dan Russell $87.40 BIM Engineer Howard Atkinson $57.23 Scheduler Brandon Howell $65.41 Sr. Project Manager Ed Deffner $93.58 General Superintendent Doug Brown $97.30 Assistant Project Manager Lars Frederickson (TBD) $111.66 Safety Specialist Jason Hughes (TBD) $52.50 Superintendent Bryan Terry (TBD) $103.09 Sr. Project Engineer Jared Mettee (TBD) $84.65 Field Engineer Jeff Estabrook (TBD) $50.70 Administrative Assistant Denise Levesque (TBD) $40.49 ($45.31 OT)

Rates include all taxes, insurance, cell phone, vehicle expense, living allowances (to be reconciled to actual cost), on site computer cost, benefits (including PTO), bonus are not included in the above rates.

County of San Mateo CM Services Agreement Bruce McDonogh Principal in Charge Bruce’s strengths lie in is working knowledge and experience in all areas of construction. He started as a carpenter at Layton and has worked as a Superintendent, Project Manager, to now Vice President of Operations. His experience includes nearly every type of Detention Facility.

6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 2. Office Location Clark County Detention Center, Las Vegas, NV This facility includes three buildings: inmate housing, administration and central Sandy, UT plant. The 36-acre site has been developed for future expansion of several addi- 3. Phone Number tional housing buildings. The 62,470--sf housing area was constructed with precast concrete, structural steel, masonry concrete and rebar and houses over 1,000 in- 801.563.3678 mates. Within the housing building is a video court room. The heart of the security systems of the facility is located within the administration building. The master 4. Years of Service with Firm command is located on the second floor of the building and has the monitors and 28 controls to operate the entire site. The second floor also contains the administrative section, staff locker rooms, classrooms and a training cell. Inmate intake, processing 5. Education and personal effects storage are located on the first floor. There is also a full-service kitchen that can prepare more than 6,000 meals per day. University of Utah Civil Engi- neering Studies Reference: Peter Wenner, The Molasky Group - 702.735.0155 9. Anticipated Services to be provided Wyoming Medium Correctional Institution, Torrington, WY The facility is located in Torrington, a remote area of Wyoming. The difficult site is Bruce will be the Principal in located on a sand dune that required approximately 500,000 cubic yards of sand to Charge on this project. Bruce be moved to fill in valleys as deep as 35 feet and hills as tall as 30 feet. Components will aid the construction team of the project include prison, administration building, central plant, gatehouse in executing the contract. building, warehouse, maintenance building and vocational training. The prison has Bruce has many years of De- 720 beds, including infirmary and mental health isolation cells. tention experience and will be a valuable asset to the team. Reference: Ed McAuley, State of Wyoming - 307.777.5950 Bruce will attend meetings on Salt Lake County Adult Detention Center, Salt Lake City, UT a regular basis and will interact with the Project Manager and The Salt Lake County Jail represents the largest single construction project in the Superintendent on a daily ba- county’s history. It includes; a total of 1,044 cells with 2,088 beds, four housing sis. Bruce will also be intregral pods, which are each 117,746-sf, a 44,650-sf food services building, 127,018-sf jail in all of the County’s meetings support facility, and a central plant and sheriff ’s office that total 84,235-sf. and correspondence. Reference: Chuck Piper, Salt Lake County Sheriffs Office - 801.468.2254 Additional Project Experience Nye County Jail - Pahrump, NV Kane County Sheriff ’s Complex - Kanab, UT Clark County Detention Center - Las Vegas, NV Wyoming Medium Correctional Facility - Torrington, WY Nevada Prison No. 8 (preconstruction) - Indian Springs, NV Davis County Jail Phase 1 and Phase 2 - Farmington, UT Davis County Jail Expansion - Farmington, UT Ada County Jail - Boise, ID Uintah County Public Safety Complex - Vernal, UT

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Cody Pearson District/Division Manager Cody’s experience spans over 32 years in the construction industry, the past seven of which have been with Sundt. He is familiar with every aspect of the construction process. Cody is responsible for the acquisition, administration and execution of all building projects the company performs in the California market. He provides direction and support to the preconstruction and construction phase efforts on all projects.

2. Office Location 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience Sacramento, CA Richard E. Arnason Justice Center, Pittsburg, CA 3. Phone Number Construction of a new, $42 million, three-story courthouse building, parking and other site development. Phase Two entails demolition of the existing Pittsburg 916.830.8032 Delta Courthouse and accessory shed. 4. Years of Service with Firm Reference: Pearl Freeman, Administrative Office of the Courts - 415.865.4060 32 Quincy Courthouse Renovation, Quincy, CA 5. Education An interior renovation to a 1,600-sf courtroom included installing new flooring, lighting, upgraded HVAC units, office space, judge’s chambers and a new court Masters of Business Admin- bench. istration - Operations and Reference: Rob Uvalle, Office of Court Construction and Management - Finance, Brigham Young 916.263.7949 University Porterville Courthouse Preconstruction, Porterville, CA Bachelor of Science - Eco- nomics, Brigham Young The $67 million project is the design, construction, and commissioning of a new University building and site development for a trial court facility comprised of approximately 100,000-gsf. The 4 story building (3 stories plus below grade basement) includes 9. Anticipated Services to be provided 9 Courtrooms (including 1 Arraignment, 8 Criminal), judges chambers, courtroom holdings, jury deliberations rooms, support services, clerks offices and work areas, Cody will be the District/Divi- public walk-up windows and queuing, holding and below grade sallyport. The sion Manager on this project. approximately 7.4 acre site includes parking and circulation and featured courtyard Cody will provide direction scheme. and support to the preconstruction and construction Reference: Kim Davis, Office of Court Construction and Management - phase efforts for this project. 559.445.5369

Mammoth Lakes Courthouse, Mammoth Lakes, CA New $15 million courthouse with two multi-purpose courtrooms, a jury delibera- tion room, judicial chambers, work areas for employees, holding cells, children’s waiting room and a 40-vehicle parking lot. Reference: Rona Rothenberg, Administrative Office of the Courts - 415.865.7550 Additional Project Experience Four US Embassy projects for the US State Department in Africa and the former Soviet Union - $168.5 million FEBR and blast resistant buildings through out the Middle East and Asia - $64.8 million Correctional facilities for the New York Department of General Services - $118.5 million

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Steve Blaylock, CPC Project Executive Mr. Blaylock has been in the construction industry for 36 years, joining Sundt in 2008, with experience at the County Government, Program Management, and General Contracting levels. He has been involved with the design and construction of 16 correctional facilities, including food service and laundry facilities. In addition, Steve has participated in the facility start-up and Sheriff Transition Teams for 7 jail projects, including 268 psychiatric jail hospital beds, a 60-bed special needs infirmary including TB (negative pressure) and AIDS (positive pressure) isolation cells, 2 full service county jail clinic facilities. He has 6 years of experience working with design-build/design assist delivery methods.

2. Office Location Sacramento, CA 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 3. Phone Number San Bernardino Juvenile Detention Facility, San Bernardino, CA 480.293.3246 Project included three new 80-bed housing units and one 40-bed housing unit, a single story administration/ warehouse facility and a kitchen. Steve was the Project 4. Years of Service with Firm Director for this $59 million project. The project completed six months ahead of 5 schedule. Reference: Cindy Jones, Sr. Project Manager, County of San Bernardino - 5. Education 909.387.5275 Associate of Arts, Architectural Technology - Purdue Univer- Theo Lacy Jail Expansion, Orange County, CA sity Project included the design and construction of a 365,650-sf expansion, 192 medium security cells, addition of 1,326-beds, support space, kitchen, administra- Bachelor of Science, Construc- tive space, laundry, and intake. Steve was the Project Director for this $78 million tion Management - California project. The Theo Lacy Jail was part of the Manchester Program which completed State University, Long Beach ahead of schedule. Reference: County of Orange, CA, Sheriffs Department, 714.647.7000 9. Anticipated Services to be provided Steve will act as the Project Santa Ana Police Administration and Holding Facility, Santa Ana, CA Executive for this project. As Project included the design and construction of a 501,000-sf, 450-bed jail and po- such, he will be the direct lice administration building, crime lab, kitchen, intake, firing range, and emergency line of communication to the communications center. Steve was the Project Manager for this $83 million project. County throughout the entire The project was completed three months behind schedule due to a 100 year flood project. Steve will be respon- event that occurred on site. sible to have his hands on Reference: Russ Davis, City of Santa Ana PD, Jail Commander - 714.245.8120 the pulse of the entire project directives. He will work with Maricopa County Justice Bond Program, Phoenix, Arizona: $520 million. The Pro- the architectural design team, gram was completed ahead of schedule. The Justice Bond Program included; 4th Ave the construction team onsite, Jail, Lower Buckeye Jail Facility, Maricopa County Central Jail Food Factory, Maricopa and the County to move the County Central Jail Laundry Facility, Maricopa County Durango Central Plant, Maricopa project forward. County Central Jail Retherm Food Delivery System, Durango Juvenile Detention, South- east Juvenile Detention Facility. Licenses/Registrations/Affiliations Reference: Heidi Birch, 602.739.1385 Certified Professional Con- structor Manchester Justice Program, County of Orange California: $185 million. The Program was completed ahead of schedule. The program included site Improvements, and a Juvenile Justice Center. Reference: County of Orange, CA, Probation Department, 714.569.2000

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Ronald Ecker, P.E., LEED AP Preconstruction Project Manager Ron has 31 years of experience providing operations management and management of multiple complex building projects. He has 25 years experience specifically with criminal justice design and construction phase management of jails, prisons, police stations and courts. As preconstruction project manager, Ron will collaborate with the project team to deliver successful GMP’s leading into the construction phase.

2. Office Location 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience Sacramento, CA Maricopa County, Court Tower Project, Phoenix, AZ Project provides a new, 695,000-sf, 16-story, high-rise criminal court tower in down- 3. Phone Number town Phoenix, Arizona. The facility, which was integrated into the existing county 916.830.8055 court complex, houses courtrooms, judicial chambers, prisoner holding areas, and court support functions. This new court tower will serve as a hub for an improved 4. Years of Service with Firm campus approach to security and safety. Key provisions included a new vehicular sally port and central holding area, campus-wide and building control center, ap- 1 Month propriate in-custody holding areas and circulation systems, new public and staff 5. Education entrances, and separate areas for public and restricted court support functions throughout the buildings. Project will achieve LEED 3.0 Silver certification. Bachelor of Science, Civil Reference: David Smith, County Manager, 602.506.1950 Engineering, Northern Arizona University Ford County Law Enforcement Center and Jail, Dodge City, KS Project provided a new law enforcement facility consisting of a 188-bed jail with 9. Anticipated Services to be provided areas for programs, booking, work release, food service, laundry, medical and den- Ron will be the Preconstruc- tal, evidence lab, sheriff’s offices, investigation, and patrol. tion Manager on this project. Reference: Not Available In this role, he will be responsible for coordinating all Tulare County, Bob Wiley Detention Center, Visalia, CA estimating and subcontract- Project provided a 384-bed county jail, consisting of six buildings, two wells, a ing activities for the project. waste treatment plant, and cogeneration facility. Multi Trade delivery. He will work directly with the estimating and scheduling Reference: Not Available departments to ensure the Iowa Department of Corrections, Newton Men’s Correctional Facility, Newton, lA project is maintained under Project provided a 750-bed men’s correctional facility on a 90-acre site and includ- the budget requirements. Ron ed a 300,000-gallon water tank and pumped sewage. The rural location required will report to Steve on a regu- an elevated water tank be provided because the existing distribution did not have lar basis to maintain all lines of adequate capacity for prison demand. Also, a sewage lift and pump station was communication. required to force sewage to the city treatment plant. Reference: John R. Bladwin, Director of Corrections, 515.725.5701 Licenses/Registrations/Affiliations Registered Professional Project Manager. Linn County Jail and Sheriff’s Facility, Albany, OR Engineer-Civil in 9 States Project provided a 111-bed jail and law enforcement facility that was master planned on a site contiguous to the Albany Police Department facility. Coordinated LEED Accredited Professional and managed multi-prime contracts. Reference: Tim Merrill, Merrill Architects, 503.238.8100

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Ed Deffner, LEED AP Senior Project Manager Ed blends his technical background with field experience to create a well-rounded manager. His attention to detail is evident in his product safety and quality standards. The projects run smoothly and within budget. Ed is also a solid problem solver, primarily because he foresees potential issues before they become critical. Ed brings the expertise to this project with his vast experience in detention projects. Ed is current with his knowledge and will be a great asset to the team in the capacity of PM over support buildings.

2. Office Location 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience Sandy, UT Davis County Jail Expansion, Farmington, UT 3. Phone Number The Davis County Jail Expansion added 400 beds to the existing 200-bed facility. It also included a new kitchen, supporting structure, video visitation, and security 801.563.3524 electronics interface. The remodel scope included demolition, reconfiguration, 4. Years of Service with Firm and reconstruction of the inmate booking, kitchen, laundry and visitation areas. Inmates’ cells consist of both masonry and precast concrete cells. The jail remained 17 in full operation during the entire construction period. 5. Education Reference: Mitch Matern, Davis County - 801.807.8684 Bachelor of Science, Architec- Uintah Public Safety Building, Vernal, UT tural Engineering – Penn State This project is a 170,000-sf public safety complex for Uintah County, with JWL Architecture and Babcock Design Group collaborating in a joint-venture effort for 9. Anticipated Services to be provided the building’s design. The facility will include a new county jail with 192 cell beds, Ed Deffner will be the Senior a new courtroom with attorney’s offices, a new sheriff ’s office as well as space for Project Manager on this proj- the FBI, Utah Highway Patrol and Emergency Dispatch. The complex will include a ect. As such Ed will execute fullservice kitchen and laundry area as well as medical facilities, and will be con- the contract and will be the structed with room for future dorm expansion. The jail cells used for the facility will main point of contact for the be Tindall precast concrete jail cells constructed in Atlanta, Georgia. County during construction. Ed will also be involved during Reference: Kelly Hays, Facilities Manager, Uintah County - 435.781.5484 the pre-construction phase. Ed will handle all administra- Salt Lake County Adult Detention Center, Salt Lake City, UT tive duties for the project The Salt Lake County Jail represents the largest single construction project in the and will be responsible for all county’s history. It includes; a total of 1,044 cells with 2,088 beds, four housing contract requirements being pods, which are each 117,746-sf, a 44,650-sf food services building, 127,018-sf jail met. Ed will hold signing au- support facility, and a central plant and sheriff ’s office that total 84,235-sf. thority on behalf of the Sundt/ Reference: Chuck Piper, Salt Lake County Sheriffs Office - 801.468.2254 Layton team and will confer with both Bruce and Steve Additional Project Experience when needed. Ed’s multiple detention project experience Kane County Sheriff ’s Complex - Kanab, UT will ensure the success of this Uintah County Children’s Justice Center - Vernal, UT project. Uintah County Public Safety Complex - Vernal, UT Spanish Fork Justice Center - Spanish Fork, UT Licenses/Registrations/Affiliations Davis County Jail Expansion - Farmington, UT LEED Accredited Professional Ada County Jail Expansion - Boise, ID Salt Lake County Special Operations Building - Salt Lake City, UT Emergency Operations Center - Salt Lake City, UT

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Doug Brown Senior Project Superintendent As a superintendent, Doug focuses on creating a working relationship with each subcontractor. These relationships allow him to envision the project and quickly resolve any issues or questions about the project. Doug’s greatest strength is his ability to multi-task project management responsibilities. With his vast experience in construction and strong leadership skills, Doug is able to handle the unforeseen and successfully manage the day to day details of a project.

6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 2. Office Location Wyoming Medium Correctional Institution, Torrington, WY The facility is located in Torrington, a remote area of Wyoming. The difficult site is Sandy, UT located on a sand dune that required approximately 500,000 cubic yards of sand to be moved to fill in valleys as deep as 35 feet and hills as tall as 30 feet. Components 3. Phone Number of the project include prison, administration building, central plant, gatehouse 801.568.9090 building, warehouse, maintenance building and vocational training. The prison has 720 beds, including infirmary and mental health isolation cells. 4. Years of Service with Firm Reference: Ed McAuley, State of Wyoming - 307.777.5950 14 Gateway Block B, Salt Lake City, UT 5. Education The Gateway, once an old rail yard, is Utah’s largest mixed-use project to date with over 2,000,000-sf of residential, retail, 12-screen movie complex, office, hotel and N/A entertainment space. Because of the project’s magnitude, the client contracted 9. Anticipated Services to be provided with three general contractors for different portions of the facilities. Block B consists of office towers, space for the Children’s Museum, a five story underground parking Doug will be the lead Superin- structure, retail space on both Rio Grande and the north side of the development tendent on this project. Doug and the development’s central plant. In Area G, Layton constructed a restaurant, a will lead all field operations 150-ft clock tower, a dock area and retail space. Doug was the Sr. Project Superin- with regards to the adminis- tendent on this project. tration and execution of sub- Reference: Mark Harris, Reavely Engineering - 801.486.3883 contractors and field personnel. Doug will manage the day Redlands California Temple, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to day construction activities Redlands, CA on site and will report directly Outside, visitors to the temple enjoy three water features and extensive landscap- back to Ed, Bruce and Steve. ing surrounded by a powder-coated aluminum fence. The temple exterior is clad Doug will also oversee the with Chinese granite in-laid with custom art glass windows from London, England. safety efforts and implemen- Doug was the Sr. Project Superintendent for this High end finish project. tation on site. He will work closely with the Safety man- Reference: Gerry Sears, LDS Church Project Manager - 435.773.1531 ager to ensure safe practices are being met. Doug will also Additional Project Experience work directly with Brandon in West Wendover Jail - Wendover, NV the scheduling department Utah State Penitentiary - Draper, UT to update and present the schedule at all weekly meet- Family Visiting and D Cell Block Remodel ings. Doug will run the weekly RiverPark Office Park - South Jordan, UT subcontractor meetings and • Office Building IV will participate in the weekly OAC meetings. • Office Building VI • Retail, Phase 5 • Retail, Phase I- IV

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Will Parco Project Scheduler Will’s strengths derive from a diverse background. He has been effectively “cross-trained” in preconstruction services, operations and scheduling through work as a project engineer and project manager on some of Layton’s largest projects and through work as the senior corporate scheduler on both fast-track and long-term projects. As Sr. Scheduler, Will has worked to create accurate schedules and constantly evaluated construction progress, ensuring on-time completion on all of his projects.

6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 2. Office Location Clark County Detention Center, Las Vegas, NV Sandy, UT This facility includes three buildings: inmate housing, administration and central 3. Phone Number plant. The 36-acre site has been developed for future expansion of several additional housing buildings. The 62,470--sf housing area was constructed with precast 801.243.6347 concrete, structural steel, masonry concrete and rebar and houses over 1,000 inmates. Within the housing building is a video court room. The heart of the security 4. Years of Service with Firm systems of the facility is located within the administration building. The master 15 command is located on the second floor of the building and has the monitors and controls to operate the entire site. The second floor also contains the administrative 5. Education section, staff locker rooms, classrooms and a training cell. Inmate intake, processing and personal effects storage are located on the first floor. There is also a full-service Masters of Business Administra- kitchen that can prepare more than 6,000 meals per day. tion, Brigham Young University Reference: Peter Wenner, The Molasky Group - 702.735.0155 Bachelor of Science, Construc- tion Management, Brigham Wyoming Medium Correctional Institution, Torrington, WY Young University The facility is located in Torrington, a remote area of Wyoming. The difficult site is located on a sand dune that required approximately 500,000 cubic yards of sand to 9. Anticipated Services to be provided be moved to fill in valleys as deep as 35 feet and hills as tall as 30 feet. Components Will has been assigned as the of the project include prison, administration building, central plant, gatehouse scheduler for this project. Will building, warehouse, maintenance building and vocational training. The prison has brings the expertise to the 720 beds, including infirmary and mental health isolation cells. project of having worked on Reference: Ed McAuley, State of Wyoming - 307.777.5950 several Detention projects. Will is fully trained in the lastest Uintah Public Safety Building, Vernal, UT scheduling software and will This project is a 170,000-sf public safety complex for Uintah County, with JWL be able to keep the team up to Architecture and Babcock Design Group collaborating in a joint-venture effort for speed with regards to schedul- the building’s design. The facility will include a new county jail with 192 cell beds, ing reports and activities. a new courtroom with attorney’s offices, a new sheriff ’s office as well as space for the FBI, Utah Highway Patrol and Emergency Dispatch. The complex will include a fullservice kitchen and laundry area as well as medical facilities, and will be constructed with room for future dorm expansion. The jail cells used for the facility will be Tindall precast concrete jail cells constructed in Atlanta, Georgia. Reference: Kelly Hays, Facilities Manager, Uintah County - 435.781.5484 Additional Project Experience Nye County Jail - Pahrump, NV Davis County Jail Expansion - Farmington, UT Salt Lake County Adult Detention Center - Salt Lake City, UT Ada County Jail - Boise, ID

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Dan Russell, LEED AP BIM Coordinator Dan has 20 years of CAD experience in the construction industry. Since 2006, he has been tasked to lead Sundt/Layton’s Simulated Construction (SIMCON) department, one of the largest of its kind for a general contractor, which manages all of Sundt/Layton’s BIM coordination efforts in-house. Prior to taking on this role, Dan worked as a Project Engineer, Project Manager and Pre-Construction Project Manager in Sundt’s Concrete Group. The majority of his career has been spent as a Formwork Engineer and he has modeled and designed concrete forms for projects as diverse as the Arizona Science Center to Water Treatment Plants and Bridges.

2. Office Location Tempe, AZ 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 3. Phone Number Dial Corporate Headquarters & Research and Development Facility, Scottsdale, AZ $117,801,617, CMAR, A four-story building to house a 220,000--sf (sf) research and 480.293.3375 development facility and 130,000-sf of office space. Project also includes an under- 4. Years of Service with Firm ground, three-story 400,000-sf parking garage. 17 Reference: Brad Gazaway, VP Corporate Counsel & Sec. Dial Henkel Corp. - 480.754.5748 5. Education Arizona State University Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communica- N/A tion, Phoenix, AZ $72,169,750, Design Build 1 Step, Construction of a 223,000--sf, multi-level, mid-rise 9. Anticipated Services to be provided building, consisting of office, retail, classrooms, and studios, located in the down- Dan will oversee all of our BIM town Phoenix core district. activities throughout the proj- Reference: Chris Callahan, Dean, ASU Cronkite School of Journalism - 602.496.5012 ect from design to construction completion. Butler Water Reclamation Facility, Peoria, AZ $106,257,716, CMAR, A 10-million gallon-per-day treatment plant, influent pump Licenses/Registrations/Affiliations station and transmission lines to the plant and back to the recharge facility. Reference: Shawn Kruezwiesner, City of Peoria, - 623.773.7329 LEED Accredited Professional Bell Armed Forces Reserve Center, Bell, CA $62,816,938, Design Build 2 Step, Design and construction of an Armed Forces Reserve Center including a 178,000--sf administration/training building, a 50,000-sf Organizational Maintenance Shop and a 20,000-sf storage facility. Reference: Stan Fujimoto, PE, USACE - 623.773.7329

University of Nevada, Reno William N. Pennington Health Sciences Education Building, Reno, NV $28,575,424, CMAR, A 58,638--sf building with lecture halls and simulation teaching labs for the UNR Schools of Medicine and Nursing in two separate wings. The project also serves as the Nursing School. Reference: Chris Chimits, Deputy Manager, State of NV Public Works, 775.684.4111

San Ysidro High School Performing Arts and Classroom Addition, San Diego, CA $24,403,039, Design Build 1 Step, Design Build 50,000-sf of additional classroom buildings, a Performing Arts/multipurpose complex, covered walkways, and athletic courts. Reference: Paul Woods, Director of Planning & Construction, SUHSD, 619.691.5553

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Steve Humphreys, CPC, DBIA, LEED AP Operations Manager Steve has been in the construction industry for 36 years, the last 12 which have been with Sundt. He has produced excellent results and generated strong loyal clients throughout his career. His responsibilities as the Operations Manager include; overall responsibility for project success; supervise area project management, administration, and field operations; providing technical and administrative direction to ensure divisional goals are achieved; responsible for the execution of projects in a safe, profitable and timely manner; assisting in the implementation of company policies and procedures; responsible for the morale, motivation, training and development of personnel. 2. Office Location Sacramento, CA 3. Phone Number 6. Professional Experience / 7. Pertinent Experience / 8. References from Pertinent Experience 916.830.8057 Richard E. Arnason Justice Center, Pittsburg, CA Construction of a new, $42 million, three-story courthouse building, parking and 4. Years of Service with Firm other site development. Phase Two entails demolition of the existing Pittsburg Delta Courthouse and accessory shed. 36 Reference: Pearl Freeman, Administrative Office of the Courts - 415.865.4060 5. Education Quincy Courthouse Renovation, Quincy, CA Bachelor of Science, Construc- An interior renovation to a 1,600-sf courtroom included installing new flooring, tion Engineering, Cal Poly, San lighting, upgraded HVAC units, office space, judge’s chambers and a new court Luis Obispo bench. 9. Anticipated Services to be provided Reference: Rob Uvalle, Office of Court Construction and Management - 916.263.7949 Steve will coordinate with the operational staff on the proj- Porterville Courthouse Preconstruction, Porterville, CA ect to ensure that they have The $67 million project is the design, construction, and commissioning of a new the resources and equipment building and site development for a trial court facility comprised of approximately needed for the project. Steve 100,000-gsf. The 4 story building (3 stories plus below grade basement) includes will communicate directly 9 Courtrooms (including 1 Arraignment, 8 Criminal), judges chambers, courtroom with the Project Manager, Ed holdings, jury deliberations rooms, support services, clerks offices and work areas, Deffner, as well as Superinten- public walk-up windows and queuing, holding and below grade sallyport. The dent Doug Brown. approximately 7.4 acre site includes parking and circulation and featured courtyard scheme. Licenses/Registrations/Affiliations Reference: Kim Davis, Office of Court Construction and Management - Certified Professional Con- 559.445.5369 structor Designated Design - Build Mammoth Lakes Courthouse, Mammoth Lakes, CA Professional New $15 million courthouse with two multi-purpose courtrooms, a jury delibera- LEED Accredited Professional tion room, judicial chambers, work areas for employees, holding cells, children’s waiting room and a 40-vehicle parking lot. Reference: Rona Rothenberg, Administrative Office of the Courts - 415.865.7550

Additional Project Experience University of California Davis - Tercero Student Housing Phase III, Davis, CA University of California Berkeley - Clark Kerr Campus Renewal, Berkeley, CA Sierra Vista Hospital, Sacramento, CA

SUNDT/LAYTON, A JOINT VENTURE Attachment C1 CM General Conditions Temporary Facilities General Conditions Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Office Trailer/Rental X Month 26 9,557.78 248,502 2 Storage Trailer & Tool Shed Rental X 3 Office Furniture/Equip/computers X Month 26 130.50 3,393 4Xerox Copies/Misc Printing X Month 26 2,156.50 56,069 5 Postage/UPS/FedEx X Month 26 630.75 16,400 6Project Photographs X Month 26 50.00 1,300 7 Temporary Toilets X Month 26 1,800.00 46,800 8Project Sign X Lump Sum 1 1,300.00 1,300 9 Temporary Fencing/Enclosures X LF 2000 6.50 13,007 10 Covered Walkways X 11 Drinking Water/Cooler/Cup X Month 26 152.25 3,959 12 Safety/First Aid Supplies X Month 26 65.25 1,697 13 Fire Fighting Equipment X Lump Sum 1 1,625.00 1,625 14 Security Guards X 15 Watchman Service X Lump Sum 1 78,713.27 78,713 16 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

Miscellaneous Project Costs 1Printing ‐ Drwgs & Specs X Lump Sum 1 13,000.00 13,000 2 Facility Operator/Training X 3 Offsite Travel X Lump Sum 1 26,000.00 26,000 4Others‐CM to include items not listed above * Contractor Bonds and Insurance costs are not to 5 be subject to Contractor mark‐up.

Hoisting

Temporary Utilities 1 Telephone Installation X Lump Sum 1 1,300.00 1,300 2 Telephone Monthly Charges X Month 26 1,050.00 27,300 3 Elect Power Installation X Month 26 1, 000. 00 26, 000 4Elect Power Dist Wiring X Month 26 800.00 20,800 5Elect Power Monthly Charges X Month 26 1,380.00 35,880 6Water Service ‐ Installation X Lump Sum 1 1,300.00 1,300 7Water Service ‐ Monthly Costs X Month 26 137.50 3,575 8Heating & Cooling Costs X Month 26 1,495.31 38,878 9Light Bulbs & Misc. Supplies X Month 26 200.00 5,200 10 Recycling/Trash Dumpster Removal/Hauling X 11 Temporary Road and Maintenance X 12 Trash Chute & Hopper X Month 26 489.38 12,724 13 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

CM Main Office Staff 1Others‐CM to include items not listed above

On Site Staff 1Project Executive/ Operation Manager X Month 6 21,285.43 127,713 2 Project Manager X Month 26 16,220.52 421,734 3 Project Superintendent X Month 26 16,865.32 438,498 4 Project Engineer X Month 26 14,672.66 381,489 4Project Engineer (COBie) X Month 26 17,868.92 464,592 5 Home Office Engineer X Month 26 8,787.99 228,488 6 Scheduling Engineer X Month 26 11,329.01 294,554 7 BIM Coordinator X Month 4 15,149.32 60,597 8 Draftsman/Detailer/ Record Drawings X In Fee 9 Field Accountant/Clerical & Administrative X Month 20 7,481.09 149,622 10 Safety X Month 26 9,093.00 236,418 11 Runner X In Fee 12 Vacation Time/Job Site Staff X In Fee 13 Sick Leave/Job Site Staff X In Fee 14 Quality Control Program X In Fee 15 Travel X 26 13,617.42 354,053

Direct Job Costs

CM@R General Conditions Total Cost transfer to 3,842,478 Fee Proposal (Attachment A1) Exhibit D ALLOWABLE REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Agreement Between County of San Mateo, Owner And Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture For

Construction Management Services

1.1 Costs To Be Reimbursed.

1.1.1 Labor Costs.

(a) Wages or salaries of Construction Manager’s supervisory and administrative personnel when stationed at the Site. In addition to the foregoing, and with Owner’s prior written approval, the wages or salaries of specifically identified employees of Construction Manager not stationed at the Site, but only for that portion of their time spent in performing their duties directly associated with the Project.

(b) Wages and salaries of Construction Manager’s supervisory or administrative personnel engaged, at factories, workshops or on the road, in expediting the production or transportation of materials or equipment required for the Work, but only for that portion of their time required for the Work.

(c) Costs paid or incurred by Construction Manager for payroll taxes, worker’s compensation insurance, contributions, assessments and benefits required by law or collective bargaining agreements, and, for personnel not covered by such agreements, the following additional benefits: sick leave, medical and health benefits, holidays, vacations, pensions, and qualified profit sharing plans, provided that such costs are based on wages and salaries included in the Cost of the Work under Sections 1.1.1(a) through 1.1.1(c); provided, however, that the cost of bonuses, if any, paid by Construction Manager shall be excluded in accordance with Section 1.2.2.

(d) If specifically agreed to by Owner in writing at the time of the execution of the Construction Management Agreement, the parties may agree that, in lieu of one or more of the accounting methods provided for in Sections 1.1.1(a) through 1.1.1(d), that the time spent on the Project for particular, named personnel shall be reimbursed at a stated rate (which includes the wages or salaries of such personnel and all of the costs specified in Section 1.1.1(d)). When a stated rate is used, Construction Manager represents and warrants to Owner that the amounts stipulated rate does not exceed the actual costs calculated in accordance with Sections 1.1.1(a) through 1.1.1(d) and do not contain any additional mark up or profit (f) The actual costs paid by Construction Manager for temporary and/or leased employees; provided, however, that the rates for such temporary or leased employees shall be subject to Owner’s prior written agreement and costs reimbursable shall not exceed such stipulated rates. 1.1.2 Subcontract Costs. Payments made by Construction Manager directly to Subcontractors in accordance with the requirements of the subcontracts, minus: (a) all credits, discounts, or back charges given for any reason whatsoever by any Subcontract to Construction Manager; and (b) any amounts paid contrary to the terms of this Contract. 1.1.3 Costs of Materials and Equipment Incorporated In the Completed Construction.

(a) Costs, including transportation, of materials and equipment incorporated or to be incorporated in the completed construction.

(b) Costs of materials described in the preceding Section 1.1.3(a) in excess of those actually installed but required to provide reasonable allowance for waste and for spoilage. Unused excess materials, if any, shall be handed over to Owner at the completion of the Work or, at Owner’s option, shall be sold by Construction Manager; amounts realized, if any, from such sales shall be credited to Owner as a deduction from the Cost of the Work. 1.1.4 Costs of Other Materials and Equipment, Temporary Facilities and Related Items.

(a) Costs, including transportation, installation, maintenance, dismantling and removal of materials, supplies, temporary facilities, machinery, equipment, and hand tools not customarily owned by the construction workers, which are provided by Construction Manager at the Site and fully consumed in the performance of the Work; and cost less salvage value on such items if not fully consumed, whether sold to others or retained by Construction Manager; provided, however, that Owner may, at Owner’s sole discretion, forego the credit of salvage value and retain ownership of such unconsumed materials. Cost for items previously used by Construction Manager shall mean fair market value.

(b) Rental charges for temporary facilities, machinery, equipment, and hand tools not customarily owned by the construction workers, which are provided by Construction Manager at the Site, whether rented from Construction Manager or others, and costs of transportation, installation, minor repairs and replacements, dismantling and removal thereof. Rates and quantities of equipment rented shall be subject to Owner’s prior written approval but in no event shall the rental rates for machinery and equipment furnished by Construction Manager from its own stock exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the published rental rates based on the local prevailing rental rates, and in no event shall the total rental on any piece of machinery or equipment furnished by Construction Manager from its own stock exceed eighty percent (80%) of its fair market value at the time it was first utilized on the Project. If the total rental cost of any item is anticipated at the time of contracting to exceed 80 percent (80%) of the fair market value of such item, Construction Manager shall present to Owner an analysis of an opportunity to purchase rather than rent the item; if Owner, in its sole discretion, chooses to purchase the item, such cost shall be part of the Cost of the Work and title to such property shall vest in Owner upon completion of the Work. Unless otherwise designated by Owner is writing, the fair market value of any item shall be established by the lowest blue book price most recently published for such item. The fair market value of any item not listed in a blue book shall be established by any method reasonably established by Owner. Rental charges for vehicles are not covered by this Section 1.1.4(b), but rather are covered by Section 1.1.4(c).

(c) Rental charges for vehicles used in the performance of the Work. Rates and quantities of vehicles rented shall be subject to Owner’s prior written approval but in no event shall the rental rates for vehicles furnished by Construction Manager exceed the lesser of the actual rental cost of such vehicles or the lowest available rate prevailing in the place of the project for a one-half ton, two- wheel drive pickup truck. If the rental cost of any vehicle is anticipated at the time of contracting to exceed eighty percent (80%) of the fair market value of such vehicle, Construction Manager shall present to Owner an analysis of an opportunity to purchase rather than rent the vehicle; if Owner, in its sole discretion, chooses to purchase the vehicle, such cost shall be part of the Cost of the Work and title to such vehicle shall vest in Owner upon completion of the Work. Unless otherwise designated by Owner in writing, the fair market value of any vehicle shall be established by the lowest blue book price most recently published for such vehicle.

(d) Costs of removal of debris from the Site.

(e) Reproduction costs, costs of telegrams, facsimile transmissions and long-distance telephone calls, postage and express delivery charges, and telephone and high speed internet service at the Site.

(f) That portion of the reasonable short-term (two weeks or less) travel (airfare, cab fare, and/or rental car expenses), temporary lodging, and meals of Construction Manager’s personnel incurred while engaged in occasional and necessary travel to locations more than 100 miles from the Project Site in discharge of duties connected with the Work; provided, however, that, without expanding the meaning or intent of the foregoing, the following are expressly not a Cost of the Work and are not reimbursable: (i) travel to and from the Site for normal commuting or otherwise, regardless of distance; and (ii) costs and expenses of relocating from another location to the place of the Project. 1.1.5 Miscellaneous Costs. (a) Costs of Subcontractor bonds, transaction privilege, sales or similar taxes applicable to the Project and not otherwise subject to an exemption or exclusion;

(b) Fees and assessments for the building permit and for other permits, licenses and inspections for which Construction Manager is required by the Contract Documents to pay.

(c) The reasonable costs of defending suits or claims for infringement of patent or other Intellectual Property arising if use of such patent or other Intellectual Property is required by the Contract Documents (Owner, at its sole option, may assume control of defense of such suit or claim); payments made, in accordance with legal judgments against Construction Manager resulting from such suits or claims and payments of settlements made with the City’s consent; provided, however, that such costs of legal defenses, judgments, and settlements shall not be included in the calculation of the Construction Manager’s Fee.

(d) Royalties and license fees paid for the use of a particular design, process or product required by the Contract Documents.

(e) Deposits lost for causes other than Construction Manager’s, Subcontractor’s, or anyone they might be responsible for, negligence or material failure to fulfill a specific responsibility to Owner as set forth in the Contract Documents or any subcontract. 1.1.6 Emergencies and Repairs. The Cost of the Work shall also include costs that are reasonably incurred by Construction Manager in taking action to prevent threatened damage, injury or loss in case of an emergency affecting the safety of Persons and/or property. 1.2 Costs Not To Be Reimbursed. The Cost of the Work shall not include: 1.2.1 Salaries and other compensation of Construction Manager’s personnel stationed at Construction Manager’s principal office or offices other than the Site office, except as specifically provided in Section 1.1.1(b). 1.2.2 Employee bonuses or incentive program payments provided by Construction Manager, whether or not the employee in question is stationed at the Site, other than bonuses or incentive program payments approved in writing by Owner. 1.2.3 Expenses of Construction manager’s principal office and offices other than the Site office except as specifically provided in Section 1.1. 1.2.4 Overhead and general expenses, except as may be expressly included in Section 1.1; in no event shall the Cost of the Work include home office overhead, whether absorbed, unabsorbed, or extended home office overhead. 1.2.5 Construction Manager’s capital expenses, including interest on construction manager’s capital employed for the Work. 1.2.6 Rental costs of machinery and equipment, except as specifically provided in Sections 1.1.4(b) and 1.1.4(c). 1.2.7 Except only to the extent that the costs enumerated in this Section 1.2.7 are covered by the Builders’ Risk policy of insurance required by this Contract and the proceeds of such policy are actually paid to Owner on account of such costs, costs incurred due to the negligence, reckless, or willful misconduct or breach of contract by Construction Manager, any Subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whom they are liable, or to the failure of Construction Manager to fulfill a specific responsibility to Owner set forth in the Contract Documents. 1.2.8 Fees for inspection, tests, or of testing laboratories for inspection or tests required to investigate and/or correct defective or nonconforming Work. 1.2.9 Any and all costs that are:

(a) Not specifically and expressly described and included in Section 1.1, whether or not included on the Schedule of Values or any General Conditions estimate;

(b) Expressly excluded from the Cost of the Work by this Section 1.2 (whether or not included in Section 1.1) or any other provision of the Contract Documents; and/or

(c) Expressly stated to be at the cost or expense of Construction Manager (or by other words of similar meaning). 1.2.10 Costs that would cause the Guaranteed Maximum Price to be exceeded. 1.2.11 Any and all costs of travel or commuting, whether or not connected with the Project, except as expressly permitted by Section 1.1.4(f).

Exhibit E PROJECT MASTER CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Agreement Between County of San Mateo, Owner And Sundt Layton, A Joint Venture For Construction Management Services

Orig Early Early Description 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Dur Start Finish MAR A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A Executive Summary Milestones Construction Notice to Proceed 0 08MAY12 Notice to Proceed

Demo Permitting 27 08MAY12 14JUN12 Demo Permitting

Phase 1 Demo 55 15JUN12 31AUG12 Phase 1 Demo

Phase 2 Demo 83 04SEP12 31DEC12 Phase 2 Demo

Piles/Offsite Utilities/Site Grading @ 100% SDs 0 24OCT12 Piles/Offsite Utilities/Site Grading @ 100% SDs

BD MEP DEC Low Voltage/FA @ 100% SD 0 24OCT12 * BD MEP DEC Low Voltage/FA @ 100% SD

Permitting 26 02JAN13 06FEB13 Permitting

Start New Construction 0 07FEB13 Start New Construction

Mobilization 10 07FEB13 20FEB13 Mobilization

Sitework, Offsite Improvements, & Piles 40 07FEB13 03APR13 Sitework, Offsite Improvements, & Piles

Construction Duration 594 07FEB13 30SEP14 Construction Duration

Cell/Structural Foundation @ 50% CDs 0 20MAR13 * Cell/Structural Foundation @ 50% CDs

Concrete 50 04APR13 13JUN13 Concrete

Super-Structure 100 23MAY13 14OCT13 Super-Structure

Exterior Skin 80 05AUG13 25NOV13 Exterior Skin

Interior Rough-Ins 97 03SEP13 20JAN14 Interior Rough-Ins

Interior Finishes 80 21JAN14 12MAY14 Interior Finishes

Electronics & Commissioning 50 06MAY14 15JUL14 Electronics & Commissioning

Close-Out 50 07JUL14 12SEP14 Close-Out

Final Completion 0 12SEP14 Final Completion

Construction Complete 0 30SEP14 Construction Complete

Shakedown/Owner Transition 65 01OCT14 31DEC14 Shakedown/Owner Transition

Data date 06APR12 Early bar Run date 20APR12 Finish date 31DEC14 San Mateo County Jail Progress bar Critical bar Sundt | Layton Summary bar Project name 120419_SanMateo 20APR12 Preliminary Schedule Start milestone point © Primavera Systems, Inc. Finish milestone point

Exhibit F Request for Statements of Qualifications Construction Management and General Contractor at Risk San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility

San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Issued: December 21, 2011 SOQ’s due: January 19, 2012, 2:30 pm

Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive, San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit 400 County Center, 3rd floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 508-6721 Email: [email protected]

2105-001\2347877.1

PART 1 – INTRODUCTION

1.01 The County of San Mateo (“County”) invites submittals of “Statements of Qualifications” (“SOQ”) from highly qualified construction management/general contracting firms (“Respondents”) interested in contracting with the County to provide construction management/general contracting services with a guaranteed maximum price (the “CM/GC at Risk Contract”) for the County’s Replacement Correctional Facility (“Project”). During the preconstruction phase, the successful CM/GC firm will collaborate with the architect on the design, constructability, cost, and schedule of the project and develop a guaranteed maximum price proposal to construct the project.

1.02 This Request for Statements of Qualifications (“RFSOQ”) and the SOQ’s submitted in response are the first stage of the County’s Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for construction management/general contracting services that will culminate in award of the CM/GC at Risk contract. After evaluating all SOQ’s submitted, the County will select a minimum of three firms to submit proposals to the County. The County will conduct an in-depth evaluation of the proposals submitted, followed by sequential negotiation beginning with the most qualified firm.

1.03 This RFSOQ and the SOQ of the selected CM/GC at Risk firm will be included in the CM/GC at Risk contract for the project following award.

PART 2–SUBMISSION OF STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

2.01 Respondents are requested to submit an original, signed SOQ, together with fifteen (15) copies, and one (1) electronic copy, no later than 2:30 PM on January 19, 2012 to:

Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit 400 County Center, 3rd floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 508-6721 Email: [email protected]

2.02 The SOQ should have complete information regarding the experience and qualifications of Respondent.

2.03 The signed, original SOQ should include a statement signed by an owner, officer, or authorized agent of the respondent, acknowledging and accepting the terms and conditions of this RFSOQ.

PART 3 – SHERIFF’S OFFICE BACKGROUND

2105-001\2347877.1

both unincorporated areas of the county and contract cities, investigations, custody, security in the courts, and various administrative functions.

3.02 The incumbent Sheriff is Greg Munks. Directly under his command are Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos and Assistant Sheriff Trisha Sanchez. Overseeing this CM/GC at Risk RFSOQ is the Jail Planning Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive.

PART 4 – STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

4.01 San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks is seeking responses from qualified construction management/general contracting firms who have demonstrated the ability to manage and construct efficient and state-of-the-art, direct-supervision county adult correctional facilities, particularly facilities that reflect the requirements and guidelines of the California Public Code Titles 15 and 24.

4.02 Respondents to this RFSOQ should have a minimum of ten (10) years of experience in the field of correctional construction management/general contracting, and have successfully managed and constructed at least five (5) correctional facilities (with at least two (2) located in urban environments) within the last ten (10) years with construction budgets exceeding $50 million dollars each.

4.03 Respondents should address every item listed in this RFSOQ, even if the item was addressed previously in the SOQ. Brevity and clarity are of utmost importance. SOQ’s that are comprised of standard marketing materials that do not specifically address the items below will not be evaluated; however, Respondents may include fifteen (15) bound copies of their marketing materials, as long as they are not permanently attached to the SOQ. SOQ’s that do not comply with all applicable requirements will not be considered.

PART 5 – BASIC SCOPE AND CHARACTER OF PROJECT AND SERVICES REQUIRED

5.01 Scope of Project

A. The Project will be located on an approximately 4.85-acre site within Redwood City, CA. The Project will initially house 576 beds (including 88 non-secure transitional beds) with future expansion to 832 beds. The project scope also includes remediation of a brownfield site, demolition of existing structures, and certain on and offsite improvements to prepare the site for development.

B. The County is using a “Construction Management/General Contractor at Risk” (CM/GC at Risk) delivery method.

C. The CM/GC at Risk ultimately selected will be asked to provide construction management/general contracting services throughout the design phase (preconstruction phase), construction phase, and post-construction phase.

2105-001\2347877.1

D. Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology will be used by the design team and the CM/GC will be required to use BIM during preconstruction and construction.

E. The County’s Request for Proposals (“RFP”) will contain a full description of the scope of the Project and the scope of services requested.

F. The County may elect to include this project under a Project Labor Agreement.

G. The Project will incorporate sustainable design measures and is expected to achieve a minimum of LEED silver certification.

H. The County intends to maintain the ability and rights to audit project costs, in order to establish and confirm ongoing project costs separate from profits.

I. Key project team members will commit to co-locating with the Jail Planning Unit in a dedicated project space in Redwood City for specified times during the duration of the project.

5.02 Scope of Services

It is anticipated that the CM/GC at Risk contract between the County and the CM/GC at Risk firm ultimately selected will contain but not be limited to the following scope of work:

5.02-1 Pre-Construction Phase Services shall include but not be limited to:

A. Provide cost control management, including an initial scope and program validation estimate, and cost estimates at each major design milestone and through construction completion.

B. Conduct a comprehensive review of Project site conditions and contiguous site conditions, sufficient to successfully perform all aspects of Project work.

C. Constructability review on an on-going basis in support of the Architect’s progress during the schematic design, design development, and construction documents phases. Provide technical assistance and advice in review and development of design and construction bid documents. Evaluate coordination issues. Evaluate whether alternative materials, methods or systems should be considered. Verify completeness of construction documents and ensure that trade bid packages include a complete scope of work.

D. Evaluate opportunities to improve maintainability and sustainability and reduce lifecycle costs and energy use.

E. Preparation of a preliminary project schedule and updates at the end of the schematic design, design development, and construction documents phase.

F. Provide County with recommendations on methods to expedite construction

2105-001\2347877.1

progress.

G. Value-engineering services to identify cost reduction opportunities to achieve the design within the Project budget or to allow County to adjust the scope of the Project.

H. Preparation of Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) including all work required to complete the Project consistent with the project budget and project schedule.

I. Preparation of bid documents for all trade work consistent with the contract documents, project schedule, and legal requirements.

J. Assisting County for the procurement of subcontractors to comply with California Public Contracting Code including prequalification of trade contractors. Subcontractor bids shall be received by the County in the presence of the CM/GC at Risk and will be disclosed publicly. The subcontractors shall be assigned to the CM/GC at Risk who will take full ownership and responsibility of subcontractors’ performance.

K. Monitor and process all regulatory approvals required during project development, including city of Redwood City, fire marshal, and Corrections Standards Authority.

L. Provide Building Information Modeling services to identify and resolve design and coordination conflicts.

M. Suggest ways to bring trade subcontractors into the design phase including their participation in constructability reviews within their respective scopes of work, subject to management and coordination by CM/GC at Risk.

N. Assist Owner in all public relations matters including attendance at public meetings as required including meetings with the city of Redwood City, civic, and regulatory agencies.

O. Development of Project strategy and proposed Project Management Plan to meet County / Sheriff Project goals, working around constraints.

P. CM/GC at Risk to work with Jail Planning Unit to plan and set up the construction trailers, and all required services at the job site.

5.02-2 Construction Phase Services shall include but not be limited to:

A. Management and supervision of the construction activities and site logistics to meet project schedule.

B. Establishment and implementation of a project safety program and a quality control program.

2105-001\2347877.1

C. Preparation of monthly project updates including: progress reports, progress photographs, actual and projected costs, actual and projected project schedule, other information as requested by County.

D. Conduct weekly project meetings and any necessary special task meetings and prepare and distribute meeting minutes.

E. Coordinate and perform all tasks necessary to achieve a minimum of LEED silver certification.

5.02-3 Post-Construction Phase services shall include but not be limited to:

A. Collaborating with the Project architect, develop and implement procedures for: completion of punch list items, operational systems and equipment, training County building maintenance staff, and initial start up, commissioning and testing.

B. Preparation and delivery of warranties, coordination and submission of as built drawings, preparation of maintenance manuals, completion of training programs, and administer closeout of the project.

C. Ensure performance of all warranty obligations, resolution of all claims and disputes, and other post-construction requirements (including LEED requirements required for certification).

PART 6 – CONTENT OF STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS

SOQ’s shall be presented in the order listed below and should clearly indicate which item is being addressed. The SOQ’s should include the following information regarding the Respondent:

6.01 Company Information

A. Name of Firm B. Address of Firm C. Telephone & Fax Numbers D. E-Mail Address E. Primary Contact Person

6.02 Brief History of Firm

A. Legal Structure (corporation, partnership, limited partnership, joint venture, etc.) B. Size of Firm / Staff C. Years in Business D. Organizational Chart of Firm, and tenure of executive management E. If Firm is a partnership or association, a listing of all of the partners, general partners, or association members known at the time of SOQ submission who will participate in a CM/GC at Risk contract if awarded.

2105-001\2347877.1

6.03 Construction Experience

A. Describe your management philosophy for the CM/GC at Risk construction delivery method. Include a description of best practices associated with CM/GC at risk.

B. Describe strategies for bringing trade subcontractors into the design phase, and list trades such as prefabricated cells, you would recommend be procured using design assist or design/build. For trades listed, include names of qualified subcontractors.

C. Provide an organization chart, and for each of the following team members provide the information in Section E below. Staff named must be committed to both preconstruction and construction phases. Proposed staff must be current employees of the proposing firm. Include the structure of Joint Ventures, if applicable.

D. Project Team

1. Principal in Charge 2. Project Executive 3. Project Manager 4. Project Engineers (including M/E/P Coordinator) 5. Project Superintendent / Scheduler 6. LEED AP & Other Staff 7. BIM coordinator 8. Estimated time commitment during pre-construction and construction phases.

E. Résumé’s of Team Members

1. Name 2. Office Location 3. Phone Number 4. Years of Service with Firm 5. Education 6. Professional Experience 7. Pertinent Experience 8. References from Pertinent Experience 9. Anticipated Services to be provided

F. Describe the proposed teams’ experience for providing CM/GC at Risk services that are relevant within the last five (5) years. List the projects in order of priority, with the most relevant public project over $50M in contract volume listed first. Provide the following information for each project listed:

1. Project name, location, contract delivery method, and description 2. Color images (photographic or machine reproductions) 3. Contracted construction cost 4. Projected cost and final construction cost

2105-001\2347877.1

5. Final project size in gross square feet 6. Type of construction (new, renovation, or expansion) 7. Name of individual responsible to the Owner 8. Name of individual responsible for coordinating the day to day work 9. References (for each project listed above, identify the following):

The owner's representative who served as the overall manager of the project, provide telephone number and email information. Architect/Engineers of Record for the project, including telephone number and email address.

G. Provide details of your experience with Project Labor Agreements.

H. Provide a list of qualified architects and structural engineers your firm has experience working with and would recommend for this project.

I. Describe demolition and brownfield site remediation experience.

J. Describe experience with projects that had deep foundation systems in soft ground conditions with a high groundwater table. Include site location, general description of the geotechnical conditions, and foundation system constructed. Also include references if these projects are not listed as part of your response to Section F.

Note: The County reserves the right to qualify, accept, or reject any proposed sub consultants/sub contractors as well as to qualify, accept, or reject the use of internal staff to provide certain types of construction management/general contracting services.

6.04 Correctional Facility Experience:

The County seeks information concerning the experience of your firm, and your proposed team, with correctional facilities. List relevant projects completed by your firm, including the five (5) most recent correctional facilities, completed, or under construction by your firm, that best represent a similar scope, program, and complexity to the direct-supervision, 576-bed adult correctional facility planned by the County. For each project, include:

A. Completion Date B. Name and Location C. Delivery Method Used D. Structural System and Structural Subcontractors E. MEP subcontractors F. Final Cost G. Graphic Description H. Photographs I. Total Square Footage J. Cost per Square Foot K. Change Order Percentage L. Special Features M. Awards Received N. Sustainability Criteria

2105-001\2347877.1

O. Was the project completed on time and within budget (if not, please explain) P. Provide client and contractor contact information Q. Describe the roles played by the team members proposed for this Project

6.05 San Mateo County and Other Local Experience:

Describe your experience involving projects planned or built within San Mateo County, or for the County. Provide information that demonstrates your ability and experience to provide the services with focus on local Bay Area project. Demonstrate your local project experience, and knowledge of local subcontractor community, knowledge of local market conditions and skills and services unique to your firm.

6.06 Construction Planning and Performance:

A. Describe how pre-construction services will be planned and performed, including your proposed methodology of reviewing design documents, site conditions, and proposed phasing. Describe your capabilities and procedures in providing the technical expertise required for constructability, schedule, and cost analysis.

B. Describe how construction services will be planned and executed, including your subcontracting plan, including any proposed outreach and utilization plans, advertising and award. Discuss your methodology for coordination of work with minimal disruption to existing operations. Include an explanation of any claims avoidance measures and processes employed.

6.07 Budget Management and Cost Control:

A. For comparable correctional facilities for which your firm and the proposed staff for the Project have performed construction management/general contracting services, list the cost per square foot for your new construction projects in the past ten (10) years. Separate hard and soft costs and explain what is included with both.

B. For comparable correctional facilities for which your firm and the proposed staff for the Project have performed construction management/general contracting services completed in the last ten (10) years, list the cost estimate, bid amount, and difference. List any changes in scope if appropriate and if this change in scope results in an increase in your fee.

C. Describe your cost estimating methods. Describe how the cost estimates were developed, how often they were updated, and the accuracy measured against actual budget.

D. Describe your cost control methods during construction, and how you procure subcontractors. Describe processes used to review and approve change orders, including proper payment methodology. Provide examples of how these techniques were used and the degree of accuracy achieved.

E. Describe your methodology for working with the Project Architect/Engineer

2105-001\2347877.1

team to deliver and maintain the GMP throughout the design and construction process.

6.08 Schedule Management:

A. Describe how you will establish, maintain, and update the project schedule during design and construction.

B. Describe your approach to assure timely completion of the project; provide examples of how these techniques were used, including specific scheduling challenges/requirements and actual solutions.

6.09 Quality Control and Problem Solving:

A. Provide an example of a constructability program used to maintain project budgets without compromising quality.

B. Describe your quality control program. Explain the methods used to ensure quality control during the construction phase of a project. Provide specific examples of how these techniques or procedures were deployed.

C. As the CM/GC at Risk, describe your relationship with the local subcontracting community.

D. Describe your plan for communicating constructability, phasing, value engineering, and other budget options in a form that will quickly facilitate the owner's decision-making.

E. Describe any issues and conflicts with the owner, consultants, Architect/Engineer, or subcontractors and how those issues and conflicts were resolved.

F. Provide examples of pre-construction services to demonstrate the knowledge and creativity of providing the structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, security and other critical system solutions for improving overall budget and schedule.

G. Describe all citations or penalties assessed against your firm by the EPA, Air Quality Management District, or any Regional Water Quality Control Board in the past five years.

H. Describe all occasions during the last five years in which your firm was required to pay either back wages or penalties for failure to comply with the state’s prevailing wage laws or federal Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements.

6.10 Technological Experience:

A. Provide a list of three new construction projects (public or private) over $50M in construction volume where the respondent utilized Building Information

2105-001\2347877.1

Modeling (BIM) to coordinate multiple trades. Provide date when projects were completed, overall schedule, and construction volume and client reference with contact information. Include experience and capabilities with 4-D BIM analysis.

B. The selected Contractor may be required to interface with the County’s project management and document control software. Confirm your familiarity with recommended scheduling software programs and provide an overview of experiences with each.

6.11 Licensure:

Provide a list of all licenses, registration, and credentials held by the Respondent as required to manage and construct the Project in the State of California including information regarding the revocation or suspension of any licenses, registration, and credentials.

6.12 Financial and Bonding Information:

Include financial information for the Respondent in order to demonstrate Respondent’s financial capability to complete the Project. This may be submitted under seal and treated as confidential. In order to demonstrate the Respondent’s financial capability, Respondents are requested to submit the following items:

A. Financial statements for the past three (3) years (including Income Statement and Balance Sheet) which were audited or reviewed by an independent accounting firm using GAAP or other information to demonstrate the financial capability necessary for this Project.

B. A list of any loans on which the Respondent or member has defaulted in the last five (5) years.

C. A list of financial references, including the name of the individual, title, company name, and phone number, for at least two (2) individuals that have provided the Respondent (or Project Team Member) with financing during the last three (3) years.

D. Submit a letter from a surety company that states that the Firm has sufficient bonding capacity for the project. The project is anticipated to be $100M in construction costs.

E. Identify if your firm is currently for sale or involved in potential transaction to expand or to become acquired or merged by another business entity. If so, explain the impact in both organization and company direction.

F. Document your ability to perform the volume of work described in this RFSOQ given your firm’s current and anticipated workloads in 2012 and 2013. List current work commitments broken down by project delivery method (GC, CM at Risk, CM Multiple Prime, other) and volume of work.

2105-001\2347877.1

6.13 Legal Proceedings and Insurance Claims:

A. List and describe all current litigation involving the Respondent and the proposed staff (in their professional capacities) for the Project.

B. List and describe all litigation history for Respondent since January 1, 2006.

C. List and describe unsettled/pending claims, demands, or notices of default since January 1, 2006.

D. Has your firm failed to complete a contract or been removed from a project within the past 10 years? If yes, please explain.

E. Has your firm been assessed liquidated damages for failing to complete a project within the time specified in the contract documents within the past 10 years? If yes, please explain.

“Litigation” includes, but is not limited to, actions in civil or criminal court, mediation, arbitration, and all other forms of dispute resolution.

6.14 Safety:

Provide the respondent’s safety mission statement that guides the safety management on projects. Describe innovations the Respondent has implemented that improved safety performance. Provide:

A. State of California Experience Modification Rate (EMR) for the last 5 years.

B. OSHA recordable incident rate for the last 5 years.

C. OSHA lost time incident rate for the last 5 years.

6.15 General Project Approach:

A. Describe Respondent’s management approach for correctional facility projects, and the benefit each step has for the County.

B. Describe any innovative techniques Respondent may employ in the construction of the Project.

C. Describe Respondent’s experience with LEED certification on projects in which Respondent has provided the requested services, including the fulfillment of LEED certification goals in the context of all project goals and objectives.

D. Describe how Respondent will closely interface and coordinate with the County and its user groups throughout the programming, schematic design, and construction phases of the Project.

2105-001\2347877.1

6.16 Unique Qualifications:

A. This section is Respondent’s opportunity to provide specific information that differentiates it from others in this RFSOQ process. This statement should be limited to two pages.

B. At Respondent’s option, Respondent may provide any additional supporting documentation or information that would be helpful in evaluating Respondent's qualifications and commitment.

PART 7 – FORMAT FOR THE STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS

7.01 The SOQ should be bound and printed vertically (“portrait” orientation) on standard 8 ½” by 11” paper. The SOQ’s should not exceed 50 pages, single sided (excluding resumes, lists of projects, and any marketing materials), but will preferably be much shorter. Type size should be no smaller than 10 point, but preferably larger.

7.02 The top of page one of the SOQ should state the Respondent’s name, address, phone number, fax number, e-mail address, and contact name. No cover letter is necessary.

PART 8 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS AND POLICIES

8.01 Respondents will be required to comply with all nondiscrimination employment regulations, including:

A. No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, creed, national origin, religious affiliation or non-affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, age (over 40), disability, medical condition (including but not limited to AIDS, HIV positive diagnosis or cancer), political affiliation or union membership be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under this Agreement.

B. Respondents shall ensure equal employment opportunity based on objective standards of recruitment, selection, promotion, classification, compensation, performance evaluations, and management relations, for all employees under any contract that may result from this submittal. Respondents’ personnel policies shall be made available to County upon request.

C. Respondents shall assure compliance with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by submitting a signed letter of compliance. Respondents shall be prepared to submit a self-evaluation and compliance plan to County upon request within one (1) year of the execution of any agreement that may result from this submittal.

D. Respondents must comply with the County Ordinance Code with respect to the provision on employee benefits. As set forth in the ordinance, such Respondents are prohibited from discriminating in the provision of employee benefits between an employee with a domestic partner and an employee with a spouse.

2105-001\2347877.1

8.02 The County reserves the right to accept or reject any or all SOQ’s submitted, or to request clarification or additional information or an alternative presentation of data from any Respondent, at the County’s sole discretion. Further, while every effort has been made to ensure the information presented in the RFSOQ is accurate and thorough, the County accepts no responsibility or liability for any unintentional errors or omissions in this document.

8.03 Should Respondent realize during the review process that there has been a substantive error or omission in its submittal, which does not alter basic services and has not already resulted in disqualification from participating in the SOQ process for other reasons, said Respondent is invited to submit to the Project Executive a written request and explanation of Respondent’s desire to correct its submittal. It shall be at the sole discretion of the County’s selection committee to decide whether to grant Respondent’s request to correct its SOQ submittal.

8.04 All submittals become the property of the County and as such become public documents available to be reviewed by the public upon request. The Government Code Sections 6250 et. seq., the Public Records Act, define public record as any writing containing information relating to the conduct of public business. This applies to submittals pursuant to this RFSOQ. The Public Records Act provides that public records shall be disclosed upon written request, and that any citizen has the right to inspect any public record, unless the document is exempted from the disclosure requirements. The County cannot represent or guarantee that any information submitted in response to the RFSOQ will be confidential.

If the County receives a request for any document submitted in response to this RFSOQ, it will not assert any privileges that may exist on behalf of the person or business submitting the proposal. Rather, the County will notify the party whose proposal is being sought. In the event that a party who has submitted a proposal wishes to prevent disclosure, it is the sole responsibility of that party to assert any applicable privileges or reasons why the document should not be produced, and to obtain a court order prohibiting disclosure.

8.05 Successful and unsuccessful Respondents will receive a written notification of whether their submittal was elevated to the next phase of finalist evaluation. The written notification will be sent to the name and address of the authorized officer of the firm provided in the SOQ submittal. The timing of written notification to Respondent is entirely at the County’s sole discretion.

PART 9 – KEY SELECTION CRITERIA

9.01 The evaluation by the selection committee will be based on the criteria listed below.

A. Completeness of SOQ Submission – SOQ’s should describe comprehensive construction management/general contracting services and should respond to each of the items set forth in the RFSOQ and adherence to the formatting and rules.

B. Personnel Experience and Qualification – Evaluation of the list of personnel specifically assigned to the proposed project, including their qualifications,

2105-001\2347877.1

overall experience, and recent experience on projects of similar nature and complexity to the proposed project. Experience with CM/GC at Risk.

C. Depth and Quality of Respondent’s Performance – Review of past performance on San Mateo County projects or other projects of similar nature and complexity as the proposed project; evaluation of client references whether included in the proposal response or not; overall responsiveness to County’s needs. Respondent’s claims history and assessment of liquidated damages.

D. Technical / Management Approach – Evaluation of the Respondent’s overall ability to interface and coordinate with the County’s various user groups throughout conceptual design, schematic design, and construction, coupled with technical expertise to construct and manage a project responsive to the County’s current and future needs. Experience using BIM technology.

E. Availability – Evaluation of the workload of Respondent and the staffing to be assigned to the proposed project; time schedule of the Respondent in relation to that of the proposed project location of the offices or facilities from which the services are to be provided to the County.

F. Financial Stability – Evaluation of the overall financial position of Respondent as determined from financial information required by the Request for Proposal or Qualifications or from other independent sources.

G. Sustainable Practices

H. Size, capability, and continuous operation of a California office for at least 5 years.

PART 10 – REVIEW PROCESS

10.01 Review of SOQ’s

A. The County will evaluate the information based on materials submitted in response to this RFSOQ. All interested architects and engineers should submit information in response to this RFSOQ based on the requested information specified.

B. Respondents should prepare their response according to the RFSOQ format, i.e., by section and paragraph of this RFSOQ. The County reserves the right to reject any SOQ not submitted within the required timeframe; reject any incomplete SOQ submitted; contact client references; require further information; and/or require interviews with any Respondent. All costs related to the preparation, submittal, and/or presentation of an SOQ are the responsibility of the Respondent and will not be assumed in full or in part by the County.

C. Following a review of the submitted SOQ’s, the Sheriff will create a short list of qualified Respondents that will be invited to participate in a subsequent Request for Proposals (RFP) process.

2105-001\2347877.1

PART 11 – GENERAL CONDITIONS

11.01 The SOQ should be clear and concise to enable the County to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether the SOQ meets the County’s requirements. To this end, each SOQ should be specific, detailed, and complete as to clearly and fully demonstrate that the Respondent has a thorough understanding of and has demonstrated knowledge of the requirements to perform the work (or applicable portion thereof). The SOQ must be verified under oath by the Respondent and each of its members.

11.02 Any explanation or question from a Respondent regarding the meaning or interpretation of this RFSOQ must be requested in writing by email only to Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive ([email protected]) by December 30, 2011 at 5:00 pm. Responses to submitted questions will be posted on the Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning webpage by January 9, 2012 at 5:00 pm. Do not contact staff or consultants with questions or clarifications.

11.03 The submission of a SOQ does not commit County to award a contract for the Project, to pay costs incurred in the preparation of a SOQ or to procure or contract for any services. Costs for preparing the SOQ will be paid entirely by the Respondents.

11.04 County reserves the right to interpret or change any provision of this RFSOQ at any time prior to the SOQ submission date. Such interpretations or changes shall be in the form of addenda to this RFSOQ and posted on the Sheriff’s Office webpage. County, in its sole discretion, may determine that a time extension is required for submission of SOQ’s, in which case such addenda shall indicate a new SOQ submission deadline. County reserves the right to waive inconsequential deviations from stated requirements.

11.05 County retains the right to reject any and all SOQ’s, to contract work with whomever and in whatever manner County decides, or to abandon the work entirely. County shall make final decisions regarding a Respondent’s qualifications as of Proposal day. All decisions concerning Respondent selection shall be made in County’s best interests.

11.06 County has made a determination in accordance with Section 6255 of the Government Code that all SOQ’s submitted in response to this RFSOQ shall not be made public by County until after County issues a notice of intent to enter into a Contract with the successful Respondent. In addition, County has made a determination in accordance with Section 6255 of the Government Code that all Respondent proprietary financial information submitted in response to this RFSOQ and specifically identified by the Respondent as “confidential” will not be made public by County and will be returned to each Respondent, unless otherwise required by law. In the event a Respondent wishes to claim other portions of its SOQ exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act, Respondent should clearly identify those portions with the word “confidential” printed on the lower right-hand corner of the page, along with a written justification as to why such information should be exempt from disclosure. Blanket designations of “confidential” shall not be effective. However, County will make a decision based upon applicable law.

2105-001\2347877.1

A. County will notify the applicable Respondents of any requests for disclosure under the Public Records Act. Respondents agree to defend and indemnify County from any claims and/or litigation arising from such requests.

B. Proprietary or confidential data should be readily separable from the SOQ in order to facilitate eventual public inspection of the non-confidential portion of the SOQ. Confidential data is normally restricted to confidential financial information. The price of products offered or the cost of services shall not be designated as proprietary or confidential information.

PART 12 – PROJECT EXECUTIVE

12.01 All written inquiries and requests for additional information pertaining to this RFSOQ, any Addendum, or any matter relating to the CM/GC at Risk selection process, must, unless otherwise identified in an Addendum, be directed to the following designated Project Executive:

Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit 400 County Center 3rd floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 508-6721 Email: [email protected]

SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE

Greg Munks, Sheriff

2105-001\2347877.1

ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE OF EVENTS FOR RFSOQ PROCESS

Sheriff Issues RFSOQ December 21, 2011

Questions via email due: 5:00 pm December 30, 2011

Responses to Questions Posted on Sheriff’s Webpage January 9, 2012

Qualification submittals due: 2:30 pm January 19, 2012

Review SOQ submittals Jan. 20- Feb. 2, 2012

Selection Committee produces short-listed Respondents February 3, 2012

Notice of pre-qualified Respondents posted February 3, 2012

Request for Proposals sent to pre-qualified Respondents February 6, 2012

Scope of services and fee proposal due: 2:30 pm February 20, 2012

Interviews of short-listed Respondents Feb. 28-29, 2012

Board of Supervisors approves contract March 27, 2012

County reserves the right to modify this schedule at any time at its sole discretion.

2105-001\2347877.1

Answers to submitted questions for: RFSOQ-CM/GC San Mateo Co. Replacement Correctional Facility Jan 5, 2012 │ Jail Planning Unit │ smcsheriff.com/jail-planning

# Question Answer 1 The County requires fifteen (15) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy of each No. Please enclose fifteen (15) copies of financial respondent's Statement of Qualifications (SOQ). Per section 6.12 of the County's Request and bonding information in a single envelope. for Statements of Qualifications (RFSOQ), each respondent is required to submit Financial and Bonding information that may be submitted in a separate sealed document and will be treated as confidential. Can we submit a single copy of this Financial and Bonding information? 2 RFSOQ Section 6.10, item B, states "The selected Contractor may be required to interface The County adopts Manhattan Centerstone for with the County's project management and document control software. Confirm your Facility Management System and Document familiarity with recommended scheduling software programs and provide an overview of Control. experiences with each.” Can the County provide the name of the project management and document control software currently in use? 3 In addition, we request clarification regarding the scheduling software programs: Is the CM/GC respondent proposes scheduling software County requesting respondents to discuss their familiarity with the County’s scheduling programs, and provide an overview of experiences software programs or is the County requesting that respondents discuss their familiarity with such software. with recommended industry standard scheduling software for the County’s evaluation? 4 RFSOQ Section 7.01 indicates the SOQ should not exceed 50 pages excluding resumes, 6.03E resumes can be excluded from the 50 pages. lists of projects and any marketing materials. Does this apply to the resumes required per Section 6.03E? 5 RFSOQ Section 7.01 indicates the SOQ should not exceed 50 pages excluding resumes, 6.03.F and 6.05 information is part of the 50 pages. lists of projects and any marketing materials. Does this apply to the project's listed in 6.04 can be excluded from the 50 pages. Sections 6.03.F and 6.04 and 6.05?

6 RFSOQ Section 7.01 indicates the SOQ should not exceed 50 pages excluding resumes, Yes, financial and bonding information is exempt lists of projects and any marketing materials. Is the Financial and Bonding information from the 50 pages. that is submitted separately exempt from the 50 page limit? 7 Section 6.13 Legal Proceedings and Insurance Claims List everything in 6.13 A thru E, nationally. Please confirm response to this section can be submitted for the local office responsible for submitting this SOQ, and should not include national or other offices of the organization? 8 Section 6.13 Legal Proceedings and Insurance Claims: Regarding the first part of this question: Refer to Please confirm the response to this section can be submitted under a separate sealed section 11.06. envelope and kept confidential? If so allowed can the response to this section be Yes, they are excluded from the 50 page limit. excluded from the 50 page limit specified in section 7.01. 9 Please confirm that the scores from the SOQ are not carried forward to the RFP phase and The scores are not carried forward to the RFP that the qualified CM/GC firms are all pre-qualified and go forward equally into the RFP phase. process. END

Request for Proposals Construction Manageement San Mateo County Replacement Correctional Facility

San Mateo County Sheriffff’s Office Issued: February 6, 2012 Responses due: February 22, 2012, 2:30 pm

Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Prroject Executtive San Mateo County Sherifff’s Office Jail Planning Unit 400 County Center, 3rd Floor Redwood City, CA94063 Telephone: (650) 508-66721 Email: [email protected]

9904-001\2346567.2

DISCLAIMER

This Request for Proposals (RFP) is not a commitment or contract of any kind. The County of San Mateo reserves the right to pursue any, or none of the ideas generated by this request. Costs for developing the proposals are entirely the responsibility of the applicants and shall not be reimbursed. The County reserves the right to select the proposal that is in the County’s best interest, to reject any and all proposals, to terminate the RFP process, and/or to waive any requirements of this RFP when it determines that doing so is in the best interest of the County. Further, while every effort has been made to ensure the information presented in this RFP is accurate and thorough, the County assumes no liability for any unintentional errors or omissions in this document.

NOTE REGARDING THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT:

(a) General Provisions Regarding Public Nature of Proposals. Government Code Section 6250 et. seq., the Public Records Act, defines a public record as any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public's business that is prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. The Public Records Act provides that public records shall be disclosed upon written request, and that any citizen has a right to inspect any public record, unless the document is exempted from the disclosure requirements.

(b) Proposer’s Rights Regarding Confidentiality of Proposals. The County of San Mateo does not represent or guarantee that any information submitted in response to the RFP will be kept confidential. If the County of San Mateo receives a request under the Public Records Act for any document submitted in response to this RFP, it will not assert any privileges that may exist on behalf of the person or business submitting the proposal. In the event that a party who has submitted a proposal wishes to prevent disclosure, it is the sole responsibility of that party to assert any applicable privileges or reasons why the document should not be produced and to obtain a court order prohibiting disclosure. If material is designated as confidential, the County will attempt in a timely manner to inform the person or entity that submitted such material of the public records request in order to permit the person or entity to assert any applicable privileges.

Section 10 of this document sets forth the procedures for designating a document as confidential. Failure to comply with the procedures in Section 10 constitutes a waiver by the submitting party of any claim that the information is protected from disclosure. If you submit information you claim is protected as a trade secret or on any other basis, you must follow all procedures in Section 10.

Request for Proposals Page 2 of 18

PART 1 – INTRODUCTION 1.01 The County of San Mateo (“County”) invites responses to this Request for Proposals (“RFP”) from the following pre-qualified firms (“respondents”), listed alphabetically Hensel Phelps Construction Company, McCarthy Building Companies, Inc., and Sundt/Layton. The successful respondent will contract with the County to provide construction management (the “CM contract”) for the County’s Replacement Correctional Facility (the “Project”).

1.02 This RFP and the proposals submitted in response to it is the second stage of the County’s RFP process that will culminate in award of the CM contract. After evaluating all Statements of Qualifications (SOQ’s) submitted pursuant to the issuance of the Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFSOQ’s), the County short-listed 3 firms who are now asked to respond to this RFP. The County will conduct an in-depth evaluation of the proposals submitted and conduct interviews with each of the short-listed respondents. The County will then begin sequential contract negotiations beginning with the most qualified firm, should these negotiations fail the County will begin negotiations with the second firm.

1.03 This RFP and the responses of the selected Construction Manager (CM) firm(s) will be included in the CM contract for the Project following award.

PART 2 –SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

2.01 Please read the entire RFP and all enclosures before preparing your proposal. Proposers should seek clarification of any requirements that they do not fully understand. Misunderstandings resulting in an improper response will not be considered a valid reason to fail to supply all features indicated to exist by the Proposer. Respondents should address any issue or question no later than 4:00 PM on February 13, 2012 via email to Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, Project Executive. Email: [email protected].

2.02 Respondents should address every item listed in this RFP, even if the item was addressed previously in your SOQ. Brevity and clarity are of utmost importance. Responses that are comprised of standard marketing materials that do not specifically address the items below will not be evaluated; however, respondents may include fifteen (15) bound copies of their marketing materials, as long as they are not permanently attached to the Proposal. Responses that do not comply with all applicable requirements will not be considered.

2.03 All proposals shall be firm offers, and will so be considered by the County, although the County reserves the right to negotiate terms upon evaluation of the proposals. Proposals will be considered valid offers for a period of ninety (90) days following the close of the RFP and included as part of the contract.

2.04 The responses to this RFP should be bound and printed vertically (“portrait” orientation) on standard 8 ½” by 11” paper. The responses should not exceed 30 pages; single sided but will preferably be much shorter. Type size should be no smaller than 10 point, but preferably larger. The top of page one of the response should state the respondent’s name, address, phone number, fax number, e-mail address, and contact name. No cover letter is necessary.

2.05 Respondents must submit an original, signed response to the RFP, together with fifteen (15) copies, and one (1) electronic copy, no later than 2:30 PM on February 22, 2012 to:

Request for Proposals Page 3 of 18

The signed original RFP response should include a statement signed by an owner, officer, or authorized agent of the respondent, acknowledging and accepting all terms and conditions of this RFP.

Proposals received late will not be opened or given any consideration for the proposed services.

PART 3 – SHERIFF’S OFFICE BACKGROUND

3.01 The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office is managed by a Sheriff who is directly elected for a four-year term. In addition to overseeing all adult correctional facilities in San Mateo County, the Sheriff is responsible for patrol services in both unincorporated areas of the county and contract cities, investigations, custody, and security in the courts, and various administrative functions.

3.02 The incumbent Sheriff is Greg Munks. Directly under his command are Undersheriff Carlos Bolanos and Assistant Sheriff Trisha Sanchez. Overseeing this RFP is Lieutenant Deborah Bazan, the Project Executive.

PART 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION

B. The County is using a “Construction Manager at Risk” (CM at Risk) delivery method. The prime contracts will be assigned to the successful Construction Manager, who must be capable of staffing the Project for preconstruction services and complete project oversight, coordination, supervision management and administration of the construction process. The successful Construction Manager will be expected to work collaboratively with the Sheriff’s consultants and Architect throughout the design and construction process.

C. The CM selected will be asked to provide and perform construction management services for the Project. As such the scope of services is expected to include full pre-construction services through the design process including but not limited to cost estimating, scheduling, and value engineering services and suggested packaging of bids during the design process. It is also expected that at an agreed point in the design process, the successful CM will provide a Maximum Fee for the construction of the Project. Although all bids will be subject to open public bidding and the laws that govern such, ultimately the successful CM will be assigned the contracts of all the lowest responsible bidders for each bid package and will be expected to successfully manage said contracts. The Construction Manager will not be permitted to perform any construction or other similar work.

D. The initial Target Hard Cost is $350 per building square foot, which includes all hard costs to construct buildings, parking, site landscaping and all onsite infrastructures.

Request for Proposals Page 4 of 18

E. This Project is to be designed and documented using Building Information Modeling (BIM).

F. The facility shall be constructed in accordance with all local and state laws, building codes and applicable zoning issues and ordinances. Additionally, the facility shall adhere to all of the requirements defined by California Administrative Code Title 24, and Minimum Standards for Local Adult Detention Facilities

G. The County’s goal is to achieve early involvement of certain subcontractors to participate in the design/preconstruction phase of the project. The County is considering using a design/build approach for mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection, and other key trades.

PART 5 – OUTLINE OF SCOPE OF WORK

A. Pre-construction Phase The Pre-construction Phase of services will be on a lump sum service agreement, the County of San Mateo requires that the CM manage costs incurred for this phase separately from costs incurred against the Maximum Fee during the Construction Phase, if awarded. It is anticipated that the Architect and the CM shall both enter into contracts with the County prior to the beginning of the Schematic Design Phase.

During the Pre-construction Phase CM shall perform the following:

A. Establish a target baseline budget at the beginning of preconstruction phase and throughout the milestone stages, ensure that the established scope with current market pricing is within budget.

B. CM (and design/build subcontractors) shall attend design meetings as necessary to coordinate the design and to provide assistance and advice regarding:

1. Constructability reviews and suggestions 2. Resolve design issues in a collaborative manner for the overall success of the project 3. Prefabrication and other offsite manufacturing opportunities 4. Establishing and resolving site logistics and storage issues 5. Coordinating required offsite improvements

C. Identify the availability and the resource of all materials against schedule, and advise Owner to secure orders for critical long lead items or labor sources.

D. Study and analyze the site conditions, explore through photographic and boring data or other means and propose a construction sequence and phasing plan.

E. In conjunction with the Architect/Engineer (A/E) recommend a cost effective structural system.

F. Develop a detailed project schedule and identify critical paths.

G. Participate in design decisions by providing information, estimates, scenarios, and recommendations regarding construction materials, methods, systems, phasing, and costs that shall provide the highest quality building within the budget and schedule.

H. Provide proposed phasing and project schedule analysis at each of the major design milestones including all of the pre-construction, bidding, entitlement, regulatory agency permits and other project-related scheduling issues and activities.

Request for Proposals Page 5 of 18

I. Provide value engineering analysis at each of the major milestones addressing all building systems along with life cycle analyses for major building elements. Provide ongoing analysis to provide indications of vulnerability of potential conflicts that may result in constructability issues, claims and/or change order requests.

J. CM to provide assistance in establishing JPU and CM site needs and assist AE to develop General Conditions as part of the demo bid package including the set up the construction trailers. Coordinate with local service providers for all temporary utilities required at the job site.

K. Prepare and evaluate a cost estimate and evaluate the estimate against the construction budget. Recommend, if necessary, the appropriate action to correct and/or avoid potential budget overruns. CM shall provide a budgetary cost estimate at the beginning of the Pre-Construction phase after the kick off meeting with Architect and JPU to factor in Sheriff’s needs as well as all locality related requirements, and provide full and complete estimates at 100% Conceptual, 100% Schematic Design, and 100% Design Development. Budget Estimates are to be in a CSI or similar format acceptable to the County. Authorization to proceed with the next step in the design process is contingent on the acceptance of the building cost estimates as compared to the construction budget approved by County.

L. CM to submit Maximum Fee proposal upon 80% of the Design Phase

M. CM shall oversee Architect’s BIM model as the design progresses to assure that it will be capable of producing fully coordinated construction documents and shop drawings showing coordination of MEP elements, sprinklers and other ceiling and building features.

N. Conduct a systematic, impartial pre-qualification process of the potential subcontractors for the project. Prepare and place notices and advertisements to solicit bids and walk through, and develop the most logical, competitive, and distinct trade contractor bid packages with clearly identified scope of work. Include bid alternatives (deductive or additive) in each trade contractor bid package to optimize the value of the project budget. If design/build procurement of certain trades is used, prepare documents to prequalify any necessary design/build subcontractors and assist in the selection process. After the subcontractors are pre-selected by the County, the CM will assist in the coordination of the documentation.

O. Assist County with the pre-bid conferences, issue addendums when appropriate. Receive and disclose bids with County, analyze the bids for completeness, and recommend the lowest responsive bidders to County for entering into contracts to be assigned to CM for full ownership and responsibility of subcontractors’ performance.

P. The CM shall include construction contingency approved by County in its fee proposal, The CM shall obtain the prior approval of the Project Executive of JPU prior to the commitment of any portion of the contingency.

Q. CM shall oversee the construction of the Project and maintain records to allow the project to be LEED certified to a minimum Silver Certification level.

R. Existing building demolition: Concurrent with the design phase, assist with the development of the existing building Demolition Plans developed by the architect. As part of this work the CM will:

1. Acquire utilities disconnection approvals from the city and other agencies

Request for Proposals Page 6 of 18

2. Develop traffic control logistic and truck route plans 3. Develop and implement SWPPP plans 4. Develop and implement a site security logistic plan 5. Obtain building demolition permits and pay permit fees as a reimbursable expense. 6. Prequalify subcontractors and solicit bids for the work in accordance with the Public Contracting Code.

S. CM will prepare budgets and schedules at various stages of development of the construction documents. When the construction documents are 80% complete, the selected CM will prepare and submit to County a statement of the CM’s Proposed Maximum Fee (PMF) for the Project, which shall be based upon the Project Budget update approved by the County at that stage of document preparation. The PMF statement must be broken down into such detail as County reasonably may require and is to include:

1. All anticipated Subcontract Costs showing actual costs plus profit, broken down on a trade-by-trade basis with sufficient detail to analyze potential value engineering suggestions. 2. General Conditions at actual costs 3. The costs for CM fee and insurance 4. A County controlled contingency which will be further described in the Construction Contract (and which must be expressed as a percentage of the Cost of the Work).

B. Construction Phase The CM shall provide construction administration and management services to construct the project in an efficient and cost-effective fashion consistent with the best interests of County of San Mateo. The scope of this task includes the CM construction phase services as described and further detailed in Attachment C1.

During the Construction Phase CM shall perform the following:

A. Update the Project Schedule on a monthly basis. In order to provide a comprehensive schedule, the CM shall coordinate and receive input from County of San Mateo, the Architect and the trade contractors for compliance with the individual requirements of each portion of the project and the overall Project Schedule. The CM shall review and approve the trade contractors’ proposed construction schedule for logic, reasonableness, and conformance to the requirements of the Contract Documents. The CM shall conduct daily review of the trade contractors’ progress and conformance with monthly updated Construction Schedules.

B. CM shall be responsible for the safety precautions and programs in connection with the Project. The CM shall provide a safe workplace as required by local, state, and federal regulations. CM shall conduct safety meetings on a regular basis and require all subcontractors to attend.

C. In conjunction with the Architect to review and approve trade contractors’ monthly progress payment requests. Compare the requested payments to actual work completed in accordance with the pre-approved schedule of values presented by the trade contractors at the beginning of construction. Combine trade contractors’ payment requests into the CM‘s payment request, prepare a current overall schedule of values, and submit one invoice in duplicate to the JPU Project Executive for approval and payment that has been pre-approved by the Architect.

Request for Proposals Page 7 of 18

D. Coordinate and address trade contractors’ Requests for Information (RFIs) with the Architect. RFIs shall be tracked through the field office by the CM. Architect shall be responsible for technical interpretations and clarifications of the contract documents. CM shall be responsible for managing the clarification and interpretation process

E. CM shall maintain the BIM model up to date and that Changes to the Contract Documents from pertinent RFIs, or Owner and Architect initiated changes, are reflected in the BIM models and integrated into the Construction Models to look for interferences and/or make changes as necessary to coordinate the changes.

F. There shall be weekly meetings between the County, the CM, and the architect. As required by the stage of construction, MEP subcontractors may also be required to attend. The meetings will be held at the job site in a trailer provided by the CM. The CM shall present a schedule showing the upcoming three (3) weeks construction activities at each meeting and will be responsible for preparing meeting notes and distributing them via email within two (2) working days after the meeting. CM shall provide a monthly construction progress report, summarizing the progress of construction and key issues currently pending. The report will indicate each trade contractor’s progress. The report shall also summarize the current cash flow projections.

G. Assist JPU Project Executive in reporting construction progress to the Board Members and senior Management of County of San Mateo at regular intervals throughout the Project. The CM shall prepare occasional presentations to other organizations as requested by the JPU Project Executive regarding construction issues of special importance.

H. Throughout construction, schedule, chair and record minutes for all regular meetings including trade contractors on a weekly basis and Owner, Architect, CM meetings on a weekly basis. Minutes must be provided within two business days to all attendees. Provide direct supervision, coordination, scheduling and problem resolution for trade contractors. Monitor that the trade contractors are maintaining as-built drawings. Coordinate the construction schedule with County/Sheriff contractors and vendors to ensure that any owner provided items are installed at the appropriate time to minimize damage to previously installed work and to coordinate with space availability. CM shall work with the County’s vendors to coordinate their work.

I. Compile the as-built drawings and submit them at the end of the project to the Architect for review, approval and further processing. Prepare a recommendation for final acceptance of the project after the trade contractors have corrected deficient work and satisfied all contract conditions. CM shall prepare final payment request and final report. CM shall provide a complete set of contract files to the JPU Project Executive. This shall include, but not be limited to, as-built drawings, operation and maintenance manuals, additional materials, and warranties.

J. The CM shall not perform any construction work.

C – Close-Out A. Prepare an ongoing punch list specifying the work to be completed and/or corrected on an ongoing basis.

B. Correct all work listed on the consolidated punch-list generated by County, and architect.

C. Obtain, review, coordinate and submit all “as built” or “record” documents from all subcontractors, including the design build subcontractors, for coordination with the

Request for Proposals Page 8 of 18

architect’s record drawing submittal. Provide one set of hard copy record documents and provide a full set of record documents in both Adobe Acrobat and AutoCAD compatible format. Provide the record BIM model.

D. Obtain, review, coordinate and submit all operations and maintenance manuals from all subcontractors. In addition, provide on-site training and instruction on the proper use and maintenance of all new, renovated, or relocated building systems.

E. Within 30 days of Substantial Completion, set up training of County/Sheriff personnel on the operation, use and maintenance of all equipment provided as part of the CM’s work.

F. Provide warrantee/guarantee letters from all subcontractors for one year after Substantial Completion of the project.

PART 6 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS Each proposal shall consist of the following sections:

6.01 Company Information and Qualifications A. Any changes to your company since the date of your Statement of Qualifications (“SOQ”) such as ownership, staff size, any significant legal actions pending against the company.

B. Any clarifications to your SOQ to better describe your team’s ability to meet the requirements of the program.

C. Describe the current and forecasted workload of the personnel included in your proposal for this Project.

6.02 Proposed Project Team Qualifications and Availability

A. If not previously included in your SOQ, attach resumes for your staff that will be committed to the Project with a listing of projects similar in scope to this Project. Provide a clear understanding of:

1. Role and time commitment of each team member 2. Each team member’s work roles on other projects 3. Detail on project approach 4. Who will attend each meeting and what will be accomplished 5. How they insure user team input 6. Projected project schedule 7. If joint a venture, provide a clear understanding of each teams role. 8. Who will be performing what work and where.

B. Present written assurances that if awarded the Project, the proposed team will be assigned for the duration of the Project.

C. If different than noted in your SOQ, describe the proposed organizational and reporting structure of your team for this Project.

D. The Sheriff is considering the use of a “Big Room” arrangement for the team. Which members do you recommend use this space, for what duration, and what stages of the Project?

E. Describe projects that have been completed by the proposed team within the past 5 years.

Request for Proposals Page 9 of 18

F. Describe the depth of experience your team has in performing services utilizing BIM to enhance cost estimating, improve Owner understanding of the design concept, reduce construction costs, increase construction productivity and reduce construction conflicts to improve overall efficiency.

G. Describe other large projects your firm has underway, committed, or pursuing. Describe the potential impact of these other large projects on your work on this project.

6.03 Project Approach

A. Elaborate on the information provided in the response to the RFSOQ to describe your firm’s construction and management philosophy and how it relates to the County and this Project.

B. Describe your methodology for completing this Project, include number of meetings onsite with Jail Planning Unit and other consultants for each phase of the Project and what tasks will be accomplished at each meeting.

C. Where more than one firm is proposed, explain your contractual relationship and each firm’s specific responsibilities during each phase of the Project.

D. Within each firm, clearly state the responsibilities of each individual proposed for each phase of the Project.

E. Provide your Firm’s proposed schedule based on the Functional Program and Project Description to achieve an optimal cost-effective schedule. Please keep this schedule high level (no more than two pages).

F. Describe your firm’s approach to work in conjunction with the Architect to recommend the most efficient and cost effective structural system for the Project. Identify your experience with various types of structural systems. Identify any unique opportunities for this Project related to structural systems.

G. Describe your experience with early involvement of subcontractors. What would you recommend for procurement of subcontractors between design/build and hard bid?

H. Provide a statement of qualifications for the top three MEP and Fire Sprinkler design build subcontractors that you consider qualified for the project, and their firms’ respective experience with BIM.

I. Describe your approach to keeping the County informed of budget and schedule status at all times to alleviate any “surprises”.

J. Describe examples of your experience co-locating with the design team on past projects. What do you recommend on this project?

K. Describe your approach to ensuring that the project construction optimizes the Sheriff’s goals and objectives while minimizing operational costs.

L. Describe your specific approach to coordinating with the project architects to take full advantage of the CM-at-risk project delivery method. Provide a list of anticipated meetings, including frequency of meetings by phase.

M. Explain how you will coordinate with relevant and local agencies during the design and construction phase

Request for Proposals Page 10 of 18

6.04 Compensation The scopes of service to be performed by the CM are two separate phases of the project: Pre-construction Phase and Construction Phase. Each phase will be on a separate Notice to Proceed. There is no guarantee for award of the Construction Phase; in case the County of San Mateo for specific reason decides not to award the Construction Phase, there will be no recovery of any monetary awards associated with the Construction Phase, such as cost and/or anticipated profit.

Respondent shall complete the information in the attachments: A1-CM Fee Proposal B1-CM Construction Phase Scope Details C1-CM General Conditions

Pre-Construction Costs of the Contract is the figure provided by the CM Fee Proposal (Attachment A1), shall be inclusive of all of Respondent’s profit and all costs necessary for the performance of the Services specified in the RFSOQ and RFP applicable to this Phase, including meetings, constructability reviews, value engineering, scheduling, and cost estimating. Prepare a “Not to Exceed” fee for the preconstruction phase of the project, and include an estimate for reimbursable expenses you expect during this phase.

Construction Phase Services Fee of the Contract is the figure provided by the CM Fee Proposal (Attachments A1, B1), shall be inclusive of all Respondent’s profit, and all costs expended in pursuit of performing the Construction Phase Services for the Project as specified in the RFSOQ, RFP and in the final approved Construction Documents, including but not limited to any materials, payroll, overhead and administrative costs, travel and living expenses, licenses, bonds, insurance and any other fees or expenses incurred necessary for the performance of the services and completion of the Project, and any other ancillary costs necessary to provide services for the turnover of the Project to the County. Also identify the cost of insurance and performance and payment bond on this project per attachment B1.

General Conditions of the Contract for Construction is the figure provided by the CM Fee Proposal (Attachments A1, C1) for the project which also includes, but is not limited to: project staff, temporary utilities, temporary facilities and other project costs as referenced in Attachments A1, B1, C1. These General Conditions shall be a budget only, and ultimately the final General Conditions shall be negotiated separately with the CM Contract and will be based on actual costs. The County will reserve audit rights to verify that only actual costs are included with General Conditions. The General Conditions amount proposed should be based on your schedule for the project.

CM’s Contingency is tentatively set up at 3% of construction cost and will be confirmed during contract negotiation stage; this is not to be included in the Fee proposal. The use of this contingency shall require prior approval by the COUNTY. The CM shall return any unused portion of this contingency and any other project savings to the COUNTY as part of the final Pay Application. Costs incurred due to conflicts and ambiguities in the contract documents, and any issues arising from a lack of coordination among and within the subcontractors’ bid packages, and for any construction phase changes arising from subcontractors’ performance, in excess of the CM’s 3% contingency shall be borne by the CM.

Risk/Reward. Please indicate if your firm is willing to share in the risk or incentive of the Project outcome with the County based on an agreed upon Target Cost. The Target Cost will not be set until the successful Construction Manager has been selected and had an opportunity to work with the Architect and other key team members on further

Request for Proposals Page 11 of 18

development of the design and additional cost evaluation. Please provide alternative approaches for sharing in the risk or incentive of the Project outcome.

6.05 Acceptance of the County’s Professional Services Agreement

A draft of the County’s Professional Services Agreement will be forwarded to you separately. Bidders are instructed to include exceptions (if any) to the County’s Draft Professional Services Agreement with specific alternate language in the form of redlines. If no exceptions are stated the County will assume the respondent is prepared to sign the County contract as-is. The County reserves the right to modify the draft agreement during the negotiations with the selected firm and is not bound to the terms set forth in the draft agreement.

Each proposal must include a statement of the respondent’s commitment and ability to comply with each of the terms of the following:

D. Respondents must comply with the County Ordinance Code with respect to the provision on employee benefits. As set forth in the ordinance, such respondents are prohibited from discriminating in the provision of employee benefits between an employee with a domestic partner and an employee with a spouse. The County jury duty ordinance must be adhered to.

In addition, the respondent should include a statement that it will agree to have any disputes regarding any Agreement venued in San Mateo County. Also include a statement indicating your ability to obtain liability insurance of a minimum of $1,000,000 for each of the following: comprehensive general, motor vehicle, professional and worker’s compensation.

PART 7 – KEY SELECTION CRITERIA

7.01 The evaluation by the Selection Committee will be based on the criteria listed below.

A. Completeness of Response Submission – RFP responses should describe comprehensive construction management and general construction administration services proposed and should respond to each of the items set forth in the RFP and adherence to the formatting to rules.

B. Team Experience, Qualifications, and Capabilities – Evaluation of the list of personnel specifically assigned to the Project as stated in their previous RFSOQ

Request for Proposals Page 12 of 18

submittal, including their qualifications, overall experience, and recent experience working together on projects of similar nature and complexity to the Project.

C. Depth and Quality of Respondent’s Performance – Review of past performance on San Mateo County projects or other projects of similar nature and complexity as the Project; evaluation of client references whether included in the proposal response or not; overall responsiveness to County’s needs.

D. Technical / Project Management Approach – Evaluation of the respondent’s overall ability to interface, coordinate with, and collaborate with the County’s various user groups and the design team throughout conceptual design, schematic design, design development, and the entire construction and post construction period, up to the date of beneficial occupancy by the Sheriff’s Office.

E. Value – The fee and overall total cost for services, and as importantly, the ability to drive to the best total project cost value to the County. Demonstrated ability to manage, develop, and coordinate BIM processes and develop a BIM to increase the accuracy and speed of cost projections, enhance the County’s understanding of the design, reduce construction costs, and improve the construction schedule to the maximum benefit of the County.

F. Availability – Evaluation of the workload of respondent and the staffing to be assigned to the Project; time schedule of the respondent in relation to that of the proposed Project location of the offices or facilities from which the services are to be provided to the County.

G. Financial Stability – Evaluation of the overall financial position of respondent as determined from financial information required by the RFSOQ or from other independent sources.

H. Sustainable Practices The County may consider any other criteria it deems relevant, and the Selection Committee is free to make any recommendations it deems to be in the best interest of the County.

PART 8 – REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS

8.01 Review of Proposals

A. The County will evaluate the information based on materials submitted in response to this RFP. All short-listed CM firms should submit information in response to this RFP based on the requested information specified.

B. Respondents should prepare their response according to the RFP format, i.e., by section and paragraph of this RFP. The County reserves the right to reject any response to this RFP not submitted within the required timeframe; reject any incomplete RFP submitted; contact client references; require further information; and/or require interviews with any respondent. All costs related to the preparation, submittal, and/or presentation of this RFP are the responsibility of the respondent and will not be assumed in full or in part by the County.

C. Proposals shall be used to determine the applicant’s capability of rendering the services to be provided and the cost for the services. By submitting a proposal, each respondent certifies that its submission is not the result of collusion or any other activity which would tend to directly or indirectly influence the selection process. The County reserves the sole right to evaluate the contents of proposals submitted in response to this RFP and to select a successful respondent, or none at all.

Request for Proposals Page 13 of 18

D. The County reserves the right to waive any requirements of this RFP when it is determined that waiving a requirement is in the best interest of the County.

E. The County will evaluate proposals based on each respondent’s written submission only. Evaluation will be performed only on the material included directly in the proposal itself unless otherwise indicated by the County in this RFP. The Evaluation Committee will not access company web sites or read sales brochures, marketing materials, or white papers in evaluating vendor experience or proposed methodology unless doing so is in the County’s best interest. You may submit additional materials or reference on-line information in your proposal if you wish, but these will not be considered during the proposal evaluation process.

F. If critical errors are found in a proposal, the County may reject the proposal. However, the County may, in its sole discretion, correct arithmetic and/or transposition errors or contact a respondent for clarification. The respondent will be informed of the errors and corrections.

G. This is a professional services selection process and as such the County reserves the right to accept other than the lowest costs submitted and to negotiate with a respondent on a fair and equal basis when the best interests of the County are served by doing so.

8.02 Interview

The Selection Committee selected by the Sheriff’s Jail Planning Lieutenant will conduct interviews for the short listed proposals on February 28, 2012. Each respondent selected for an interview will have 60 minutes to make a presentation to the evaluation committee and then a 60 minute question and answer period will follow.

The Selection Committee will notify respondents of the results of the evaluation by telephone, mail or email to the designated contact person.

PART 9 –Appeal of Decision

Unsuccessful respondents/firms shall have five business days from the delivery of County’s letter of rejection to submit a written appeal, addressed directly to Sheriff Greg Munks at 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063. Appeals received after the deadline will not be accepted. The written appeal should specifically address any perceived irregularities in the process and/or the RFP review committee’s recommendation. The committee will review the written appeal, and to present to the Sheriff the reason for the committee’s recommendations. An appeal that merely addresses a single aspect of the selected proposal, e.g., comparing the cost of the selected proposal in relation to the non-selected proposal, is not sufficient to support an appeal. A successful appeal will include sufficient evidence and analysis to support a conclusion that the selected proposal, taken as a whole, is an inferior proposal. The Sheriff will respond to an appeal within ten (10) business days of receiving it, and the Sheriff may, at its election, set up a meeting with the respondent to discuss the concerns raised by the protest. The decision of the Sheriff will be final.

PART 10 – CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROPOSALS

California Government Code Sections 6250 et seq. (the "Public Records Act") defines a public record as any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public business. The Public Records Act provides that public records shall be disclosed upon written request and that any citizen has a right to inspect any public record unless the document is exempted from disclosure. The County is subject to the California Public Records Act.

Request for Proposals Page 14 of 18

Any contract that eventually arises from this RFP is a public record in its entirety, as is all information submitted in response to this RFP except as outlined in this Section. Failure to comply with the procedures in this Section constitutes a waiver by the submitting party of any claim that the information is protected from disclosure.

If you submit information you claim is protected from disclosure as a trade secret or on any other basis, you must do all of the following:

(i) Identify each page of such material as "CONFIDENTIAL";

(ii) Place all such pages in a separate tab in the appropriate section of your submission as listed in Section V.C, below; and

(iii) Submit with your proposal a proposed non-disclosure agreement for review.

For example, if your response contains confidential materials in Tabs 5 and 6, you should include separate tabs labeled "Tab 5-CONFIDENTIAL" and "Tab 6-CONFIDENTIAL" in the appropriate sections of your submission, and each page within those tabs must have the label "CONFIDENTIAL" on it. In this way you must segregate such materials in relation to each tab. You must also submit a proposed non-disclosure agreement.

Over-designation of materials as confidential, such as designating every page of a submission, may result in rejection of the entire proposal at the County's sole discretion. Failure to designate a portion of your submission as confidential means that you consent to that portion's release by the County if requested under the Public Records Act without further notice to you and that you will indemnify and hold harmless the County for release of such information.

The County of San Mateo does not represent or guarantee that any information submitted in response to this RFP will be kept confidential. If the County receives a request for any portion of a document submitted in response to this RFP that complies with the procedures in this Section, the County will not assert any privileges that may exist on behalf of the person or entity submitting the proposal but will notify the party that marked the pages/information "CONFIDENTIAL." It is the responsibility of the person or entity submitting the proposal to assert any applicable privileges or reasons why the portion of the document so marked should not be produced. If material is designated as confidential, the County will attempt in a timely manner to inform the person or entity that submitted such material of the public records request in order to permit the person or entity to assert any applicable privileges.

To the extent consistent with applicable provisions of the Public Records Act and applicable case law interpreting those provisions, the County and/or its officers, agents and employees retain the discretion to release or withhold disclosure of any information submitted in response to this RFP.

Submission of a proposal constitutes a complete waiver of any claims whatsoever against the County and/or its officers, agents, or employees that the County has violated a respondent's right to privacy, disclosed trade secrets, or caused any damage by allowing the proposal to be inspected.

PART 11 – GENERAL CONDITIONS

11.01 The RFP responses should be clear and concise to enable management-oriented personnel to make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether the RFP response meets the County’s requirements. To this end, each RFP response should be as specific, detailed, and complete as to clearly and fully demonstrate

Request for Proposals Page 15 of 18

that the respondent has a thorough understanding of and has demonstrated knowledge of the requirements to perform the work (or applicable portion thereof). The respondent and each of its members must verify the RFP response under oath.

11.02 The submission of a response to this RFP does not commit County to award a contract for the Project, to pay costs incurred in the preparation of responses to this RFP or to procure or contract for any services. Costs for preparing responses to this RFP will be paid entirely by the respondents.

11.03 County reserves the right to interpret or change any provision of this RFP at any time prior to the RFP submission date. Such interpretations or changes shall be in the form of addenda to this RFP and all respondents will be notified by email. County, in its sole discretion, may determine that a time extension is required for submission of responses to this RFP, in which case such addenda shall indicate a new RFP submission deadline. County reserves the right to waive inconsequential deviations from stated requirements.

11.04 County retains the right to reject any and all responses to this RFP, to contract work with whomever and in whatever manner County decides, or to abandon the work entirely. County shall make final decisions regarding a respondent’s qualifications as of proposal day. All decisions concerning respondent selection shall be made in County’s best interests.

11.05 This RFP constitutes part of each proposal and includes the explanation of the County’s needs, which must be met.

11.06 This RFP and all materials submitted in response to this RFP will become the property of the County.

11.07 Alteration of Terms and Clarifications. It is mutually understood and agreed that no alteration or variation of the terms of this RFP shall be valid unless made or confirmed in writing and signed by the County and respondent selected, and that no oral understandings or agreements not incorporated herein, and no alterations or variations of the terms hereof unless made or confirmed in writing between said parties hereto, shall be binding.

11.08 If a respondent discovers any ambiguity, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or other error in the RFP, the respondent shall immediately notify the County of such error in writing and request modification or clarification of the document. Modifications to the RFP will be made by addenda as outlined above.

11.09 Clarifications will be sent by email to all parties. Each respondent must provide the County with electronic contact information in response to this RFP.

11.10 If a respondent fails to notify the County of an error in the RFP prior to the date fixed for submission, the respondent shall submit a response at his/her own risk, and if the respondent enters into a contract, the respondent shall not be entitled to additional compensation or time by reason of the error or its later correction.

11.11 Should respondent realize during the review process that there has been a substantive error or omission in its submittal, which does not alter basic services and has not already resulted in disqualification from participating in the RFP process for other reasons, said respondent is invited to submit to the Project Executive a written request and explanation of respondent’s desire to correct its submittal. It shall be at the sole discretion of the County’s selection committee to decide whether to grant respondent’s request to correct its RFP submittal.

Request for Proposals Page 16 of 18

11.12 Contact with County/Jail Planning Unit Employees is prohibited. As of the issuance date of this RFP and continuing until the final date for submission of proposals, all respondents are specifically directed not to hold meetings, conferences, or technical discussions with any County or Jail Planning Unit employee (or their agents or representatives), for purposes of responding to this RFP except as otherwise permitted by this RFP. Any respondent found to be acting in any way contrary to this directive may be disqualified from entering into any contract that may result from this RFP.

PART 12 – Negotiation of Contract Once a respondent is selected, the agreement with that firm must still be negotiated and submitted to the Sheriff and/or San Mateo County Board of Supervisors for approval, and there is no contractual agreement between the selected firm unless and until the Board of Supervisors or its designee, as applicable, accepts and signs the Agreement. Selection of a proposal for negotiation of contract terms and eventual submission to County management by way of an agreement does not constitute an offer, and respondents acknowledge by submission of a proposal that no agreement is final unless and until approved by the County Manager or the Board of Supervisors, as applicable. Should the selected firm not, in the County’s determination, be prepared to negotiate in good faith; or should the selected firm not be able to meet the County’s contractual terms and conditions which the County believes to be essential to a successful contract, the County reserves the right to terminate contract negotiations and begin contract negotiations with one or more than one of the remaining respondents.

PART 13 – PROJECT EXECUTIVE

All written inquiries and requests for additional information pertaining to this RFP, any addendum, or any matter relating to the architect selection process, must, unless otherwise identified in an addendum, be directed to the following designated Project Executive:

Lieutenant Deborah Bazan San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office Jail Planning Unit 400 County Center 3rd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Telephone: (650) 508-6721 Email: [email protected]

SAN MATEO COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE

Greg Munks, Sheriff

Request for Proposals Page 17 of 18

ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE OF EVENTS FOR RFP PROCESS

RFP responses due: 2:30 pm February 22, 2012

Interviews February 28, 2012

Board of Supervisors approves contract May 8, 2012

County reserves the right to modify this schedule at any time at its sole discretion.

L:\CLIENT\S_DEPTS\SHERIFF\Jail Planning\CM RFP.Docx

Request for Proposals Page 18 of 18

Attachment A1 CM at Risk Fee Proposal

Estimated project construction cost is Fee Percentage (Fee as % of Construction Cost) Fee in $ (Fee % multiplied by Construction Cost) $100M Pre-Construction Phase 1 Construction Phase Service (General 2 Conditions) CM at Risk Fee (Overhead & Profit) 3 Total CM at Risk Cost Proposal Amount in 4 Dollar ($):

Note 1:The Construction Budget does not include fees for professional architectural and engineering services, inspection, testing and inspection services, or Owner's contingency. Attachment B1 CM Construction Phase Scope Details

Temporary Facilities Direct Cost of the Work General Conditions Overhead and Profit SM County 1 Office Trailer/Rental X 2 Storage Trailer & Tool Shed Rental X 3 Office Furniture/Equip/computers X 4 Xerox Copies/Misc Printing X 5 Postage/UPS/FedEx X 6 Project Photographs X 7 Temporary Toilets X 8 Project Sign X 9 Temporary Fencing/Enclosures X 10 Covered Walkways X 11 Barricades X 12 Temporary Stairs X 13 Opening Protection X 14 Safety Railing & Nets X 15 Drinking Water/Cooler/Cup X 16 Safety/First Aid Supplies X 17 Fire Fighting Equipment X 18 Security Guards X 19 Watchman Service X 20 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

Miscellaneous Project Costs Premium – Contractor Performance and Payment 1 Bonds X* Premium ‐ Contractor provided insurance (other 2 than CCIP insurance) X* 3 Premium‐CCIP insurance X* 4 Premium ‐ Subcontractor insurance X Premium ‐ Subcontractor performance and payment 5 bonds X 6 Printing ‐ Drwgs & Specs X 7 Initial Soils Investigation X 8 Testing and Inspection X 9 Maintenance After Occupancy X 10 Facility Operator/Training X 11 Fees‐ Plan Check X 12 Fees‐ Sidewalk Permit X 13 Fees‐ Water Connection X 14 Fees‐ Water Meter X 15 Fees‐ Sanitary Sewer X 16 Fees‐ Storm Drain X 17 Fees‐ Gas Service X 18 Fees‐ Power Service X 19 Fees‐ Curb & Gutter X 20 Fees‐ Sign X 21 Others‐CM to include items not listed above * Contractor Bonds and Insurance costs are not to be subject to Contractor mark‐up.

Hoisting 1 Hoist & Tower Rental X 2 Hoist Landing & Fronts X 4 Hoist Operator X 5 Hoist Safety Inspections X 6 Hoist Material Skips/Hoppers X 7 Erect & Dismantle Hoists X 8 Crane Rental X 9 Crane Operators X 10 Crane Safety Inspections X 11 Erect & Dismantle Crane X 12 Fuel, Repairs, Maintenance X 13 Crane Raising/Jumping Costs X 14 Temporary Elevator/Rental X 15 Elevator Operation Costs X 16 Elevator Repairs/Maintenance X 17 Cage Rider at Elevator X 18 Safety Inspections X 19 Forklift Rental X 20 Forklift Operator X 21 Forklift Safety Inspections X 22 Fuel, Repairs, Maintenance X 23 Elevator Service Costs X 24 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

Temporary Utilities 1 Telephone Installation X 2 Telephone Monthly Charges X 3 Elect Power Installation X 4 Elect Power Dist Wiring X 5 Elect Power Monthly Charges X 6 Water Service ‐ Installation X 7 Water Service ‐ Monthly Costs X 8 Heating & Cooling Costs X 9 Light Bulbs & Misc. Supplies X 10 Clean‐Up‐Periodical X 11 Clean‐Up‐Final X 12 Dump Permits and Fees X 13 Recycling/Trash Dumpster Removal/Hauling X 14 Flagger/Traffic Control X 15 Dust Control X 16 Temporary Road and Maintenance X 17 Trash Chute & Hopper X 18 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

CM Main Office Staff 1 Corporate Executives X 2 Principal in Charge X 3 Estimating Cost Engineering X 4 Value Engineering X 5 Scheduling X 6 Drafting and Detailing X 7 Purchasing & Contracts X 8 Accounting & Bookkeeping X 9 Safety Officer X 10 Secretarial X 11 Clerk/Typist X 12 Computer/Data Processing X 13 Legal (General Services/Pertaining to Project) X 14 Travel & Subsistence X 15 Fringe Benefits & Burden X 16 Vacation Time/Main Office X 17 Bonuses/Main Office X 18 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

On Site Staff 1 Project Executive/ Operation Manager X 2 Project Manager X 3 Project Superintendent X 4 Project Engineer X 5 Home Office Engineer X 6 Scheduling Engineer X 7 BIM Coordinator X 8 Draftsman/Detailer/ Record Drawings X 9 Field Accountant/Clerical & Administrative X 10 Independent Surveyor X 11 Safety X 12 Runner X 13 Vacation Time/Job Site Staff X 14 Sick Leave/Job Site Staff X 15 Bonuses/Job Site Staff X 16 Quality Control Program X Direct Job Costs 1 Wages of Construction Labor X 2 Labor/Fringe Benefits & Burden X 3 Subcontract Costs X 4 Material & Equipment X 5 Rental‐Contractor Owned Equip X 6 Small Tools ‐ Purchase X 7 Small Tools ‐ Rental X 5 Warranty Work & Coordination X 6 Corrective Work Damaged by GC or his subs X 7 Corrective Work Non‐Conforming with Specs X

CM@R General Conditions Total Cost transfer to Fee Proposal (Attachment A1) $ Attachment C1 CM General Conditions

Temporary Facilities General Conditions Unit Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Office Trailer/Rental X 2 Storage Trailer & Tool Shed Rental X 3 Office Furniture/Equip/computers X 4 Xerox Copies/Misc Printing X 5 Postage/UPS/FedEx X 6 Project Photographs X 7 Temporary Toilets X 8 Project Sign X 9 Temporary Fencing/Enclosures X 10 Covered Walkways X 11 Drinking Water/Cooler/Cup X 12 Safety/First Aid Supplies X 13 Fire Fighting Equipment X 14 Security Guards X 15 Watchman Service X 16 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

Miscellaneous Project Costs 1 Printing ‐ Drwgs & Specs X 2 Facility Operator/Training X 3 Others‐CM to include items not listed above * Contractor Bonds and Insurance costs are not to 4 be subject to Contractor mark‐up.

Hoisting

Temporary Utilities 1 Telephone Installation X 2 Telephone Monthly Charges X 3 Elect Power Installation X 4 Elect Power Dist Wiring X 5 Elect Power Monthly Charges X 6 Water Service ‐ Installation X 7 Water Service ‐ Monthly Costs X 8 Heating & Cooling Costs X 9 Light Bulbs & Misc. Supplies X 10 Recycling/Trash Dumpster Removal/Hauling X 11 Temporary Road and Maintenance X 12 Trash Chute & Hopper X 13 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

CM Main Office Staff 1 Others‐CM to include items not listed above

Direct Job Costs

CM@R General Conditions Total Cost transfer to Fee Proposal (Attachment A1) $ Construction Manager Request for Proposal Questions and Answers

Please confirm a response to Section 6.03 D is not required if submitting as one firm.

Confirmed.

Items 4 and 5 of Section 6.02A were not required on resumes submitted for the SOQ. Please confirm this information is only required for any additional resumes submitted.

Confirmed.

Please confirm Section 6.04 Attachments A1, B1 and C1 should not be included within the 30 page count limitation.

Confirmed.

Please confirm MEP and Fire Sprinkler statement of qualifications required under Section 6.03H should not be included within the 30 page count limitation.

Provide names only, part of 30 pages.

Please advise if the requested projects within the past 5 years, required in Section 6.02 E, are for relevant projects or for all projects?

Similar in scope to this project.

Please provide the anticipated pre-construction and construction schedule durations for use in our fee and GC analysis so that all proposers are using the same durations.

Assuming Design starts 5/15/2012, 100% Design to be completed approximately 12 months later. CM to provide most cost-effective optimal schedule.

Are sections 6.04 Compensation and 6.05 Acceptance of County's Professional Services Agreement included in the 30 page limit count?

Can be excluded from 30 page limit.

In the general conditions spread sheet. It lists temporary power, electric, heat, etc., as being included in the CM's General Conditions. This needs to be calculated and included as part of our Construction Phase Service line 2 on attachment A1. Is the amount we are quoting for our trailer and office complex needs or does it also included the entire temporary power, heat, etc. for the building and all the sub trades - normally the building power and heat would be a direct reimbursable, cost of work. What about "finishing" power and fuel? Such as the electric and gas burned up during the last few months of the project, running the permanent lights and running the permanent chillers and heaters? Utility bills for final start up and commissioning (for the new Jail) will be reimbursable.

Can we confirm that the Architect currently being selected will include mechanical, electrical professional engineers, consultants as part of the Architects' scope of services?

Yes.

Subcontractors selected by the CM at Risk to be Design Assist partners will not need to provide the engineered and stamped final mechanical and electrical drawings?

Correct, if CM should hire the M/E/P design-assist subs as directed by the County, then Engineer of Record will be under Architect's team.

We need to provide a schedule. Is there a tentative start date and finish date for the project?

Assuming Design starts 5/15/2012, 100% Design to be completed approximately 12 months later. CM to provide most cost-effective optimal schedule.

Attachment B1 has a row at the bottom that requests a dollar amount for “CM@R General Conditions Total Cost transfer to Fee Proposal (Attachment 1)”. Attachment C1 has a row at the bottom that requests a dollar amount for “CM@R General Conditions Total Cost transfer to Fee Proposal (Attachment 1)”.

Please confirm we are only to include the dollar amount in Attachment C1 with our RFP submittal as the Attachment B1 appears to be a responsibility matrix only.

Confirmed.

Attachment B1, Miscellaneous Project Costs, Rows 2 & 3, reference a CCIP being provided by SM County. Is it the County’s intent to provide the insurance program as an Owner Controlled Insurance Program (OCIP)? Does CCIP mean County Controlled Insurance Program and not Contractor Controlled Insurance Program as the Attachment B1 indicates by SM County?

CCIP is Contractor Controlled Insurance Program and should be classified as part of the General Conditions.

Please confirm who is responsible for the Builder’s Risk Insurance premium.

It is part of CM's O/H and Profit, CM to breakdown all insurance items (except CCIP) as part of Attachment B1.

In reference to Attachment B1, we recommend the following General Conditions Items be moved to Direct Cost of the Work and bid out at a later stage of design development. Temporary Fencing/Enclosures (Unable to accurately quantify scope at this time)

Submit as part of General Conditions

Covered Walkways (Unable to accurately quantify scope at this time)

Delete this item.

Security Guards (Unable to accurately quantify project needs at this time)

Submit as part of General Conditions

Watchman Services (Unable to accurately quantify project needs at this time)

Delete this item.

Facility Operator Training (Normally we would buy this from the Subcontractors for their specific equipment)

This item should be reclassified as part of Direct Cost of Work.

Temporary Road & Maintenance (Unable to accurately quantify scope at this time)

Submit as part of General Conditions

Please advise if it would be allowable to move these items into the Direct Cost of the Work in an effort to procure them in a competitive environment through subcontractors at a later stage of design development.

See reply above.

Are the Cost Attachments in Section 6.04 (A1, B1, C1) included in the 30 page count or can it be in a separate sealed envelope?

Not included in the 30 pages.

Regarding Section 6.03 H:

Are there any specific statement of qualifications that the County wants to review in regard to the top 3 MEP and Fire Protection Design Build Subcontractors?

No, just provide subcontractor names.

Depending on how detailed the qualifications are being requested above, is this section included in the 30 page count or can it be in a separate section, such as an Appendix?

Included.

Part 10 iii, asks to submit with your proposal a proposed non-disclosure agreement for review. Is this proposed non-disclosure agreement included in the 30 page count or can it be a in a separate section, such as an Appendix?

Appendix. BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING [To be Included in Both Architect Agreement and Construction Contract] 1. Architect’s Design and Initial Hosting of BIM

1.4 Architect shall correct and clarify any clashes, coordination or issues resulting from the BIM within Architect’s Basic Services. Coordination and design corrections and clarifications resulting from such further modeling (whether performed by Architect, Contractor or subcontractors) shall be within Architect’s Basic Services.

2. BIM Workshop and Pre-Construction Phase BIM Activities

3. Transfer to and Hosting of BIM by Contractor

4. General

4.1 Architect and Contractor and each major sub-contractor must be capable of utilizing the BIM to perform the functions assigned to them in paragraph 3 above.

4.2 The BIM and any portion of the BIM is a work for hire for the benefit of Owner and will be provided to Owner as a contract deliverable that may be used by Owner without restriction for the use on this Project. Architect grants to Owner a license in perpetuity to use and reproduce the BIM and any portion of the BIM for any purpose whatsoever related to this Project. Contractor and its sub-contractors shall transfer to Owner copyrights or licenses necessary for Owner to use the BIM and supporting information.

4.3 The BIM is not a Construction Document or Contract Document, and does not supplement or supersede the final permitted Drawings or Specifications.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence Sheriff's Office

Date: April 20, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Sheriff Greg Munks

Subject: Project Labor Agreement for the Replacement Jail Project

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the County Manager to execute a Project Labor Agreement with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council and signatory unions for the Replacement Jail Project .

BACKGROUND: In December, 2010, by Resolution No. 071202,the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City, just east of Highway 101, on Maple Street at Blomquist Street for the express purpose of constructing a Replacement Jail. Additionally, the Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the Replacement Jail on the Chemical Way location. On October 4, 2011, by Resolution No. 071672, the Board approved the scope and size of the jail project, clearing the way for the project to enter the design phase. This agreement is in anticipation o f the commencement of construction which should occur with the demolition phase in June , 2012.

DISCUSSION: The San Mateo County Replacement Jail Project is a large and complex project. Completing the project in an expeditious fashion will require a large number of skilled workers in various trades. The project could potentially employ an average of 150 worker s throughout the construction period. During peak productivity, the work force could reach over 400 workers Projects of this magnitude can sometimes experience labor disagreements which are costly, disrupt work and delay progress. A Project Labor Agreem ent (“PLA”), among other things, requires the work to continue during the resolution of any labor/management disagreement. Other public agencies in the County, including the San Mateo Community College District and the City of San Mateo have entered into PLA's to ensure on time and within budget completion of projects. The recommended PLA was developed using model PLA’s used by other public agencies. William Nack, Business Manager/Executive Officer of the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council, represented the unions in developing the proposed PLA. The Sheriff is recommending the Board of Supervisors enter into a PLA with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council, the project Construction Manager and all trade unions that will be performing work on the Replacement Jail worksite. By executing this PLA, the County and the general public can expect the project to proceed in an orderly manner without labor disruptions. Approval of this Project Labor Agreement contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring labor peace on the Replacement Jail construction project.

The PLA and the resolution have been reviewed and approved as to form by the County Counsel’s Office.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES: FY 2011 -12 FY 2012 -13 Measures Projected Projected Number of Labor Disputes on Replacement Jail Project 0 0 Number of Signatory Trades Unions Working on 5 19 Replacement Jail

FISCAL IMPACT: None

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN MATEO COUNTY BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL AND SIGNATORY UNIONS FOR THE REPLACEMENT JAIL PROJECT ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , in December 2010, the Board of Supervisors acquired 4.85 acres of land in Redwood City east of Highway 101 for the purpose of constructing a replacement jail and the Board approved a mitigated negative declaration for the construction of a replacement jail on that location; and

WHEREAS , a Site Management Plan (SMP) and the mitigated negative declaration has been approved by the Board of Supervisors for the Replacement Jail location; and

WHEREAS , it is in the best interest of the County and general public to have the Replacement Jail project proceed in an orderly and cost efficient manner without labor disruption or strife; and

WHEREAS , having a Project Labor Agreement in place will allow the project to proceed without labor disruption; and

WHEREAS , this Board has been presented with the Project Labor Agreement and has examined and approved it as to both form and content and desires to enter into the same.; and

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

County Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute a Project Labor

Agreement with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council, and all trades unions that will perform work on the San Mateo County Replacement Jail

Project.

* * * * * *

PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT

FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY REPLACEMENT JAIL

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

INTRODUCTION/FINDINGS

The purpose of this Agreement is to promote efficiency of construction operations during

San Mateo County’s Replacement Jail Capital Improvement Project (the Project”) and provide for peaceful settlement of labor disputes and grievances without strikes or lockouts, thereby promoting the public interest in assuring the timely and economical completion of the Project.

WHEREAS, the successful completion of the Project is of the utmost importance to San

Mateo County; and

WHEREAS, large numbers of workers of various skills will be required in the performance of the construction work, including those to be represented by the unions affiliated with the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council and any other labor organization which is signatory to this Agreement employed by contractors and subcontractors who are signatory to agreements with said labor organizations; and

WHEREAS, it is recognized that on a Project of this magnitude with multiple contractors and bargaining units on the job site at the same time over an extended period of time, the potential for work disruption is substantial without an overriding commitment to maintain continuity of work; and

WHEREAS, the interests of the general public, the County, the Unions and

Contractor/Employers would be best served if the construction work proceeded in an orderly manner without disruption because of strikes, sympathy strikes, work stoppages, picketing, Jail PLA - County 3/30 1 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted lockouts, slowdowns or other interferences with work; and

WHEREAS, the Contractor/Employers and the Unions desire to mutually establish and stabilize wages, hours and working conditions for the workers employed on the Project by the

Contractor/Employer(s) and the Union(s) to the end that a satisfactory, continuous and harmonious relationship will exist among the parties to this Agreement; and

WHEREAS, this Agreement is not intended to replace, interfere, abrogate, diminish or modify existing local or national collective bargaining agreements in effect during the duration of the Project, insofar as a legally binding agreement exists between the Contractor/Employer(s) and the affected Union(s) except to the extent that the provisions of this Agreement are inconsistent with said collective bargaining agreements, in which event, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail; and

WHEREAS, the contracts for the construction of the Project will be awarded in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California State Public Contract Code; and

WHEREAS, the County has the absolute right to select the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the award of construction contracts on the Project; and

WHEREAS, the parties signatory to this Agreement pledge their full good faith and trust to work towards mutually satisfactory completion of the Project;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED BETWEEN AND AMONG THE PARTIES

HERETO, AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS

1.1 “Agreement” means this Project Labor Agreement.

1.2 “County” means San Mateo County, its Board of Supervisors, and its officers and

Jail PLA - County 3/30 2 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted employees.

1.3 “Contractor/Employer(s)” means any individual, firm, partnership or corporation, or combination thereof, including joint ventures, which is an independent business enterprise and has entered into a contract with the County or Project Manager or any of its contractors or subcontractors of any tier, with respect to the construction of any part of the Project under contract terms and conditions approved by the County and which incorporate the Agreement.

1.4 “Construction Contract” means the public works or improvement contracts which are awarded by the County after execution of this Agreement and which are necessary to complete the Project.

1.5 “Project” means the construction of the new San Mateo County Replacement Jail located on Chemical Way, in Redwood City, CA. The Project does not include any other County construction, including construction or renovation, if any, of existing County facilities.

1.6 “Union’ or “Unions” means the San Mateo County Building and Construction

Trades Council, AFL-CIO (“Council”) and any other labor organization signatory to this

Agreement, acting in their own behalf and on behalf of their respective affiliates and member organization whose names are subscribed hereto and who have through their officers executed this Agreement (“Signatory Unions”).

1.7 “ Project Manager” means the business entity or individual designated by the

County to oversee all phases of construction on the Project. "Project Executive" means the individual County employee designated by the County to oversee the Project, including the construction and the services of the Project Manager, and to be the principal County contact. The

Project Executive shall be County Sheriff's Lieutenant Deborah Bazan.

Jail PLA - County 3/30 3 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted 1.8 “Master Agreement” means the Master Collective Bargaining Agreement of each craft union signatory hereto.

ARTICLE II

SCOPE OF AGREEMENT

2.1 Parties: The Agreement shall apply only to and is limited to that construction work performed by the Contractor/Employers during the term of this Agreement performing construction contracts on the Project including surveying and on-site testing and inspection where such work is traditionally covered by a collective bargaining agreement with a Union and the San Mateo County Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO (“Council”) and any other labor organization signatory to this Agreement, acting in their own behalf and on behalf of their respective affiliates and member organizations whose names are subscribed hereto and who have through their officers executed this Agreement (“Signatory Unions”). All work covered by the terms of this Agreement is referred to herein as “Project Work”. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, all on-site construction work that is part of the Project shall be considered Project Work. On-site work includes work done for the Project in temporary yards or areas adjacent to the Project, and at any on-site or off-site batch plant constructed solely to supply materials to the Project. This Agreement covers all on-site fabrication work over which the Prime Contractor(s) or its Subcontractor(s) possess the right of control (including work done for the Project in any temporary yard or area established for the Project.) . Except as may be limited by Section 2.5, below, this Agreement also covers all off-site work, including fabrication traditionally performed by the Unions that is part of the Project, provided such offsite work is covered by a current “Master A” or “Schedule A” Agreement or local addenda to a

National Agreement of the applicable Union(s) that is in effect as of the execution date of this

Jail PLA - County 3/30 4 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted agreement. The furnishing of supplies, equipment or materials which are stockpiled for later use shall in no case be considered subcontracting, however, the delivery of ready-mix, asphalt, aggregate, sand or other fill material which are directly incorporated into the construction process as well as the off-hauling of debris and excess fill and/or mud shall be covered by the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

2.2 Project Description: The Agreement shall govern the award of all Construction

Contracts awarded by the County as part of the Project identified in Section 1.5.. For the purposes of this Agreement, the Project shall be considered completed upon filing of a Notice of

Completion, or otherwise provided by applicable State law.

2.3 Project Labor Disputes: All Project labor disputes involving the application or interpretation of the master collective bargaining agreement to which a signatory

Contractor/Employer and a signatory Union are parties shall be resolved pursuant to the resolution procedures of the master collective bargaining agreement. All disputes relating to the interpretation or application of the Agreement shall be subject to resolution by the Grievance

Committee and the grievance arbitration procedure set forth herein.

2.4 Work covered by the Agreement within the craft jurisdiction of the Elevator

Constructors will be performed under the terms of the National Agreement of the International

Union of Elevator Constructors except that Articles IV, XII, and XIII of the Agreement shall prevail and be applied to such work. Work covered by the Agreement within the craft jurisdiction of the Boilermakers will be performed under the terms of the National Transient

Lodge (NTL) Articles of Agreement except that Articles IV, XII, and XIII of the Agreement shall prevail and be applied to such work.

2.5 Exclusions from Project Work. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Jail PLA - County 3/30 5 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted Agreement, the following limitations, conditions and exceptions shall apply

(1) This Agreement shall be limited to construction work on the Project.

(2) This Agreement is not intended to, and shall not affect or govern the award of public works contracts by the County which are not included in the Project.

(3) This Agreement shall not apply to a Contractor/Employer’s non-construction craft employees, including but not limited to executives, managerial employees, engineering employees and supervisors (except those covered by existing Master

Agreements), staff engineers or other professional engineers, administrative and management.

(4) This Agreement shall not apply to any work performed on or near or leading to the site of work covered by this Agreement that is undertaken by state, county, city or other governmental bodies or their employees, contractors or design consultants; or by public or private utilities or their contractors.

(5) The following shall not be considered Project Work and this Agreement shall not apply to such work:

(i) Specialty work related to Detention Equipment Contractors;

(ii) Off-site maintenance of leased equipment and on-site supervision

of such maintenance;

(iii) All work by employees of a manufacturer or vendor necessary to

maintain its warranty or guaranty or installation of specialty prison/jail security

systems, where the Unions’ members do not possess the skill, knowledge or

experience to perform the work. If there is any dispute concerning this issue, the

dispute shall be submitted to expedited arbitration for resolution.

(iv) Maintenance and repair work, including on-going maintenance,

Jail PLA - County 3/30 6 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted janitorial, and security services;

(v) All non-construction support services contracted by any

Contractor/Employer or the County in connection with the Project;

(vi) Work by employees of the County, design teams (including, but

not limited to architects, engineers, and master planners), or any other

consultants for the County (including, but not limited to, project managers and

construction managers and their non-construction employees) and their sub-

consultants, and other employees of professional service organizations, not

performing manual labor within the definition of Project Work

(vi) Work occurring on a building or portion or a building after a

certificate permitting occupancy is issued for the building or portion of the

building;

(6) Should it be determined by the Design Team to utilize off-site manufactured jail cells, the off-site manufacture of the core and shell of such modular jail cells shall not be considered Project Work; however, the installation of all other component parts of the cells shall be considered project work and all work dealing with the installation and hook-up of the modular jail cells at the site of construction, including the off-loading of all modular jail cells, shall be considered project work.

2.6 Award of contracts: It is understood and agreed that the County and/or Contractor as appropriate have the absolute right to select any qualified bidder for the award of contracts under this Agreement. Such selection shall be made without regard to and is not dependent upon the existence or nonexistence of an agreement between such bidder and any party to this

Agreement. The bidder need only be willing, ready and able to execute and comply with this

Jail PLA - County 3/30 7 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted Agreement.

2.7 The Parties agree that this Agreement is a Section 8(f) pre-hire agreement within the meaning of Section 8 (29 U.S.C. § 158(f)) of the National Labor Relations Act.

ARTICLE III

EFFECT OF AGREEMENT

3.1 By executing the Agreement, the Unions and the County agree to be bound by each and all of the provisions of the Agreement.

3.2 By accepting the award of a construction contract for the Project, whether as contractor or subcontractor, the Contractor/Employer agrees to be bound by each and every provision of the Agreement and agrees that it will evidence its acceptance prior to the commencement of work by executing the Letter of Assent in the form attached hereto as

Attachment A. Other than agreeing to be bound by the terms of this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require a Contractor/Employer to be a signatory to or be bound to a collective bargaining agreement with any of the Unions.

3.3 At the time that any Contractor/Employer enters into a subcontract with any subcontractor providing for the performance of a construction contract, the Contractor/Employer shall provide a copy of this Agreement to said subcontractor and shall require the subcontractor as a part of accepting an award of a construction subcontract to agree in writing, to be bound by each and every provision of this Agreement prior to the commencement of work. If a

Contractor/Employer requires a subcontractor to agree in writing to comply with the terms of this

Agreement as a condition of awarding work to the subcontractor, the Contractor/Employer shall not be liable in any way for the subcontractor’s failure to pay the wages and benefits required by

Jail PLA - County 3/30 8 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted this Agreement except as required by the provisions of the California Labor Code.

3.4 This Agreement shall only be binding on the signatory parties hereto and shall not apply to the parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, or other ventures of any such party.

3.5 The provisions of this Agreement, including Schedules A’s, which are the local

Master Agreements of the Signatory Unions having jurisdiction over the work on the Project shall apply to the work covered by this Agreement, notwithstanding the provisions of any other local, area and/or national agreements which may conflict with or differ from the terms of this

Agreement. Where a subject covered by the provisions of this Agreement is also covered by a

Schedule A, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. Where a subject is covered by the provisions of a Schedule A and is not covered by this Agreement, the provisions of the Schedule

A shall prevail.

ARTICLE IV

WORK STOPPAGES, STRIKES, SYMPATHY STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS

4.1 The Unions, County and Contractor/Employers agree that for the duration of the

Project:

(1) There shall be no strikes, sympathy strikes, work stoppages, picketing, handbilling or otherwise advising the public that a labor dispute exists, or slowdowns of any kind, for any reason, by the Unions or employees employed on the Project, at the job site of the Project or at any other facility of the County because of a dispute on the Project. Nor shall the Unions or any employees employed on the Project participate in any strikes, sympathy strikes, work stoppages, picketing, handbilling, slowdowns, or otherwise advising the public that a labor dispute exists at the jobsite of the Project because of a dispute between Unions and

Contractor/Employer on any other project. It shall not be considered a violation of this Article if Jail PLA - County 3/30 9 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted labor is withheld by a Union due to lack of payments to a Trust Fund or failure to make payroll on the Project. Nothing stated in this Agreement shall prevent Unions from participating in the actions mentioned in this section on jobsites other than the Project jobsite because of disputes between the Unions and Contractor/Employers on projects other than the Project. Prior to withholding its members services for a particular contractor's failure to timely make payments to the applicable Trust Funds, the affected Union shall give at least fifteen (15) days written notice of such failure to pay by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and by facsimile transmission to the involved contractor and to the Project Manager. The Union will meet within the fifteen (15) day period to attempt to resolve the dispute. Upon the payment of the delinquent contractor of all monies due and then owing for fringe benefit contributions, the Union shall direct its members to return to work and the Contractor shall return all such members back to work.

(2) As to employees employed on the Project, there shall be no lockout of any kind by a Contactor/Employer covered by the Agreement.

(3) If a Master Agreement between a Contractor/Employer and the Union expires before the Contractor/Employer completes the performance of a construction contract for work covered under this Agreement and the Union or Contractor/Employer gives notice of demands for a new or modified Master Agreement, the Union agrees that it will not strike the

Contractor/Employer on said contract for work covered under this Agreement and the Union and the Contractor/Employer agree that the expired Master Agreement shall continue in full force and effect for work covered under this Agreement until a new or modified Master Agreement is reached between the Union and Contractor/Employer. If the new or modified Master Agreement reached between the Union and Contractor/Employer provides that any terms of the Master

Agreement shall be retroactive, the Contractor/Employer agrees to comply with any retroactive Jail PLA - County 3/30 10 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted terms of the new or modified Master Agreement which is applicable to employees employed on the project within seven (7) days.

4.2 Any party to this Agreement shall institute the following procedure, prior to initiating any other action at law or equity, when a breach of this Article is alleged to have occurred:

(1) A party invoking this procedure shall notify Thomas Angelo, as the permanent arbitrator, or, Robert Hirsch, as the alternate under this procedure. In the event that the permanent arbitrator is unavailable at any time, the alternate will be contacted. If neither is available, then a selection shall be made from the list of arbitrators in Article 12.2. Notice to the arbitrator shall be by the most expeditious means available, with notices by facsimile or telephone to the party alleged to be in violation and to the San Mateo Building and Construction Trades Council and involved local Union if a Union is alleged to be in violation.

(2) Upon receipt of said notice, the designated arbitrator named above or his alternate will attempt to convene a hearing within twenty-four (24) hours if it is contended that the violation still exists.

(3) The arbitrator shall notify the parties by facsimile or telephone of the place and time for the hearing. Said hearing shall be completed in one session, which, with appropriate recesses at the arbitrator’s discretion, shall not exceed twenty-four (24) hours unless otherwise agreed upon by all parties. A failure of any party to attend said hearings shall not delay the hearing of evidence or the issuance of any award by the arbitrator.

(4) The sole issue at the hearing shall be whether or not a violation of Article IV,

Section 4.1 of the Agreement has occurred. The arbitrator shall have no authority to consider any matter of justification, explanation or mitigation of such violation or to award damages, which

Jail PLA - County 3/30 11 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted issue is reserved for court proceedings, if any. The award shall be issued in writing within three

(3) hours after the close of the hearing, and may be issued without a written opinion. If any party desires a written opinion, one shall be issued within fifteen (15) days, but its issuance shall not delay compliance with or enforcement of the award. The arbitrator may order cessation of the violation of this Article and other appropriate relief and such award shall be served on all parties by hand or registered mail upon issuance.

(5) Such award may be enforced by any Court of competent jurisdiction upon the filing of this Agreement and all other relevant documents referred to above in the following manner. Written notice of the filing of such enforcement proceedings shall be given to the other party. In the proceeding to obtain a temporary order enforcing the arbitrator’s award as issued under Section 4.2(4) of this Article, all parties waive the right to a hearing and agree that such proceedings may be ex parte. Such agreement does not waive any party’s right to participate in a hearing for a final order or enforcement. The Court’s order or orders enforcing the arbitrator’s award shall be served on all parties by hand or delivered by certified mail.

(6) Any rights created by statute or law governing arbitration proceedings inconsistent with the above procedure, or which interfere with compliance are waived by the parties.

(7) The fees and expenses of the arbitrator shall be divided equally between the party instituting the arbitration proceedings provided in this Article and the party alleged to be in breach of its obligation under this Article.

ARTICLE V

PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE

5.1 Preconstruction conferences shall be held as needed. Such conferences shall be

Jail PLA - County 3/30 12 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted attended by a representative each from the participating Contractor/Employers and Union(s) and the Project Manager.

ARTICLE VI

NO DISCRIMINATION

6.1 The Contractor/Employers and Unions agree not to engage in any form of discrimination on the ground or because of race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, disability or Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or AIDS Related

Condition (AIDS/ARC), against any employee, or applicant for employment, on the Project.

ARTICLE VII

UNION SECURITY

7.1 The Contractor/Employers recognize the Union(s) as the sole bargaining representative of all craft employees working within the scope of this Agreement.

7.2 All employees who are employed by Contractor/Employers to work on the Project will be required to become members and maintain membership in the appropriate Union on or before 8 days of consecutive or cumulative employment on the Project. Membership under this section shall be satisfied by the tendering of periodic dues and fees uniformly required to the extent allowed by the law.

7.3 Authorized representatives of the Unions shall have access to the Project whenever work covered by this Agreement is being, has been, or will be performed on the

Project.

ARTICLE VIII

REFERRAL

8.1 Contractor/Employers performing construction work on the Project described in Jail PLA - County 3/30 13 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted the Agreement shall, in filling craft job requirements utilize and be bound by the registration facilities and referral systems established or authorized by the Unions signatory hereto when such procedures are not in violation of Federal law. The Contractor/Employer(s) shall have the right to reject any applicant referred by the Union(s), in accordance with the applicable Master

Agreement.

8.2 The Contractor(s) shall have the unqualified right to select and hire directly all supervisors above general foreman it considers necessary and desirable, without such persons being referred by the Union(s).

8.3 In the event that referral facilities maintained by the Union(s) are unable to fill the requisition of a Contractor/Employer for employees within a forty-eight (48) hour period

(Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays excluded) after such requisition is made by the

Contractor/Employer(s), the Contractor/Employer(s) shall be free to obtain work persons from any source.

8.4 Unions will exert their utmost efforts to recruit sufficient numbers of skilled craft persons to fulfill the requirements of the Contractor/Employer(s). Recognizing the special needs of the Project and the acute shortage of skilled craftspeople, the Unions shall consider a

Contractor’s request to transfer key employees to work on this Project in a manner consistent with the Union’s referral procedures.

ARTICLE IX

BENEFITS

9.1 All Contractor/Employers agree to pay contributions to the established vacation, pension and other form of deferred compensation plan, apprenticeship, and health benefit funds established by the applicable Master Agreement for each hour worked on the Project in the Jail PLA - County 3/30 14 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted amounts designated in the Master Agreements of the appropriate local unions. The

Contractor/Employers shall not be required to pay contributions to any other trust funds that are not contained in the published prevailing wage determination to satisfy their obligation under this Article except those Contractor/Employers who are signatory to the Master Agreements with the respective trades shall continue to pay all trust fund contributions as outlined in such

Master Agreements.

9.2 By signing this Agreement, the Contractor/Employers adopt and agree to be bound by the written terms of the legally established Trust Agreements, as described in 9.1, specifying the detailed basis on which payments are to be made into, and benefits paid out of, such Trust Funds.

9.3 Wages, Hours, Terms and Conditions of Employment: The wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment on the Project shall be governed by the Master

Agreement of the respective crafts, copies of which shall be on file with the County, to the extent such Master Agreement is not inconsistent with this Agreement. Where a subject is covered by the Master Agreement and not covered by this Agreement, the Master Agreement will prevail. When a subject is covered by both the Master Agreement and this Agreement, to the extent there is any inconsistency, this Agreement will prevail.

ARTICLE X

EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

10.1 All disputes involving discipline and/or discharge of employees working on the

Project shall be resolved through the grievance and arbitration provision contained in the Master

Agreement for the craft of the affected employee. No employee working on the Project shall be disciplined or dismissed without just cause.

Jail PLA - County 3/30 15 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted ARTICLE Xl

COMPLIANCE

11.1 It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor/Employers and Unions to investigate and monitor compliance with the provisions of the Agreement contained in Article IX. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to interfere with or supersede the usual and customary legal remedies available to the Unions and/or employee benefit Trust Funds to collect delinquent Trust Fund contributions from Employers on the Project. The County shall monitor and enforce compliance with the prevailing wage requirements of the state and

Contractors/Employers compliance with this Agreement.

ARTICLE XII

GRIEVANCE ARBITRATION PROCEDURE

12.1 The parties understand and agree that in the event any dispute arises out of the meaning, interpretation or application of the provisions of this Agreement, the same shall be settled by means of the procedures set out herein. No grievance shall be recognized unless the grieving party (Local Union or District Council on its own behalf, or on behalf of an employee whom it represents, or a contractor on its own behalf) provides notice in writing to the signatory party with whom it has a dispute within five (5) days after becoming aware of the dispute but in no event more than thirty (30) days after it reasonably should have become aware of the event giving rise to the dispute. The time limits in Section 12.1 may be extended by mutual written agreement of the parties.

12.2 Grievances shall be settled according to the following procedures:

Step 1: Within five (5) business days after the receipt of the written notice of the

Jail PLA - County 3/30 16 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted grievance, the Business Representative of the involved Local Union or

District Council, or his/her designee, or the representative of the

employee, and the representative of the involved Contractor/Employer

shall confer and attempt to resolve the grievance.

Step 2: In the event that the representatives are unable, to resolve the dispute

within the five (5) business days after its referral to Step 1, within five (5)

business days thereafter, the alleged grievance may be referred in writing

by either involved party to the Business Manager(s) of the affected

Union(s) involved and the Manager of Labor Relations of the Employer(s)

or the Manager's designated representative, and the Project Manager for

discussion and resolution.

Step 3: If the grievance is not settled in Step 2 within five (5) business days, either

party may request the dispute be submitted to arbitration or the time may be

extended by mutual consent of both parties. Within five (5) business days

after referral of a dispute to Step 3, the representatives shall choose a

mutually agreed upon arbitrator for final and binding arbitration. The

parties agree that if the permanent arbitrator or his alternate is not available,

an arbitrator shall be selected by the alternate striking method from the list

of five (5) below. The order of striking names from the list of arbitrators

shall be determined by a coin toss, the winner of which shall be decide

whether they wish to strike first or second.

1. William Riker

2. Barry Winogard

Jail PLA - County 3/30 17 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted 3. Mathew Goldberg

4. Chuck Askin

5. Jeri-Lou Cossack

The decision of the Arbitrator shall be binding on all parties. The

Arbitrator shall have no authority to change, amend, add to or detract

from any of the provisions of the Agreement. The expense of the

Arbitrator shall be borne equally by all parties. The Arbitrator shall

arrange for a hearing on the earliest available date from the date of his/her

selection. A decision shall be given to the parties within five (5) calendar

days after completion of the hearing unless such time is extended by

mutual agreement. A written opinion may be requested by a party from the

presiding arbitrator.

The time limits specified in any step of the Grievance Procedure set forth

in Section 12.2 may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties

initiated by the written request of one party to the other, at the appropriate

step of the Grievance Procedure. However, failure to process a grievance,

or failure to respond in writing within the time limits provided above,

without an agreed upon extension of time, shall be deemed a waiver of

such grievance without prejudice, or without precedent to the processing

of and/or resolution of like or similar grievances or disputes.

In order to encourage the resolution of disputes and grievances at Steps 1

and 2 of this Grievance Procedure, the parties agree that such settlements

shall not be precedent setting. Jail PLA - County 3/30 18 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted

ARTICLE XIII

WORK ASSIGNMENTS AND JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES

13.1 The assignment of Covered Work will be solely the responsibility of the Employer performing the work involved; and such work assignments will be in accordance with the Plan for the Settlement of the Jurisdictional Disputes in the Construction Industry (the “Plan”) or any successor Plan.

13.2 All jurisdictional disputes on this Project between or among the building and construction trades Unions and the Employers parties to this Agreement, shall be settled and adjusted according to the present Plan established by the Building and Construction Trades

Department or any other plan or method of procedure that may be adopted in the future by the

Building and Construction Trades Department. Decisions rendered shall be final, binding and conclusive on the Employers and Unions who are parties to this Agreement.

13.3 For the convenience of the parties, and in recognition of the expense of travel between Northern California and Washington, DC, at the request of any party to a jurisdictional dispute under this Agreement an Arbitrator shall be chosen by the procedures specified in Article

V, Section 5, of the Plan from a list composed of John Kagel, Thomas Angelo, Robert Hirsch, and

Thomas Pagan, and the Arbitrator’s hearing on the dispute shall be held at the offices of the

Building and Construction Trades Council of San Mateo County. All other procedures shall be as specified in the Plan.

13.4 All jurisdictional disputes shall be resolved without the occurrence of any strike, work stoppage, or slow-down of any nature, and the Employer’s assignment shall be adhered to until the dispute is resolved. Individual employees violating this section shall be subject to Jail PLA - County 3/30 19 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted immediate discharge. Each Employer will conduct a pre-job conference with the Council prior to commencing work. The Project Manager and County will be advised in advance of all such conferences and may participate if they wish. Pre-job conferences for different Employers may be held together.

ARTICLE XIV

APPRENTICES

14.1 Recognizing the need to develop adequate numbers of competent workers in the construction industry, the Contractor/Employer(s) shall employ apprentices of a California State approved joint Apprenticeship Program in the respective crafts to perform such work as is within their capabilities and which is customarily performed by the craft in which they are indentured.

14.2 The apprentice ratios will be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the

California Labor Code and Prevailing Wage Rate Determination.

14.3 There shall be no restrictions on the utilization of apprentices in performing the work of their craft provided they are properly supervised.

ARTICLE XV

MANAGEMENT RIGHTS

15.1 The Contractor/Employer(s) shall retain full and, exclusive authority for the management of their operations, including the right to direct their work force in their sole discretion. No rules, customs or practices shall be permitted or observed which limit or restrict production, or limit or restrict the working efforts of employees except that lawful manning provisions in the Master Agreement shall be recognized.

ARTICLE XVI

HELMETS TO HARDHARTS

Jail PLA - County 3/30 20 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted

16.1 The Contractor/Employers and the Unions recognize a desire to facilitate the entry into the building and construction trades of veterans who are interested in careers in the building and construction industry. The Contractor/Employers and Unions agree to utilize the services of the Center for Military Recruitment, Assessment and Veterans Employment (hereinafter “Center) and the Center’s “Helmets to Hardhats” program to serve as a resource for preliminary orientation, assessment of construction aptitude, referral to apprenticeship programs or hiring halls, counseling and mentoring, support network, employment opportunities and other needs as identified by the parties.

16.2 The Unions and Contractor/Employers agree to coordinate with the Center to create and maintain an integrated database of veterans interested in working on the Project and of apprenticeship and employment opportunities for this Project. To the extent permitted by law, the

Unions will give credit to such veterans for bona fide, provable past experience.

ARTICLE XVII

DRUG & ALCOHOL TESTING

17.1 The use, sale, transfer, purchase and/or possession of a controlled substance, alcohol and/or firearms at any time during the work day is prohibited.

17.2 The substance Abuse program contained in each applicable Union’s Schedule A shall apply to the construction workers on the site.

ARTICLE XVIII

SAVINGS CLAUSE

18.1 The parties agree that in the event any article, provision, clause, sentence or word

Jail PLA - County 3/30 21 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted of the Agreement is determined to be illegal or void as being in contravention of any applicable law, by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. The parties further agree that if any article, provision, clause, sentence or word of the Agreement is determined to be illegal or void, by a court of competent jurisdiction, the parties shall substitute, by mutual agreement, in its place and stead, an article, provision, clause, sentence or word which will meet the objections to its validity and which will be in accordance with the intent and purpose of the article, provision, clause, sentence or work in question.

The parties also agree that in the event that a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction materially alters the terms of the Agreement such that the intent of the parties is defeated, then the entire Agreement shall be null and void.

If a court of competent jurisdiction determines that all or part of the Agreement is invalid and/or enjoins the County from complying with all or part of its provisions and the County accordingly determines that the Agreement will not be required as part of an award to a

Contractor/Employer, the unions will no longer he bound by the provisions of Article IV.

ARTICLE XIX

TERM

19.1 The Agreement shall be included as a condition of the award of all

construction contracts for the Project.

19.2 The Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until the completion of the

Project.

SAN MATEO COUNTY

Jail PLA - County 3/30 22 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted By ______DATE:

SAN MATEO BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL AFL-CIO

By ______DATE:

111749/663488

Jail PLA - County 3/30 23 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted International Association of Heat and Frost Carpenters 46 Northern Insulators & Asbestos Workers Local #16 California Counties Conference Board

______Date: ______Date: ______

Brick Layers & Allied Crafts Local #3 Northern California Carpenters Regional Council

______Date: ______Date: ______

International Brotherhood of Electrical District Council of Plasterers & Workers Local #617 Cement Masons of No. California

______Date: ______Date: ______

International Association of Bridge District Council #16 for Painters #913, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers Glaziers #718 & Carpet Layers #12 Local #377

______Date: ______Date: ______

International Union of Operating Roofers & Waterproofers Local Union #40 Engineers Local #3

______Date: ______Date: ______

United Association of Plumbers & International Brotherhood of Steamfitters Local Union #467 Teamsters Local Union #853

______Date: ______Date: ______

Sprinkler Fitters Local #483 Elevator Constructors Local 8

______Date: ______Date: ______Jail PLA - County 3/30 24 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted

Sheet Metal Workers Local #104 Laborers Local 67

______Date: ______Date: ______

Plasterers Local Union #66 U.A. Local 355

______Date: ______Date: ______

Laborers Local #389

______Date: ______

Jail PLA - County 3/30 25 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted Attachment A: Agreed To Letter of Assent

[Date]

[Addressee] [Address] [City and State]

Re: San Mateo County Jail Replacement Capital Improvement Project, Project Labor Agreement -- Letter of Assent

Dear Mr./Ms. ______:

The undersigned party confirms that it agrees to be a party to and bound by the San Mateo County Jail Replacement Capital Improvement Project, Project Labor Agreement as such Agreement may, from time to time, be amended by the parties or interpreted pursuant to its terms.

By executing this Letter of Assent, the undersigned party subscribes to, adopts and agrees to be bound by the written terms of the legally established trust agreements specifying the detailed basis upon which contributions are to be made into, and benefits made out of, such trust funds and ratifies and accepts the trustees appointed by the parties to such trust funds.

Such obligation to be a party to and bound by this Agreement shall extend to all work covered by said Agreement undertaken by the undersigned party on the San Mateo County Jail Replacement Capital Improvement Project. The undersigned party shall require all of its subcontractors, of whatever tier, to become similarly bound for all their work within the scope of this Agreement by signing an identical Letter of Assent.

This letter shall constitute a subscription agreement, to the extent of the terms of the letter.

CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR:______California State License Number:______

Name and Signature of Authorized Person: ______(Print Name)

______(Title)

______(Signature)

______(Telephone Number) Jail PLA - County 3/30 26 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted

______

Jail PLA - County 3/30 27 BTC – 4/10/12 County Revisions Accepted

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Manager

DATE: April 12, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: John L. Maltbie, County Manager

SUBJECT: Uncodified Ordinance of the County of San Mateo establishing new requirements for the leasing of the Circle Star Plaza buildings owned by the County without competitive bidding, in compliance with California State law

RECOMMENDATION: Introduce an uncodified Ordinance setting the requirements for the leasing of the Circle Star Plaza buildings owned by the County without competitive bidding if the lease is limited to an initial rent of no more than $300,000 per month and a term not to exceed ten years.

BACKGROUND: Articles 1 and 8 of Title 3 of Division 2 of the California Government Code (i.e., Sections 25350 et seq. and Section 25520 et seq. provide the general procedures for the sale or lease of County-owned real property. Subject to certain exceptions, those procedures generally call for a public bidding process. Government Code Section 25537 sets forth an alternate procedure that allows counties to lease county-owned real property to other parties without a bid process for a maximum term of ten years and allows counties to determine an appropriate maximum rental amount. Pursuant to the authority contained in Government Code Section 25537, San Mateo County Ordinance Code section 2.51.080 sets limits on the leasing of real property owned by the County to other parties without bidding. The current limits are a maximum term of five (5) years and a maximum monthly rental amount of $2,000. Ordinance Code Section 2.51.080 also permits such leases to be negotiated and executed by the County Manager or his designee.

Because the County is considering the leasing of one of the Circle Star Plaza buildings at a monthly rental rate that is expected to exceed $2,000, and for a term that may exceed 5 years, the County cannot utilize the alternative procedures set forth in Section 2.51.080 for such a lease. Therefore, the County can either amend Section 2.51.080 to increase the rental and time limits for all leases, or adopt a separate ordinance specifically for the lease of Circle Star Plaza, that essentially waives the applicability of Section 2.51.080 for this particular property.

DISCUSSION: With the County’s acquisition of Circle Star Plaza in San Carlos, plans are now in place for several County departments to move from County-leased space to County-owned facilities at Circle Star Plaza as these leases are terminated or expire. Due to the timing of the expiration of leases, there is an opportunity to lease one of the Circle Star Plaza buildings for up to 10 years.

The existing bid process limits the ability of County staff to be responsive to prospective tenants, and delays approval of tenant leases, which is a hardship on prospective tenants and reduces the likelihood of successful lease negotiations. In addition, the bid process limits the pool of potential tenants. For example, a firm wishing to relocate to the area must be able to sign a lease immediately and cannot wait for the six months that the bid process would take. Adopting an uncodified ordinance specifically for the purpose of leasing one of the Circle Star Plaza buildings using an alternative to the bidding process will allow the County to more quickly, efficiently and effectively lease the available space.

The proposed ordinance will track Section 2.51.80, except that the limits on monthly rental rates and the length of the lease will be increased to reflect the higher value of Circle Star Plaza. A bid process, plus negotiations can take six months or longer to complete. The process authorized by the proposed ordinance could get a lease in place in a month or two, depending on the market interest. Thus, adoption of the proposed ordinance could shorten the leasing process by up to five months. In addition, the proposed ordinance would better position the County to benefit from current market dynamics.

Adoption of the proposed ordinance gives staff clear authority to enter into lease negotiations for Circle Star Plaza. To establish a starting point for lease negotiations, and to assure a fair process, the County of San Mateo will advertise property for lease at specific market lease rates and terms. The Board will have the opportunity to provide direction to staff and guide staff’s responses to lease proposals. The proposed ordinance also requires that the negotiated leases and amendments be brought to the Board for approval prior to their execution. This proposed ordinance will be effective 30 days from the date of final passage.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Ordinance as to form.

The proposed ordinance contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Livable Community by promoting affordable, livable, and connected communities.

FISCAL IMPACT: Potential revenue to the General Fund as a result of future leases.

ORDINANCE NO. ______BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA * * * * * *

An Ordinance Relating to Requirements for Non-Bid Leases. of Circle Star Plaza

The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of California, ORDAINS as follows

SECTION 1. Requirements for non-bid leases of Circle Star Plaza

The County Manager or his designee may, without calling for bids, negotiate leases for all or part of Circle Star Plaza, owned by the County, for non-renewable terms not to exceed ten years and actual monthly rentals not to exceed an initial rent of $300,000, subject to annual increases reflecting cost of living adjustments; provided that notice is given pursuant to Government Code section 6061, posted in the office of the County Clerk, and, if the lease involves residential property, is given to housing sponsors (as defined by sections 50074 and 50074.5 of the California Health and Safety Code). The Board of Supervisors must adopt a resolution authorizing the County Manager or his designee to execute a lease negotiated pursuant to this Ordinance. The notice shall state that, upon approval of the Board of Supervisors, the lease will be executed by the County Manager or his designee on behalf of the County and shall describe the property proposed to be leased, the terms of the lease, and the location where the lease will be executed.

SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be effective 30 days from the date of final passage.

The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m.

April 24, 2012

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL – Present: Supervisors Pine, Groom, Horsley, Jacobs Gibson and Tissier Absent: None

PUBLIC COMMENT

Speakers recognized by the President: Martin Fox, Belmont Supervisor Carol Groom Linda Malone, Pyramid Alternatives Susan Navratil, Redwood City Angie Junck, Immigrant Legal Resource Center The Rev Anna Lange-Soto, Peninsula Inner-Faith Coalition Immigration

ACTION TO SET AGENDA and TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

Motion: Jacobs Gibson / Horsley

Item #3 was pulled from the agenda. Item #15 was moved to Presentations and Awards. Item #28 was moved to the regular agenda.

PRESENTATIONS AND AWARDS

A) Presentation of a resolution (3315) honoring the Order of Native Daughters of the Golden West upon the celebration of its 125th Anniversary (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

Speakers recognized by the president: Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier Maria Amaya, Daughters of the Golden West

Motion: Horsley / Jacobs Gibson

B) Presentation of a proclamation (3316) designating April 22 - 28, 2012 as National Crime Victims' Rights Week (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

Speakers recognized by the president: Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier Grace Nelson, National Crime Victims’ Rights

Motion: Tissier / Horsley

C) Presentation of a proclamation (3317) designating May 6, 2012 as Streets Alive! Parks Alive! Day in San Mateo County (Supervisor Carole Groom)

Speakers recognized by the president: Supervisor Groom Julia Bott, Executive Director San Mateo Parks

Motion: Groom / Horsley

D) Presentation on Caltrain Memorandum of Understanding with High Speed Rail for Advancement of Electrification and Caltrain Budgetary Issues (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

Speakers recognized by the president: Shamus Murphy, San Mateo County Transit District Supervisor Don Horsley Supervisor Adrienne Tissier Supervisor Dave Pine Jean Fraser, Chief of Health Systems

MATTERS SET FOR SPECIFIED TIME

REGULAR AGENDA

PROBATION

1. Adopt the Public Safety Realignment Local Implementation Plan as recommended by the Community Corrections Partnership (4/5th Vote Required to Reject Plan)

Speakers recognized by the president: Stuart Forrest, Chief of Probation Linnea Nelson, ACLU of Northern CA Jay Laefer, ACLU North Peninsula Chapter Martin Fox, Belmont

Sarah Matlin, American Civil Liberties Union – North Peninsula Chapter Supervisor Dave Pine Supervisor Carol Groom Steve Wagstaffe, District Attorney Supervisor Tissier Supervisor Rose Jacobs Gibson John Bieres, County Counsel Supervisor Don Horsley

Motion: Jacobs Gibson / Horsley Ayes: Supervisors Horsley, Jacobs Gibson, Tissier, Pine, Groom Noes: None Absent: None

COUNTY MANAGER

2. Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) FY 2011-12 Budget

A) Adopt the Public Safety Realignment Spending Plan for FY 2011-12 as recommended by the CCP;

B) Approve an Appropriation Transfer Request (ATR) in the amount of $3,199,376, making appropriations to various accounts in the Probation Department, Health System and Human Services Agency budgets to fund the new positions, operating costs and service delivery for AB 109 clients in San Mateo County; and (4/5th Vote Required)

C) Introduction of an ordinance amending the Master Salary Ordinance, adding a Deputy Probation Officer III, a Legal Office Specialist and a Human Services Supervisor

Item was moved to the meeting of May 8, 2012 for adoption

Speakers recognized by the president: John L. Maltbie, County Manager Sarah Matlin, American Civil Liberties Union – North Peninsula Chapter Martin Fox, Belmont Supervisor Don Horsley Stu Forrest, Chief Probation Officer Jim Saco, Budget Director Sheriff Greg Munks Supervisor Tissier Supervisor Pine

Motion: Horsley / Pine Ayes: Supervisors Jacobs Gibson, Tissier, Pine, Groom, Horsley Noes: None Absent: None

SHERIFF'S OFFICE

3. Sheriff's report

This item was pulled from the agenda, no Sheriff’s report.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

4. Board members' reports

The meeting was adjourned in memory of: Virginia Ruggeiro, Art Lapor and Edward Ward.

Supervisor Pine congratulated President Tissier on her award from Advancing Women in Transportation. Supervisor Pine also thanked the County for the efforts to collect $180,000 from employees to fund the Be a Hero Campaign.

Supervisor Horsley congratulated Supervisor Rose Jacobs Gibson on her award from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

CONSENT AGENDA

5. Approve the minutes for the meeting of April 10, 2012

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

6. Recommendation for the appointments of Wanda Thompson and Edmund Bridges to the Mental Health & Substance Abuse Recovery Commission Consumer/Client vacancies, terms expiring April 30, 2015 (Supervisor Dave Pine)

7. Recommendation for the appointment of Donald Mulliken to the San Mateo County Arts Commission, term expiring January 2017 (Supervisor Dave Pine)

8. Ratification of a resolution (3318) honoring Marc K. Alcantara upon his retirement from the County of San Mateo (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

9. Ratification of a resolution (3319) honoring Dr. Josefina Enriquez as the recipient of the 2012 Dolores Mullin Like a Rock Award (Supervisor Don Horsley)

10. Ratification of a resolution (3320) honoring Donna Garcia as the recipient of the 2012 Glenn Ashcraft Chamber Community Service Award (Supervisor Don Horsley)

11. Ratification of a resolution (3321) honoring Rich Giusti for 50 years of service to the Colma Fire Department (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier) 4

12. Ratification of a resolution (3322) honoring Harrison Higaki as the recipient of the 2012 San Mateo County Farmer of the Year Award (Supervisor Don Horsley)

13. Ratification of a resolution (3323) honoring Thomas Richard Huening upon his retirement from the County of San Mateo (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

14. Ratification of a resolution (3324) honoring Thomasians U.S.A. Education Empowerment Program's 25th Anniversary (Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier)

15. Ratification of a proclamation (3325) designating April 24, 2012 as Armenian Genocide Commemoration Day (Supervisor Dave Pine)

This item was moved to Presentations and Awards

Speakers recognized by the President: Supervisor Dave Pine Matt Senekeremian, Director of Bay Area Armenian National Committee

Motion: Jacobs Gibson/Horsley

16. Ratification of a proclamation (3326) designating April 23, 2012 as The Week of the Young Child (Supervisor Dave Pine)

COUNTY COUNSEL

16. Resolution (071906) authorizing the issuance and sale of Redwood City School District 2011- 12 Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes in an amount not to exceed $20,000,000

17. Resolution (071907) authorizing the South San Francisco Unified School District to issue and sell its 2012 General Obligation Bonds (Measure J), Series A, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $12,000,000, by negotiated sale, without further action of the County

COUNTY MANAGER

18. Resolution (071908) authorizing the President of the Board of Supervisors to enter into a three year agreement with eCivis, Inc. for the term May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2015 and a not-to-exceed amount of $114,855

19. Resolution (071909) directing the County Manager to implement the Voluntary Employee Separation Program (VESP), in which employees in classifications facing probable lay-off are offered a cash payment to end their employment

20. Resolution (071910) authorizing an Appropriation Transfer Request in the following amounts for support costs related to the property tax system: $141,000 from Tax Collector Departmental Reserves and $35,000 from Non-Departmental Reserves to Controller's Office Other Charges (ISD); $88,160 from Tax Collector Services and Supplies to Other Charges (ISD); and $141,228 from Controller's Office Departmental Reserves to Other Charges (ISD) 5

(4/5th Vote Required)

21. Resolution (071911) authorizing:

A) The President of the Board of Supervisors to execute a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with Vista Marin, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, of office space at 900 Veterans Blvd, Redwood City, California, extending the term for one year to April 30, 2013 and authorizing the County to terminate the lease on 180 days notice and increasing the base rent from $11,497.90 to $11,720.44 per month; and

B) The County Manager or his designee to accept or execute notices, options and documents associated with the First Amendment and Lease including, but not limited to, extension or termination of the lease under the terms set forth therein

HEALTH SYSTEM

22. Resolution (071912) authorizing the President of the Board to execute a Second Amendment to the Agreement with Telecare Corporation to provide funding for a Video Monitoring System, increasing the maximum obligation by $37,000 to a new maximum of $7,634,582 with no change to the agreement term of July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012

23. Resolution (071913) authorizing:

A) The President of the Board to execute an Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for funding to provide HIV prevention services for the term January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012, for a maximum obligation of $456,287; and

B) The Chief of the Health System or designee to execute contract amendments which modify the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $25,000 (in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal provisions

24. Introduction of an ordinance repealing and replacing three sections of Title 5, Sections 5.64.060 and 5.64.070 in Chapter 5.64, and Section 5.120.040 in Chapter 5.120 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code, which establishes Environmental Health program fees

Continued to the meeting of May 8, 2012 for adoption.

25. Resolution (071914) authorizing the revision of the Public Guardian/Public Administrator Warehouse Cost Recovery Schedule

26. Resolution (071915) authorizing:

A) Submission of the FY 2012-16 Area Plan for Services for Older Adults and Adults with Disabilities to the California Department of Aging; and

B) Execution of a Transmittal Letter to the California Department of Aging required to complete the submission process 6

HUMAN RESOURCES

27. Adoption of an ordinance (04613) amending the salary ordinance and accepting the report on the total number of positions in the County, previously introduced on April 10, 2012 and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety

28. Adoption of an ordinance (04614) amending Ordinance 04578 increasing the Controller's salary, previously introduced on April 10, 2012 and waiver of reading the ordinance in its entirety

This item was moved to the regular agenda.

Speakers recognized by the president: Supervisor, Dave Pine Supervisor, Adrienne J. Tissier John Beiers, County Counsel

Motion: Horsley / Jacobs Gibson Ayes: Tissier, Groom, Horsley, Jacobs Gibson Noes: Supervisor Dave Pine Absent: None

HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY

29. Resolution (071916) authorizing the President of the Board to execute amendments to the agreements with Child Care Coordinating Council and Professional Association for Childhood Education to continue to provide Stage 2 child care and child development services, the term remains the same, July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2014, increasing the amounts by $669,969 to $1,614,999 for the Child Care Coordinating Council and by $19,224 to $424,237 for Professional Association for Childhood Education for a total obligation of $2,039,236 for fiscal year 2011-12

INFORMATION SERVICES

30. Resolution (071917) authorizing the President of the Board to execute amendment no. 6 to the agreement with Netsmart Technologies, Inc. for the addition of "Meaningful Use" features to the Management Information System and maintenance/support, increasing the maximum obligation by $605,479 to $6,542,626 with no change to the tem February 26, 2008 through February 28, 2015

PUBLIC WORKS

31. Adopt Resolutions:

A) (071918) Accepting the report on county-wide mitigation fees for the term January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011; and

B) (071919) Determining that for calendar year 2012, the rates for the fees for new development authorized by Chapter 2.53 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code shall be computed on the base rates specified in Section 2.53.030, as adjusted in 2011

32. Resolution (071920) authorizing the Director of Public Works or his designee to:

A) Apply for and accept a California Department of Transportation Bicycle Transportation Account grant in the amount of $300,000 for the Crystal Springs Regional Trail South of Dam Project; and

B) Execute any other documents associated with acceptance of the grant funding from the California Department of Transportation in the amount of $300,000; and

C) Certify that the Department of Public Works has sufficient grant matching funds from eligible sources and the Park Acquisition and Development Fund to finance 100% of the project

CLOSED SESSION

A) Conference with legal counsel - anticipated litigation

Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9

One case

The board recessed to regular Closed Session at 11:20 a.m.

The board reconvened the open session at 12:11 p.m.

County Counsel made the following report: No reportable action taken.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:11 p.m.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Board of Supervisors

DATE: April 30, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Supervisor Dave Pine, District 1

Supervisor Don Horsley, District 3

SUBJECT: Appointments to the Design Review Committee

RECOMMENDATION: Appoint the following to the Design Review Committee:

A) Chris Johnson representing El Granada to a term expiring June 30, 2015; and

B) Kris Lannin Liang representing Moss Beach to a term expiring June 30, 2015.

BACKGROUND: The Design Review Committee exists to review condition and approve all building permit applications in the design review area. The Committee reviews all applications for compliance with specific site planning and architectural standards developed for the area.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Board of Supervisors

DATE: April 30, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Supervisor Carole Groom, District 2

Supervisor Adrienne J. Tissier, District 5

SUBJECT: Appointments to the San Mateo County Event Center

RECOMMENDATION: Appoint the following to the San Mateo County Event Center:

A) William G. Gass representing Director, Agricultural Community with a term expiring June 30, 2015; and

B) Beverly Miller representing Board Director with a term expiring June 30, 2015.

BACKGROUND: The Exposition and Fair Association directs the use of County fairground facilities. Directors are responsible for policy in the management and daily operation and maintenance of the Expo Center.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Board of Supervisors

DATE: April 16, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Supervisor Don Horsley

SUBJECT: Reappointment to the First Five Commission

RECOMMENDATION: Reappoint Angel Barrios to the First Five Commission, term expiring March 31, 2015.

BACKGROUND : The commission consists of nine members (a) one member of the Board of Supervisors, (b) the director of the County of Health System, (c) the director of the County Human Services Agency, (d) the County Superintendent of Schools, and (e) five members appointed by the Board of Supervisors from among the following categories: recipients of project services included in the county strategic plan; educators specializing in early childhood development; representatives of a local child care resource or referral agency or a local child care coordinating group; representatives of a local organization for prevention of early intervention for families at risk; representatives of community-based organizations that have the goal of promoting nurturing and early childhood development; representatives of local school districts; and representatives of local medical, pediatric or obstetric associations or societies.

This appointment contributes to the 2025 Shared Vision statement of a Collaborative Community. Our diverse population works well together to build strong communities, effective government and a prosperous economy, civic engagement – including voting, public service, charitable giving, volunteerism, and participation in public discussions of important issues – is uniformly high among the diverse population of San Mateo County.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING Eunice Kushman

Upon her retirement after 32 years on the Caminar Board of Directors * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WHEREAS, Eunice Kushman has been a dedicated member of the Board of Directors of Caminar since 1980; and

WHEREAS, Eunice worked as the head bookkeeper for the San Francisco Jewish Community Center and was the bookkeeper and secretary to the CEO of a mortgage company; and

WHEREAS, Eunice is a member of the National Alliance on Mental Illness and previously facilitated their Family Support Group, was the past President of NAMI San Mateo and was a member of the North County Citizens Advisory Board for fifteen years; and

WHEREAS, Eunice was a Director on the San Mateo County Mental Health Board where she served as President for three years and is currently the Chair of the Caminar San Mateo Regional Advisory Committee; and

WHEREAS, she is pass ionate about the welfare of the mentally ill and continues to fight against the stigma associated with mental illness; and

WHEREAS, Eunice Kushman personifies the mission of Caminar and has helped steer Caminar through tumultuous times for the past thirty–two years. As a voice of history for the mission of the Agency she has made sure that where the Agency has come from must also guide Caminar wherever it goes in the future.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo C ounty congratulates Eunice Kushman upon her retirement after 32 years of dedicated service on the Board of Directors of Caminar. The Board hereby extends its gratitude to Eunice and adds sincere wishes for many more years of continuous peace, health and happiness.

Dated: April 27, 2012

SUPERVISORS:

ADRIENNE J. TISSIER, PRESIDENT

DAVE PINE

CAROLE GROOM

DON HORSLEY

ROSE JACOBS GIBSON

Attest: ______Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Controller

Date: April 10, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Bob Adler, Controller Sandie Arnott, Treasurer-Tax Collector Anne E. Campbell, County Superintendent of Schools

Subject: Temporary transfer of available funds

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing: Controller to temporarily transfer available funds to County Operating Funds, the Superintendent of Schools, County Board of Education and School Districts during the Fiscal Year 2012-13.

BACKGROUND: Each year after July 1, certain funds experience a cash-flow problem pending the receipt of real property taxes. Education Code Section 42620 provides that the County shall temporarily loan to school districts such amounts as are necessary to meet the cash flow needs of school districts in anticipation of receipt of property taxes and other moneys by the districts. The lending limit is 85 percent of the amounts expected to accrue to the school districts, and the temporary loans are to be made out of County funds not immediately needed by the County to meet its own obligations. Historically, the resolution adopted each year by the Board simply allowed each school fund to “go negative” and pay interest expense with the assumption that the fund would be “in the black” at the end of the fiscal year.

A resolution is necessary to allow the flexibility needed to finance the needs of the County, the Superintendent of Schools, County Board of Education and the School Districts for FY 2012-13, because Resolution No. 071397, which addressed these issues by incorporating certain safeguards and was passed and adopted May 24, 2011, expires by its own terms on April 30, 2012. The new resolution is identical to Resolution No. 071397 except for date references, which now address FY 2012-13.

DISCUSSION: Given the uncertainties presented by the current fiscal situation, and the possibility that the State might take actions in the future to reduce funding both to the County and school districts, it is necessary to incorporate certain procedural “safeguards” in the resolution authorizing temporary borrowing by school districts. These safeguards ensure (1) that school districts and the County Superintendent of Schools, to the maximum extent possible, fully avail themselves of Education Code provisions which allow school districts to borrow on an intra-district basis, allow the County Superintendent to make temporary loans to school districts, and require that school districts fully consider and avail themselves of the issuance of Tax Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS) under the authority of the Government Code before borrowing from the County, (2) that temporary borrowing by any school district from the County will neither occur after the last Monday in April of any fiscal year nor, at any time, exceed 85 percent of the remaining estimated amount of funds to accrue to the school district during the fiscal year, and (3) that the County is never put in the position of being unable to meet its own immediate needs as a result of such borrowing. These safeguards also ensure close communication and coordination between the County Superintendent of Schools and County officials to ensure compliance with constitutional and statutory provisions which authorize and limit temporary borrowing. With these safeguards in place, funds will still be allowed to “go negative”, with the assurance that amounts borrowed will be repaid as required by law.

Approval of this Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community because it facilitates financial assistance to other agencies when such assistance is needed.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution as to form.

PERFORMANCE MEASURE(S): Measure FY 2010-11 Actual FY 2011-12 Projected Percent of survey 98% 97% respondents rating Controller services good or better

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the County, since any amounts accrued by the school districts which borrow temporarily from the County must first be applied to pay down the amounts borrowed. Interest is charged to sub-funds that run negative cash balance by way of negative interest apportionment. RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION Resolution authorizing: Controller to temporarily transfer available funds to County Operating Funds, the Superintendent of Schools, County Board of Education and School Districts during the Fiscal Year 2012-13 ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , the County, the County Superintendent of Schools and County

Board of Education, and the school districts within the County experience a cash-flow problem subsequent to July 1, of each year; and

WHEREAS , unless funds are made available to school district operating funds and county school service funds, said funds will realize a deficit and the ability of the

County, the County Superintendent of Schools and the County Board of Education, and the school districts to meet their obligations in these areas would be impaired; and

WHEREAS , during the year there will be on deposit in other legally available funds amounts in excess of the needs of the County, the County Superintendent of

Schools and the County Board of Education, and the school districts which amounts are not immediately needed for other purposes; and

WHEREAS , Government Code section 25252 provides that the Board of

Supervisors may authorize the County Controller to transfer money from one fund to another; and

WHEREAS , Education Code Section 42603 provides that the governing board of a school district may direct that moneys held in any fund and account of the school district may be transferred to another account of the school district for payment of district obligations, up to 75 percent of the maximum of moneys held in the fund during the current fiscal year, with any such transferred amounts to be repaid in the same fiscal year, or during the next ensuing fiscal year if the transfer takes place within the final 120 calendar days of a fiscal year; and

WHEREAS , Education Code Section 42621 provides that the county superintendent of schools of each county, with the approval of the Board of Education, may make temporary transfers to any school district which does not have sufficient money to its credit to meet current operating expenses from the county school service fund, in such amounts and at such times as the superintendent deems necessary, provided that such transfers shall not exceed 85 percent of the amount of money accruing to the school district at the time of transfer, and further provided that the amounts so transferred shall be repaid to the county school service fund prior to June

30 of the current year from funds subsequently received by the school district; and

WHE REAS , Government Code Section 53852 et. seq. authorizes school districts to issue short term interest bearing notes in anticipation of tax revenues that will be received at a later date (“TRANS”), and the money borrowed may be used and expended by the school district to meet current expenses and to discharge any debt or obligation of the school district, and school districts often issue a TRANS either through the County Board of Supervisors, on their own or through the California School Board

Association; and

WHEREAS , Education Code Section 42620 provides that if a school district, or a county school service fund, prior to its receipt of funds, lacks sufficient money to meet its current expenses of maintenance, the Board of Supervisors shall order the temporary transfer of county funds to the school districts and the county school service fund in the amount needed, not to exceed 85 percent of the remaining amount of money which will accrue to the school district or the county school service fund during the fiscal year, and provided that the funds are not immediately needed to pay the claims of the

County; and

WHEREAS , Article 16, Section 6 of the California Constitution provides that temporary borrowing between local governmental agencies may not take place after the last Monday in April of any fiscal year; and

WHEREAS , it is necessary to impose safeguards to ensure (1) that school districts and the County Superintendent of Schools fully avail themselves of the inter- fund transfer provisions of Education Code sections 42603 and 42621, and the TRANS provisions of Government Code section 53852 et. seq., to the maximum extent possible when necessary to meet ongoing school district obligations before availing themselves of the temporary borrowing provisions of Education Code section 42620; (2) that the temporary transfer of County funds to any school district does not exceed 85 percent of the remaining funds estimated to accrue to the school district, as that amount may be adjusted from time to time; and (3) that funds that are immediately necessary for the

County to meet its own financial obligations are not temporarily transferred to any school district; and

WHEREAS , this Board finds it necessary and desirable that subject to such safeguards, there be temporarily transferred from available County funds to the other funds above described, such amounts as needed until April 29, 2013; and

WHEREAS , this Board further recognizes that the purpose of these resolutions is to set forth the mutual expectations of all interested parties and to facilitate an orderly compliance with provisions of the Government Code and Education Code in the most cooperative and efficient manner and in the best interests of all interested parties.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED:

1. That the County Controller be, and is hereby, authorized from July 1, 2012 until

April 29, 2013, to temporarily transfer such amounts from said available County

funds to the other funds above described provided such transfers of school

amounts are limited in amount as described above, and subject to the following

conditions:

a. The Controller and Treasurer, in consultation with the County Superintendent

of Schools and individual school districts if necessary, shall determine the remaining estimated amounts to accrue to each school district during the fiscal

year for which the Treasurer maintains funds. Such amounts shall be updated

during the course of the fiscal year at intervals as deemed appropriate by the

Controller and Treasurer. In no event shall County funds be transferred to any

school district if such transfer would exceed 85 percent of the remaining

estimated amount to accrue to that school district during the fiscal year. b. To ensure compliance with Article 16, section 6 of the California Constitution,

the Treasurer and Controller shall not transfer any County funds to any school

district under the authority provided in this resolution after April 29, 2013. c. The Treasurer and Controller shall consult with the County Superintendent of

Schools, on a regular and continuing basis, to confirm that each school district

either has sufficient and available funds on hand, or that such funds will accrue

to such school district during the fiscal year, to meet its ongoing financial

obligations through intra-fund transfer under Education Code section 42603.

The County Superintendent of Schools shall identify, for each school district,

such school district funds that are legally available for the purpose of making

such an intra-district transfer, and conversely which funds are not available for

any such intra-district transfer due to legal or other constraints. It is understood

that school districts will fully avail themselves of the inter-fund transfer

provisions of Education Code section 42603 to the maximum extent possible

when necessary to meet ongoing school district financial obligations before

availing themselves of the temporary borrowing provisions of Education Code section 42620. d. The Treasurer and Controller shall also consult with the County Superintendent

of Schools, on a regular and continuing basis, to determine the extent to which

the County Superintendent of Schools either has sufficient and available funds

on hand in the county school service fund, or that sufficient and available funds

will accrue to the County Superintendent of Schools, to provide necessary

temporary transfers under the provisions of Education Code section 42621, to

assist school districts in meeting their ongoing financial obligations if such

assistance proves necessary. It is understood that school districts and the

County Superintendent of Schools will fully avail themselves of the temporary

transfer provisions of Education Code section 42621 to the maximum extent

possible when necessary to meet ongoing school district financial obligations

before availing themselves of the temporary borrowing provisions of Education

Code section 42620, consistent with the County Superintendent’s need to meet

her own financial obligations. e. It is understood that school districts, to the extent legally feasible, will fully avail

themselves of the TRANS provisions of Government Code section 53852 et.

seq., unless market conditions are unfavorable, when necessary to meet

ongoing school district financial obligations before availing themselves of the

temporary borrowing provisions of Education Code section 42620. f. In the event, for any reason, a school district will be unable to meet its financial

obligations through intra-district transfer of funds under Education Code section 42603 or temporary borrowing from the County Superintendent of Schools under Education Code section 42621, or the issuance of a TRANS per

Government Code section 53852 et. seq., the affected school district and the

County Superintendent of Schools shall notify the Controller and Treasurer, in writing, of the need to temporarily borrow funds from the County (the “Notice”) at least 30 days before such funds will be required, but in no event later than

30 days prior to the last Monday in April, which is April 29, 2013. The request shall include detailed cash flow forecasts for each school district for which borrowing is needed, the specific amounts requested for each school district within the 85 percent limit allowed by the Education Code, and such further information that might be necessary to support the request. Upon receipt of such request, the Controller and Treasurer, in conjunction with the County

Manager, shall undertake a review to determine whether funds proposed to be temporarily transferred to a school district must instead be retained by the

County to pay the immediate ongoing financial obligations of the County. Upon conducting such review, but in no event later than thirty (30) days from receiving the aforementioned written Notice from the school district and County

Superintendent of Schools, the County will notify the school district and County

Superintendent of Schools that it will transfer the funds requested, or will not transfer the funds requested because they are necessary to meet the ongoing financial obligations of the County. If the provision of 30 days notice is not possible because the circumstances giving rise to the school district’s inability to meet its financial obligations through an intra-district transfer or temporary borrowing were not known, then the affected school district and the County

Superintendent of Schools shall provide the above-referenced Notice as soon

as practicable and the County shall conduct its review and shall notify the

school district and County Superintendent of Schools of its determination on an

expedited basis. As provided in Education Code Section 42620, amounts

transferred by the County to any school district shall be re-transferred to the

County by the Controller from the first moneys accruing to the school district

and before any other obligations of the school district are paid from the money

accruing.

g. If, at any time, the County Superintendent anticipates that a school district will

be unable to meet its financial obligations between April 29, 2013 and June 30,

2013, because an insufficient amount of funds is expected to accrue in the

fiscal year to meet its expenses during that time period, the County

Superintendent may consult with the County about other available financing

options. In this event, the County Controller and County Treasurer shall

consult with the County Superintendent upon request.

2. That on or before June 30, 2013, the County Controller shall retransfer any and all

principal amounts from the funds to which the amounts were transferred back to the

other funds from which the amounts were transferred. Under no circumstances will

the County hold any school district harmless for any County funds temporarily

transferred under the provisions of Education Code Section 42620.

3 That, pursuant to Government Code Section 25252 and as may be necessary in

the furtherance of these resolutions, the County Controller, in consultation with the

County Treasurer, is hereby authorized to establish or abolish such County funds

as necessary for the proper transaction of the business of the County, and may

transfer monies from one County fund to another provided that the Board has

authority over each such fund.

4. That in addition to re-transferring to the appropriate funds the principal amounts

transferred therefrom pursuant to this resolution, the County shall also deposit in

each such appropriate fund in an amount equivalent to the interest that would

otherwise have been credited to the transferred funds had the temporary transfer

not been made, as directed by the County Superintendent.

* * * * * *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence County Counsel

Date: April 20, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: John C. Beiers, County Counsel Subject: Ordinance amending Section 2.14.040 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code relating to legal services from outside counsel

RECOMMENDATION: Introduce and waive first reading of an ordinance amending Section 2.14.040 (Use of Outside Counsel for Legal Services, Advice, or Representation) of Chapter 2.14 (County Counsel) of Title 2 (Administration) of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code, relating to legal services from outside counsel.

BACKGROUND: On March 1, 2012, Administrative Memorandum B -1 was revised to authorize County Department Heads to enter into contracts in a mounts not to exceed $100,000.

DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the County Ordinance Code, your Board has the sole authority to retain the services of atto rneys outside of the County Counsel’s Office to provide legal services, advice, or representation to County departments or employees, except that Section 2.14.040 of the Ordinance Code provides that the County Counsel may approve, on behalf of the County, contracts in amounts up to $50,000.

This ordinance would amend Section 2.14.040 to increase, from $50,000 to $100,000, the dollar amount of contracts for legal services that may be approved by the County Counsel to bring this section into alignment with the recently-revised Administrative Memorandum B-1.

Adoption of this ordinance will contribute to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by allowing the County rapid and flexible access to specialized legal services.

County Counsel has revi ewed and approved the proposed o rdinance as to form .

FISCAL IMPACT: None. ORDINANCE NO.______BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * *

ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.14.040 (USE OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR LEGAL SERVICES, ADVICE, OR REPRESENTATION) OF CHAPTER 2.14 (COUNTY COUNSEL) OF TITLE 2 (ADMINISTRATION) OF THE SAN MATEO COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE, RELATING TO LEGAL SERVICES FROM OUTSIDE COUNSEL

The Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of California,

ORDAINS as follows

SECTION 1 . ORDINANCE CODE AMENDMENT. Section 2.14.040 of the San

Mateo County Ordinance Code is hereby amended in its entirety as follows (additions in italics ; deletions in strikethough ) :

2.14.040 Use of outside counsel for legal services, advice, or representation

Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, except as provided herein, the

Board of Supervisors has sole authority to retain the services of any attorney or law firm outside the County Counsel's Office for the purpose of providing legal services, advice, or representation to any County employee or department. Contracts for such services in an amount up to $50,000 $100,000 may be approved and entered into by the County

Counsel. Contracts for such services in an amount over $50,000 $100,000 must first be reviewed by County Counsel and approved by the Board of Supervisors. The Controller shall not pay any bills for outside legal services unless the contract for the use of outside counsel has been approved in accordance with this section.

SECTION 2 . SEVERABILITY. If any provision(s) of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is the intent of the Board of Supervisors that such invalid provision(s) be severed from the remaining provisions of the ordinance.

SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days from the passage date thereof.

* * * * * * * *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Manager

DATE: April 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: John L. Maltbie, County Manager

SUBJECT: Amendment to Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the County Manager to execute an Amendment to the Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates, in order to incorporate the provisions of California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7056 into said Agreement.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: On December 13, 2011, the Board adopted a Resolution authorizing the President of the Board to execute an Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates (HdL) for the three year term January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014. The County has since been informed that certain provisions in Section 7056 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code must be included in the Agreement itself in order for the Board of Equalization to provide HdL with the County’s sales or transactions and use tax information. By Resolution No. 066528 (March 2, 2004), the Board previously designated HdL as a representative of the County authorized to examine confidential sales or transactions and use tax records of the Board of Equalization for the County. Resolution No. 066528 and this Amendment incorporate the required provisions.

County Counsel has reviewed the Resolution and Amendment as to form.

Approval of this Agreement contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by maximizing sales or transactions and use tax revenues and ensuring that sound practices are used to project sales and use taxes for budgeting purposes. Sales and use tax revenue is a significant general purpose funding source that can be used at the Board’s discretion to provide services that achieve the County’s vision.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH HINDERLITER, DE LLAMAS AND ASSOCIATES, IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 7056 INTO SAID AGREEMENT ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, pursuant to San Mateo County Board Resolution 066528, adopted

March 2, 2004, the County of San Mateo entered into a contract with the State Board of

Equalization (“Board”) to perform all functions incident to the administration and

collection of local sales or transactions and use taxes and designated Hinderliter, de

Llamas and Associates as a representative of the County authorized to examine

confidential sales or transactions and use tax records of the State Board of Equalization

provided to County pursuant to contract under the Bradley-Burns Uniform Sales and

Use Tax Law and California Revenue & Taxation Code applicable to sales or

transactions and use taxes; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to San Mateo County Board Resolution 071740, adopted

December 13, 2011, the County of San Mateo entered into an agreement with

Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates for the provision of Sales and Use Tax Auditing

and Consulting Services, for the term January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014; and

WHEREAS, Section 7056 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code sets forth certain requirements and conditions for the disclosure of Board records and establishes criminal penalties for the unlawful disclosure of information contained in, or derived from sales or transactions and use tax records of the Board; and

WHEREAS, among other requirements, Section 7056 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code requires that any person designated by the County to examine the

County’s sales or transactions and use tax records, other than an officer or employee of the County, shall have a contract to examine such sales or transactions and use tax records, and that such contract specifically provide that said contractor:

a) has an existing contract with the County to examine sales or transactions

and use tax records; and

b) is required by that contract to disclose information contained in, or derived

from, those sales or transactions and use tax records only to the officer or

employee of the County who is authorized by resolution to examine the

information; and

c) is prohibited by that contract from performing consulting services for a

retailer during the term of the Agreement; and

d) is prohibited by that contract from retaining the information contained in, or

derived from, those sales or transactions and use tax records after that

contract has expired; and

WHEREAS, this Board has been presented with a form of amendment to the

December 13, 2011 Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates, incorporating the above-reference provisions required by the California Revenue and Taxation Code section 7056 into said Agreement and has examined and approved it as

to both form and content and desires to enter into the Amendment.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

Amendment to the December 13, 2011 Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and

Associates is hereby approved, and the County Manager or his designee is hereby

authorized to execute said Amendment;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution is not intended to, and does

not, supersede Resolution 066528 which previously authorized Hinderliter, de Llamas

and Associates, as a representative of the County, to examine confidential sales or transactions and use tax records of the Board of Equalization for the County.

* * * * * *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence County Managers Office/Clerk of the Board

Date: May 8, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority

TO Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Peggy Jensen, Deputy County Manager

SUBJECT : 2011-12 Grand Jury Response

RECOMMENDATION: Accept this report containing the Board of Supervisor’s response to the 2011-12 Grand Jury report titled: “The County, San Carlos, and CAL FIRE, A Missed Opportunity?”

BACKGROUND: On February 15, 2012, the Grand Jury filed a report titled: “The County, San Carlos, and CAL FIRE, A Missed Opportunity?” The Board of Supervisors is required to submit comments, within ninety days, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under control of the County of San Mateo. The County’s response to the report is due to the Hon. Gerald J. Buchwald no later than May 15, 2012.

Acceptance of this report contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring that all Grand Jury findings and recommendations are thoroughly reviewed by the appropriate County departments and that, when appropriate, process improvements are made to improve the quality and efficiency of services provided to the public and other agencies.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no Net County Cost associated with accepting this report.

The County, San Carlos, and Cal Fire, A Missed Opportunity?

Findings:

Grand Jury Finding Number 1 . CAL FIRE is a full-service rural, suburban and urban fire protection agency.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 2 . CAL FIRE is a fully integrated part of the County’s fire protection system with 72 fire fighters working effectively with municipal fire departments and fire districts and utilizing the County’s central dispatch system. The CAL FIRE coverage area includes most unincorporated portions of the County and the Coastside Fire District.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 3 . From interviews, the Grand Jury learned that there is broad agreement among officials and staff from the County and cities that CAL FIRE has provided effective fire protection services in the areas of San Mateo County it serves.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 4 . Differences between work shifts of CAL FIRE and municipal fire departments, and differences in the wage rates and benefits, allow CAL FIRE to offer comparatively less expensive fire services in the Bay Area.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 5 . CAL FIRE prices its services by applying a standard 11% overhead cost on top of direct costs.

Response: Partially Agree.

CAL FIRE does apply an overhead factor to their contract, but that amount varies year to year. The last two years the factor has been between 11% and 12%.

Grand Jury Finding Number 6 . San Mateo County has contracted with CAL FIRE for services to its unincorporated areas since 1962. The current contract expires on June 30, 2012.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 7 . As of October, 2011 the San Mateo County budget deficit stood at $50 million.

Response: Partially Agree.

San Mateo County has a structural budget deficit that is updated annually. On January 31, 2012, the County Manager reported to the Board of Supervisors that the structural deficit for FY 12-13 is $41 million.

Grand Jury Finding Number 8 . San Carlos requested that the County Board of Supervisors allow San Carlos to obtain fire protection services from CAL FIRE through the County’s contract with CAL FIRE. Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 9 . From the County staff report of January 18, 2011, adjusted for a budgetary mistake, CAL FIRE could have saved San Carlos between approximately $600,000 and $2.5 million per year.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 10 . From the County staff report of January 18, 2011, in addition to substantial savings for San Carlos, bringing San Carlos under the County contract with CAL FIRE could have saved the County an additional $650,000 per year. Neither the savings to San Carlos or the County were discussed by the F&O Committee on January 18.

Response: Partially Agree.

The County staff report did not specify an “additional” $650,000 savings per year – it noted that the total savings could be $650,000 (up to $300,000, plus an additional $350,000). The Committee considered the financial information at their meeting but it was not the only issue of concern. The Committee was also interested in shared services options among the cities. At the January 18, 2011 meeting the F&O Committee members requested more information from the cities regarding shared services and associated cost savings.

Grand Jury Finding Number 11 . From the County staff report of February 15, 2011, “County Fire has a budget reduction target of $218,877 for FY 2011-12 with the goal of eventually eliminating all $1 million in general fund contributions.” (See, Appendix C)

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 12 . In response to a request from the F&O Committee, CAL FIRE prepared a cost estimate for delivery of fire protection to five County cities (Redwood City, San Carlos, Belmont, Foster City and San Mateo). According to the County staff report of February 15, 2011, the estimated aggregate cost savings to those five cities could be between $1.7 million and $16.8 million per year.

Response : Partially Agree. The potential cost savings of between $1.7 million and $16.8 million was an aggregate for the five cities and the County – not just the five cities.

Grand Jury Finding Number 13 . The CAL FIRE service cost estimates and potential savings for the County and the five County cities were not discussed by the Committee members at the February 15, 2011, F&O Committee meeting.

Response : Partially Agree.

The information in the staff report, including the financial information and data, was presented to the Finance and Operations Committee both in the report and orally at the meeting. The Committee had requested but did not receive information on a city shared service model at the February 15, 2011 meeting. But in an effort to promote city savings, Committee members offered to mediate talks between the cities of Belmont and San Carlos regarding fire service costs.

Grand Jury Finding Number 14 . From the audio transcripts of both the January 18 and February 15, 2011 F&O Committee meetings, Supervisor Adrienne Tissier said that the Governor had called for CAL FIRE getting out of the urban fire-fighting business.

Response: Agree.

Grand Jury Finding Number 15 . The Governor’s January 10, 2011 recommendations on CAL FIRE realignment only applied to State Responsibility Areas and did not apply to contracts with local jurisdictions, such as its contracts with San Mateo County or the Coastside Fire District. There was no suggestion from the Governor that CAL FIRE should curtail delivery of urban fire protection services funded by counties or cities.

Response: Partially Agree. The initial information from the state was not clear on which aspects of CAL FIRE services should be curtailed. At the Finance and Operations Committee meeting, Chief Ferreira clarified that the Governor’s comments did not apply to the contract with San Mateo County.

Grand Jury Finding Number 16 . Also during the February 15, 2011 F&O Committee meeting, the Supervisors said that the County does not want to be in the fire-fighting business. The Supervisors further said they strongly supported regional fire-protection solutions in the County as a means to reduce redundant administrative and infrastructure costs to the cities.

Response: Partially Agree. The statement about the County not being in the firefighting business should be clarified. The Board is committed to providing fire protection services to the unincorporated areas of the County. The Supervisors had concerns about expanding County provided fire services into incorporated areas prior to exploring regional solutions among the cities.

Grand Jury Finding Number 17 . The Supervisors recommended that Belmont and San Carlos enter into mediation to continue their joint fire department while regionalization alternatives could be explored. From interviews and meeting transcripts, most San Carlos and Belmont officials stated there was little chance for mediation to be successful. Response: Partially Agree . The Supervisors did recommend mediation. We cannot comment on local official’s statements regarding the potential success of mediation made by city officials in interviews.

Recommendations:

The Grand Jury recommends to the County Board of Supervisors that it should:

1. Renew its contract with CAL FIRE by June 30, 2012, unless there is a new compelling fiscal reason to change.

Response: Agree.

2. During contract negotiations with CAL FIRE, include a provision within the contract that would allow fiscally qualified cities to sub-contract for CAL FIRE services through the County such that the County as well as the cities can benefit.

Response: Disagree. Specific language is not necessary. The standard CAL FIRE contract language allows expansion of the service area when that expansion is supported by the CAL FIRE review process. The review includes evaluation of fiscal and service impacts.

3. Until the provision in Recommendation 2 is approved, allow fiscally qualified cities and fire districts in the County to sub-contract services with CAL FIRE under the County’s contract.

Response: Partially Agree. As noted in response Number 2 above, the first step in extending the service area under any CAL FIRE contract is a detailed review by the State. That process can take up to three or four months. Therefore, while the County would be willing to discuss expanding service under the current contract, it is unlikely the state service review would be completed prior to the renewal date of the current contract.

4. View CAL FIRE as a potential component of the regionalization effort.

Response: Agree.

San Mateo County fire service providers, including CAL FIRE, all participate in a countywide move and cover plan. This plan is a regional approach to fire protection services. Therefore, CAL FIRE is currently part of a regional approach to fire protection in San Mateo County. In addition, the County is participating in the San Mateo County City Managers Association shared fire services workgroup which is looking into many ways to further regionalize fire service.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Department of Public Works

Date: April 20, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority

To: Honorable Board of Supervisors

From: James C. Porter, Director of Public Works

Subject: Water Rates and Charges for County Service Area No. 11, Pescadero Area

RECOMMENDATION: Acting as the governing board of County Service Area No. 11, adopt a Resolution:

A) Setting June 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. at your regularly scheduled Board meeting, as the time and place for a public hearing on the water rates and meter service charges for County Service Area No. 11; and

B) Directing the Director of Public Works to send a notice of the proposed water rates and meter service charges to each property owner within County Service Area No. 11.

BACKGROUND: County Service Area No. 11 (CSA 11) was formed in 1988 to provide potable water service to the portion of Pescadero included within the urban rural boundaries. Water for CSA 11 customers is provided from an underground aquifer over 230 feet below ground and is delivered to 99 water service connections through approximately 2.2 miles of water mains. CSA 11 water usage and service charges are collected every two months based on rates approved by your Board. Revenue collected through water sales and meter service charges must be sufficient to support CSA 11 operations.

On September 9, 2003, your Board adopted Resolution No. 066229 adopting the current water service rates and meter service charges for CSA 11. Revenue generated from these rates is not sufficient to adequately operate, maintain, and administer CSA 11.

The Coastal Development Permit (CDP) approved in 1990 for CSA 11 system stated that the proposed water source had a limited life, water rates should be set to encourage water conservation, water should be used for domestic purposes with limited landscape usage, and alternate sources of water should be evaluated. In 2001, CSA 11 retained consultants to evaluate the estimated remaining life of the aquifer. The conclusions reached in 2002 were that the two (2) existing wells serving CSA 11 could fail due to lack of water in eight (8) to fifteen (15) years or in 2010 to 2017. The analysis also concluded that the installation of a deeper well in the vicinity of the existing wells would extend the life of the CSA 11 water supply for at least 38 years.

In 2002, your Board directed the Director of Public Works to submit an application to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for a grant to fund a portion of the construction cost of a new deeper well. The USDA offered a grant in the amount of $135,000 to CSA 11. On September 9, 2003, your Board adopted Resolution No. 066230 authorizing the execution of an agreement between CSA 11 and the County that provided a General Fund loan in the amount of $165,000 to help finance the construction of the well.

On February 3, 2004, the Department conducted an informational meeting in Pescadero with the CSA 11 property owners regarding construction of a deeper well. A result of the meeting was that the Department would survey the CSA 11 property owners to determine the level of support for construction of a deeper well. The survey indicated that 92% of the property owners that returned surveys did not support construction of a deeper well. On June 8, 2004, your Board adopted Resolution No. 066706 rescinding the Agreement for a loan from the General Fund and Resolution No. 066707authorizing the Director of Public Works to decline the USDA grant.

The process to be followed for adopting the water rates and meter service charges includes:

1. Adopt a Resolution of the proposed water rates and meter service charges.

2. Hold a public hearing and receive testimony on the proposed water rates and meter service charges.

Article XIIIC and XIIID of the State Constitution (Proposition 218) requires that notices be sent to property owners alerting them of the public hearing to consider any new or increased property related fees, and a mechanism for rejecting the fees via a “majority protest” at the public hearing. We are recommending that your Board direct us to notify each affected property owner in CSA 11 of the proposed water rates and meter service charges by mail and to explain that protests to the rates and meter charges must be in writing.

DISCUSSION: Water Rates and Meter Service Charges The water rates and meter service charges have been adjusted once (2003) since the initial rates were established. The current charges are comprised of a water rate charged per unit of water consumed (1 unit = 100 cubic feet or 748 gallons of water) and a meter service charge. Customers are billed every two months or six times per year.

The current water rate is $1.38 per unit of water and $22.00 for the meter service charge for a residential meter. The existing flat rate charged per unit of water consumed does not encourage water conservation. The Department is recommending that a tiered rate structure, one in which the rate charged per unit of water used increases as a customer’s usage increases, be adopted for CSA 11. Attachment A includes the current and proposed water rates and meter service charges for CSA 11, as well as, the rates currently charged by nearby water agencies. This comparison indicates that a tiered rate structure is used by the other water agencies and that the current water rates for CSA 11 are significantly lower than the rates charged by other agencies.

The proposed rate increase is significant, but necessary to adequately support CSA 11. The average residential customer that uses 12 units of water per month currently pays $38.56, which is comprised of $16.56 (12 units @ $1.38) for water and $22.00 for the monthly meter service charge. With the proposed rate increase the same customer would pay $61.63, which is comprised of $33.63 (11 units @ $2.69 plus 1 unit @ $4.04) for water and $28.00 for the monthly meter service charge. This large rate increase is necessary because CSA 11 expenditures exceed revenues and the fund balance will be entirely exhausted by the end of the calendar year absent the rate adjustment.

CSA 11 System and Compliance The Department has monitored the water surface elevation in the supply well for the past several years. The results indicate that it has been dropping by approximately 0.7 feet per year. These measurements support the consultants’ conclusions that construction of a deeper well will be warranted. In August 2011, CSA 11 experienced a water outage due to the failure of the pump in the supply well. It is believed that the lowered water surface elevation caused the two year old pump to fail because it was not fully submerged in water while it was pumping. The reliability of the water supply source for CSA 11 and the limited water storage capacity have become issues of major concern.

The California State Department of Public Health (DPH) assumed regulatory responsibility for small water systems from the County’s Environmental Health Division on July 1, 2011. As a result of the DPH’s involvement and the recent water outage, CSA 11 is required to perform specific water testing more frequently, implement an Operation and Maintenance Plan (Plan), provide 24 hour supervision by a certified operator, and make necessary improvements to the system to prevent future water outages. The requirements of the Plan are specific and require that additional staff time and contract services be utilized to ensure compliance with the Plan. The Plan requires that specific activities be performed by a certified operator for water systems. It is not feasible for the Department to retain certified operators on staff and instead we are currently relying on contract services for specific activities outlined in the Plan. The Department operates two small water supply systems, namely CSA 7 in the La Honda area with approximately 70 connections and CSA 11. Both systems have small customer bases, limited revenue to support required operations and maintenance, and are located a significant distance from County offices. The limited revenue and work required for both systems does not support having staff that are certified operators.

Public Input Process Staff has been communicating with customers, property owners, and the Pescadero Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC) regarding the water outage, improvements that should be made to the system, the need for a rate increase, and proposed rates. These communications have taken place through letters, public meetings, electronic mail, and telephone conversations. A “Ratepayers Group” was established by the community and has been comprised of CSA 11 property owners, PMAC members, and participants representing the interests of CSA 11 customers. Staff has met with the “Ratepayers Group” and provided them with detailed information regarding CSA 11 operations, requirements, budgetary information, and the need for a rate increase. The “Ratepayers Group” also submitted a broad Public Records Request to the Department, as well as, other County Departments regarding CSA 11. The Department dedicated significant staff time responding to the Public Records Request between December 2011 and February 2012 and provided information relative to CSA 11 finances, operations and maintenance records.

Staff met with representatives from the community on August 30, 2011 at the request of the PMAC Chair to specifically discuss the water outage and events that occurred. Staff has attended the monthly PMAC meetings in September and December of 2011 and January, February, March, and April of 2012 to specifically discuss CSA 11 or to be available for discussion. Staff met with the “Ratepayers Group” in Pescadero at the CSA 11 well site on February 15, 2012 and in our office on February 17, 2012 to discuss the proposed rates. Additionally, the Department sent letters to all property owners and customers of CSA 11 informing them of two public meetings held by the Department at the Pescadero Elementary School on October 19, 2011 and February 21, 2012.

Although staff has been working with the “Ratepayers Group” for the past several months, recent input from the group revealed a suggested revenue scenario in which the expenditure requirements were far from being adequately met. Their proposal included a $0.12 per unit increase in water rates, which is significantly less than the increase must be to support the system. Based on recent input from other community members, it appears that many customers recognize that a significant rate increase is required and have recommended that the Department move forward with the Department’s proposed rate increase.

The San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission approved a Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update for CSA 11 (Update) at their October 19, 2011 meeting. The Update discussed the water outage, evaluated the CSA 11 past and current budget, included a water rate comparison, and discussed options for shared services. The Update recommended that CSA 11 proceed with a rate increase immediately.

The proposed water rates and meter service charges were communicated to the property owners and customers through two separate mailings by the Department. Based on feedback from the property owners, the Department has adjusted the first tier of rates from 0-8 units, as originally proposed, to 0-11 units. The proposed water rates and meter service charges must support the following, at a minimum:

1. Continued routine and emergency operation and maintenance of the CSA 11 system per the Plan approved by DPH.

2. Administration of CSA 11 to comply with reporting requirements, customer support, and customer billing.

3. Inspections to determine the condition of the wells and storage tank.

4. Upgrade existing alarm, monitoring, and electrical systems.

5. Minimum fund reserve to respond to emergency events.

6. Long term capital improvements, including addressing the limitations of the aquifer and storage capacity of CSA 11 system.

The Department is recommending that the proposed rates be approved and be evaluated one year after their implementation to determine their adequacy. We anticipate that the tiered rate structure will encourage water conservation and revenue estimates have been based on a reduction in water use. It will be beneficial to review actual usage inclusive of winter and summer consumption patterns. Additionally, the Department will have data regarding the required expenditures to comply with the Plan. During this time period the Department intends to explore options for maintaining the system that may be more cost effective while still complying with the Plan.

We are proposing that the rate increase become effective on July 1, 2012. Staff will continue to work with PMAC and the “Ratepayers Group” to evaluate the financial condition of CSA 11 and develop long-term rates that will be acceptable to the ratepayers while adequately meeting the financial obligations of CSA 11. The County’s Ordinance Code allows for the formation of a Customer Advisory Committee for water districts. The committee is advisory to the Director of Public Works and the customers of CSA 11 may be interested in establishing a committee. The Department will work with the community to establish a committee if that is their desire.

The water rates, meter service charges, and other associated CSA 11 charges are described in Exhibit A of the Resolution.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved a Resolution as to form.

Your Board’s setting of the water service rates contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Healthy Community by allowing for uninterrupted service to CSA 11 customers and providing revenue to CSA 11.

FISCAL IMPACT: The following are the current and proposed water service rates for CSA11:

Water Service Description Current Rates Proposed Rates

5/8” Monthly Meter Service Charge $22.00 $28.00

1-1/2” Monthly Meter Service Charge $33.00 $42.00

Tier 1 Water Rate (0-11 HCF) $1.38 $2.69

Tier 2 Water Rate (12-25 HCF) - $4.04

Tier 3 Water Rate (26-40 HCF) - $5.45

Tier 4 Water Rate (> 40 HCF) - $7.36

A residential customer that uses 12 units of water per month currently pays $38.56 per month and would pay $61.63 per month with the proposed rates.

We estimate that it will cost approximately $200 ($2 per rate payer in CSA 11) to prepare, print and mail individual notices to each property owner in CSA 11. This cost will be paid from the revenue of CSA 11.

There is no direct impact to the General Fund. However, water service charges are levied on properties that are either leased or owned by the County and provided water by CSA 11, such as the County Fire Station Number 59 located on Pescadero Creek Road.

Attachment A: Monthly Meter Service Charges and Water Rates Comparison

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING AS THE GOVERNING BOARD OF COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 11

* * * * * * RESOLUTION

A) SETTING JUNE 26, 2012 AT 9:00 A.M. AT THE REGULARLY SCHEDUL ED BOARD MEETING, AS THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE WATER RATES AND METER SERVICE CHARGES FOR COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 11; AND B) DIRECTING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO SEND A NOTICE OF THE PROPOSED WATER RATES AND METER SERVICE CHARGES TO EACH PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 11.

______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, as the governing board of County Service Area No. 11, that

WHEREAS , in 1992 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 56747 establishing regulations and rate schedules for furnishing of water service within County

Service Area No. 11; and

WHEREAS , in 2003 the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 066229 increasing the rate schedules for the furnishing of water service within County Service

Area No. 11; and

WHEREAS , it is necessary and desirable to amend the regulations to operate and maintain the water system and increase said rate schedules as shown on Exhibit A in order to meet the anticipated financial obligations for County Service Area No. 11; and

WHEREAS , the Constitution of the State of California requires that written notice of any proposed new or increased fees or property related charges be provided by mail to the record owner of each parcel upon which the charge is proposed for imposition; and

WHEREAS , in light of the proposed increase of the rates in the County Service

Area No. 11, written notice of the proposed increase must be provided to the record owner of each parcel within County Service Area No. 11; and

WHEREAS , in accordance with Proposition 218, the time and place of a hearing thereon to be published once a week for two successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in County Service Area No. 11.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that:

Tuesday, June 26, 2012, at 9:00 A.M., in the Chambers of the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, in the Hall of Justice and Records, Redwood City, California, is hereby fixed as the time and place of the hearing on the water rates and meter service charges for County Service Area No. 11.

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Department of Public Works shall cause a copy of the "NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING", attached hereto, to be published once a week for two successive weeks prior to the date set for hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in County Service Area No. 11.

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the Director of

Public Works shall prepare a written notice of the proposed rates for County Service

Area No. 11 as shown on Exhibit A, which rates will be the basis for the imposition of the water service charges in said County Service Area No. 11, and that the notice be sent by mail to the record owner of each parcel within County Service Area No. 11.

* * * * * *

Attachment A

Monthly Meter Service Charges and Water Rates Comparison

CSA - 11 Other Water Agency Rates No. of Customers 99 6,583 12,412 1,656 Current Proposed Coastside North Coast Montara Rate Rates County County Water Water & Water Sanitary 5/8" x 3/4" Monthly Meter Service Charge $22 $28 $15.36 $24.94 $20.84 1-1/2" Monthly Meter Service Charge $33 $42 $74.32 $44.95 $37.51 Tier 1 Water Rate $2.53 $6.54 (0-11 Unit) $1.38 $2.69 $5.02 (0-5 Unit) (0-6 Unit) Tier 2 Water Rate $5.62 $8.72 (12-25 Unit) - $4.04 $5.53 (6-16 Unit) (7-13 Unit) Tier 3 Water Rate $8.04 $10.9 0 (26-40 Unit) - $5.45 $7.19 (17-28 Unit) (14-27 Unit) Tier 4 Water Rate $14.75 $15.26 (> 40 Unit) - $7.36 $8.88 (> 28 Unit) (> 27 Unit)

1 Unit = 100 cubic feet or 748 gallons of water EXHIBIT A

EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2012

SCHEDULE OF “RATES FOR WATER SERVICE” FOR

COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. 11 (CSA 11)

1. SERVICE CONNECTION CHARGE CHARGE METER DESIGNATION AND SIZE A. 5/8” x 3/4” $660.00 B. 1-1/2” $1,650.00 C. FIRE DETECTOR CHECK $1,650.00

2. BUY -IN CHARGE CHARGE A. 5/8” x 3/4” CONNECTION $10,280.00 B. 1-1/2” CONNECTION $12,850.00 Buy-In Charges reflect July 1, 2011 ENR Construction Cost Index. Buy-In Charges to adjusted annually on July 1 according to the ENR Construction Cost Index

3. METER DEPOSIT DEPOSIT A. 5/8” x 3/4” $35.00 B. 1-1/2” $250.00 C. FIRE DETECTION CHECK $35.00

4. SERVICE CHARGE MONTHLY CHARGE METER DESIGNATION AND SIZE A. 5/8” x 3/4” $28.00 B. 1-1/2” $42.00 C. FIRE DETECTION CHECK $28.00 D. ACCOUNT NOT IN SERVICE $0.00

5. WATER CHARGE CHARGE UNITS (Per HCF – 100 cubic foot of water delivered) A. TIER 1 WATER RATE (0-11 Units) $2.69 B. TIER 2 WATER RATE (12-25 Units) $4.04 C. TIER 3 WATER RATE (26-40 Units) $5.45 D. TIER 4 WATER RATE (>40 Units) $7.36

6. BULK RATE WATER PERMITS PER TANK CHARGE TANK CAPACITY A. 1,500 GALLONS OR LESS $1,500.00 B. OVER 1,500 GALLONS $3,000.00

1 of 2

7. MISCELLANEOUS FEES CHARGE REASON A. DELINQUENCY $30.00

B. METER TEST (AT CUSTOMER’S $200.00 REQUEST) C. REINSTALL METER (REMOVED FOR NON- Up to 1” Meter – 250.00 PAYMENT) Over 1” Meter – $300.00 D. METER REPLACEMENT (AT CUSTOMER’S Up to 1” Meter – 250.00 REQUEST) Over 1” Meter – $300.00 E. RECONNECTION OF SERVICE One half (1/2) the service connection charge for a new water service G. FIRE HYDRANT FLOW TEST PERMIT (FOR $200.00 PRESSURE DERTERMINATION) H. RELOCATE WATER METER (FROM 100% of the service OBSTRUCTIONS) connection charge for a new water service

2 of 2

Notice of Public Hearing

The County of San Mateo Board of Supervisors has scheduled a public hearing on proposed water rate and meter service charge increases for County Service Area No. 11.

The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 26, 2012 at 9:00 A.M. in the Chamber of the Board of Supervisors, located in the Hall of Justice and Records, 400 County Center, Redwood City, California. The meeting will be open to the public and anyone interested may appear and be heard on this matter or submit a written statement.

If you own property in County Service Area No. 11, you may obtain information about these rates from the County of San Mateo Department of Public Works, 555 County Center, 5 th Floor, Redwood City, telephone (650) 363-4100, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday or by visiting the Department of Public Works’ website at: www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/water .

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Department of Public Works

DATE: April 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: James C. Porter, Director of Public Works

SUBJECT: Executive Summary – Water Rates and Charges for County Service Area No. 11, Pescadero Area

RECOMMENDATION: Acting as the governing board of County Service Area No. 11, adopt a Resolution:

1. Setting June 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. at your regularly scheduled Board meeting, as the time and place for a public hearing on the water rates and meter service charges for County Service Area No. 11; and

2. Directing the Director of Public Works to send a notice of the proposed water rates and meter service charges to each property owner within County Service Area No. 11.

DISCUSSION: The water rates and meter service charges have been adjusted once (2003) since the initial rates that were established. The current charges are comprised of a water rate charged per unit of water consumed (1 unit = 100 cubic feet of water or 748 gallons) and a meter service charge. Customers are billed every two months or six times per year. The existing flat rate charged per unit of water consumed does not encourage water conservation. The Department is recommending that a tiered rate structure, one in which the rate charged per unit of water used increases as a customer’s usage increases, be adopted for CSA 11.

The following are the current and proposed water service rates for CSA11:

Water Service Description Current Rates Proposed Rates 5/8” Monthly Meter Service Charge $22.00 $28.00 1-1/2” Monthly Meter Service Charge $33.00 $42.00 Tier 1 Water Rate (0-11 HCF) $1.38 $2.69 Tier 2 Water Rate (12-25 HCF) - $4.04 Tier 3 Water Rate (26-40 HCF) - $5.45 Tier 4 Water Rate (> 40 HCF) - $7.36

The proposed water rates and meter service charges were communicated to the property owners and customers through several meetings and two separate mailings by the Department. Based on feedback from the property owners, the Department has adjusted the first tier of rates from 0-8 units, as originally proposed, to 0-11 units.

The water rates, meter service charges, and other associated CSA 11 charges are described in Exhibit A of the Resolution.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved a Resolution as to form.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct impact to the General Fund. However, water service charges are levied on properties that are either leased or owned by the County and provided water by CSA 11, such as the County Fire Station Number 59 located on Pescadero Creek Road.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Health System

Date: April 19, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Jean S. Fraser, Health System Chief Brian Zamora, Director, Family Health Services

Subject: California Department of Public Health for Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the:

A) President of the Board to execute an Agreement with the California Department of Public Health to provide funding for the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program for the term of July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2014, in the amount of $823,260; and B) Chief of the Health System or designee to execute contract amendments which modify the funding amount by no more than $25,000 (in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

BACKGROUND: Lead poisoning in children remains a major preventable public health problem. In San Mateo County, there were over 200,000 homes built prior to the 1978 ban on the use of lead in paint. Some sources of childhood lead poisoning in the County include: lead paint in homes, ceramic pottery with lead glazes, lead in candies, home remedies that include lead, and lead dust that is brought home from industries where lead is present. There are also a number of children who arrive from other countries who display elevated blood lead levels (BLL).

Slight elevations in BLL can result in disruptions of growth and development, cause behavioral problems and affect every organ of a young child. Children are particularly vulnerable because their small bodies absorb more lead, the lead is excreted slowly from their systems, there are no symptoms, and the only way to tell if a child is poisoned is through a blood lead test.

Local health departments receive funds to assure that children are screened for lead poisoning. Since January 1992 Child Health and Disability Prevention Program (CHDP) providers have been required to screen children aged six months to six years for the risk of lead poisoning. Children eligible for Medi-Cal, CHDP, Healthy Families, or Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program should have a blood test at age 12 months and again at 24 months of age.

DISCUSSION: Since 1993 the State Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (CLPPP) has awarded funding to local health departments to support the cost of home investigations, case management, surveillance, tracking, and community outreach and education. CLPPP supports screening and testing by providing education and outreach to medical and service providers who target low income families with young children. Additionally, CLPPP provides case management and tracking of children with elevated blood levels, surveillance on sources, and information and referrals for all County residents.

When a case of lead poisoning is identified, home visits are made with a Registered Environmental Health Specialist, a Public Health Nurse, and a Community Worker. This team is essential to tracking the source of a child’s lead poisoning and providing follow- up and resources.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Agreement and Resolution as to form. This contract is late due to delays at the State in distributing contracts to local agencies.

This Agreement contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Healthy Community by providing funding to support lead poisoning prevention activities in San Mateo County. It is anticipated that 95% of children receiving lead poisoning prevention services will benefit from a reduction in blood lead levels.

PERFORMANCE MEASURE(S): Measure FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 Actual Projected Percent of children with elevated blood lead 95% 95% levels where lead level decreased due to Lead Program activities.

FISCAL IMPACT: The term of this Agreement is July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2014. The Agreement maximum is $823,260. The maximum for FY 2011-12 is $274,420, which has been included in the Family Health FY 2011-12 Adopted Budget. For FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-2014 costs will be $274,420 and $274,420, and will be included in the future budget requests. There is no Net County Cost. RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZI NG THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM FOR THE TERM OF JULY 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2014, IN THE AMOUNT OF $823,260; AND B) CHIEF OF THE HEALTH SYSTEM OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH MODIFY THE FUNDING AMOUNT BY NO MORE THAN $25,000 (IN AGGREGATE), AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES IS/ARE WITHIN THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS. ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , there has been presented to this Board of Supervisors for its consideration and acceptance an Agreement, reference to which is hereby made for further particulars, whereby the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) shall provide funding for San Mateo County for childhood lead poisoning prevention and case management services in the amount of $823,260 for the term of July 1, 2011 through

June 30, 2014; and

WHEREA S, this Board has examined and approved it as to both form and content and desires to enter into said Agreement.

NOW , THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

President of the Board of Supervisors be and is hereby, authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the County of San Mateo and the Clerk of this Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto.

* * * * * *

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZI NG: A) PRESIDENT OF THE BOA RD TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN SAN MATEO MEDICAL CENTER AND SAN MATEO COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2011, CONTINUING INDEFINITELY, FOR A MAXIMUM OBLIGATION OF $250,000; AND B) CHIEF OF THE HEALTH SYSTEM OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH MODIFY THE COUNTY’S MAXIMUM FISCAL OBLIGATION BY NO MORE THAN $25,000 (IN AGGREGATE), AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES IS/ARE WITHIN THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) serves the health care needs of all residents of San Mateo County, with an emphasis on health promotion and primary care, is part of the San Mateo County Health System, and receives financial support from San Mateo County Health Foundation (SMCHF); and

WHEREAS , SMCHF, a fundraising foundation committed to advancing wellness in our community ranging from prenatal to palliative care, funds innovative healthcare programs that treat the whole person for the entire lifespan; and

WHEREAS , in the twenty years of its existence, SMCHF has raised over $15 million to benefit the health of San Mateo County’s residents by making funding decisions based on careful consideration of future impact rather than temporary relief; and

WHEREAS , extraordinary generosity from the SMCHF donor community has helped SMMC to remain at the forefront of innovation and a vital community resource that impacts the entire community; and

WHEREAS , the purpose of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to describe and make explicit the agreement between the County and SMCHF by which the County of San Mateo will make an annual contribution to SMCHF and SMCHF will direct its fundraising efforts solely to supporting SMMC and will make other organizational changes to increase its focus on SMMC and to address other SMMC- related initiatives; and

WHEREAS , the County wishes to commit to providing $250,000 to fund

SMCHF for the current FY 2011-12 and SMCHF commits to distributing a minimum of

$500,000 to SMMC-related programs, projects, or equipment during the same period; and

WHEREAS , this Board has been presented with a form of such MOU, has examined and approved it as to both form and content, and desires to enter into it.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

President of this Board of Supervisors be and is hereby authorized and directed to execute said MOU for and on behalf of the County of San Mateo, and the Clerk of the

Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chief of the Health System or designee is authorized to execute contract amendments which modify the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $25,000 (in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

* * * * * *

Memorandum of Understanding Between San Mateo Medical Center and San Mateo County Health Foundation

The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to describe and make explicit the agreement between the San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) and the San Mateo County Health Foundation (SMCHF) by which the County of San Mateo, through SMMC, will make an annual contribution to the SMCHF and the SMCHF will direct its fundraising efforts solely to supporting SMMC and will make other organizational changes to increase its focus on SMMC and to address other SMMC-related initiatives.

I. Background Information

SMMC is a 509-bed public hospital and clinic integrated health care delivery system fully accredited by The Joint Commission. SMMC operates outpatient clinics throughout San Mateo County, an acute-care hospital, and long-term care facilities in San Mateo and Burlingame. San Mateo Medical Center serves the health care needs of all residents of San Mateo County, with an emphasis on health promotion and primary care. San Mateo Medical Center is part of the San Mateo County Health System and receives financial support from the San Mateo County Health Foundation.

The SMCHF is a fundraising foundation committed to advancing wellness in our community. From prenatal to palliative care, the SMCHF funds innovative healthcare programs that treat the whole person for the entire lifespan. In the twenty years of its existence, it has raised over $15 million to benefit the health of San Mateo County. The SMCHF makes funding decisions based on careful consideration of future impact rather than temporary relief. The SMCHF has historically primarily funded programs of SMMC. Extraordinary generosity from the SMCHF donor community has helped SMMC to remain at the forefront of innovation and a vital community resource that impacts the entire community.

II. Term of Agreement

This MOU shall be in effect starting July 1, 2011, and continue indefinitely. The MOU may be terminated by either party with sixty days advance written notice.

III. Responsibilities

SMMC is responsible for the following under this MOU:

1. SMMC will work with the County of San Mateo to provide an annual contribution to the SMCHF to support the SMCHF’s operating expenses, starting with the 2011-2012 fiscal year.

Page 1 of 4

2. Once any required changes are made to the SMCHF bylaws, SMMC will propose two voting members for the SMCHF Board of Directors, one of whom will be the SMMC Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and one of whom will be selected by SMMC in any manner it deems appropriate. Once ratified by the SMCHF Board of Directors, the SMMC CEO will serve on the SMCHF Board of Directors for a term that is concurrent with that individual’s term as SMMC CEO. Once ratified by the SMCHF Board of Directors, the other SMMC- selected member of the SMCHF Board of Directors will serve the same length of term as other members of the SMCHF Board of Directors as outlined by the SMCHF bylaws.

3. SMMC will continue to work closely with the SMCHF to further the goals outlined by this MOU.

4. SMMC will communicate with the SMCHF in a timely manner regarding any issues relating to this MOU.

5. SMMC has no obligations under this MOU until all necessary changes to the SMCHF bylaws and the SMCHF organizational structure are implemented to accommodate the purposes of this MOU.

The SMCHF is responsible for the following under this MOU:

1. The SMCHF shall make all necessary changes to its bylaws and organizational structure to implement the requirements outlined by this MOU. Until such changes are made, SMMC has no obligations under this MOU.

2. The SMCHF Board of Directors will not unreasonably withhold its approval and ratification of the two voting members of the SMCHF Board of Directors proposed by SMMC under this MOU. Once approved/ratified, those members shall serve on the SMCHF Board of Directors for the terms outlined by this MOU.

3. For the term of this MOU, the SMCHF agrees to direct its fundraising efforts to supporting SMMC. However, this focus on fundraising for SMMC does not preclude the SMCHF from accepting unsolicited donations to support other health-related causes in San Mateo County.

4. The SMCHF will merge with and incorporate SMMC’s employee giving organization, formerly known as Chope Champions and now known as Healthcare Heroes. This new group will function as a committee of the SMCHF Board of Directors and will nominate one voting member of the SMCHF Board of Directors, said voting member to serve for the term and as otherwise outlined by the SMCHF bylaws.

5. The SMCHF will establish an employee-directed fund, known as the Healthcare Heroes Fund that functions similarly to the fund recently overseen by Chope Champions. SMMC and other County of San Mateo employees

Page 2 of 4

can continue to donate to the SMCHF’s general fund and/or to the Healthcare Heroes Fund through payroll deduction or single donation. The SMCHF will work with SMMC and the County of San Mateo to ensure that these methods of donation are possible for County employees.

6. The SMCHF will include in its fund-raising appeals direct appeals to employees of SMMC and/or the County of San Mateo Health System.

7. The SMCHF will continue to work closely with SMMC to further the goals outlined by this MOU.

8. The SMCHF will communicate with SMMC in a timely manner regarding any issues relating to this MOU.

IV. Amount and Source of Payment

Once the SMCHF has made all necessary changes to its bylaws and structure outlined above, the County of San Mateo, through SMMC, shall make a contribution to the SMCHF of two-hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) for the 2011-2012 SMMC fiscal year to support the SMCHF’s operating expenses. Thereafter, the County of San Mateo, through SMMC, shall make an annual contribution to the SMCHF to support the SMCHF’s operating expenses in the amount included in the approved SMMC budget for that fiscal year. The amount contributed each year to the SMCHF is subject to and contingent upon the annual approval of the SMMC budget by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, and nothing in this MOU obligates the County of San Mateo or SMMC to provide any contribution to SMCHF if funds are not allocated or available in any given year. The total amount of funding for the SMCHF under this MOU for the 2011-2012 fiscal year shall not exceed two-hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000).

For the 2011-2012 fiscal year, SMCHF commits to distributing a minimum of $500,000 to SMMC programs, projects, or equipment and may distribute more during that period, and during future years SMCHF will distribute such funds to SMMC programs, projects, or equipment as it decides are appropriate.

V. Other Terms

This agreement includes the following additional terms:

1. This MOU constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the parties hereto regarding the subject matter of this MOU and correctly states the rights, duties, and obligations of each party as of this document’s date. Any prior agreement, promises, negotiations, or representations between the parties regarding the subject matter of this MOU not expressly stated in this document are not binding. All subsequent modifications shall be in writing and signed by an authorized representative of the parties to this MOU.

Page 3 of 4

2. The parties agree, understand, and acknowledge that the responsibilities outlined by this MOU are performed as separate entities, and that the employees of the County of San Mateo are not employees of the SMCHF and the employees of the SMCHF are not employees of the County of San Mateo. The employees of each party acquire none of the rights, privileges, powers or advantages of employees of the other party.

3. By signing below, each party’s representative indicates that he or she is duly authorized to enter into this MOU.

SIGNATURES

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

By: President, Board of Supervisors, San Mateo County

Date:

ATTEST:

By: Clerk of Said Board

______Patricia O'Brien, Executive Director Date San Mateo County Health Foundation

Page 4 of 4

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Health System

DATE: April 12, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Jean S. Fraser, Chief, Health System Susan Ehrlich, MD, MPP, Chief Executive Officer San Mateo Medical Center

SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding between San Mateo Medical Center and San Mateo County Health Foundation

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the: A) President of the Board to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between San Mateo Medical Center and San Mateo County Health Foundation, effective July 1, 2011, continuing indefinitely, for a maximum obligation of $250,000; and

B) Chief of the Health System or designee to execute contract amendments which modify the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $25,000 (in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

BACKGROUND: San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) serves the health care needs of all residents of San Mateo County, with an emphasis on health promotion and primary care. SMMC is part of the San Mateo County Health System and receives financial support from San Mateo County Health Foundation (SMCHF).

SMCHF is a fundraising foundation committed to advancing wellness in our community. SMCHF funds innovative healthcare programs in the twenty years of its existence, it has raised over $15 million to benefit the health of San Mateo County’s residents. SMCHF makes funding decisions based on careful consideration of future impact rather than temporary relief. Historically, SMCHF has primarily funded programs of SMMC. Extraordinary generosity from the SMCHF donor community has helped SMMC to remain at the forefront of innovation and a vital community resource that impacts the entire community.

DISCUSSION: The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to describe and make explicit the agreement between the County and SMCHF by which the County of San Mateo will make an annual contribution to SMCHF and SMCHF will direct its fundraising efforts solely to supporting SMMC. They will make other organizational changes to increase SMCHF’s focus on SMMC and to address other SMMC-related initiatives.

SMMC will work with the County of San Mateo to provide an annual contribution to SMCHF to support SMCHF’s operating expenses, starting with FY 2011-12. The MOU commits the County to contribute $250,000 for FY 2011-12. In return, SMCHF commits to distributing a minimum of $500,000 to SMMC programs, projects, or equipment during the same period. Future contributions will be subject to future approval by your Board and the annual budget process. SMCHF will similarly continue to contribute to the County/SMMC in future years. This funding commitment by the public hospital to its foundation is similar to partnerships between Alameda County Medical Center, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, and Contra Costa Regional Medical Center and their foundations. Those partnerships, however, do not require minimum funding by the foundation in return.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the MOU and Resolution as to form.

This MOU contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Healthy Community by strengthening the relationship between SMMC and SMCHF and maximizing fundraising capabilities in our community. It is anticipated that SMCHF may distribute a minimum of $500,000 to SMMC projects, or equipment in FY 2011-12.

Performance Measure: Measure FY 2010 -11 FY 2011 -12 Actual Projected Anticipated annual contribution to SMMC $745,721 $500,000

FISCAL IMPACT: The MOU will be effective starting July 1, 2011, and will continue indefinitely. The MOU may be terminated by either party with sixty days advance notice. The maximum amount of funding for SMCHF under this MOU for FY 2011-12 is $250,000. Funds in the amount of $250,000 are included in the SMMC FY 2011-12 Adopted Budget. SMCHF commits to distributing a minimum of $500,000 to SMMC programs, projects, or equipment for FY 2011-12. During future years, SMCHF will distribute such funds to SMMC programs, projects, or equipment as it decides appropriate, and the County will fund SMCHF as approved by your Board and as outlined by the annual budget process.

Expenses at SMMC are covered by fees for services or third-party payors whenever possible. The portion of expenses for services provided to the medically indigent or to those covered by programs that do not meet the full costs of care are covered by the County’s General Fund contribution to SMMC and are within the existing annual appropriation.

AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO AND LAWRENCE A. SAUNDERS, DDS

THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT, entered into this _____ day of ______, 20_____, by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, hereinafter called "County," and LAWRENCE A. SAUNDERS, DDS, hereinafter called "Contractor";

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code, Section 31000, County may contract with independent contractors for the furnishing of such services to or for County or any Department thereof;

WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Agreement for oral and maxillofacial surgery services on December 9, 2011 for a term of May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2014, in an amount not to exceed $100,000; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Agreement to expand the scope of services to include dental services for the County’s Correctional Health Department and to increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by $24,000 from $100,000 to $124,000.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY TH E PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS:

1. Exhibit A, Services, to the Agreement is replaced in its entirety by Revised Exhibit A (rev. March 21, 2012), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Exhibit B, Payments, to the Agreement is replaced in its entirety by Revised Exhibit B (rev. March 21, 2012), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement dated December 9, 2011 , between the County and Contractor shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

- 1 -

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by their duly authorized representatives, have affixed their hands.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

By: President, Board of Supervisors San Mateo County

Date:

ATTEST:

By: Clerk of Said Board

LAWRENCE A. SAUNDERS, DDS

Contractor’s Signature

Date:

- 2 -

REVISED EXHIBIT A SERVICES

In consideration of the payments specified in Exhibit B , Contractor shall perform the services described below under the general direction of the Dental Program Manager.

I. Provide professional oral and maxillofacial surgery services in the Division of Dentistry, including repair of mandibular fractures.

II. Provide two (2) one-day clinics per month, to be mutually arranged and agreed upon by members of the Department of Dentistry, under the supervision of the Dental Program Manager. For purposes of this Agreement, a one-day clinic means a period of time of at least eight (8) hours of patient care services in a clinic setting during a given day.

III. Provide dental services for the patients of Correctional Health one(1) day per month for a six hour shift.

IV. Participate in such scheduled rotational coverage for mandibular fractures one week per month, or as is otherwise mutually arranged and agreed upon by members of the Department of Dentistry, under the supervision of the Supervising Dentist.

V. Contractor shall participate in a schedule for "on-call" and/or "emergency-call" status during other than scheduled times and for twenty-four (24) hours each Saturday, Sunday, or holiday. "On-call" and "emergency-call" are defined as being available by telephone or pager to the hospital medical staff, nursing supervisor, and administrator on call as needed. In addition, Contractor must adhere to the guidelines of the San Mateo County Trauma System by being immediately available by telephone and must make every reasonable effort to be present at the hospital at the time of the patient's arrival.

It is expressly understood that Contractor and subcontractors for medical specialty services are subject to these conditions, that all will accept equal scheduling for "on- call" status, and that each will be responsible for his/her portion of "on-call" time. All physicians who take calls for medical specialty services must have San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) privileges.

VI. Contractor shall participate in such teaching and/or training programs as are, or may be, established by the medical staff at SMMC. Each individual’s participation in continuing education is documented and will be considered at the time of reappointment to the medical staff and/or renewal or revision of individual clinical privileges.

VII. Contractor shall fulfill those requirements for active staff membership set forth in Articles 3 and 4.2 of the SMMC Medical Staff Bylaws, Rules and Regulations and maintain such active staff status as a condition of the Agreement.

VIII. Contractor shall attend regularly and serve without additional compensation on committees responsible for peer review activities, quality assurance, and utilization review as outlined in the SMMC Medical Staff Bylaws, Rules and Regulations.

IX. Contractor shall provide medical staff administrative support to all SMMC departments in meeting surgical standards as defined by the Joint Commission, Title XXII and other applicable standards. REVISED EXHIBIT B

PAYMENTS

In consideration of the services specified in Exhibit A, County will pay Contractor based on the following:

I. Contractor shall be paid at fixed rate of ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($1,500) for each one-day clinic.

II. Contractor shall be paid at the rate of ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,000) per case, for all cases for which he is required to physically come into SMMC to perform his duties when on call. This case rate includes one post-operative and all follow-up appointments, as needed.

III. Contractor shall be paid TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS ($200) when called by the SMMC Emergency Department to consult on a patient if no surgical service is required and such consultation is on a day other than his regularly scheduled surgery day.

IV. Contractor shall be paid ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,000) for the one, six hour dental clinic in Correctional Health that Contractor provides each month.

V. Contractor shall submit an invoice for services to County for payment in accordance with the provisions of this Exhibit. County shall not be obligated to pay Contractor for the services covered by any invoice if Contractor presents the invoice to County more than one hundred eighty (180) days after the date Contractor renders the services or more than ninety (90) days after this Agreement terminates, whichever is earlier. This timeline also applies to tracers and appeals.

VI. The term of this Agreement is May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2014. Total payments for services performed under this Agreement shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS ($124,000).

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE: A) PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH LAWRENCE A. SAUNDERS, DDS TO PROVIDE ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY SERVICES EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND INCREASING THE AMOUNT BY $24,000 TO A MAXIMUM OBLIGATION OF $124,000 FOR THE TERM MAY 1, 2012 THROUGH APRIL 30, 2014; AND B) CHIEF OF THE HEALTH SYSTEM OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH MODIFY THE COUNTY’S MAXIMUM FISCAL OBLIGATION BY NO MORE THAN $25,000 (IN AGGREGATE), AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES IS/ARE WITHIN THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, on December 9, 2011, the County Manager approved an

Agreement with Lawrence A. Saunders, DDS to provide oral and maxillofacial surgery services at San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) for a term of May 1, 2012 through April

30, 2014, for a maximum amount payable not to exceed $100,000; and

WHEREAS, the Correctional Health Division (CH) has a continuing need for dental and oral and maxillofacial surgery services for inmates and the County’s

Agreement with Dr. Saunders does not presently include within its scope such services for CH; and

WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Agreement to expand the scope of services to include provision of dental and oral and maxillofacial surgery services for CH and to increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by $24,000 from

$100,000 to $124,000; and

WHEREAS, this Board has been presented with a form of such Amendment and has examined and approved it as to both form and content and desires to enter into it.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the President of this

Board of Supervisors be and is hereby authorized and directed to execute said

Amendment for and on behalf of the County of San Mateo, and the Clerk of the Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto.

* * * * * *

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Health System

DATE: April 5, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Jean S. Fraser, Chief, Health System Susan Ehrlich, MD, MPP, Chief Executive Officer San Mateo Medical Center

SUBJECT: Amendment to the Agreement with Lawrence A. Saunders, DDS

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the: A) President of the Board to execute an Amendment to the Agreement with Lawrence A. Saunders, DDS to provide oral and maxillofacial surgery services expanding the scope of services and increasing the amount by $24,000 to a maximum obligation of $124,000 for the term May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2014; and

BACKGROUND: Dr. Saunders has been providing oral and maxillofacial surgery services at San Mateo Medical Center (SMMC) for many years. In February 2011 he began providing dental services to jail inmates for the Correctional Health Division. He provides one six hour dental clinic per month at a cost of $1,000 per clinic. The County’s most recent Agreement with Dr. Saunders was approved by the County Manager on December 9, 2011.

DISCUSSION: When the new Agreement was written, provision of services to the Correctional Health Division was inadvertently omitted from the scope of services. The purpose of this Amendment is to modify the scope of services to include dental services for Correctional Health and to increase funding by $24,000 from $100,000 for a new maximum fiscal obligation of $124,000.

The Amendment and Resolution have been reviewed and approved by County Counsel as to form. The Contractor’s insurance meets certification requirements.

The contractor has assured compliance with the County’s Contractor Employee Jury Service Ordinance, as well as all other contract provisions that are required by County ordinance and administrative memoranda, including, but not limited to, insurance, hold harmless, non-discrimination and equal benefits.

This Amendment contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Healthy Community by providing access to dental services, including oral and maxillofacial surgery services, to residents and inmates of San Mateo County. As a safety net medical service provider SMMC is acutely aware of the importance of controlling hospital-borne infections. Failure to control infection results in higher cost to the County for additional care of those patients who become victims of a preventable infection. It is anticipated that 100% of all dental services provided will adhere to the infection control standards as defined by the Joint Commission and Title 22 of the State of California Code of Regulations, which will result in reduced risk of healthcare-associated infections.

Performance Measure: Measure FY 2010 -11 FY 2011 -12 Actual Projected Reduce the risk of healthcare-associated infections and 100% 100% adhere to infection control standards as defined by Joint Commission, Title 22, and other applicable standards

FISCAL IMPACT: The term of this Agreement is May 1, 2012 through April 30, 2014. The maximum fiscal obligation is $124,000. Funds in the amount of $10,333 are included in the SMMC FY 2011-12 Adopted Budget and $62,000 will be included in the SMMC FY 2012-13 Recommended Budget. Similar arrangements will be made for future budget years. This contract is administered by SMMC, but the portion of expenses associated with Correctional Health inmates will be reimbursed to SMMC.

Expenses at SMMC are covered by fees for services or third-party payors whenever possible. The portion of expenses for services provided to the medically indigent or to those covered by programs that do not fully meet the costs of care are covered by the County General Fund contribution to SMMC, and are within the existing annual appropriation.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Human Resources Department

DATE: April 18, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Donna Vaillancourt, Director, Human Resources Department Scott Johnson, Risk Manager

SUBJECT: Disposition of Claims Filed Against County

RECOMMENDATION: Deny the claims listed below.

BACKGROUND: Under authority of section 2.10.070 of the Ordinance Code, the County Manager has designated the Director to process claims filed against the County. Further investigation may indicate justification for payment by the County. If so, payment will be made under the authority of the Risk Manager or will be brought back to the Board.

DISCUSSION: The Risk Management Division has reviewed these claims and recommends that you take the following action.

Claim # Claimant Recommended Board Action and Basis Claims recommended for denial: G11-055 Abellera, Christina 10/11/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages due to the dangerous road conditions on Skyline Boulevard which caused the wrongful death of decedent, Brian Sacdalan. G11-054 Hengesbach-Gomes, Anni 10/9/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges injuries due to a swing harness that had disengaged while playing at Quarry Park in El Granada.

Claim # Claimant Recommended Board Action and Basis G10-113 Maduro, Kelvin Lloyd 6/1/11- 9/15/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages due to being arrested for a violation. G11-055C Mandigna, Christian (a minor) 10/11/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages due to the dangerous road conditions on Skyline Boulevard which caused the wrongful death of decedent, Brian Sacdalan. G11-053 Milos Jr., Richard Anthony 10/25/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages while riding in the bike lane on Junipero Serra Boulevard in South San Francisco. G07-110 Pagtakhan, Marlon Estacio 9/26/11-12/16/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages by the District Attorney's Office. G11-051 Ponce, Rueben 9/24/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages and injuries due to being stopped by deputies for driving under the influence. M11-022 Powell, Yolanda 2/5/12 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages and personal injuries while an inpatient and resident of Burlingame Long Term Care Facility. G11-055D Sacdalan, Abcd (a minor) 10/11/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages due to the dangerous road conditions on Skyline Boulevard which caused the wrongful death of decedent, Brian Sacdalan. G11-055B Sacdalan, James (a minor) 10/11/11 Non-culpable Claimant alleges damages due to the dangerous road conditions on Skyline Boulevard which caused the wrongful death of decedent, Brian Sacdalan.

Careful consideration of these claims contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by ensuring fair and equitable handling of all claims while conserving financial resources and protecting assets.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Human Services Agency

DATE: April 11, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Beverly Beasley Johnson, J.D., Director, Human Services Agency

SUBJECT: Revenue Agreement with San Mateo County Community College District – Skyline College for Allied Health Career Advancement Academy

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the: A. President of the Board to accept a revenue Agreement from San Mateo County Community College District (SMCCCD) – Skyline College, to provide training for a new workforce in Allied Health for the term of April 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012, in the amount of $120,000; and

B. Director of the Human Services Agency (HSA) or the Director’s designee to execute contract amendments in an amount up to $360,000.

BACKGROUND: The SMCCCD through Skyline College implements the Career Advancement Academy (CAA), a program targeting youth for bridge coursework and career technical education funded through a grant from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office. The timeframe of the grant is 15 months, commencing April 1, 2011 and terminating June 30, 2012. The grant may be extended for three years.

DISCUSSION: SMCCCD Skyline College and included partners were awarded funding to offer a training program for young adults that provides a pathway to high-wage jobs in Allied Health careers. Through the grant, participants will be supported both during and after the program with training support, job development and placement. The San Mateo County Workforce Investment Board (SMCWIB), a key partner with SMCCCD, will make referrals, coordinate services and link participants to the Career Advancement Academy.

The processing of this Agreement was delayed due to negotiations to reach agreement in regards to partner roles and due to the transition of staff both internally and at the college.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Agreement and Resolution as to form.

Approval of this revenue Agreement contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Prosperous Community by providing customized training to the youth of San Mateo County. It is anticipated that at least 50 candidates will be referred to the Allied Health programs and at least two Healthcare Sector Taskforce meetings will take place.

Performance Measure(s):

Measure FY 20 11 -12 Target

Candidates referred to the Allied Health California 50 Advancement Academy programs Number of referred candidates estimated to be placed in 44 industry employment Convene the Healthcare Sector Taskforce Meetings 2

FISCAL IMPACT: The term of this revenue Agreement is April 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012. Funding for this Agreement is provided by SMCCCD and will be reimbursed via standard invoicing to SMCCCD. There is no Net County Cost.

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A) THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD TO ACCEPT A REVENUE AGREEMENT FROM SAN MATEO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT (SMCCCD) – SKYLINE COLLEGE, TO PROVIDE TRAINING FOR A NEW WORKFORCE IN ALLIED HEALTH FOR THE TERM OF APRIL 1, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2012, IN THE AMOUNT OF $120,000; AND B) THE DIRECTOR OF THE HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY (HSA) OR THE DIRECTOR’S DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS IN AN AMOUNT UP TO $360,000

RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, The San Mateo County Community College District (SMCCCD) through Skyline College implemented the Career Advancement Academy (CAA), a program targeting youth for bridge coursework and career technical education funded through a grant from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office; and

WHEREAS , Through this grant SMCCCD has awarded the County a revenue

Agreement in the amount of $120,000 with the term of April 1, 2011 through June 30,

2012, the grant is renewable for three years; and

WHEREAS, it has been requested that this Board authorize the Director of the

Human Services Agency or the Director’s designee to accept and execute subsequent amendments on behalf of the County of San Mateo, in an amount up to $360,000; and

WHEREAS , this Board has been presented with a form of such revenue

Agreement and said Board has examined and approved same as to both form and content and desires to enter into same.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that

A. The President of this Board of Supervisors be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to execute said revenue Agreement for and on behalf of the County of

San Mateo, and the Clerk of this Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto; and

B. The Director of the Human Services Agency, or the Director’s designee is hereby authorized to execute contract amendments in an amount up to $360,000, on behalf of the County of San Mateo.

* * * * * *

For SMCCCD Use Only Vendor # ______P.O. # ______

SAN MATEO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT AGREEMENT WITH San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

This Agreement entered by and between the San Mateo County Community College District, a political subdivision of the State of California, having its principal business address at 3401 CSM Drive, San Mateo, CA 94402 (hereinafter called "District") and San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board, having its principal business address at: 400 Harbor Blvd., Building B, Belmont, CA 94002 (hereinafter called "Contractor").

WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that Contractor be engaged by District for the purpose of performing services hereinafter described;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments hereinafter set forth, Contractor shall perform services for District in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth herein and in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and, in consideration of the services rendered in accordance with all terms and conditions set forth herein and in Exhibit A, District shall make payment to Contractor in the manner specified in Exhibit A.

1. UTERM AND TERMINATION U. This Agreement shall commence July 1, 2011 and terminate on June 30, 2012. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any applicable law limits the permissible length of the term of this Agreement, then the term of this Agreement shall not extend beyond the length permitted by law. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party.

2. UAMENDMENTS U. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both District and Contractor which writing shall state expressly that it is intended by the parties to amend the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

3. UGOVERNING LAW AND EXTENT OF AGREEMENT U. This Agreement, including all exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, shall be construed in and governed by the laws of the State of California and constitutes the sole agreement of the parties hereto and correctly states the rights, duties and obligations of each party. Any prior agreement, promises, negotiations, or representations between the parties not expressly stated in this document are of no force or effect. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions set forth herein and those in the exhibits attached hereto, the terms and conditions set forth herein shall prevail.

4. U INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS U. It is understood that this is an Agreement by and between independent contractors and is not intended to, and shall not be construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture of association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of independent contractor. Except as District may specify in writing, Contractor shall have no authority, expressed or implied, to act on behalf of District in any capacity whatsoever. Contractor shall have no authority, expressed or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind District to any obligation whatsoever.

5. UTIME OF PERFORMANCE U. Time is of the essence and Contractor shall perform the services required by this Agreement in an expeditious and timely manner so as not to unreasonably delay the purpose of this Agreement.

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

6. UFAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACTS U. District is an equal opportunity employer. By entering into this Agreement, Contractor certifies that he/she is in compliance with the Equal Employment Opportunity Requirement of Executive Order 11246, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1973, the California Fair Employment Practices Act and any other Federal or State laws and regulations related to Equal Employment Opportunity. Contractor's personnel policies shall be made available to District upon request.

7. ULICENSES, PATENTS, PERMITS U. Contractor shall apply for and maintain in current status all licenses, patents and permits necessary in performance of the work required under this Agreement.

8. ULIABILITY AND INSURANCE U. Contractor shall be responsible for all damages to persons or properties that occur as a result of Contractor's or Contractor's employees fault or negligence in connection with the performance of this Agreement.

Contractor is self-insured and a combination thereof, and maintain during the life of this Agreement, Comprehensive General Liability insurance which provides for injuries including accidental death, per any one occurrence in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,000 annual aggregate; property damage insurance in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence; and business automobile liability insurance in an amount not less than $2,000,000 including coverage for owned, non- owned and hired vehicles.

Contractor shall have in effect, during the entire life of this Agreement, Workers' Compensation and Employer Liability Insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, Contractor makes the following certification, required by Section 1861 of the California Labor Code (select one):

I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of the Agreement.

Certificates of Insurance for coverages required herein shall be filed with District's Executive Vice Chancellor prior to the commencement of work . The certificates shall provide that if the policy or policies be canceled by the insurance company or Contractor during the term of this Agreement, thirty (30) days written notice prior to the effective date of such cancellation will be given to District's Executive Vice Chancellor. The certificates shall also show the information that the San Mateo County Community College District is named on Contractor's Comprehensive General Liability and Property Damage policies as co-insured or added thereon by endorsement as a named insured or additional insured.

9. UMUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION U. Contractor shall indemnify and save harmless District, its officers, agents, employees and servants from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind, description, brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from performance of any work by Contractor, its officers, agents, employees and/or servants that is required under this Agreement.

District shall indemnify and save harmless Contractor, its officers, agents, employees and servants from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind, description, brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from performance of any work by District, its officers, agents, employees and/or servants that is required under this Agreement.

10. UASSIGNABILITY U. Contractor shall not assign this Agreement or any portion thereof to a third party without the prior written consent of District, and any attempted assignment without such prior written

Page 2 of 7

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

consent in violation of this paragraph 10 is null and void and automatically shall terminate this Agreement. In the event of any assignment, Contractor shall remain liable to District as principal for the performance of all obligations under this Agreement.

11. UFAILURE TO PERFORM U. If, at any time, in the opinion of District, Contractor fails to render services of proper quality or has failed to perform, keep, and observe any of the terms or conditions herein contained on the part of Contractor to be performed, kept, and observed, District may give Contractor written notice to correct such conditions or cure such default; and if any such condition or fault shall continue for ten (10) days after said written notice, then, and in that event, this Agreement shall cease and expire. Thereupon District or its duly authorized representative may employ other parties to carry this Agreement to completion as District may deem proper.

12. UFORCE MAJEURE U. Neither party shall be responsible for delays or failure in performance resulting from acts beyond the control of such parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, Acts of God, labor disputes, civil disruptions, acts of war, epidemics, fire, electrical power outages, earthquakes or other natural disasters.

13. UDISPUTE RESOLUTION U. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement, the parties agree to meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually agreed upon mediator. The

Mediation process shall provide for the selection, within fifteen (15) days of either party notifying the other of the existence of a dispute, by both parties of a disinterested third person as mediator and shall be

concluded within forty-five (45) days from the commencement of the Mediation unless a time requirement is extended by stipulation of both parties.

If a mediated settlement is reached, neither party shall be the prevailing party for the purposes of the mediated settlement. Each party agrees to bear an equal quota of the expenses of the mediator.

Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and maintaining a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution.

14. USEVERABILITY U. Should any part of this Agreement be declared through a final decision by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the authority of either party to enter into or to carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexercised portion, can be interpreted reasonably to give effect to the intentions of the parties.

15. UWAIVERS U. No waiver of default by District of any terms or conditions hereof to be performed, kept, or observed by Contractor shall be construed to be or act as a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms and conditions herein contained.

16. UNOTICES U. All notices to be given between the parties hereto shall be in writing and may be served by commercial express/overnight courier service or by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid and certified receipt requested and addressed to:

"DISTRICT" San Mateo County Community College District Jan Roecks, Director of General Services 3401 CSM Drive San Mateo, CA 94402

Page 3 of 7

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

"CONTRACTOR" San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board Mike Curran, Interim Workforce Development Manager 262 Harbor Boulevard, Building A Belmont, California, 94002

Either party by written notice to the other party may change the address of the notice or the names of the persons or parties to receive written notices.

17. UEXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS U. Contractor agrees to comply with Government Code Section 8546.7 which provides that any contract involving expenditure of public funds in excess of $10,000 requires that the contracting parties shall be subject to the examination and audit of the Auditor General for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the contract.

18. UCAPTIONS U. Any captions to or headings of the articles, sections, subsections, paragraphs, or subparagraphs of this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties, are not a part of this Agreement, and shall not be used for the interpretation or determination of validity of this Agreement or any provision hereof.

19. UCOUNTERPARTS U. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

20. UEXECUTION U. By their signatures below, each of the following represents that they have authority to execute this Agreement and to bind the party on whose behalf their execution is made.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in duplicate.

SAN MATEO COUNTY COMMUNITY CONTRACTOR COLLEGE DISTRICT

By: By:

Jan Roecks, Adrienne Tissier, President Director of General Services San Mateo County Board of Supervisors

Date: Date:

Page 4 of 7

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

EXHIBIT A - INVOICING

Services shall be billed to “San Mateo County Community College District” and become payable upon presentation of detailed invoice(s) specifying services provided and costs associated with those services during the activity period. The following is a quarterly schedule for invoicing:

Invoice Invoice Date For Activities During Period: 1 10/5/2011 July 1, 2011 - September 30, 2011 2 1/5/2012 October 1, 2011 – December 30, 2011 3 4/5/2012 January 1, 2012 – March 31, 2012 4 6/5/2012 April 1, 2012 – June 30, 2012

The sum of all invoices for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011 and ending June 30, 2012 shall not exceed the indicated value:

Partner Fiscal Year 2011-2012

San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment 120,000 Board

The total amount paid under this Agreement shall not exceed $120,000.

Invoices shall be sent to: SMCCCD, Accounts Payable Office, 3401 CSM Drive, San Mateo, CA 94402 with a copy sent to: Barbara Lamson, Skyline College, 3300 College Drive, San Bruno CA 94066.

Page 5 of 7

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

EXHIBIT B – PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The San Mateo County Community College District through Skyline College is implementing the Career Advancement Academy (CAA), a project targeting youth for bridge coursework and career technical education funded by the California Community College Chancellors Office. The timeframe of the grant is 15 months, commencing on April 1, 2011 and terminating on June 30, 2012. The grant is renewable for three years.

The following describes a subgrant designated in the grant award for the project’s partner, San Mateo County, on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board, in the amount of $120,000.

Highlights of Grant Activities Include:

1) Local Collaborative - Create a regional industry-education partnership of community colleges, the Workforce Investment Board, non-profits and employers, to provide training and career pathways in health care for San Mateo County. The partnership will work collaboratively to connect the needs of the community workforce with clean energy training and resources.

2) Training Programs and Implementation – Create and provide training through the SMCCCD Career Advancement Academies to 150 underserved students, particularly youth. Special emphasis will be placed contextualized basic skills, direct bridges to allied health training and leveraging college and partner supportive services.

3) Capacity Buildin g – Create allied health career pathways to provide multiple entry and exit points into health care, including training at the K-12 system, CBO training centers and community colleges.

This subgrant provides funding to assist San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board with linking the CAA resources with potential clients. This program component will support the grant’s goal of training a new workforce in allied health.

Page 6 of 7

SMCCCD - CAA sub-grant with San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board

EXHIBIT C - PROJECT OBJECTIVES FOR SAN MATEO COUNTY ON BEHALF OF THE WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD

Dates are subject to change on agreement between SMCCCD and Contractor.

1. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board will actively participate in CAA meetings and communications where appropriate. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

2. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board , along other Career Advancement Academy partners, will assist Skyline College to complete quarterly, Mid-Program and Summative Evaluations. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

3. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board will assist Skyline College with wrap- around support services and case management services necessary to promote student success. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

4. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board , will refer candidates for CAA course programs including and assist with outreach to youth and other clients to link them to CAA resources. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

5. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board , will lead the continuation of a countywide health care sector organization that includes employers, community colleges, training providers and CBOs in San Mateo County. Group membership will be determined jointly by the SMCCCD and the SMCWIB. SMCWIB staff will interview members individually or in a group to determine workforce and training needs which will be used to develop a county-wide action plan in allied health. SMCWIB staff will convene at least two meetings of the whole group. Ongoing progress in this grant will be shared with the group. Next steps for development will be agreed upon by June of 2012 and the SMCWIB will dedicate resources in 2012-2013 to take appropriate follow-up actions. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

6. San Mateo County on behalf of the Workforce Investment Board , will support outreach efforts and curriculum development as needed for the Allied Health courses for High School and Regional Occupational Program students and faculty. (July 1, 2011 – June 30, 2012)

Page 7 of 7

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Planning and Building Department

DATE: April 30, 2012 BOARD MEETING DATE: May 8, 2012 SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING: None VOTE REQUIRED: Majority

TO: Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM: Jim Eggemeyer, Community Development Director

SUBJECT: Third Amendment to Agreement with Environmental Science Associates (ESA)

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the:

(A) President of the Board to execute a Third Amendment to the Agreement with Environmental Science Associates for the provision of administrative and technical support to the San Francisco International Airport/Community Roundtable, modifying the scope of services, increasing the maximum amount payable thereunder by $193,000 from $180,000 to $373,000, and modifying the term so that it coincides with the end of the fiscal year; and

(B) Community Development Director or his/her designee to execute contract amendments which modify the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $25,000 (in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

BACKGROUND: On July 17, 2009, the County contracted with ESA to provide technical and administrative support to the San Francisco International Airport/Community Roundtable (“ACRT”) for FY 2009/2010. ESA was selected through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process, and out of the four responders who were interviewed by the Roundtable Coordinator Selection Subcommittee, ESA was selected as the most qualified firm to carry out the Scope of Work defined by the ACRT. On July 27, 2010, the Board amended the contract to increase the total amount payable to $120,000 and extend the term to July 16, 2011. On July 11, 2011, the Board amended the contract to increase the total amount payable to $180,000 and extend the term to July 15, 2012.

The contract with ESA and the amendments thereto provide for a scope of services to be provided by ESA that anticipates that the ACRT will have in place its own staff, consisting of a Coordinator/Program Manager and Administrative Assistant, in place and performing the tasks associated with those positions. Pursuant to long-standing understandings among the ACRT participants, the County provided that staffing and was reimbursed for those costs by the ACRT through a contract between the County and the City and County of San Francisco acting by and through its Airport Commission (“SFO”).

DISCUSSION: As a result of the retirement of the Roundtable Program Manager and the departure of the Administrative Assistant, ESA has been asked to fill those roles as well. With that change in the scope of services, the fees generated by ESA have exceeded the budgeted amounts and the funding provided to the County through its contract with SFO.

Due to the lack of funding, ESA effectively ceased performing services for the ACRT in mid-March, but has provided estimates as to the cost for services through the end of this fiscal year. SFO leadership has agreed in principle to provide the additional $100,000 necessary to have ESA provide the required services through the end of this FY 2011-12. ESA has agreed to amend its contract with the County and to provide the required services to ACRT through June 30, 2012 pursuant to that amendment. Under the proposed amendment, the County would not be obligated to pay ESA any more than it receives from SFO.

The current contract has a termination date of July 15, 2012. In order to align the end of the current contract term with the end of the fiscal year, the proposed amendment effectively shortens the contract period by two weeks by establishing a new end date of June 30, 2012.

It is anticipated that for FY 2012-13 and beyond, ACRT, SFO and the County will work together to determine how best to acquire the required services and make the appropriate arrangements to see that those services are properly contracted and paid for at no separate expense to the County.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Amendment of the contract with ESA and the Resolution as to form.

The Amendment contributes to the 2025 Shared Vision outcome of a Livable Community by providing support to the activities of the Airport/Community Roundtable to address noise impacts in affected neighborhoods and communities from aircraft operations at San Francisco International Airport.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Amendment increases the maximum amount payable pursuant to the Agreement by $193,000, from $180,000, for a total of $373,000, which amount the County is being reimbursed by the Airport/Community Roundtable and SFO. There is no Net County Cost impact associated with the proposed Amendment.

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * *

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE: (A) PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD TO EXECUTE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES FOR THE PROVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT/COMMUNITY ROUNDTABLE, MODIFYING THE SCOPE OF SERVICES, INCREASING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT PAYABLE THEREUNDER BY $193,000, FROM $180,000 TO $373,000, AND MODIFYING THE TERM SO THAT IT COINCIDES WITH THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR; AND (B) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE CONTRACT AMENDMENTS WHICH MODIFY THE COUNTY’S MAXIMUM FISCAL OBLIGATION BY NO MORE THAN $25,000 (IN AGGREGATE), AND/OR MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES IS/ARE WITHIN THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2009, the County of San Mateo authorized an

Agreement with Environmental Science Associates (#38000-10-C053) in the amount of $60,000 for the term of July 17, 2009 to July 16, 2010 for the purpose of providing

administrative and technical support to the San Francisco International

Airport/Community Roundtable; and

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2010, the parties entered into a First Amendment

(Resolution No. 70959) to the Agreement to increase the maximum amount payable

thereunder by $60,000, from $60,000 to $120,000, and to extend the term from July 16,

2010 to July 15, 2011; and

WHEREAS, on July 11, 2011, the parties entered into a Second Amendment to the Agreement to increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by another

$60,000, from $120,000 to $180,000, and to extend the term from July 16, 2011 to

July 15, 2012 (the “Second Amendment”); and

WHEREAS, the parties now wish to further amend the Agreement to increase the scope of work, increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by $193,000, from $180,000 to $373,000, and to revise Contract Term so that its termination coincides with the end of the fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, the Board has been presented with and has considered, as to both form and substance, this Third Amendment to the Agreement and desires to enter into it.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that;

(A) The President of this Board of Supervisors be, and is hereby, authorized

and directed to execute said Third Amendment for and on behalf of the

County of San Mateo, and the Clerk of this Board shall attest the

President’s signature thereto; and

(B) The Community Development Director or his/her designee be, and is

hereby, authorized to execute amendments to the Agreement with

Environmental Science Associates (#38000-10-C053) which amendments

modify the County’s maximum fiscal obligation by no more than $25,000

(in aggregate), and/or modify the contract term and/or services so long as

the modified term or services is/are within the current or revised fiscal

provisions.

* * * * * *

THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES

THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT, entered into this 8th day of May, 2012, by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, hereinafter called "County," and Environmental Science Associates, hereinafter called "Contractor;

WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code, Section 31000, County may contract with independent contractors for the furnishing of such services to or for County or any Department thereof; and

WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Agreement for the provision of administrative and technical support services for the San Francisco International Airport/ Community Roundtable (the “Roundtable”) on July 17, 2009; and

WHEREAS, on July 12, 2010 the parties amended the Agreement to increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by $60,000, from $60,000 to $120,000, and to extend the term from July 16, 2010 to July 15, 2011 (the “First Amendment); and

WHEREAS, on July 11, 2011 the parties further amended the Agreement to increase the maximum amount payable thereunder by another $60,000, from $120,000 to $180,000, and to extend the term from July 16, 2011 to July 15, 2012 (the “Second Amendment”); and

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS:

1. Paragraph 2 of the Agreement, Contract Term, is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

2. Contract Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from July 17, 2009 through June 30, 2012, unless terminated earlier by the County.

Page 1 of 3

2. Paragraph 3 of the Agreement, Payments, is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

3. Payments.

A. In consideration of the services provided by Contractor, in accordance with all terms, conditions and specifications set forth herein and in Exhibits "A" and "B", during the during the period July 17, 2009, through July 15, 2011,County shall make payment to Contractor as specified in Exhibit "A"

B. In consideration of the services provided by Contractor, in accordance with all terms, conditions and specifications set forth herein and in Exhibit C, during the during the period July 16, 2011, through June 30, 2012 (“Third Year Services”), County shall make payment to Contractor as specified in Exhibit "C". Provided, however, County’s obligation to make payment to Contractor, and any payment to Contractor for Third Year Services in excess of $153,000, is and shall be contingent upon and limited to the amounts received by County from the City and County of San Francisco acting by and through its Airport Commission (“City”) in excess of the $125,000 specified in section 5 of the unamended Agreement for Partial Reimbursement between the County and the City dated for convenience July 1, 2011, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D.

Contractor will not be compensated for any work or services provided after May 1, 2012, unless such work or services is first authorized in writing by the County or by the Chairman of the Roundtable.

C. In the event that the County makes any advance payments, Contractor agrees to refund any amounts in excess of the amount owed by the County at the time of contract termination. The County reserves the right to withhold payment if the County determines that the quantity or quality of the work performed is unacceptable. In no event shall the County's total fiscal obligation under this Agreement exceed $253,000 for Third Year Services, or $373,000 for the full term of this Agreement.

Page 2 of 3

3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement dated July 17, 2009 between the County and Contractor, as previously amended, shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by their duly authorized representatives, have affixed their hands.

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

By: ______President, Board of Supervisors, San Mateo County

Date:______

ATTEST:

By:______Clerk of Said Board

Environmental Science Associates

______Contractor's Signature

Date:______

Page 3 of 3

Exhibit “C” Agreement No. 38000-10-C053

DEFINITION OF CONTRACTOR AND SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE DESIGNATED SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT/COMMUNITY ROUNDTABLE COORDINATOR

I. Definition of Contractor and Designated Roundtable Coordinator

The Contractor for this Scope of Work is Environmental Science Associates (ESA), a nationwide environmental consulting firm. Steven Alverson, Director, ESA Airports Practice Group, based in Sacramento, California, shall serve as the designated Roundtable Coordinator. Mr. Alverson and other ESA staff, as needed, shall perform the Scope of Work described below.

II. Scope of Work

The following tasks describe the Scope of Work for the designated Roundtable Coordinator:

A. Provide technical/administrative support to the Roundtable, as the Roundtable Coordinator. These responsibilities include but are not limited to the following:

1. Assist in agenda planning and coordination with San Francisco International Airport Staff, Roundtable Chairperson, the Roundtable Program Manager, and others as needed.

2. Prepare staff reports, memos, letters, emails, and other written material and graphics, related to Roundtable Work Program items and other relevant topics/issues, for all Roundtable Regular Meetings, Special Meetings, Workshops, and Subcommittee Meetings; follow-up, as needed, on requests for information about Roundtable activities.

3. Coordinate/assist with Roundtable administrative duties with part-time Roundtable Administrative Staff and Roundtable Program Manager; including preparation of Roundtable meeting packets and a Roundtable annual budget.

4. Attend up to: six Roundtable Regular Meetings, three Special Meetings, four Subcommittee Meetings, and one Workshop.

B. Represent the Roundtable in meetings and interactions with (1) CalTrans Division of Aeronautics Staff, (2) FAA Staff, (3) key staff at San Francisco International Airport, (4) elected officials, (5) the public, and (6) all other interested persons.

Page 1 of 2 C. Develop and maintain an effective working relationship with (1) local elected officials, (2) FAA Staff, (3) CalTrans Division of Aeronautics Staff, (4) San Francisco International Airport Staff, (5) local city planning staff, and (6) others, regarding noise issues related to aircraft operations at San Francisco International Airport.

D. Coordinate Roundtable technical issues with FAA Staff, San Francisco International Airport Staff, CalTrans Division of Aeronautics Staff, the Roundtable Program Manager, and others, as necessary.

E. Complete additional relevant assignments/activities, as directed, including but not limited to (1) responding to the July 2011 Grand Jury report on Airport Noise, (2) planning and participating in the October 5, 2011 Brisbane Aircraft Noise Workshop, (3) organizing and maintaining the Roundtable’s website and records, (4) drafting letters to the FAA concerning, and assisting with the analysis of, the PORTE THREE departure, and (5) fulfilling the duties of the part-time Roundtable Administrative Staff and Roundtable Program Manager following the completion of their employment with the County including: posting meeting notices; assembling, reproducing, and distributing Roundtable meeting agenda packets; and responding to written and telephone inquiries.

Page 2 of 2

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence Department of Public Works

Date: April 20, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority

To: Honorable Board of Supervisors

From: James C. Porter, Director of Public Works

Subject: Agreement to Provide Additional Staff Services to the City/County Association of Governments

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing:

A) The President of the Board of Supervisors to execute an Agreement with the City/County Association of Governments for the provision of staff services; and

B) The Director of Public Works to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications in the types of services and payment arrangements provided under the Agreement.

BACKGROUND: City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) is a joint powers agency consisting of the twenty cities within the County and the County of San Mateo, which collectively acts as the Countywide Congestion Management Agency. Its member agencies determined that C/CAG should be staffed by an Executive Director and an Administrative Assistant only. All other staffing needs are met through arrangements for staff support from member agencies, or contracts for specific tec hnical services. The Department of Public Works (Department) has been providing additional staff and administrative services since 2001.

C/CAG included funding in its FY 2011/12 budget for additional staff services to assist with the delivery of programs , projects, and other activities as determined by the C/CAG Executive Director.

DISCUSSION: The C/CAG Board of Directors, during its consideration of C/CAG’s FY 2001 -02 budget, decided to continue and expand its role in assisting its member agencies in securing and obligating federal and state funds for transportation projects, and ensuring that these projects are delivered in a timely manner to avoid the loss of the federal and state funds. C/CAG’s Board also determined that additional staff support would be needed to help its member agencies with federal and state grants as the grant processes were becoming more complex with each funding cycle.

C/CAG has requested that the Department continue to provide staff services and the Department is willing to do so. If the proposed agreement is approved, the Department will continue to retain employees in unclassified positions that will be fully reimbursed by C/CAG. The proposed agreement is perpetual unless terminated in writing by either party. It is our understanding that C/CAG’s Board of Directors will consider the proposed agreement at their May 10, 2012 regular meeting.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution and Agreement as to form.

Approval of this action will contribute to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community by implementing regional congestion relief measures and furthering the County’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of providing C/CAG with five additional staff is $1,159,376 in FY 2011-12. C/CAG will pay the actual cost, including overhead, for the Department to provide these services.

There is no impact to the General Fund.

RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A) THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE PROVISION OF STAFF SERVICES; AND B) THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS AND MINOR MODIFICATIONS IN THE TYPES OF SERVICES AND PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS PROVIDED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , the City/County Association of Governments, hereinafter “C/CAG”, is a joint powers agency comprised of the twenty cities in the County and the County; and

WHEREAS , C/CAG contracts with its member agencies, where appropriate, for assistance in meeting its staffing needs; and

WHEREAS , C/CAG has made provisions to fund staff services and desires to contract with the County of San Mateo for said staff services; and

WHEREAS , the County of San Mateo is willing and able to provide said staff services to C/CAG and an Agreement for said staff services has been prepared and presented to this Board of Supervisors for its consideration; and

WHEREAS , this Board finds it necessary and desirable to execute said Agreement.; and

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

President of this Board of Supervisors be, and is hereby, authorized and directed to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the County of San Mateo, and the Clerk of this Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto; and the Director of Public

Works is hereby authorized to execute subsequent amendments and minor modifications in the types of services and payment arrangements provided under the

Agreement.

* * * * * *

AGREEMENT FOR STAFF SERVICES

THIS AGREEMENT is made as of this ____ day of ______, 2012, by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO (County), a political subdivision of the State of

California and the CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN

MATEO COUNTY (C/CAG), a joint powers agency.

RECITALS

A. C/CAG is composed of the twenty cities and the County of San Mateo. Each

member city and the County of San Mateo, in its role as a member of C/CAG,

shall be referred to hereinafter as a “member agency.”

B. C/CAG looks to each of its member agencies, where appropriate, for assistance

in meeting its staffing needs.

C. C/CAG has made provisions to fund full-time staff positions to perform services

as directed by the C/CAG Executive Director.

D. C/CAG desires to contract with the County of San Mateo for said services.

E. The County of San Mateo is willing and able to provide said staff services to

C/CAG.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and

conditions contained in this Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Scope of Services to be provided by the County.

In consideration of the payments by C/CAG to the County as hereinafter provided, the County will employ qualified full-time persons, acceptable to C/CAG, to perform services for C/CAG intended to augment and assist the efforts of the existing

C/CAG staff. The work to be performed by the County, as hereinafter described, will be limited to that which can reasonably be accomplished by these full-time persons. Said services could include:

• Staff support to all C/CAG’s committees.

• Staff support for all C/CAG programs, including but not limited to the

Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Program, Congestion

Management Program (CMP), Transit Oriented Development (TOD)

Program, Congestion Management and Environmental Mitigation Pilot

Program, Measure M Program, State Transportation Improvement Program

(STIP), Congestion Relief Plan related programs, and Lifeline Program.

• Staff support for bicycle and pedestrian activities of C/CAG.

• Staff support for the State and Federal transportation funding programs.

• Provide urban planning input into transportation planning efforts of C/CAG.

• Assist in the research of transportation related legislation.

• Represent C/CAG at various local and regional meetings.

2. Contract Term

This Agreement shall commence on the date this Agreement was first made, and

shall be deemed terminated when either party provides written termination notice to the

other party as specified in section 6 of this Agreement.

3. Payments

In consideration of the services rendered in accordance with all terms, conditions

and specifications set forth herein, C/CAG shall make payments to the County on a

quarterly basis. County shall bill C/CAG on a quarterly basis for the following costs

related to the County employee(s) performing said staff services under this Agreement:

a. The actual cost of said employee(s) to the County, the components of which

are salary, benefits and overhead.

b. The actual cost of any direct expenses related to carrying out this Agreement.

c. The actual cost of attendance by said County employee(s) at meetings,

conferences, seminars or workshops which are germane to carrying out this

Agreement and which do not involve overnight travel unless the C/CAG

Executive Director or his/her designee has given prior approval.

d. The actual cost of any other expenses when the C/CAG Executive Director or

his/her designee has given prior approval for those expenses.

Billings by the County shall be in the form of an invoice submitted to the

Executive Director of C/CAG. All invoices shall be due and payable upon receipt.

4. Relationship of the Parties

The parties to this Agreement view it as establishing a cooperative and interactive relationship between C/CAG and the County. The parties further understand and agree that the person employed by the County to provide said staff services to

C/CAG is an employee of the County, will be supervised by C/CAG and the County, and acquires the rights, privileges, powers or advantages of County employees, and is not an employee of C/CAG.

5. Hold Harmless/Indemnity

COUNTY shall defend, indemnify and save harmless C/CAG and its member agencies and their employees, agents and officers from all claims, suits, damages or actions arising from COUNTY’s performance under this Agreement.

C/CAG shall defend, indemnify and save harmless County and its member agencies and their employees, agents and officers from all claims, suits, damages or actions arising from C/CAG’s performance under this Agreement

The duty of the parties to indemnify and save harmless as set forth herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.

6. Termination of Agreement

Either party to this Agreement may, at any time, terminate this Agreement for the convenience of that party by giving ninety (90) days written notice to the other party specifying the effective date of such termination. County shall be entitled to receive payment for services provided prior to termination of this Agreement. The right of either party to terminate this Agreement as provided herein shall continue during any extensions of this Agreement.

7. Non-discrimination

No person shall illegally be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under this Agreement on account of their race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, or disability. County shall ensure full equal employment opportunity for all employees under this Agreement.

8. Merger Clause

This Agreement constitutes the sole agreement of the parties hereto and correctly states the rights, duties, and obligations of each party as of this document’s date. Any prior agreement, promises, negotiations, or representations between the parties not expressly stated in this document are not binding. All subsequent modifications shall be in writing and signed by the Chairperson of C/CAG and the

County Director of Public Works, or as otherwise provided for herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be

executed by their duly authorized officers on the day and year first hereinabove written.

FOR THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (C/CAG)

BY: ______Bob Grassilli, Chairman

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY: ______C/CAG Legal Counsel

FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO (COUNTY)

BY: ______President, Board of Supervisors County of San Mateo

ATTEST:

______Clerk of the Board

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY: ______County Counsel COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence Sheriff's Office

Date: April 19, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Sheriff Greg Munks, Office of Emergency Services Area Coordinator Subject: Amendment One to the FY 2010 UASI Grant Funding Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the:

A) President of the Board of Supervisors to execute Amendment One to the Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for distribution of FY 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Funds, increasing the amount by $668,058 to $3,010,277; B) Sheriff or Sheriff’s designee(s) to sign Appendix B, grant assurances; and C) Sheriff, in his capacity as OES Area Coordinator to execute amendments and minor modifications to this agreement not to exceed $25,000; and/or to modify the contract term and/or services so long as the modified term or services are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

BACKGROUND: The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) is a Federal Department of Homeland Security Grant that provides funding resources for unique equipment, training, planning, and exercise needs to 35 selected national high threat urban areas. The Bay Area UASI is one of the 35 national urban areas and one of the six identified in California.

The Bay Area UASI serves a population of 7 million and is comprised of three core cities; San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose; 12 Bay Area counties; and over 100 incorporated cities. The geographical area covered by this region equates to approximately 8,800 square miles.

The City and County of San Francisco serves as the lead agency and contracts with the recipient agencies for distribution of UASI funds. The County has entered into agreements with the City and County of San Francisco for the past seven years in order to receive UASI funding.

On June 21, 2011, the County entered into an Agreement (Resolution No. 071487) with the City and County of San Francisco for the distribution of funds to San Mateo County as part of the FY 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative Federal Grant, in an amount not to exceed $2,342,219 and a term commencing April 1, 2011, through January 31, 2013.

DISCUSSION: Additional funds are being distributed by the Bay Area UASI to purchase Mobile Field Force equipment, Automated License Plate Readers, Countywide Mobile Field Force training, preparedness kits for Countywide CERT teams, and preparedness funds for reference materials and resources.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution and Amendment as to form.

Approval of this Amendment contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community through the cooperation of agencies within the County giving both regional and local responders the ability to share information and resources in real time and across borders to ensure that the public’s safety, as well as that of first responders, is met in a responsible and timely manner.

PERFORMANCE MEASURE(S): Measures FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 Actual Projected Number of incidents responded to by OES staff 44 50 Percent of emergency incidents responded to within 100% 100% one hour

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no Net County Cost associated with approving Amendment One to the FY 2010 UASI Grant Funding Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco. RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE A) PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT ONE TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FY 2010 URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE (UASI) GRANT FUNDS, INCREASING THE AMOUNT BY $668,058 TO $3,010,277; B) SHERIFF OR SHERIFF’S DESIGNEE(S) TO SIGN APPENDIX B, GRANT ASSURANCES; AND C) SHERIFF, IN HIS CAPACITY AS OES AREA COORDINATOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENTS AND MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS AGREEMENT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000; AND/OR TO MODIFY THE CONTRACT TERM AND/OR SERVICES SO LONG AS THE MODIFIED TERM OR SERVICES ARE WITHIN THE CURRENT OR REVISED FISCAL PROVISIONS: ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) is a Federal Department of Homeland Security grant that provides resources for the unique equipment, training, planning, and exercise needs of 35 selected national high threat urban areas; and

WHEREAS , the City and County of San Francisco has been designated as the grantee for UASI funds granted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through the California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA) and to serve as the Fiscal

Agent for the Approval Authority; and

WHEREAS , the County entered into an Agreement (Resolution No. 071487) with the City and County of San Francisco for the distribution of funds to San Mateo County as part of the FY 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative Federal Grant, in an amount not to exceed $2,342,219; and

WHEREAS , additional funds have been identified and are being distributed by the Bay Area UASI in the amount of $668,058 to purchase Mobile Field Force equipment, Automated License Plate Readers, preparedness kits for Countywide CERT teams, and preparedness funds for reference materials and resources; and

WHEREAS , this Board has been presented with a form of Amendment one and has examined and approved same as to both form and content, and desires to enter into same;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

A) President of the Board is hereby authorized to execute Amendment One to the

Agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for distribution of FY 2010 Urban

Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant funding, increasing the amount by $668,058 to

$3,010,277, and the Clerk of this Board shall attest the President’s signature thereto; and

B) Sheriff or Sheriff’s designee(s) to sign Appendix B, grant assurances; and

C) Sheriff in his capacity as OES Area Coordinator to execute amendments and minor modifications to this agreement not to exceed $25,000; and/or to modify the contract term/or services so long as the modified term or services are within the current or revised fiscal provisions.

* * * * * *

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FY 2010 UASI GRANT FUNDS

FIRST AMENDMENT

THIS AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of MARCH 1, 2012, in San Francisco, California, by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO (“SAN MATEO”) and the City and County of San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”), in its capacity as fiscal agent for the UASI Approval Authority, acting by and through the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management.

RECITALS

WHEREAS, City and SAN MATEO have entered into the Agreement (as defined below); and

WHEREAS, City and SAN MATEO desire to modify the Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth herein;

NOW, THEREFORE, SAN MATEO and the City agree as follows:

1. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to this Amendment:

a. Agreement. The term “Agreement” shall mean the “Agreement between the City and County of San Francisco and the County of SAN MATEO for the Distribution of FY 2010 UASI Grant Funds” dated April 1, 2011, between SAN MATEO and City.

b. Other Terms. Terms used and not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.

2. Modifications to the Agreement. The Agreement is hereby modified as follows:

a. Section 3.2, Maximum Amount of Funds. Section 3.2 of the Agreement currently reads as follows:

In no event shall the amount of Grant Funds disbursed hereunder exceed TWO MILLION, THREE HUNDRED FORTY-TWO THOUSAND, TWO HUNDRED NINETEEN DOLLARS ($2,342,219).

Such Section is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

In no event shall the amount of Grant Funds disbursed hereunder exceed THREE MILLION, TEN THOUSAND, TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY-SEVEN DOLLARS ($3,010,277).

b. Section 6.1, Indemnification. Section 6.1 of the Agreement currently reads as follows:

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO Page 1 of 4 March 1, 2012 loss of or damage to property caused, directly or indirectly, by any act or omission of SAN MATEO or its employees, subgrantees or agents; (e) the use, misuse or failure of any equipment or facility used by SAN MATEO, or by any of its employees, subgrantees or agents, regardless of whether such equipment or facility is furnished, rented or loaned to SAN MATEO by an Indemnified Party; (f) any tax, fee, assessment or other charge for which SAN MATEO is responsible under Section 10.4; or (g) any infringement of patent rights, copyright, trade secret or any other proprietary right or trademark of any person or entity in consequence of the use by any Indemnified Party of any goods or services furnished to such Indemnified Party in connection with this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity shall include, without limitation, reasonable fees of attorneys, consultants and experts and related costs and San Francisco’s costs of investigating any claims against San Francisco.

Such Section is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

6.1 Indemnification. SAN MATEO shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless each of the Indemnified Parties from and against any and all Losses arising from, in connection with or caused by SAN MATEO’s performance of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following: (a) a material breach of this Agreement by SAN MATEO; (b) a material breach of any representation or warranty of SAN MATEO contained in this Agreement; (c) any personal injury or death caused, directly or indirectly, by any act or omission of SAN MATEO or its employees, subgrantees or agents; (d) any loss of or damage to property caused, directly or indirectly, by any act or omission of SAN MATEO or its employees, subgrantees or agents; (e) the use, misuse or failure of any equipment or facility used by SAN MATEO, or by any of its employees, subgrantees or agents, regardless of whether such equipment or facility is furnished, rented or loaned to SAN MATEO by an Indemnified Party; (f) any tax, fee, assessment or other charge for which SAN MATEO is responsible under Section 10.4; or (g) any infringement of patent rights, copyright, trade secret or any other proprietary right or trademark of any person or entity in consequence of the use by any Indemnified Party of any goods or services furnished by SAN MATEO or its employees, subgrantees, or agents to such Indemnified Party in connection with this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity shall include, without limitation, reasonable fees of attorneys, consultants and experts and related costs and San Francisco’s costs of investigating any claims against San Francisco.

c. Appendix A, Authorized Expenditures and Timelines. Appendix A includes project descriptions, deliverables, not to exceed (“NTE”) amounts, and deadlines for deliverables.

Such Appendix is hereby amended to reflect the following:

i) Add equipment funds, in the amount of $259,900, for Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) for Project B; ii) Add equipment funds, in the amount of $138,372, for Mobile Field Force (MFF) for Project B; iii) Add training funds, in the amount of $67,464, for Mobile Field Force (MFF) for Project B; iv) Increase equipment funds, in the amount of $432, for Rescue Boat for Project D; v) Increase equipment funds, in the amount of $18,587, for Tactical Intervention Vehicle for Project D; vi) Decrease equipment funds, in the amount of $19,019, for Chemical Detector for Project D; vii) Add equipment funds, in the amount of $34,000, for CERT Kits for Project F; viii) Add equipment funds, in the amount of $100,000, for Reference Materials/Resources for Project F; and ix) Add equipment funds, in the amount of $68,322, for WEB EOC Hardware for Project F.

A revised Appendix A is attached to this Amendment and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. The attached Appendix A supersedes all prior versions of Appendix A.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO Page 2 of 4 March 1, 2012

d. Appendix B, Grant Assurances. Appendix B contains the applicable grant assurances. Appendix B is not amended but SAN MATEO is re-signing Appendix B in executing this First Amendment, to certify its current compliance with all applicable grant assurances.

3. Effective Date. Each of the modifications set forth in Section 2 shall be effective on and after the date of this Amendment.

4. Legal Effect. Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO Page 3 of 4 March 1, 2012

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date first specified herein.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO: COUNTY OF SAN MATEO:

SAN FRANCISCO DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

By: By:

______ANNE KRONENBERG PRESIDENT, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Federal Tax ID #: 94-6000532

Approved as to Form: Attest: Dennis J. Herrera City Attorney

By: ______Thomas Owen Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Deputy City Attorney

Amended Appendices: Amended Appendix A, Grant Timelines and Deliverables, dated March 1, 2012 Appendix B, Grant Assurances, dated March 1, 2012

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO Page 4 of 4 March 1, 2012 Appendix A — Authorized Expenditures and Timelines

ENTITY: SAN MATEO

Total allocation to be spent on the following solution areas:

Solution Deliverable UASI Project Title Area Program Description Dates Amount Funds to purchase Multi Camera Automated License Plate Reader Mobile Trailers and the necessary configuration for the West Bay Information Sharing Initiative.

AEL #14SW-01-SIDV

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo if Project B applicable Information  As allowable under Federal Not to Analysis and Equipment guidelines, procurement of 10/31/2012 Exceed: Infrastructure equipment must follow local policies $259,900 Protection and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations. Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase identified and approved equipment for Mobile Field Force Regional Response Team.

AEL# 12TR-00-TEQP AEL# 12VE-00-SPEC AEL# 01ZA-03-EYEP Project B AEL# 01LE-01-HLMT Information Not to AEL# 01LE-01-SHLD Analysis and Equipment 9/30/2012 Exceed: AEL# 01LE-02-BDUS Infrastructure $138,372 AEL# 01ZP-00-GBAG Protection

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  A Performance Bond is required for the vehicle.  An approved EHP memo if applicable

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-1 March 1, 2012  As allowable under Federal guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations. Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to support the training identified for the Mobile Field Force Regional Response Team in cooperation with San Francisco Police Department.  All training courses require an approved EHP memo.  All expenses must be pre-approved by the UASI Director of Strategy and Compliance or designee prior to scheduling.  Training course expenses may include backfill/overtime, travel, tuition, per diem or other grant eligible expenses. Grant eligible training expenses are published in the FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidance.  When seeking reimbursement for Project B grant eligible training expenses, Information Not to submit completed ledger page Analysis and Training 10/31/2012 Exceed: indicating course title, feedback Infrastructure $67,464 number, sub category (e.g., OT, Protection BF, Course Development).  Provide registration receipts and agendas.  Provide copies of sign in sheets (must have supervisor’s signature).  All publications created or published with funding under this grant shall prominently contain the following statement: “This document was prepared under a grant from FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of FEMA's Grant Programs

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-2 March 1, 2012 Directorate or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.” All reimbursement requests must be submitted by not later than 11/30/12. Funds to purchase TENS Notification System, a public notification, alert and warning service that draws from a wire lined telephone database used to notify residents in the event of an emergency.

AEL#: 04AP-09-ALRT AEL#: 21GN-00-MAIN

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo if applicable. Project C  As allowable under Federal Not to Interoperable Equipment guidelines, procurement of 9/30/2012 Exceed: Communications equipment must follow local policies $146,000 and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase SMC Alert - Opt in e-mail/digital messaging system used by public agencies and the public for notification of emergencies and events.

AEL#: 04AP-09-ALRT

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require: Project C  An approved EHP memo if Not to Interoperable Equipment applicable 9/30/2012 Exceed: Communications  As allowable under Federal $37,000 guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices,

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-3 March 1, 2012 AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase Siren Interface/Maintenance - Sirens on the coast used to notify residents of impending disasters or emergencies.

AEL#: 04AP-09-ALRT AEL#: 21GN-00-MAIN

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo id applicable. Project C  As allowable under Federal Not to Interoperable Equipment guidelines, procurement of 9/30/2012 Exceed: Communications equipment must follow local policies $17,000 and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase interoperable communications equipment for the 700MHz P25 Radio Sites.

Interoperable Communications Equipment: 06CP-03-REPT, 06CP-03-TOWR, 06-CP-02-BRDG

Reimbursement for equipment Project C purchases require: Not to Interoperable Equipment  An approved EHP memo 9/30/2012 Exceed: Communications  As allowable under Federal $1,440,000 guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  A Performance Bond is required for this project.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-4 March 1, 2012  A project plan, to include all AEL#s, and a project schedule must be submitted to the UASI Interoperability Program Manager no later than June 30, 2011.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase enhancement parts for the South San Francisco Fire Department Rescue Boat.

AEL# 17WC-00-BOAT

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo  As allowable under Federal guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies Not to Project D Equipment and procedures for competitive 6/30/2012 Exceed: CBRNE purchasing. If sole source approval $25,432 is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 9/30/2012. Funds to purchase one Urban Search and Rescue Logistical Command/Support Vehicle:

AEL# 12VE-00-CMDV

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require: Not to Project D Equipment  An approved EHP memo 9/30/2012 Exceed: CBRNE  A Performance Bond is required. $300,000  As allowable under Federal guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-5 March 1, 2012 request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase one Tactical Intervention Vehicle:

AEL# 12VE-00-MISS

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo  A Performance Bond is required.  As allowable under Federal guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies Not to Project D Equipment and procedures for competitive 9/30/2012 Exceed: CBRNE purchasing. If sole source approval $318,587 is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to purchase chemical detector equipment.

AEL#: 07CD-02-DLSP

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo  A Performance Bond is required. Not to Project D  As allowable under Federal Equipment 9/30/2012 Exceed: CBRNE guidelines, procurement of equipment must follow local policies $58,200 and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-6 March 1, 2012 deployed locations.  Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to be used to purchase CERT Kits for San Mateo County Citizen Preparedness Program.

AEL#: 21GN-00-CCEQ

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo if applicable.  As allowable under Federal Project F guidelines, procurement of Not to Planning and Equipment equipment must follow local policies 9/30/2012 Exceed: Citizen and procedures for competitive $34,000 Preparedness purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations. Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. Funds to procure reference materials, web site resources and other educational tools for San Mateo County Community Preparedness efforts.

AEL#: 11RE-00-RFNC

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo if applicable. Project F  As allowable under Federal Not to Planning and guidelines, procurement of Equipment 10/31/2012 Exceed: Citizen equipment must follow local policies $100,000 Preparedness and procedures for competitive purchasing. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations. Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-7 March 1, 2012 Funds to purchase hardware for WEB EOC deployment for San Mateo County in the Emergency Operations Center and remote Command Posts as necessary. Also, to fund consultant services to customize WEB EOC program for use within San Mateo County, and for regional responses.

AEL#: 04HW-01-INHW AEL#: 04AP-05-CDSS AEL#: 21GN-00-CNST

Reimbursement for equipment purchases require:  An approved EHP memo if Project F applicable. Not to Planning and Equipment  As allowable under Federal 10/31/12 Exceed: Citizen guidelines, procurement of $68,322 Preparedness equipment must follow local policies and procedures for competitive purchasing.  At a minimum, more than one quote or bid must be obtained, unless a sole source is justified. If sole source approval is needed, SAN MATEO must transmit the request to the UASI for request to the State.  Prior to reimbursement, SAN MATEO must submit all invoices, AEL numbers, and a list of all equipment ID numbers and the deployed locations. Final deadline to submit a Reimbursement Request is 11/30/2012. NOT TO TOTAL ALLOCATION EXCEED: $3,010,277

 All requests for reimbursements must be submitted by NOVEMBER 30, 2012 unless an earlier deadline is set in this Appendix.  Authorized expenditures must fall into one of the following categories: Planning, Organization, Equipment, Training, or Exercises. Descriptions of authorized expenditures are in the following documents:  FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program, Guidance and Application Kit dated December, 2009: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/2010/fy10_hsgp_kit.pdf  California Supplement to Federal Program Guidance and Application Kit: http://www.calema.ca.gov/WebPage/oeswebsite.nsf/ClientOESFileLibrary/Homeland%2 0Security%20Files/$file/FY10HSGPSupplementGuidance.pdf  Authorized Equipment List: www.rkb.us

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-8 March 1, 2012  Office of Justice Programs Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/

 Any equipment purchased under this Agreement must match the UASI 2010 Grant Application Workbook. Any modification to the inventory list in that Workbook must receive prior written approval from by the Bay Area UASI Program Manager. Subrecipents shall mark all equipment purchased with grant funds with the following statement; “Purchased with funds provided by the US DHS.”

 No Management and Administration expenses are allowed, unless expressly identified and authorized in this Appendix.

 Sustainability requirements may apply to some or all of the grant funded projects or programs authorized in this Appendix. See Agreement, ¶3.12.

 All EHP documentation must be submitted and approved prior to any expenditure of funds requiring EHP submission.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO A-9 March 1, 2012 Appendix B-- Grant Assurances

Name of Jurisdiction: County of San Mateo, Office of the Sheriff____ Name of Authorized Agent: Lt. Mark Robbins______Address: 400 County Center, 4th Floor______City: __Redwood City______State: CA__ Zip Code: 94063 Telephone Number: (650) 599-1295_ Fax Number: (650) 363-1868_____ E-Mail Address: [email protected]__

As the duly authorized representative of SAN MATEO, I certify that SAN MATEO:

1. Will assure that grant funds will support efforts related to providing an integrated mechanism to enhance the coordination of national priority efforts to prevent, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters and other emergencies.

2. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assistance and has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure proper planning, management and completion of the grant provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and sub-granted through the State of California, California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA).

3. Will assure that grant funds are used for allowable, fair, and reasonable costs only and will not be transferred between grant programs (for example: State Homeland Security Program, Urban Area Security Initiative, Citizen Corps Program, and Metropolitan Medical Response System) or fiscal years.

4. Will comply with any cost sharing commitments included in the FY2010 Investment Justifications submitted to DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA, where applicable.

5. Will give the Federal government, the General Accounting Office, the Comptroller General of the United States, the State of California, the Office of Inspector General, through any authorized representative, access to, and the right to examine, all paper or electronic records, books, or documents related to the award; and will establish a proper accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards and/or awarding agency directives.

6. Agrees that funds utilized to establish or enhance State and Local fusion centers must support the development of a statewide fusion process that corresponds with the Global Justice/Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) Fusion Center Guidelines, follow the Federal and State approved privacy policies, and achieve (at a minimum) baseline level of capability as defined by the Fusion Capability Planning Tool.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-1 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

7. Will provide progress reports, and other such information as may be required by the awarding agency, including the Initial Strategy Implementation Plan (ISIP) within 45 (forty- five) days of the award, and update via the Grant Reporting Tool (GRT) twice each year.

8. Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable time frame after receipt of approval from Cal EMA.

9. Will maintain procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the award of funds and the disbursement of funds.

10. Will comply with all provisions of DHS/FEMA's codified regulation 44, Part 13, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, including the payment of interest earned on advances.

11. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that constitutes, or presents the appearance of, personal or organizational conflict of interest, or personal gain for themselves or others, particularly those with whom they have family, business, or other ties.

12. Understands and agrees that Federal funds will not be used, directly or indirectly, to support the enactment, repeal, modification or adoption of any law, regulation, or policy, at any level of government, without the express prior written approval from DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA.

13. Agrees that, to the extent contractors or subcontractors are utilized, will use small, minority- owned, women-owned, or disadvantaged business concerns and contractors or subcontractors to the extent practicable.

14. Will notify Cal EMA of any developments that have a significant impact on award-supported activities, including changes to key program staff.

15. Will comply, if applicable, with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 4801 et seq.) which prohibits the use of lead based paint in construction or rehabilitation of structures.

16. Will comply with all Federal and State Statues relating to Civil Rights and Nondiscrimination. These include, but are not limited to: a. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352), as amended, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin. b. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. §§ 1681- 1683 and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender. c. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 794), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicaps. d. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 6101-6107), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age. e. The Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-2 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

f. The Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism. g. §§ 523 and 527 of the Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290 dd-3 and 290 ee-3), as amended, relating to confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records. h. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of housing. i. Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 7, 16, and 19 relating to nondiscrimination. j. The requirements on any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which the application for Federal assistance is being made. k. Will, in the event that a Federal or State court or Federal or State administrative agency makes a finding of discrimination after a due process hearing on the grounds or race, color, religion, national origin, gender, or disability against a recipient of funds, the recipient will forward a copy of the finding to the Office of Civil Rights, Office of Justice Programs. l. Will provide an Equal Employment Opportunity Plan, if applicable, to the Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights within 60 days of grant award. m. Will comply, and assure the compliance of all its subgrantees and contractors, with the nondiscrimination requirements and all other provisions of the current edition of the Office of Justice Programs Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants, M7100.1.

17. Will comply with the requirements of Titles II and III of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. § 4601 et seq. [P.L. 91-646]) which provides for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or whose property is acquired as a result of Federal or Federally assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interested in real property acquired for project purposes regardless of Federal participation in purchases. Will also comply with Title 44 CFR, Part 25, Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally-assisted programs.

18. Will comply, if applicable, with the flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) which requires recipients in a special flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of insurable construction and acquisition is ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more.

19. Will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Local environmental and historical preservation (EHP) requirements. Failure to meet Federal, State, and Local EHP requirements and obtain applicable permits may jeopardize Federal funding. Will comply with all conditions placed on any project as the result of the EHP review; any change to the scope of work of a project will require reevaluation of compliance with these EHP requirements.

20. Agrees not to undertake any project having the potential to impact the EHP resources without the prior written approval of DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA, including, but not limited to, ground disturbance, construction, modification to any structure, physical security enhancements, communications towers, and purchase and/or use of any sonar equipment. The subgrantee

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-3 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

must comply with all conditions placed on the project as a result of the EHP review. Any construction- related activities initiated without the necessary EHP review and approval will result in a noncompliance finding, and may not be eligible for reimbursement with DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA funding. Any change to the scope of work will require re-evaluation of compliance with the EHP. If ground-disturbing activities occur during the project implementation, the subgrantee must ensure monitoring of the disturbance. If any potential archeological resources are discovered, the subgrantee will immediately cease activity in that area and notify DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA and the appropriate State Historic Preservation Office.

21. Will ensure that the facilities under its ownership, lease or supervision, which shall be utilized in the accomplishment of this project, are not on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPAs) List of Violating Facilities, and will notify Cal EMA and the Federal Grantor agency of the receipt of any communication from the Director of the EPA Office of Federal Activities indicating if a facility to be used in the project is under consideration for listing by the EPA.

22. Will provide any information requested by DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA to ensure compliance with applicable laws, including the following: a. Institution of environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental Policy Act, National Historical Preservation Act, Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, and Executive Orders on Floodplains (11988), Wetlands (11990) and Environmental Justice (EO12898) and Environmental Quality (EO11514). b. Notification of violating facilities pursuant to EO 11738. c. Assurance of project consistency with the approved state management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1451 et seq.). d. Conformity of Federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq.). e. Protection of underground sources of drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93-523). f. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). California Public Resources Code Sections 21080-21098. California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3 Section 15000-15007. g. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1271 et.seq.) related to protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic rivers system. h. Applicable provisions of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (P.L. 97-348) dated October 19, 1982 (16 USC 3501 et seq.) which prohibits the expenditure of most new Federal funds within the units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System.

23. Will comply with Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) requirements as stated in the California Emergency Services Act, Government Code, Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2, Section 8607.1(e) and CCR Title 19, Sections 2445, 2446, 2447, and 2448.

24. Agrees that all publications created or published with funding under this grant shall prominently contain the following statement: “This document was prepared under a grant from FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Points of view or opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-4 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

represent the official position or policies of FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.” The recipient also agrees that, when practicable, any equipment purchased with grant funding shall be prominently marked as follows: “Purchased with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.”

25. Acknowledges that DHS/FEMA reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, for Federal government purposes: a) the copyright in any work developed under an award or sub-award; and b) any rights of copyright to which a recipient or sub-recipient purchases ownership with Federal support.

26. The recipient agrees to consult with DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA regarding the allocation of any patent rights that arise from, or are purchased with, this funding.

27. Has requested through the State of California, Federal financial assistance to be used to perform eligible work approved in the submitted application for Federal assistance and after the receipt of Federal financial assistance, through the State of California, agrees to the following: a. Promptly return to the State of California all the funds received which exceed the approved, actual expenditures as accepted by the Federal or State government. b. In the event the approved amount of the grant is reduced, the reimbursement applicable to the amount of the reduction will be promptly refunded to the State of California. c. Separately account for interest earned on grant funds, and will return all interest earned, in excess of $100 per Federal Fiscal Year.

28. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Sections 4728- 4763) relating to prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the nineteen statutes or regulations specified in Appendix A of OPM’s Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration (5 C.F.R. 900, Subpart F).

29. Will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. Sections 1501-1508 and 7324- 7328) which limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.

30. Will comply, if applicable, with P.L. 93-348 regarding the protection of human subjects involved in research, development, and related activities supported by this award of assistance.

31. Will comply, if applicable, with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (P. L. 89-544, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or other activities supported by this award of assistance.

32. Will comply with the minimum wage and maximum hour provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 201), as they apply to employees of institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-5 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

33. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. Section 276a to 276a-7), the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. Section 276c and 18 U.S.C. Sections 874), and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. Sections 327-333), regarding labor standards for Federally-assisted construction sub-agreements.

34. Agrees that: a. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the making of any Federal grant, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal grant or cooperative agreement. b. If any other funds than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or an employee of Congress, or employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the Federal grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,” in accordance with its instructions. c. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub awards at all tiers including subgrants, contracts under grants and cooperative agreements, and subcontract(s) and that all sub recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. d. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.

35. Agrees that equipment acquired or obtained with grant funds: a. Will be made available pursuant to applicable terms of the California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement in consultation with representatives of the various fire, emergency medical, hazardous materials response services, and law enforcement agencies within the jurisdiction of the applicant, and deployed with personnel trained in the use of such equipment in a manner consistent with the California Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Plan or the California Fire Services and Rescue Mutual Aid Plan. b. Is consistent with needs as identified in the State Homeland Security Strategy and will be deployed in conformance with that Strategy.

36. Agrees that funds awarded under this grant will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not supplant (replace) non-Federal funds.

37. Will comply with all applicable Federal statutes, regulations, policies, guidelines and requirements, including OMB Circulars A102 and A-133, E.O. 12372 and the current Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-6 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

38. Will comply with all provisions of 2 CFR, including: Part 215 Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A-110); Part 225 Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments (OMB Circular A-87); Part 220 Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (OMB Circular A-21); Part 230 Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A-122).

39. Will comply with Subtitle A, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990.

40. Agrees to cooperate with any assessments, national evaluation efforts, or information or data collection requests, including, but not limited to, the provision of any information required for the assessment or evaluation of any activities within this agreement.

41. Will comply with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), part 31.2 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, Contracts with Commercial Organizations.

42. Will comply with the financial and administrative requirements set forth in the current edition of the DHS Financial Management Guide.

43. Agrees that all allocations and use of funds under this grant will be in accordance with the FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidance and Application Kit, and the California Supplement to the FY 2010 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidance and Application Kit. All allocations and use of funds under this grant will be in accordance with the Allocations, and use of grant funding must support the goals and objectives included in the State and/or Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies as well as the investments identified in the Investment Justifications which were submitted as part of the California FY2010 Homeland Security Grant Program application. Further, use of FY10 funds is limited to those investments included in the California FY10 Investment Justifications submitted to DHS/FEMA/Cal EMA and evaluated through the peer review process.

44. Will not make any award or permit any award (subgrant or contract) to any party which is debarred or suspended or is otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs under Executive Order 12549 and 12689, “Debarment and Suspension”.

45. As required by Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, and implemented at 44 CFR Part 17, for prospective participants in primary covered transactions, a. The applicant certifies that it and its principals: i. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, sentenced to a denial of Federal benefits by a State or Federal court, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency. ii. Have not within a three-year period preceding this application been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement,

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-7 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property. iii. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification; and have not within a three-year period preceding this application had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or local) terminated for cause or default; and b. Where the applicant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, he or she shall attach an explanation to this application.

46. Agrees to comply with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, and certifies that it will or will continue to provide a drug-free workplace by: a. Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition. b. Establishing an on-going drug-free awareness program to inform employees about: i. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; ii. The grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; iii. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and iv. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace. c. Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph (a).

d. Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will i. Abide by the terms of the statement; and ii. Notify the employer in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five calendar days after such conviction. e. Notifying the agency, in writing, within 10 calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to:

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs ATTN: Control Desk 633 Indiana Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20531

Notice shall include the identification number(s) of each affected grant.

f. Taking one of the following actions, within 30 calendar days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any employee who is so convicted.

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-8 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

i. Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or ii. Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency. g. Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f).

47. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other Federal and State laws, executive orders, regulations, program and administrative requirements, policies and any other requirements governing this program.

48. Understands that failure to comply with any of the above assurances may result in suspension, termination, or reduction of grant funds.

The undersigned represents that he/she is authorized by SAN MATEO to execute these Grant Assurances for and on behalf of SAN MATEO.

Signature of Authorized Agent: ______

Printed Name of Authorized Agent: _____Lt. Mark Robbins______

Title: Director, Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Services and Homeland Security Date: ______

FY 10 UASI 1st Amendment – SAN MATEO B-9 March 1, 2012

Initials: _____

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter -Departmental Correspondence Sheriff's Office

Date: April 19, 2012 Board Meeting Date: May 8, 2012 Special Notice / Hearing: None Vote Required: Majority To: Honorable Board of Supervisors From: Greg Munks, Sheriff Subject: Renewal of Licenses and Software for an Additional Two Years for the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center’s Fusion Center Application Suite

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the:

A) Purchasing Agent to renew licenses, software and maintenance for an additional two years for the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center’s Fusion Center Application Suite from Digital Sandbox in the amount of $258,000.

BACKGROUND: On November 24, 2010, the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) approved the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center’s (NCRIC) sole source request for the purchase of a Fusion Center Application Suite from Digital Sandbox.

On November 30, 2010, yo ur Board approved the purchase of a Fusion Center Application Suite from Digital Sandbox for the NCRIC in the amount of $239,000.

DISCUSSION: The Fusion Center Application Suite is a suite of analytic software and services that enable public safety r isk managers to assess, prioritize, and manage their risks. It was specifically designed to meet the needs of federal, state and local risk managers to develop and deploy more effective risk management strategies. Consisting of a powerful risk analysis s oftware application, the Fusion Center Application Suite helps its users understand, monitor, prioritize and act on their jurisdictional risks.

For the past two years, the NCRIC, in collaboration with the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) and the region’s county and city agencies, has populated the NCRIC’s Fusion Center Application Suite with thousands of data points related to the region’s risk. In addition, the NCRIC has developed a comprehensive Bay Area Preparedness Report and a Grant Effectiveness Self Sustainment Plan utilizing the data from the Fusion Center Application Suite. The NCRIC has also enhanced the operation utility of its Fusion Center Application Suite through the addition of a Special Events Module and the Elected Official Threat Monitoring System. The NCRIC is requesting approval for the Purchasing Agent to renew the NCRIC’s licenses, software and maintenance for its Fusion Center Application Suite in the amount of $258,000. FY10 UASI grant funds will be used to renew the licenses, software and maintenance for the second year in the amount of $129,000 and FY11 UASI grant funds will be used to renew the licenses, software and maintenance for the third year in the amount of $129,000.

County Counsel has reviewed and approved the Resolution as to form.

Approval of the Resolution contributes to the Shared Vision 2025 outcome of a Collaborative Community as the NCRIC is a collaborative regional public safety undertaking which leads to safer communities by improving cooperation and information sharing between agencies.

PERFORMANCE MEASURE(S): FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 Measure Actual Projected Number of assets added to the Digital Sandbox 5000 5000 RAC

FISCAL IMPACT: All costs associated with the NCRIC operation are 100% reimbursable from federal funds. There will be no Net County Cost incurred. RESOLUTION NO. ______

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

* * * * * * RESOLUTION WAIVING THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL S (RFP) PROCESS AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASING AGENT TO PURCHASE A SPECIAL EVENTS PACAKGE FOR THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER’S FUSION CENTER APPLICATION SUITE FROM DIGITAL SANDBOX IN THE AMOUNT OF $284,000 ______RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of

California, that

WHEREAS , since 1997, the Northern California High Intensity Drug Trafficking

Area (NCHIDTA) has administered and continues to administer federal and state funding to implement a variety of public safety initiatives focusing on narcotics eradication; and

WHEREAS , since 2004, the Northern California Regional Terrorism Threat

Assessment Center (NCRTTAC), through the NCHIDTA, has administered and continues to administer federal and state funding to implement a variety of public safety initiatives focusing on anti-terrorism; and

WHEREAS , NCHIDTA and NCRTTAC are managed by the NCHIDTA

Executive Board which has designated the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office to serve as fiduciary and fiscal agent for the NCHIDTA; and

WHEREAS , since 2009, the NCHIDTA and NCRTTAC’s Fusion Center began doing business as the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC) in order to provide a clear description and single identity for the “All Crimes” Fusion Center; and

WHEREAS , the County of San Mateo has previously received federal

Department of Homeland Security grant funds through the Bay Area Urban Area

Security Initiative (UASI) Program for which the City and County of San Francisco serves as the lead agency and contracts with the recipient agencies for the distribution of funds; and

WHEREAS , the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management

(SFDEM) has been designated to serve as the local administrator for the FY 2009 and

FY 2010 UASI grant awards; and

WHEREAS , on December 7, 2010, the County of San Mateo waived the RFP process and authorized the Purchasing Agent to purchase the Fusion Center

Application Suite from Digital Sandbox (Resolution No. 071158); and

WHEREAS , for the past year, the NCRIC, in collaboration with the Bay Area

UASI and the region’s county and city agencies, has populated the Fusion Center

Application Suite with thousands of data points related to the region’s risk; and

WHEREAS , the Special Events Package will enhance the operation utility of the

NCRIC’s Fusion Center Application Suite and will allow the NCRIC to support risk management activities in support of special events in the Bay Area; and

WHEREA S, Digital Sandbox has proprietary and protected algorithms used in the process and holds three US patents for methods and tools used in risk management; and

WHEREAS , waiving the RFP process is being requested as no other vendor will be able to enhance the operation utility of the NCRIC’s Fusion Center Application

Suite without violating US Patent Law as such software is proprietary to Digital

Sandbox; and

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DETERMINED AND ORDERED that the

President of the Board of Supervisors waives the Request for Proposals

process and authorizes the Purchasing Agent to purchase a Special Events

Package for the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center’s Fusion

Center Application Suite from Digital Sandbox in the amount of $284,000, and

the Clerk of this Board of Supervisors shall attest the President’s signature

thereto.

* * * * * *