Public comment on item 2 now i pose. All right. No Public Comment. That was an information item. [gavel] item 3 please. Item 3 approval of the minutes of the january 17, 2017 meeting. This is an action item. Colleagues if you have looked at the minutes we can get a motion to approve the minutes. So moved. [inaudible] [off mic] all right. And we will do roll call. Commissioner safai. Aye. Commissioner sheehy. Aye. Commissioner tang. Aye. The minutes are approved. [gavel] all right. Item 4 please. Item 4 recommendation allocation of 4,456,324 in prop k funds and 2,540,359 in prop aa funds with conditions for five requests subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedule. This is an action item. We have anna leforthere. I am director of program and policy and i am present the program for the half cent funds and vehicle funds and those at home and for new members of the commission as well as others the prop k half cent sales tax has been in its a voter approved sales tax. The original sales tax which is proposition b was approved in 1989. It was a 20 year expenditure plan with a host of programs and with the signature project being the third street light rail project and reauthorized in the year 14 of the plan and the voters approved proposition k in 2003. It generates 100 million a year and host of programs including traffic calming, bicycle and pedestrian safety, curb ramps as well as the vehicle fleet, tire replacement and other projects. The vehicle Registration Fee is a annual Registration Fee that folks pay when they register vehicles in San Francisco and generates about 5 million a year. Half of the funds are for street resurfacing and for transit safety and safety and reliability as well. So focusing specifically on the allocations before you today i will be brief. The first request i believe that theyre all from no, theyre not all from sfmta. Theyre from sfmta scpptd California Department of Motor Vehicles department between all San Francisco public works and this is a green project and 650,000 and leveraging about 2 million in Public Utility Commission sfpuc Green Infrastructure funding and fund the pavement part of the project and elements include bike signals, bulb outs and roadway crossings et cetera and between church and duboce and fell and scott intersections. There is a specific map with the intersections shown in your packet on page 25 of the enclosure which is the packet of the allocation request details. The next request is from the department of public works and this is for the design phase of a Neighborhood Transportation Improvement ProgramCapital Project that will be funded. It will be a cost sharing arrangement between districts nine and ten to Fund Improvements on the Western Entrance to the hairball which is the Cesar Chavez Potrero and bayshore intersection for the design phase and dap tal funds for construction phase as well and came out from the report from the department of public works about six months ago. Scope includes wider and regraded bike and ped path that goes underneath the freeway so it would provide adequate clearance. [inaudible] [off mic] okay. Next project is from the mta. It is for neighborhood greenways in district 11 planning work. Its to focus on three key corridors and just by way of background the neighborhood greenway designs are something that has come out of both the neighborhood im sorry, the greens Connection Network by the planning department. Theyre key corridors in sfmtas bicycle strategy and the plan is to figure out how to prioritize non motorized Access Points to transit and employment and education and open space over or in addition to the motorized uses of the street so this is for the planning work that under way soon and should take about a year and a half. The next two are payment projects and by the prop k program and the Registration Fee. This is the first request from public works is for the filbert and leavenworth pavement project. There is no project at van ness and filbert but they be coordinated to avoid conflicts and teams are working at this time and this is about two and a half miles of paving to be done and construction to start this summer. The next project with the Registration Fees is for two and a half million to pave one and a half blocks of work so thats all that i have to present toed today. I am here to answer questions as various project managers from the agencies. Thank you for the presentation. Commissioner safai. All right. Were commissioners today. Thank you. So i have a specific question regarding the greenways if you could talk about that a little more and i know as part of your process youre doing supposed to be outreach to the Supervisors Office and i know we transitioned into our position so if you could include cathy from my staff and any conversations. I know you have been doing outreach with the community but were hearing about it after the outreach is happening so we would like to be folded into that Going Forward and if you could say more about that for my own edification that would be helpful . Absolutely. I am ask nick carr to speak to your questions from the mta. Hes the project manager. Good morning. I am the project manager for the district 1 greenways planning project. We have done a little bit of Neighborhood Outreach in the Grant Application process really, and our just embarking now on the preliminary stakeholder interviews both internal to the city and community groups, resident groups, things of that nature, so i was just talking to kneel patel yesterday and getting to talk about this project and launch out into the city. Great. Thank you very much. Colleagues any other questions on this allocation here . Okay. All right. Seeing none then were going to Public Comment on item 4. Any members of the public wish to comment . Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] colleagues can we get a motion on item 4. So moved. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. All right. And we will do a roll call since the house has changed. Q. Commissioner farrell. Aye. Commissioner safai. Aye. Commissioner sheehy. Aye. Commissioner tang. Aye. The item is approved. [gavel] all right thank you. Item 5 please. Item 5 recommendation adoption of the fiscal year 201718 transfund for clean air for local expenditure criteria. This is an action item. Good morning the Transportation Fund for clean air is fund by a 4 surcharge on Motor Vehicle registrations inlet bay area. 60 of the funds collected go to Grant Programs managed directly by the air districts and 40 go to programs at the county level with the Transportation Authority administering the program in San Francisco. The goal is to reduce emissions and improve air quality. In fiscal year 201718 we expect to have 724,000 in Funds Available to fund projects. The air district establishes regulations that govern what types of projects are eligible for funding and they require counties to adopt local expenditure criteria for the projects. Given the small amount of Funds Available we fund 48 projects a year but in past years we funded diverse types in San Francisco from bike parking to low emissions vehicles to signal timing on arterials. So the local expenditure criteria are what were seeking your approval today. Theyre on page 29 of your packet. The criteria are the same as last year but this is the boards opportunity we hope to reaffirm your support. The primary way that our local criteria add to the air districts underlying policy is establishing a priority order for project types. As you see on the screen with the zero emissions Vehicle Projects as the top priority and for evaluating Grant Applications these prioritize cost effectiveness of the Emissions Reductions and consideration of project deliverability and diversity and past delivery performance. The air district keeps the underlying policies for tfca consistent but made some changes and notable examples they increase the cost effectiveness limit for shuttle projects and upgrades to existing bicycle facilities. They relaxed requirements around bike share projects and policy language on alternative fiewls vehicles and buses and add a category for on road Goods Movement and truck replacement that is low emissions Goods Movement trucks. We provided input to the air district on these policies including advocating for changes that allow upgrades to the existing bicycle vehicle and add a buffer, curb to separate an existing bike lane from car traffic which was previously ineligible for tfca funds and they had to be new facilities and so were appreciative of that change from the air district. And finally this is our proposed schedule for this years funding cycle so we would have applications due at the end of april and back to the board with programming recommendations in june. With that i can take any questions. All right. Colleagues any questions on this . I know we were personally interested and staff at looking at some of the funding for bike lanes in district 4 so i will be following up on that with staff. All right. Seeing no other questions or comments and thank you for the presentation and go to Public Comment on item 5. All right. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] colleagues can we get a motion to item 5 . Motion to approve. Second. All right. Thank you by commissioner farrell and we do that without objection. [gavel] okay. Item 6 please. Item 6 recommended adoption of the one Bay Area Grant Program cycle two San Francisco call for projects framework. This is an action item. Thank you. We have amer wrap her. Good morning commissioners. I am excited to be here today and this one Bay Area Grant Program is the once in five year opportunity we have to program the frl funds passed to us from the metropolitan transportation commission. This is really outside of the local fund sources we have, the biggest chunk of funding to program unless the state gets its act together and passes one of the funding bills. Great. So basically what were going to what i am presenting to today is the praim work how we evaluate the projects for submitted to the grant program. We will come back with recommendations in june but this is how we develop the staff recommendation to move forward with the project. So the one Bay Area Grant Program mtc developed it to support projects identified for meeting the growth patterns thats approved through plan bay area, the Regional Transportation Plan and target and reward jurisdictions developing housing and the ambitious totals that mtc has approved. So okay. So this is a map of Priority Development areas which are areas that the city self designated as where they anticipate growth will occur in the city over the next 25 years or where the growth will be focused rather. So obag as i said is not an insignificant program. Its about 44 billion million. Over five years and its three theres three pots of money identified. The first is for planning activities a little under 2 million and safe routes to School Program that is under 2 million and represents the set aside pot where we can Program Additional funds to safe route projects at the discretion of the committee, and then finally the bulk is a competitive Citywide Program that i will go into a little more detail in a second. So the projects that can be funded through obag are diverse so transit, bike and pedestrian projects also looking at mobility management and Transportation Management projects so were proposing to select the projects basically mtc has set a lot of the criteria. Their federal funding as you can imagine there are strings and timely requirements so what you see here are screening criteria. The ones in blue are basically the ones that we are proposing to add but this is pretty straightforward consistency with planned bay area eligible project sponsors and things like that so the first half of the non screening criteria is our location specific criteria so its many layers of maps where youre either in the identified area or outside. This is again the Development Areas that i showed the map before and 70 of the Grant Funding has to be spent or serving those areas. Theres also considerations for communities of concern, communities that are identified air quality risks or near freight corridors and for the first time in this obag cycle mtc asked us to reward projects for jurisdictions that have Affordable Housing and antidisplacement policies so were adopting that for San Francisco to reward Affordable Housing developments in the pipeline. And then finally there are project based criteria and you can see theres a lot in blue which means were tailoring the project to meet San Franciscos needs so in addition to project readiness we will be looking at community source, Community Support safety and multimodal benefits, coordination with multiple projects and then somewhat an evolution from the last cycle where we focused on streetscape projects and safe routes to School Projects and were looking for the opportunity to finish what we started. Looking at an opportunity at the large known Infrastructure Projects that are moving forward that support those Development Areas and the core transportation improvements and in particular looking at not just with the corridors within the city but how people are getting in and out of the city, so that is going to be a new consideration, and then we will also consider things like geographic equity and what the project sponsors telling us are their priorities. The schedule as i said bringing the framework through this month for approval. Then we will go through the call for projects. Make recommendations and bring it to you in june for approval. In the meantime we are doing our first round of its basically consistent with the way we do outreach around the call for projects and do one round of vetting. Stakeholders know there is a call available. We will do a second round of speaking with steak takes and public agencies and staff when we release the project recommendations. And so with that i am happy to take any questions and i look forward to working with you over the next couple of months over this. Thank you very much for your presentation so one of the things i spoke briefly with staff about and i want to reiterate in public as well just because this is such a large pot of funding that were receiving through this i want to make sure were funding any sort of current obligations that we might have helping to complete existing projects that are already under way versus starting completely new projects that might take a huge chunk of money and a lot of time so thats my preference here. Again i know that this call for projects is pretty broad but i like to put that on the record. The other thing if you could clarify when we expect to hear from the mtc commission on approval. We dont have an exact date. We have to submit the projects to them in july and given their turn around and review process probably between september and december for approval. Okay. And then i know that there is a small portion of this that we do have to put towards safe routes to school which i think has been wonderful, but in looking through some of the reports that have come out about what thats translated into i want to make sure were ensuring theyre good outcomes, measurable impacts to the community in terms of people actually feeling safer going to school whether its walking, biking or so forth, and theyre actual deliverables that come out of the funding. Thats correct. We are for the small portion that is required we are recommending prioritizing it for non Infrastructure Projects which are incredibly difficult to fund elsewhere but at the same time we are looking back at the projects we funded in the last cycle to ensure exactly what i said that there are measures that we can point to about their effectiveness. Okay. All right. So commissioners do you have any questions or comments on this item . Okay. Seeing none then we will sorry, commissioner safai. I just want to add on to what chair tang was saying the safe routes to School Program is important and effective in our district and a lot of the schools and Community Folks have accessed it and we have seen some positive things with people getting out of cars and taking advantage of kind of pooling their energy in terms of some working families, working with other parents to get their children to school safely, so were really supportive of that. The other thing due to the inordinate amount of rain this year and i would like to go on the record that street are you surfacing is a priority for the district given the number of pot holes we have unfortunately come out of this bad weather so that would be something i would like to Pay Attention to and encourage you in your process to talk about that. Okay. Yeah, i think this fund sources suited to not emergency responsiveness but kind of the longer term planned resurfacing activities. Its 44 million but over five years so there is limited availability each year for the planning. You have to plan pretty far in advance. All right. And you know i think some of the commissioners i were you know looking at this map here, and kind of thinking about how where it is that these Development Priority areas are, and really just shows when you dont have development occurring in your neighborhood you also lose out on funding for other types of projects, so just something to point out. In any case do we have any other comments or questions from the Committee Members . Okay. Seeing none well go to Public Comment on item 6. Okay. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] and that was an action item so if we can get a motion on item 6 please . Motion to approve. All right. And the house is changed so we will do a roll call. On item 6. Commissioner breed. Aye. Commissioner farrell. Aye. Commissioner safai. Aye. Commissioner sheehy. Aye. Commissioner tang. Aye. The item is approved. Thank you. [gavel] all right. Item 7 please. Item 7 presentation on regional measure 3. This is an informational wrm. Thank you. We have michelle here. Hello. Thank you so much. Good morning so i am here today to provide an update on regional measure 3 and a proposal to increase the tolls on the bridges. Okay. So today i will provide background on the existing bridge tolls that we have and history how they were put in place and talk about the process we expect to see for regional measure three. I will go some of the mtcs draft principle as theyre leading the technical side of this and begin a discussion of draft priorities we see emerging for San Francisco and seek your input on this and then discuss next steps including how were working with the stakeholders. Thank you. Okay. So mtc one of their roles is as administrator of batta, the Bay Area Toll Authority where they administer the tolls on the seven state owned bridges and provide oversight on caltrans seismic and rehab work on the seven bridges and i will note that the Golden Gate Bridge is not included in that as its managed by the golden gate management district and support their boat and ferry programs. Mtc can raise tolls without going to the voters for bridge and seismic work. However if they want it for other purposes they require authority to go to the voters for approval so currently the bridges have a 5 base toll and that includes two times that mtc has gone to the voters as far as for the this approval and regional measures one and two and the funds are considered a fee so bridge nexus is important for the funds of the tolls and the tolls require only a 50 plus one vote of the nine bay area counties to pass so thats an aggregate so a total over all of the counties. So the last time that a new bridge toll was brought to the voters was the 2004 regional measure two and fund the the regional traffic relief plan and we expect there are similarities from the measure two to measure three. Rm2 was passed by 57 of the vote across the counties and raised the toll by 1 dollar and two programs, a Capital Outlay program and a transit operating program. There is also some operating funds in it for the trans bay terminal building which started at 3 million a year. So theres a couple of different ways of looking at the rm2 program of projects and this is one way. Here on this table you can see the largest project funded out in San Francisco was the transbay terminal at 150 million for capital as well as the operating fund they already mentioned. In addition to that there was funding for muni Capital Projects including 30 million to the light rail expansion as well as funding to bart Capital Projects, and then there is funding in there for muni operations including late Night Transit Service and operating funds for the line. So the next slide i throw this in for information and includes all the projects directly benefits San Francisco in regional measure two. Okay. So now we will move on to talk about the proposal for regional measure 3. This is a top priority for mtc and planned bay area and for us as well and adopted into the legislative program in the end of 2016 and as with the other measures regional measure 3 is considered a fee so the Investment Program will need to have a clear nexus with the bridge corridors. Unlike the previous measures we expect that mtc will propose this goes to all nine bay area counties and here what we have done is shown where the traffic is on these bay area bridges. You can see that the bay bridge accounts for a third of the traffic on all seven bridges but there are going to be different ways of talking about this fee so for example another way to look at it where are the fee payers residing . So thats about 12 in San Francisco. Where are the voters coming from . Santa clara residents only about 2 of the bridge tolls but make up 22 of the voters in the region, and et cetera, so theres going to be part of the conversation about what goes into the Investment Program. So were early in this process and were still not entirely sure what regional measure 3 will look like but getting back to the process mtc does need state authorization to bring this measure to the voters and the legislation laid out the projects and the operating funds that would be earmarked from the toll, and so for rm3 were not sure if the legislature wants to go in that direction again and earmark most of the funding to specific projects or give more leeway to mtc to develop projects with all the partner agencies, so were engaged in the conversation with mtc. Theyre working closely with the delegation to get a sense of what they want to see in the legislation, and they have begun to have the stakeholder meetings which again were participating in. Another big question about rm3 and what it will look like is how much of a bridge toll increase it will include. The previous measures were 1 increase but talking up to three increase at this time. There are a couple of reasons for that. A dollar doesnt go as as far as it used to and there are tremendous needs across the region. 3 would allow to fund Capital Projects and other funds as well and the voters are willing to pay for the improvements as the bart measure in 2016 that passed. Our bridge tolls are lower in a lot of other regions particularly in new york city where the tolls are up to 11 and getting one of the measures passed takes a lot of effort at a lot of different lefs so if there is a sense that if we do this we should go big and the question of operations. Should rm3 go to Capital Projects or funding out of that. Regional measure two was capped on the programs for the top rated and there are two sides of benefiting operations. There is limited funding for that but if youre starting to direct funding to operations it reducing what the Capital Budget will be as you can see on the slide. There are is other questions out there. Should there be a fast track discount built into this . Should we compress the congestion from the bay bridge and were track being it all so some of the draft principles are here for a starting point about the conversation and what funding from regional measure 3 which include. The first one is bridge nexus which i talked about and very important for the Fee Structure and the rest of the principles are consistent with everything mtc done for the Regional Transportation Plan and sustainability and planned bay area and the other planning work they have done so now i will move on to how we see this playing out. I think the staff here support the mtc draft principles and consistent with the previous planning they have done but we feel there are things missing so we recommend that equity be a part of the regional measure two framework. We know its very important to keep stakeholders in San Francisco and equity and particularly the affordability piece is a major topic of conversation around the unfortunately failed november 2016 revenue measure here in San Francisco and i think that feeds into supporting limited operations funding and again we would like to see caps and Performance Measures and things that are performing well but could go to late Night Transit Service which we have seen a need for in San Francisco. We request mtc to include multimodal in their principles. We know that the bridge corridors and travel through them is more than just what is happening on the bridges but all the different transit modes out there, buses, bart and ferries and lastly you know we really do see the need for a large increase in Transportation Funding here in San Francisco and across the region so i think it makes sense to go for the two to 3dollar pull this time so were also here to talk about proposed San Francisco policy framework and this is really where were asking for input at this time. If were taking a holistic approach to Transportation Funding here in San Francisco and in the bay area excuse me,. Yeah commissioner breed. I am confused about your community about the toll. Can you clarify . The two to 3dollar . Yes. So right now mtc is discussing a toll increase that could be for anywhere from one to 3, and we see the tremendous need for Transportation Funding in the region. There were a couple of measures that didnt pass this past fall which theres need for the funding from bart to ferries to muni and for our highways system so we think it makes sense to do this increase and likely its phased in over time to try to minimize the impact and it would be supporting transit across the region. Thank you. So for San Francisco again thinking about holistic picture of Transportation Funding in San Francisco, thinking about the projects most appropriately funded out of regional measure 3, thinking about the bridge nexus that is required we think that core capacity projects, projects that will increase the capacity of transit in the center part of the system where were really seeing the congestion problems right now and the crowding. Those are the kinds of investments that really make sense to have a nexus with this Funding Source so we expect to see a sizable investment in dtx and improve capacity downtown. In line with this thinking and again consistent with mtcs framework other projects recommended out of the core capacity transit study that mtc is leading right now that were, wog with them on and include Market Street and geary and within that framework muni and bart expansion needs fall neatly into that category. Those fleet projects support the equity guideline that we talked about and providing limited funding for late Night Transit Service. Again the multimodal approach and lastly we think that active congestion management project such as recommendations from the freeway Corridor Management study and the work in the Treasure IslandMobility Program that work demonstrates that you know there are innovative ways to manage the congestion in our system and we think that rm3 funding would have a direct nexus with those improvements. Okay. So again this is all just beginning. Were currently working with all the agencies serving the corridor to identify the total need for funding before we start to talk about project level recommendations. We worked with mta on these principles that i already talked about and were working with all of these sponsors. These projects are identified by San Francisco transportation plan. A lot of them are in planned bay area and needs recently identified by project sponsors so this is just the sampling of some of the projects we heard in congestion with regional measure 3. And again as the next steps were continuing to coordinate with the agencies and Regional Transit operators on the San Francisco priorities through the Technical Working Group meetings and oneonone meetings and convening meetings with all of these sponsors. We are seeking input from the board and other Key Stakeholders including [inaudible] and the bicycle coalition, the Transit Riders Union and bart et cetera. Were attending mtc stakeholder meetings. At the next board were seeking action on a policy framework and potentially list of candidate projects for regional measure 3 for San Francisco, and we are going to working with the board and Mayors Office and engaging the state delegation and they need to pass the authorizing legislation so mtc can bring this to the voters so with that i conclude and if you have any questions. Thank you for your presentation. I think that what would help me at least in terms how we move forward even thinking about the potential projects if we could get from staff a list of some of the major priorities that we have with the cost estimate that is left that needs to be funded because when i look at without numbers with it i just dont know how to make a decision on this so thats what i would ask in between now and when the full board makes a decision. Absolutely and goes back to the conversation about taking a holistic approach and the need identified is so tremendous compared to the size of the Funding Source and at a max 5 billion Funding Source for the region so yes absolutely. Great. Thank you. Commissioner safai. Yeah, just to add on to what commissioner tang said one of the things that you highlighted in the presentation they would like to hear more about is Late Night Service because a lot of people in the economy that work late at night and particularly from the industry i came from and the Janitors Union we heard for years about safety issues and concern and need for service, people getting off at two in the morning and i want that on the record and if ta staff could follow up with me thats a priority for us. Absolutely. So i will mention that regional measure two did have owl service for the bart corridors that provides late Night Transit Service and were leading a study and someone else can talk about this. Through the chair commissioner. Thank you for the request and we would like to like presentation to the full board on late night and in the broader economy and neighborhood groups. Now we have refined the recommendationses and around Service Planning and lighting and things that are very much needed across the city and identify and prioritize some of the investments so we will definitely bring that back to you. Yeah, and if you could make sure we have enough time to do outreach to the stakeholder sos they can be part of that conversation that would be helpful. Absolutely. While i have the mic if you dont mind chair tang and thank michelle and staff for the work and were working with all of the operators. This is a reesessal effort and its exciting to come together as a city to look at revenues for 2018. All of the increases will require legislation so mtc is engaged with the state legislative leaders in the bay area and throughout leadership of the state because at the state level theyre looking for special revenues for transportation so were looking to coordinate our regional and local efforts here with the statewide efforts to find funding and as far as the broader holistic strategy we can speak more to this in the next months but the idea is to tightly coordinate like the item we presented, the one Bay Area Grant Program with this program as well as with the regional and state initiatives so when we go to the voters potentially next year locally we were able to say we took care of certain things in the obag funding. We were securing funding for other things and have the opportunity to put Additional Needs in the package but in a strategy and i can coordinated way with your guidance. Thank you. Commissioner breed. Thank you. Just two comments. First of all with Late Night Service specifically i just wanted to make sure i know that local two represents the Hotel Industry but not necessarily probably all hotel workers. Theres also the Restaurant Industry and other places you know that do business late at night, our night life industry, and i want to make sure when we talk about Late Night Services we understand what the needs are with the individuals who are working in that particular area, bot union and non union. The other thing that i wanted to mention is definitely my concern with toll increases specifically when you talk about all the need, and then you talk about Additional Needs. I think that its important that we understand what our priorities are. I mean yes, there are things that are icing on the cake, but you know were talking about like a lot of money here. We have passed a bond as you know that still is not being spent properly. We have all this need that everyone continues to talk about, and then on top of that we will add another layer of service or support or something that may not even be necessary so the point that i am making i want to make sure that we have our priorities straight that were doing what we absolutely necessarily need to do rather than focusing on adding a list of Additional Needs and then all of a sudden trying to figure out how we pay for it like what were doing unfortunately with our trains but we know we need those, so the point that i am making is i just want to see us do a better job at prioritizing clarifying the cost around those particular priorities, not adding additional layers of things that we dont absolutely need and being very resourceful about how we spend our existing revenues without continuously looking for additional revenues. Thank you. All right. Thank you commissioner breed. Okay. So colleagues any other questions or comments . All right. Seeing none we look to getting more information from staff. On that well go to Public Comment on item 7. Anyone wishing to speak . Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] and that was an information item. Item 8 please. Item 8 introduction of new items. New items from colleagues . All right. Seeing none. Public comment. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. Item 9. Item 9 general Public Comment. Good morning commissioners. [inaudible] we must apply the true principle [inaudible] human hearts for the recovery of [inaudible] hearts. The [inaudible] for once self nature. Path of mercy and divine for rescue. Political leaders [inaudible] compassion and love and mercy to the people [inaudible] studies. One must establish supreme virtues of pathways and engage on the mission of managing the people with the holy truth. One must make recovery [inaudible] wisdom. Then one would apply this mighty nature with wisdom to deliver true principle for the rescue of human hearts [inaudible] progress of civilization. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other members of the public th