=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SF Gate. The original article can be found on SFGate.com here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/chronicle/archive/2002/10= /11/EB136927.DTL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Friday, October 11, 2002 (SF Chronicle) Commissioner seeks to cut fat from bloated airport project Chip Johnson Port of Oakland Commissioner Phil Tagami, a developer by trade, is obsessed with the bottom line. It's no wonder that the spendthrift policies of the Oakland Airport officials heading a $1.4 billion terminal expansion project are driving him crazy. Tagami has worked and re-worked the figures as percentage of overall cos= ts per square foot and compared them with industry standards. It adds up to waste. "Any way you analyze it, we've spent 10 times that amount," he said. In four years, airport officials have racked up more than $50 million in design fees and hired more consultants than it appears they know what to do with. To illustrate that point, Tagami need merely suggest that any airport official stand up and explain to John Q. Citizen how they spent more than $1 million scouting two design firms that have never been assigned a task. Neither Engineering Director Joe Wong nor Aviation Director Steve Grossm= an returned calls seeking comment. Wong and Grossman each has project consultants who cost about $1 million= a year, and the airport's terminal expansion team has retained two firms as well. A fifth consultant has a four-year, $1.6 million contract to serve as a liaison between the airline company clients and the airport. None of the four consultant firms actually consults with the other, and = in fact such discussions have been discouraged by port officials to keep down the billable hours. Tagami contends that the project's organizational tree is nothing more than a sagging public bureaucracy with no real concept of working in a cost- efficient manner. With the commission's approval, Tagami has frozen the salaries of the consultants working for Grossman and Wong, and he has forced the issue to board level. Tagami wants the board to adopt a master-builder model for the six-year construction project, a method that would open the books and plans. Such a structure would coordinate the project under an office that would take the entire project into account instead of breaking into sections. "Instead of asking someone to build a team before the project, we pick a master builder who builds a team that looks at the whole picture," he said. Harold Jones, a port spokesman, said the board and staff had embraced Tagami's proposal as a break from the traditional governmental method of designing a project, putting it out to bid and building it. And while port officials have agreed to adopt the master-builder method, the transition will take time and create some costs of its own, said Tay Yoshitani, Port of Oakland executive director. "If we'd started from day one by handing over the keys to a master builder, maybe none of the expense would have been incurred, but we're making a course adjustment," Yoshitani said. "He's brought his agenda to the table and the staff and board agree that it's the thing to do." The master-builder method would also allow for an open evaluation of loc= al companies selected as contractors, a process that has been rife with problems in the past. In July, the commission awarded a contract to MWM Lee, an architectural design firm ranked second by an independent evaluation team. When the firm's selection brought claims of political patronage, the boa= rd awarded a second contract to Carter Burgess, the top-ranked firm. A master-builder method might be preferable simply because it would put = an end to such shenanigans. Port officials signed an ambitious agreement with labor officials during the project's planning to hire residents from Oakland, Alameda, Emeryville and San Leandro, cities within the project's impact area. Oakland airport officials cleared one hurdle last week when they reached agreement with neighborhood groups and Alameda city officials to complete an environmental impact report and to allow community input to the project. A lawsuit brought by the City of Alameda and residents had stalled planning for the airport expansion for almost a year. Now that it's time for the heavy lifting to begin, it's time to cut out the waste so that the job of expanding passenger and air cargo facilities doesn't end up costing a lot more. E-mail Chip Johnson at chjohnson@sfchronicle.com or write to him at 483 Ninth St., Suite 100, Oakland, CA 94607.=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright 2002 SF Chronicle