Thank you very much i simply wanted to appreciate the allocation that would go towards helping to improve the line its one of our most heavily utilized lines in the city. Overcrowded issues that happened midway through the line and im thankful that this allocation will be happening to help improve that line. And i would say good timing for you as well. [laughter]. Any other comments. Again this gives us an opportunity on our light rails to address the camera issue. The camera issue is not going to go way. Maybe it will go to court but when things go to court nobody ever hears about it but i would say because our inter um director is forth right ive known her for a long time but somehow we need to have a hearing on our light rail and critical lines we get the funding from the federal government thats okay but we need to Pay Attention in this hearing and address the cameras and the safety we had a chinese coming who were beaten very badly. There was a camera on that box but no camera on the bus somebody got stabbed on the 9 no camera on the bus it goes on and on and on because we just the camera or recording system that could help the Law Enforcement in this case the Law Enforcement doesnt seem to care so chief, im putting you on notice i know im your friend but do the right thing. Mayor we can talk the talk time to walk the walk. Those supervisors who come up and back the mta for the sake of backing the mta be educated on issues and to the public at home be very leery when you take m u. N. I is there a working camera before you board the bus thank you very much. Thank you. If there are no other members of the public to comment we can close Public Comments. Okay our actually this resolution is adopted. Next item please. Amendment 2009 strategic plan. This is an action item. Any comments from colleagues i see none well go onto Public CommentPublic Comment is open and if none come forward well close Public Comment this resolution is adopted next item please. This is an action item. Colleagues, this resolution came forward unanimous consent from the committee to look at an executive recruit er firm and to have a director in by july 1st hopefully sooner than that. Any comments from colleagues . I want to thank you for the comments you made earlier about also at the same time that were doing a new search for executive director to take a step back and really take a review of the cta and sort of what were doing and whether there are either examples of other jurisdictions that we can look to i know that a number of us thought about the opportunity we have right now to think about the most efficient and effective way for the San FranciscoTransportation Authority to be run and managed. I look forward to working with you and other colleagues and staff as we move this forward. Thank you. Thank you actually this is just a budgetary question i know that it was recommended that theres available budget in the administrative operating expenses because theres a vacancy im just curious i know this comes from prop k and i know prop k was set aside for Transit Needs and im not saying this is going to facility Transit Needs but i want to make sure this is an appropriate way to spend our taxpayer dollars. Correct me if im wrong this is from the operating budget not from Personnel Salaries id clarify the authoritys updating budget we dont receive general funds. This is probably coming from saving within that portion of the budget. That is correct this is actually coming from the line item where we had for the commercial paper were taking this from the financial advisors. Thank you for that clarification. Commissioner. Thank you mr. Im really happy that were moving forward with the process and it will be a really good process i know theres been a discussion earlier in terms of the committee that over saw the process would be a five Person Committee to make it as broad based as possible on the board i know right now on this resolution indicates the Personnel Committee which is the committee defined in our administrative code i think it would be good to have it can be the executive director Search Committee that would include the members of the Personnel Committee plus 2 additional members id suggest that we proceed in that manner Everything Else about this i think is completely good and appropriate and i support and so i guess my question for i know for staff and counsel is how we would go about creating that upset ad hoc committee. Just before staff might answer that ive had previous conversations with commissioner weiner about looking for a committee to review candidates for the executive director. It gives the authority to actually do the work were recommending to the full transportation board to a committee that consists in order to create a five Member Committee to make a formal recommendation we would need to change administrative code i talked to the Transportation Authority about that i thought it would be a process that would seem comeumbersome but i also thought it was possible that we can consult together to move forward on you know on recommendations. If theres a process that can happen thats separate from the Committee Meetings that are officially on kaeshl camera that can engage a five Member Committee to review candidates, im open to that but frp much of that probably a question for the ta to answer. I would say the challenge of doing it id imagine that there would be i dont know but for the committee thats doing this public discussions there could be sometimes for Personnel Matters goes into closed session and issues about having i dont know and so i had i dont think it would be that cumbersome if the only way we could do it is to change Administration Code id look for guidance from staff and counsel what we will require or not require to change the admin code. The formation of the ad hoc xhi committee is something we could do. My understanding is that when the Personnel Committee is discussing particular candidates which ones they want to interview that it is closed session and only the members of the committee maybe present and around. And i would note for the benefit of those watching too that the current proposal does include having as soon as the recruit er is on board to offer to interview the Board Members what they are looking for in terms of an executive director. Of course i would expect the recruit ers to do that but thats different than what i think some of the conversations were about the five members doing the search and vetting the candidates so is it the view of staff and counsel that the only way we could do that would be to change the add min code to create a committee or is that something we could do without a formal change to the code . I think the question of maintaining the confidentiality of communications in closed session is an issue wed have to look at wpt with with that respect to the ad hoc committee. We could look at once its been agenda ized so take a look at the issue more closely and bring it back next month with a recommendation. What i would suggest then im not comfortable adopting this today. And so i would suggest continuing this one month and i dont think we have to wait a month to receive advice on what we need to do i think as soon as that advice is ready hopefully within a day or two if thats conceivable if thats the only way we can do that then we can do that as quickly as we can. This is a once in a blue moon opportunity and i think its very critical that we have the best process possible and that is precisely why there were conversations about having a five Person Committee to do this exhaustive work. So before we actually look at delaying a month which i think would set us back i lot i want to ask if theres any other way we can make a more robust process of reviewing candidates whether im not sure if we can do it possibly in closed session we cant do it but if theres another way it can be conducted. Im sure theres a way we can do that the problem with doing it today is we havent agenda ized it. We need to agenda ize a meeting where we can adopt an action. Im certain theres a process for expanding participation in the process subject to resolving the closed session and confidentiality issue im not sure about at this point. Commissioner weiner. So if theres a way that theres two members that would effectively be members of the community and participate in the entire process and have that five Person Committee i think thats the goal i think theres a distinction between members exhaust ive ly, versus a consultation process which is not the same thing so i do make a motion to continue this one month. Motion from commissioner weiner is there a second . Second by commissioner chew. Do that take precedence to vote on that immediately . Thank you mr. Chair. Trying to figure out if theres a way that we can move forward and still address the concerns that have been raised. I do have a question for counsel from my understanding theres nothing in the code or in the rules that actually prohibits another member of this body that wants to sit on a committee that they are not a part of that happens all the time is there something that actually precludes that from happening . For purposes of closed sessions theres a problem if you go into closed session generally ly attendance is limited to Committee Members in open session its common for other members of a legislative body who are not on the committee to attend the meetings. The general rule i dont know what the rule is for the San Francisco board of supervisors because you are a charter city and you have your own rules but we advise our clients if the members of a larger legislative body is at the Committee Meeting is that they dont participate directly in the discussion but they can participate as citizens for purposes of the brown act id imagine if you notice in such a way you let the public know that a member of the body that is not on that specific committee could be participating in closed session that that might actually satisfy the notice requirement wouldnt it . Im happy to take a look at that issue and get back to you. Im happy to look at it. I would hope that we look at that. I think were probably complicating things too much i think theres enough discretion under the rules for us to move forward and to allow the chair to add you know 2 people who can sit in on this process i actually think that its important to move forward because of the fact that you know we need to come up with someone sooner rather than later but i also understand the points that commissioner weiner is raising. Seems that theres narrow interpretation of the rules i think thats very unfortunately i think theres a way to accomplish the objective thats been outlined. Clearly theres ways to move forward. To temporarily expand the committee we can see if theres other ways to accomplish the same thing you are asking for. I welcome you know more members to be part of that its not like im posed to that i i i was going to be soliciting support and comment and participation on the effort to look at candidates im not sure if this is actually the best timing because i think what we need to be doing is moving forward on executive recruitment form and i think we can move that forward and the process for reviewing candidates separately. If we were to move forward exclusive ly im fine with that the sooner the better and continuing the portion of the resolution dealing with the actual committee and then we can resolve that hopefully next month i have no problem if we just limit the action today to initiate the search firm retention process. I think thats a great solution to this impasse. It seems all the Personnel Committee would be doing in the month of march would be to sit down in the initial recruitment approach with the consult ant is going to review all the Board Members for that anyway way and by april when we start to actually consider the recruitment materials and all of that well be able to settle a five Person Committee by that i dont want to delay that process i think its important to interview candidates in the month of may but june is the budget season and ive participated in this Selection Process in the past and its incredibly time consuming to do all of these interviews even if its a 3 Person Committee by the month of march and by april a five Member Committee that was my suggestion but it seems like it might be a simimilar com promise. I think we should definitely move forward on this issue and kim thank you for highlighting this. We will be in the midst of budget cycle. So i want to ask staff to come back to us with a proposal and tell you how this change of from a that 3 Person Committee to 4 Person Committee. Im thinking about march 18th. We might have to agree to a special meeting. I dont know if we want to comment on my suggestion on asking staff to come back to us with this new meeting with the possible timeline its an extremely save schedule. One of the its not was not only to get somebody on board the n gining of the fiscal year. But the staff can actually go head and seem like the deal with a recruiter. One of the things we want to do is direct staff to come forward with a special Board Meeting before especially, if we want this 5 Board Committee to meet. However, we dont anticipate this meeting to be closed sessions. Okay. So youre saying in order to look at expanding for you to provided input we have to have a special meeting on that . Why cant we have a regular Board Meeting if its okay that the two Board Members sit in on the Committee Even though their not members of the committee then we could ask the committee to have this expanded. Thats a better way. Thank you. I imagine your withdraw your first amendment. First of all, i mean clearly we all want to get an executive director on board. As with any good search youre going to consider external and internal candidates and i agree with commissioner campos we have some talented people who are sharing the ship on staff who i know we all have a lot of confidence. Beyond why there would be such a rush with having whether a person starts july 1st or august 1st or september 1st why that matters. The goal s to a have a process and i dont think it matters if it starts thirty days after its penciled out. This strikes