Meetings

05-2005



GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE, HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

MEMORANDUM OF MINUTES

BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

MARCH 11, 2005


The Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (District) met in regular session in the Board Room, Administration Building, Toll Plaza, San Francisco, California, on Friday, March 11, 2005, at 10:00 a.m., President Middlebrook presiding.

ROLL CALL
 

Directors Present (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook

Directors Absent (1): Director Dufty

Staff Present: General Manager Celia G. Kupersmith; District Engineer Denis J. Mulligan; Auditor-Controller Joseph M. Wire; District Secretary Janet S. Tarantino; Attorney David J. Miller; Deputy General Manager/Bridge Division Kary H. Witt; Deputy General Manager/Bus Division Susan C. Chiaroni; Deputy General Manager/Ferry Division James P. Swindler; Deputy General Manager/Administration and Development Teri W. Mantony; Public Affairs Director Mary C. Currie; Executive Assistant to the General Manager Amorette Ko; Assistant Clerk of the Board Karen B. Engbretson; Captain Michael J. Locati; Lieutenant David Rivera; Lieutenant Dan Brown

Visitors Present: Roger Grimes, suicide prevention advocate; Mel Blaustein, M.D., Psychiatric Foundation of Northern California; John Kevin Hines, suicide survivor; Mike and Terry Oxford, Raymond and Mary Zablotny, Jean and David Hull, Maria Martinez, parents of suicide victims; Eve Meyer, San Francisco Suicide Prevention, Inc.; Patrick Fitzgerald, Sr., and Karen Fitzgerald, suicide prevention advocates; Terence Faulkner, J.D., San Francisco Republican Committee; Lennart Moller, M.D., Psychiatrist, Kaiser Hospital; Robert L. Schmidt, G. White and John C. Diamante, suicide barrier opponents; Danielle Hutchings, Robert Simpson and Douglas Wahl, U.C. Berkeley students; Robert Guernsey, Citizens for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge; Jenni Olson, Filmmaker

   
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
  Director Leah C. Shahum led the Board of Directors in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
   
PUBLIC COMMENT
  Public comment was provided under Agenda Item No. 8.A., below.
   
CONSENT CALENDAR
 

Directors STROEH/EDDIE moved approval of the Consent Calendar. All items were approved by the following vote of the Board of Directors:

AYES (16): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (3): Directors Dufty, McGoldrick and Sandoval

   
1.

Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of February 25, 2005

Carried

   
2.

Denial of Claims

1. Claim of Shirley Legant

Carried

2. Claim of Maritza Quintanilla

Carried

3. Claim of Ruth Elizabeth Quintanilla

Carried

4. Claim of Marta Rodriguez

Carried

5. Claim of Jonathan Leon (A Minor)

Carried

6. Subrogation Claim of State Farm Insurance Companies
(Insured: Kristina Page)

Carried

7. Claim of Suzine K. Young

Carried

   
3.

Ratify Actions by the Auditor-Controller

Resolution No. 2005-014 (Finance-Auditing Committee, February 24, 2005) ratifies actions taken by the Auditor-Controller, as follows:


a. Ratify commitments and/or expenditures totaling $82,287.66;
b. Ratify investments made by the Auditor-Controller during the period January 18, 2005 through February 14, 2005, as follows; and,

Security
Purchase Date
Maturity Date
Original Cost
Percent Yield
Goldman Sachs Comm. Paper
01/19/05
02/14/05
5974539.55
2.42
Kitty Hawk Funding Corp Comm Paper
02/14/05
03/21/05
5984244.13
2.53


c. Authorize the Auditor-Controller to re-invest, within the established policy of the Board, investments maturing between February 15, 2005 and March 14, 2005, and all other funds not required to cover expenditures that may become available; and,
d. Accept the Investment Report for January 2005 prepared by Public Financial Management.

Adopted

   
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
   
4.

Legislative Trip to Washington, D.C.

General Manager Celia Kupersmith reported that during the week of February 28 to March 4, 2005, a delegation of District staff and Board members traveled to Washington, D.C., to meet with members of Congress and articulate the District’s need for additional federal funding for various District projects. She stated that the trip was quite successful, and reported that on March 10, 2005, the House of Representatives passed H.R.3, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, TEA-LU, which includes significant funding allocations for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project. She noted that TEA-LU includes a one-time allocation of $11 million requested by Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, as well as an allocation of $10 million per year in Bridge Discretionary Funds.

   
5.

Bay Area Vendor Fair 2005

General Manager Celia Kupersmith highlighted an item in her written report regarding the first annual Bay Area Vendor Fair. The Vendor Fair, co-hosted by the District in collaboration with several other Bay Area public agencies and corporations, was held on February 10, 2005, in Oakland, CA, and provided the District with an opportunity to promote participation of small businesses, including Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, in District contracts. Ms. Kupersmith stated that the Vendor Fair was a resounding success, with twice the number of attendees than had been anticipated. She also stated that Director Sabrina Hern ández participated in the event, for which DBE Programs Administrator Aida Caputo served as the Chair of the Participants Sub-committee. Director Hernández acknowledged the exceptional efforts of Deputy General Manager/Administration and Development Teri Mantony ’s staff, in particular Aida Caputo, for representing the District so superbly at the Bay Area Vendor Fair.

   
ATTORNEY’S REPORT
   
6. Attorney David Miller reported that all items contained in the Attorney’s Report were informational. Mr. Miller also reported that a closed session would be held just prior to the conclusion of the meeting to discuss a matter of anticipated litigation and a matter of pending litigation, as listed on the Agenda.
   
ENGINEER’S REPORT
   
7. No written report was presented by District Engineer Denis Mulligan. A written report is presented to the Board of Directors by the District Engineer at the second Board meeting of the month.
   
REPORT OF THE BUILDING AND OPERATING COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2005
   
8.

Approve Proceeding with Environmental Studies and Preliminary Design Work Related to Development of a Physical Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge

Celia Kupersmith introduced the recommendation, which was unanimously approved by the Building and Operating Committee on February 24, 2005. She presented the proposed resolution associated with the recommendation, and explained the various findings and actions outlined in the resolution. She noted that if the action is approved, one of the first tasks to undertake would be the establishment of different design and engineering criteria relative to a physical suicide deterrent system, as well as the generation of financial support from external public and private sources to finance the project. She also noted that the resolution calls for the formation of a Bridge Barrier Projects Advisory Committee of the Board, which would be tasked with identifying and pursuing funding for studies of both a physical suicide deterrent system, as well as a moveable median barrier system.

a. Discussion by Board Members Relative to Development of a Physical Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge

Director Martini made the following comments and inquiries:

  • He inquired as to whether staff contemplates beginning work on requisite studies for a physical suicide deterrent system project, while simultaneously seeking funding from outside sources. He further inquired as to the amount of staff time and financial resources that would be committed through the proposed resolution. In response, Ms. Kupersmith stated that the first order of business would be policy-related, with no significant budgetary impacts in the preliminary stages of the project described in the resolution.
  • He expressed his opposition to physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge, emphasizing that the matter of deterring suicides should be a community mental health issue rather than a unilateral District project.

Director Smith inquired as to whether the District would have any legal responsibilities relative to the actions proposed in the resolution, particularly if a suicide occurs after a physical suicide deterrent system has been installed on the Bridge. In response, Attorney David Miller cited judicially prescribed standards derived from an interpretation of the California Tort Claims Act that have led to court decisions that the bridge sidewalks, in their current condition, do not constitute a dangerous condition of public property. This is based on the premise that individuals who use the bridge sidewalks for the purpose of taking their lives are not using the sidewalks in a manner used by the general public exercising ordinary care. Mr. Miller advised that there should be no different outcome if a similar suit were filed following construction of a physical suicide deterrent system. He concluded that the Resolution presented to the Board at this time fundamentally presents policy issues for the Board to decide.


Directors Stroeh and Kerns expressed support for the resolution, contingent on the fact that only outside funding would be used for the project, since the District continues to experience a fiscal crisis.

Director Sandoval inquired regarding the types of physical suicide deterrent systems that have been installed on other bridges around the world, and whether or not staff would study those designs in seeking a feasible design for the Golden Gate Bridge. Ms. Kupersmith and Mr. Mulligan both responded, noting that various designs would be studied as part of the environmental review process and describing how other deterrent designs may or may not work on the Golden Gate Bridge.

Director Ammiano made the following comments:

  • He expressed his support for the resolution, emphasized that public education is crucial throughout the development process for a physical suicide deterrent system.
  • He described a recent trip to Washington, D.C. by a delegation from the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which included meetings with Congresswoman Pelosi and Senator Boxer. He stated that there is a possibility of receiving federal funding for a physical suicide deterrent system. He has also met with Assemblymen Yee and Leno regarding possible state funding. Ms. Kupersmith added that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has also expressed an interest in helping to fund the project.

Director Kerns stated that the media should educate the public to dispel any myths regarding suicide from the Golden Gate Bridge, and perhaps understanding the terrible realities of death by suicide could act as a deterrent.

Director Murray made the following comments:

  • She stated that she wholeheartedly supports a suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge.
  • She urged the public to withhold their judgment of a physical suicide deterrent system until all alternatives are available for study.
  • She expressed confidence that an effective suicide deterrent could be developed that would not spoil the aesthetics of the Bridge.

Director Boro made the following inquiries and comments:

  • He stated that certain suicide deterrent designs, such as those on the Eiffel Tower and the Empire State Building would not be appropriate for the Golden Gate Bridge.
  • He noted that the challenging work will begin once the alternative designs have been selected.
  • He underscored that the District has a responsibility to Bridge users and transit users, and should keep in mind that its first priority is the safety of the Bridge for its users.

Directors Boro and Shahum expressed their support for the resolution because it prioritizes studies of a movable median barrier at the same level as a physical suicide deterrent system.

Director Harrison expressed her support for a physical suicide deterrent system, but cautioned that the District has limited staff resources at this time. She stated the importance of a public-private partnership to undertake the project.

Director Reilly expressed her support for a physical suicide deterrent system and stated that she is confident that such a system could save lives.

Director Eddie expressed his support for a physical suicide deterrent system, since the project would rely on external funding rather than burden the District’s toll payers.

Director McGoldrick stated that District personnel deserves recognition for diverting a large number of potential suicides. He suggested that the District gather data on the costs of District staff time expended on the matter of suicides on the Bridge, and that such data could be used in a cost benefit analysis of the feasibility of a physical suicide deterrent system.

b. Public Comment

The following members of the public expressed their support for a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge:

1. Roger Grimes, advocate for a physical suicide deterrent system on the Bridge;
2. Dr. Mel Blaustein of St. Francis Memorial Hospital;
3. John Kevin Hines, who survived a jump off the Golden Gate Bridge in 2000;
4. Terry and Mike Oxford, parents of suicide victim Jennifer Marie Oxford;
5. Eve Meyer, Executive Director of San Francisco Suicide Prevention, Inc.;
6. Patrick Fitzgerald, Sr., suicide prevention advocate;
7. Terence Faulkner, San Francisco Republican Committee;
8. Maria Martinez, mother of suicide victim Leonard Bernard Branzuela;
9. Mary Zablotny, mother of suicide victim Jonathan Zablotny;
10. Lennart Moller; and,
11. Danielle Hutchings, U.C. Berkeley Student.

The following members of the public expressed their opposition to a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge:

1. Robert Schmidt, San Mateo resident;
2. G. White, San Francisco resident; and,
3. John Diamante, Sausalito resident.

c. Approve Proceeding with Environmental Studies and Preliminary Design Work Related to Development of a Physical Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge

Directors EDDIE/HARRISON
Resolution No. 2005-015 approves proceeding with environmental studies and preliminary design work related to development of a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge subject to various assumptions and conditions, as outlined in the attached resolution.

Adopted

AYES (17): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (1): Director Martini
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
REPORT OF THE FINANCE-AUDITING COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2005
   
9.

Approve Revisions to the Investment Policy and Amend Rule XI of the Rules of the Board

Directors STROEH/BROWN
Resolution No. 2005-016 approves revisions to the Investment Policy, and amends Rule XI, Section I., Permitted Investment Instruments, Subsection 6, of the Rules of the Board, in order to conform the District’s Investment Policy with Section 53601(g) of the California Government Code, by replacing Subsection 6 in its entirety with the revised text as outlined below:

“Commercial paper of “prime” quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and number rating, as provided for by a nationally recognized statistical-rating organization (NRSRO). The entity that issues the commercial paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (A) or paragraph (B):

(A) The entity meets the following criteria: (i) is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. (ii) has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). (iii) has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated "A" or higher by a nationally recognized statistical-rating organization (NRSRO).

(B) The entity meets the following criteria: (i) is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company; (ii) has program-wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, over-collateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond; (iii) has commercial paper that is rated "A-1" or higher, or the equivalent, by a nationally recognized statistical-rating organization (NRSRO).”


Eligible commercial paper shall have a maximum maturity of 270 days or less. Local agencies, other than counties or a city and county, may invest no more than 25 percent of their money in eligible commercial paper. Local agencies, other than counties or a city and county, may purchase no more than 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any single issuer. Counties or a city and county may invest in commercial paper pursuant to the concentration limits in subdivision (a) of Section 53635.

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
REPORT OF THE FINANCE-AUDITING COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005
   
10.

Approve Renewal of Property Insurance Program for the Bridge Physical Damage and Use and Occupancy Policy and the District Buildings and Facilities Policy

Directors STROEH/BROWN
Resolution No. 2005-017 approves the following actions relative to the Property Insurance Program:

a. Renew the Bridge Physical Damage policy with ACE, providing “all risk” coverage for the Golden Gate Bridge structure, excluding the peril of earthquake, with a limit of $25 million per occurrence/annual aggregate and a deductible of $15 million per occurrence and Use & Occupancy policy with ACE, providing “all risk” coverage for loss of toll revenue to the District from physical damage to the Golden Gate Bridge, including the peril of earthquake, with a limit of $25 million per occurrence/annual aggregate and a 30-day deductible, at a premium of $1,078,701, for a one-year term, effective April 8, 2005; and,

b. Renew the District Buildings and Facilities policy with ACE/Westchester, as well as the incumbent panel of carriers, providing “all risk” coverage for all land-based District facilities, except the Bridge itself, in case of fire, flood and earthquake, with a limit of $45 million per occurrence and a deductible of $250,000 each loss for fire, including 5% of value for flood and earthquake, at a premium of $509,869, for a one-year term, effective April 8, 2004;

with the understanding that requisite funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2005 Operating Budgets for the Bridge, Bus, Ferry and District divisions and that requisite funds will be budgeted in the appropriate division operating budgets for Fiscal Year 2006; and, with the further understanding that renewal of the Boiler and Machinery Policy will be presented to the Board of Directors for its consideration at its meeting of March 25, 2005.

Adopted


AYES (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
REPORT OF THE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC INFORMATION COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 25, 2005
   
11.

Approve Actions Relative to Contract No. 2005-D-5, Printing of Golden Gate Transit System Maps, Timetables and Guides:

a. Reject the Bid of Fruitridge Printing & Lithograph, Inc.; and,
b. Authorize Award of Contract No. 2005-D-5 to Consolidated Printers, Inc.

Directors BORO/MARTINI
Resolution No. 2005-018 approves the following actions relative to Contract No. 2005-D-5, Printing of Golden Gate Transit System Maps, Timetables and Guides:

a. Reject the apparent low bid of Fruitridge Printing & Lithograph, Inc., Sacramento, CA, as non-responsive; and,
b. Authorize award of Contract No. 2005-D-5, to Consolidated Printers, Inc., Berkeley, CA, in the amount of $166,423, including all taxes, fees and charges, for a one-year term, with a one-year option, exercisable by the General Manager or her designee, subject to an increase in cost not to exceed five percent or $174,555, based upon a corresponding increase in the Contractor’s costs;


with the understanding that requisite funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2005 Administration and Development Division Operating Budget.

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
REPORT OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2005
   
12.

Authorize Award of Contract No. 2005-D-6, Revenue Collection, with Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.

Directors BROWN/SHAHUM
Resolution No. 2005-019 authorizes award of Contract No. 2005-D-6, Revenue Collection, to Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., Sacramento, CA, in the amount of $101,875, for revenue collection services, which involves collecting and transporting bus and ferry fare revenue from the Bus and Ferry Divisions to the District’s Vault Department in a vehicle provided by the District, for a two-year term, effective May 1, 2005, with a one-year option, exercisable by the General Manager or designee, subject to a cost adjustment of up to five percent; with the understanding that requisite funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2005 Bus Division Operating Budget (75%) and in the Fiscal Year 2005 Ferry Division Operating Budget (25%).

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
REPORT OF THE RULES, POLICY AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 11, 2005
   
10.

Approve Proposed Overall Project Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Goal for Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project Phase IIIA

Directors HARRISON/KERNS
Resolution No. 2005-020 approves the following actions relative to the overall project Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal for the Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project Phase IIIA – North Anchorage Housing/North Pylon:

a. Establish a twelve percent (12%) proposed goal applicable to $44,440,000 in contracts assisted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and authorize the General Manager to publish notice of the proposed goal in accordance with federal regulations;
b. Authorize the General Manager to formally adopt the goal if no public comments are received that require further consideration or modifications of the proposed goal by the Board; and,
c. Authorize staff to submit the overall project DBE goal to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on behalf of FHWA.

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, Martini, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

   
CLOSED SESSION
   
17.

Attorney’s Report

Attorney David Miller advised that it would be appropriate to continue until the March 25, 2005 meeting of the Board of Directors, the following items listed under closed session on the March 11, 2005 agenda:

a. Conference with Legal Counsel
Annual Litigation Audit Report Prepared by Attorney Covering Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a); and, Anticipated Litigation (Multiple Potential Cases) Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)
b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Pending Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District vs. Marsh and McLennan Companies, Inc., et al.

   
ADJOURNMENT
   
19. All business having been concluded, the meeting was adjourned at 11:35 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

/s/Janet S. Tarantino
Secretary of the District
JST:KBE:kbe

 

Attachment: (Resolution Relative to the Matter of a Physical Suicide Deterrent System on the Golden Gate Bridge)


GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE, HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT

RESOLUTION NO. 2005-015

APPROVE PROCEEDING WITH ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN WORK RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT OF A PHYSICAL SUICIDE DETERRENT SYSTEM ON THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE

March 11, 2005

THIS RESOLUTION IS ADOPTED WITH REFERENCE TO THE FOLLOWING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH ARE FOUND AND DETERMINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

1. The concept of installing a suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge has been explored at various intervals by District management and the Board of Directors during the past three decades. For a variety of reasons, however, the development of a physical suicide deterrent system suitable for installation on the Golden Gate Bridge has not been found to be feasible from various perspectives.
2. California law and judicial precedent establish that the absence of a physical suicide deterrent on the Golden Gate Bridge does not constitute a dangerous condition of public property within the meaning of Government Code Section 835, et seq. Notwithstanding that fact, as a result of renewed interest being expressed in revisiting the subject of a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge, on January 27, 2005, a presentation was made by District staff to the Building and Operating Committee of the Board of Directors regarding the history of District activities relevant to possible suicide deterrent systems. The report outlined criteria previously used in evaluating possible physical suicide deterrent systems and presented design alternatives previously considered.
3. On February 24, 2005, staff presented a report that outlined the environmental and design procedures necessary to undertake development of a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge. Specifically, the report identified the following actions that would have to be undertaken as a part of such consideration:

a. Adoption of criteria for the evaluation of alternatives for a physical suicide deterrent system, coupled with development of a “Purpose and Need” statement for the project pursuant to applicable environmental procedures;
b. Review of prior proposals for a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge and review of designs that have been implemented on other bridges;
c. Engagement of consultants to undertake preliminary engineering and environmental work;
d. Solicitation of input from various professional organizations with expertise in mental health regarding the adequacy of alternatives conceptualized as a potential physical suicide deterrent;
e. Undertaking wind tunnel tests to ensure the feasibility of the proposed design or improvements with respect to the wind stability of the Golden Gate Bridge;
f. Preparation of a Visual Analysis of the workable alternatives, including preparation of several still photographic simulations of each alternative;
g. Preparation of an historical “106 Evaluation” in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and, if necessary, the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) culminating in the preparation of a “Section 4f” report;
h. Solicitation of feedback from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission ’s Design Review Board and Engineering Criteria Review Board regarding the alternatives; and
i. Preparation of environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act.
The District Engineer estimated that the cost to complete these various milestones to be $2 million.
4. Notwithstanding the absence of any legal obligation to construct a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge, the Building and Operating Committee, following receipt of extensive public testimony and deliberations on the aforementioned report presented by staff, unanimously voted to recommend that the Board of Directors approve proceeding with environmental studies and preliminary design work for development of a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge with the understanding that a new set of assumptions and conditions are to be established to govern project development, including (a) the establishment of different design and engineering criteria calling for a physical suicide deterrent system to serve as a deterrent to suicides, recognizing the difficulty, if not impossibility, to devise any practical system that would make it physically impossible in all circumstances for suicides to occur; and, (b) the generation of financial support from external public and private sources to finance the project with the understanding that much of this work cannot begin until funds have been identified and appropriated; and, (c) with the further understanding that these initial actions are being authorized to enable the Board of Directors to ultimately determine whether to proceed with construction of a physical suicide deterrent system.


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District as follows:


1. The Board of Directors hereby approves proceeding with environmental studies and preliminary design work for development of a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge with the understanding that a new set of assumptions and conditions are to be established to govern project development, including (a) the establishment of different design and engineering criteria calling for a physical suicide deterrent system to serve as a deterrent to suicides, recognizing the difficulty, if not impossibility, to devise any practical system that would make it physically impossible in all circumstances for suicides to occur; and, (b) the generation of financial support from external public and private sources to finance the project with the understanding that much of this work cannot begin until funds have been identified and appropriated; and, (c) with the further understanding that these initial actions are being authorized to enable the Board of Directors to ultimately determine whether to proceed with construction of a physical suicide deterrent system.
2. Staff is directed to begin the project by developing proposed criteria for evaluation of alternatives for a physical suicide deterrent system for consideration and ultimate adoption by the Board of Directors.
3. Staff is directed to investigate and report on funding opportunities for the project from sources, including federal, state, regional and local governmental agencies, as well as from various private sector sources.
4. Staff is directed that with regard to aerodynamic studies required to evaluate the feasibility of installing a physical suicide deterrent system on the Golden Gate Bridge, such studies are to analyze the physical suicide deterrent both with and without the installation of a moveable median barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge as to which the Board of Directors enacted legislation granting conceptual approval pursuant to resolution No. 98-116 on May 22, 1998.
5. The Board of Directors authorize the President of the Board to constitute a Bridge Barrier Projects Advisory Committee of the Board for purposes of working with staff and outside interested parties to identify and pursue funding for implementation of the studies associated with the Physical Suicide Deterrent System and the Movable Median Barrier System projects. Said Advisory Committee is to report on its activities to the standing Finance-Auditing Committee of the Board.


ADOPTED this 11th day of March, 2005, by the following vote of the Board:


AYES (17): Directors Ammiano, Brown, Cochran, Eddie, Hernández, Kerns, McGoldrick, Murray, Pahre, Reilly, Sandoval, Shahum, Smith and Stroeh; Second Vice President Boro; First Vice President Harrison; President Middlebrook
NOES (1): Director Martini
ABSENT (1): Director Dufty

 

________________________________
Maureen Middlebrook
President of the Board of Directors

ATTEST: ___________________________
Janet S. Tarantino
Secretary of the District