Pilaties. Its a creation, an old regimen of exercise. Really based on core engagement and core structure and core development. We do a lot of exercise in developing that and think about lengthening of the spine and our muscles. If youre a runner, if youre into kayaking, martial arts, cycling pilates are for you. Programs are variety year around at various locations and to learn more come to the good morning, i will call to order this monthly meeting of the San Francisco county Transportation Authority. Im scott weiner the chair of the authority. Clerk please call the roll. Avalos, commissioner breed, commissioner campos, commissioner christensen, commissioner cohen, commissioner farrell. Commissioner kim, kim absent, commissioner mar, mar absent, tang present, weiner present, commissioner yee. We have a quorum. Thank you very much. I want to thank sfgov tv for broadcasting todays hearing. Now move to item two. Item two, chairs report. I will share a few updates related to the city transit planning work and funding prospects. Earlier in month, San Francisco hosted annual meetings of the American Public transit association, also called apta. Which is indeed true here in San Francisco. Our director, joined us, mta directors and general managers from around the region to highlight the importance of local leadership. The conference topics reininged from how to build transit around the communities and invest in infrastructure, to managing and technology and ways to increase safety. The conference celebrated the 25th anniversary of the americans with disability act and look ahead to providing broad access to transit. I was pleased to hear of the remarks of our secretary of state secretary of transportation anthony foxx who lent his support in San Francisco to take sentence every planning extensive planning. I want to thank speaking of subway master plan, i wanted to thank my colleagues on the land use transportation committee. For yesterday moving forward subway master plan legislation to the full board of supervisors. I want to thank staff for participating in yesterdays hearing and for their current and future work in moving this planning process forward. Its good to see that weve already under taken tran set planning efforts. A few have been completed. That well able to build upon those efforts to really move forward with a strong subway master planning process. We are at our highest population ever in San Francisco. Our transit systems robusterring. We neeare bursting. Of course, funding is required for all of this. As much as we want the state and the federal government to get it together and increase their investment in transit, we also have to make sure that were supporting our transportation efforts locally and the voters of San Francisco made clear over and over again, they understand the need for taxation and bonds for transportation Infrastructure Projects and over and over again, voted in favor of these funding measures. The voters of San Francisco really get it when it comes to transit funding. Im pleased well be hearing during this meeting from staff about the results of a poll that i requested of San Francisco voters to gauge the support of voters for funding street and transit via a new onehalf cent sales tax. As well as the restoration locally of the vehicle license fee. Back to historic levels 2 instead of the current 6. 5 that came into effect when the former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger slashed the vehicle fee two third. Deprived the state of california billions of dollars. The sales tax both recommended by mayor, Transportation Authority task force. We want to go out with a poll and engage support. You will hear during the presentation, the results of the poll are promising. San francisco voters very much want improvements to muny bar and caltrans. They want more paratransits and improve safety. At the end of the day, it appears the voters are willing to pay for those improvements through a sales tax. Provided that we can assure them that the funds will be used for these transportation improvements and we will, of course, provide that assurance. Im encouraged by the results i look forward to the presentation today. That concludes my report. Colleagues, if there are no competentes, well move to Public Comment on item two. Is there any public Public Comment on item two. Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. This is an information item. We will move to item three. Item three, executive directors report. Information item. Ms. Chang. Im pleased to provide an update to follow up on funding to echo the need for more investment to rally and develop more resources locally. Again, the picture from the federal government is still quite stark. It remains to be done to bring the house and the senate sides together and administration. The house did pass Transportation Infrastructure Committee did approve the surface reauthorization program but funded it for only three years. Unfortunately, we still have work to do to get to a six year bill but at least the house bill mirrors the senate bill. Which was passed last month or couple of months ago. We continue to monitor that but really the inability of congress to move a bill forward to finance any significant Capital Improvements, no one can rely on funding beyond the immediate period. At the state level, we were pleased to see the governor and the special session propose the 3. 5 billion funding package over 10 years to improve annual road maintenance and stabilize our state funding. The proposal is anchored by a 65 per vehicle road user charge as well as some increases to the diesel and gas tax. The funds will fund highway and local rehabilitation and repair and there will be some Funds Available for transit Expansion Projects through the cap and trade funds. Theres a 40 40 category. We will be monitoring the special session committees as they meet again in the new year. Hope that will result in new revenue package in 2016. On the Transit Center cost review, quick update, phase one and two work is under way to review the costs of these projects and that mtc has presented initial findings to the policy Advisory Committee educating that there would be most likely, few hundred Million Dollars up to 200 million increase in the project in order to capture the recommendations for contingencies by ther consultants. Giving us more confidence. They will be bring it back on november 4th with a final recommendation. Ly original recommendation was more of of a range. We also are looking to participate in the phase two cost review. That draft report is expected in november. Well bring both of those back to the programming allocation committee. Once the work has been completed. It will be presented to the transbay joint powers authority. Local issues, the Treasure IslandManagement Program requested information to support our Technology Work related to the towing system and Parking Systems on the islands. Bidders can look for that information on our website. On related note for freeway management work, we have finalized negotiations with consultants. Were kicking off the work next week. Weve been working with the corridor partners and sister agencies are ahead of us on the 101 studies and three counties are collaborating to ensure its efficient as possible and as coordinated as possible when we look at the 101 corridor between San Francisco and stan hose. We also have been tapped to present on technology and congestion pricing and Parking Management and automated connected vehicles at various technical conferences. One of these will link the technologies to pedestrian safety. Really theying how automated and connected vehicles can be. Chaired by chair kim. On the late night transportation study front, this was initiated by commissioner weiner. We kicked off that work with a task force broad sector of night Time Entertainment and workforce and venue stakeholders. Well be refreshing those recommendations. Many of them have been to implemented as are result of the earlier work. Were excited to continue to build on the recommendations and bring concrete fundable actions to the board in the coming few months. Our neighborhood planning work is also continuing at pace. Our strategic analysis report on westside transit on better out eyes the cubs for commissioner tang. We hope to bring that report to you in the next month or two. Well be briefing the commerces this month commissioners this month. Thats gaining lot of momentum to a new survey work to inform us on what residents are most interested in seeing. We know that the travel times are very slow, paralle in particularly to the bart station. Were looking the all different modes and trying to improve those options for westside travelers. I do believe these recommendations will be very relevant to other neighborhoods across the city. On the neighborhood transportation improvement program, we have worked in multiple directs, district two and the lumbar street corridor district 10, there were some Great Community events in district 5 with the Western Addition neighborhood transportation improvement project. Used with the help of the Community Based organization and portal as well. The pna for the district five safety study. We thank our Community Partners and mta for doing a great job and moving those forward. We connecting off some work with commerce commissioner yee on the balboa plan study. And potential Planning Project on san jose avenue near balboa park station. We hope to bring the district six proposal forward in the coming period. Thats getting closer. Our deputy for policy and programming joined with staff across the city agencies to have a workshop on vision zero to assess projects over the last couple of years. Its been a productive first two years as well as to look ahead to see what might be on deck in terms of the next generation of vision zero Capital Improvements and noninfrastructure, so called outreach in education initiatives as well as enforce. We will be bringing results of that workshop to the december 10th Committee Meeting as well. On project delivery, i wanted to highlight here in my report, a few projects that are being funded by our transportation for clean air dollars that the authority programmed. One is the goldengate National Recreation area. Weve provided 120,000 of tsca funds there. It doesnt anticipate opening a trail for use by thanksgiving. Were excited to see that. We can celebrate that with commissioner farrell and others. The funds that the authority programmed for the vision zero heat injury corridors is being put to good use. This is looking at decreasing vehicle speeds and reducing the speeds through the timing of signals on 16th street and turk streets. The lower vehicle streets combined with better management have improved safety for pedestrian. Sfmta is monitoring these results. These were made possible by the grant funds which is 4 vehicle register fund for a project to smooth out traffic. Finally the Market Street is under construction. Many of us are looking forward to that work. This has been funded by proposition k Sales Tax Fund 750,000 grant to sfmta. Raised cycle track with green lanes on Market Street between castro and debose. Some statistics here, finance and Administration Reporting on the performance. This is a disadvantage business and local and Small Business enterprise performance. As of 2015, end of fiscal 2015, our performance was able to achieve 20 of contract payments to disadvantage business enterprisesu enterprises. I presented some of these results to the Small Business network last night. They were pleased. They wanted to see more and continue progress. I think they were very pleased and appreciatorriv appreciative of the efforts to bring Small Business into our work. Finally, they we just wanted to highlight that there is a request for proposals out for Consultant Services related to the work that the chairman mentioned yesterday at land use committee. We discussed a long range Transportation Planning of which the subway master plan will be a part. I do encourage potential bidders to look for that request for proposals for Consultant Services on our website, sfgov tv. Org. Thank you very much. Colleagues know comments or questions relating to the executive directors report . Is there any Public Comment on item three . Seeing none. Well close Public Comment. This is an information item. Item number four. Item four, approve the minutes of the september 22, 2015 meeting. This is an action item. Any comments or changes to the september minutes . Is there any Public Comments on item four . Public comment is closed. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll on item four. Commissioner avalos, absent, commissioner breed, campos, christensen, commissioner cohen, commissioner farrell, commissioner kim, commissioner mar, absent, commissioner tang, weiner, commissioner yee, the minutes are approved. We will now move to item number five. Authorize executive director to execute cooperative Agreement Number 042502 for the i280 modify modifications of balboa park. Smith, watts and hartmann in the amount 135,000. Negotiate contract Payment Terms. This is an action item seeing no names on the roster. Can we go comment . Is there any comment on item six . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues can we take item six. Same house same call. That will be the order. Item seven. Increase the amount of the professional Services Contract with aecom executive services by 1 million to a total amount not to exceed 16,001,935,000 to complete the services. Authorize executive director to modify contract Payment Terms and nonmaterial contract terms. Colleague, any questions or comments . Well move to Public Comment. Any Public Comment . Public comment is closed. Can we take item seven same house same call. Without objection, that will be the order. Item eight, increase the amount of professional Services Contract to brinckerhoff to a total amount not to exceed 70,650,000. Modify contract Payment Terms. Colleagues, any questions or comments about item eight . Seeing none. Is there any Public Comment on item eight. Public comment is closed. Item nine, appoint paul chan to the Advisory Committee. This is an action item. Seeing no comment. Any Public Comment on item nine . Public comment is closed. Colleagues take item nine same house same dual. That will be the order. Item ten. Appropriate 54,325,000 in prop k funds. This is an action item. Commissioner christensen. I just wanted to thank the ta and the mta for working out part of this allocation with regards to the chinatown financial district area. We were able to Work Together to achieve a project that adjusts addresses some of my concerns in chinatown. Im glad to see that the mta will be building off existing study to figure out to quickly implement some of the needed changes. Particularly the pedestrian scramble. Ive been concerned about whether clay and washington are ready for the opening of the central subway. This important connection between chinatown and the financial districts. Im glad we were able to address that issue. Since ive become supervisor, im been trying to bring these projects together. Im very grateful to the progress that weve made admitting these east coast corridors together that is meaningful to the district. Im grateful and happy to see this move forward. Okay, any additional comments or questions . Seeing none. Is there any Public Comment on item ten . Seeing none. Public comment is closed. Colleagues, can we take item ten same house. That will be the order. Item 11. Adopt San Franciscos project priorities for the 2016 regional transportation improvement program. Commissioner christensen. [inaudible]. Movement of the central subway consideration up to the top of this list. Im grateful for that. Look forward to greater progressen tha progress on that topic. Commissioner cohen. I want to express gratitude. Three of the six projects are going to be in the community. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional comments . I will move to Public Comment on item 11. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues, take 11 same house same call. That will be the order. Item number 12. Item 12, San Francisco objectives and project list for plan bay area 2040. Action item. Commissioner campos. Thank you very much mr. Chairman. Some folks claim that i caused some displacement. I do something about the displacement today. We had been working with my office and staff at the ta on language that we would like to propose to add to our strategy around plan bay area. I believe that staff actually has drafts of what were proposing. It would be attachment one on page three. The section that deals with policy. That language basically, just actually small change to what staff has. I would on the bullet that says, housing displacement, i would add anti displacement so there is no confusion that were talking about doing something against displacement. Essentially, this language would note that we would work with the Mayors Office of housing, the Planning Department as well as Different Community groups in terms of recommendations to support the production of Affordable Housing to prevent displacement and also work with the mtc in terms of developing strategies and tools to enhance the production of Affordable Housing. I also want to thank staff for the great work on this. I think one thing that is clear when you look at whats happening in terms of displacement at the regional level, is that San Francisco is playing a very important leadership role in making sure that the region is addressing the issue of decembe displace. This language will ensure that we continue to do that. Thank you. Okay, thank you commissioner. Commissioner christensen . So my comments related to item 29, late night transportation improvements which very meaningful to fishermans worth merchants and workers. Thank you commissioner weiner for your work on that. Note item 50, which includes the long term planning and conceptual design for the extension of fixermans work. I proposed amendment. I wondered if staff has any comments on these changes . Commissioner christensen, we appreciate commissioner campos on this. The work in this area is compl complex. Theres opportunity to continue shaping and leading. We like to work more closely. Sfmta Planning Department and mayor hou office of housing in particular. How the region can develop policies in the area of Performance Measurement in the areas of communitybased planning. Particularly related to the Regional Planning funds that are available during the next round of obag. This level of guidance have very helpful to us. We will be convened a working group comprised of ourselves and the mayor office of housing and also sister agencies in transportation to advance some of these proposals. Thank you. Okay, colleagues, any additional comments or questions . Seeing none, we will open item 12 up for Public Comment. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. There is a motion on the table to amend by commissioner campos. Seconded by commissioner yee. Seeing no names for additional comment, we will take that motion. We dont need a roll call. Is there any objection to the motion to amend . Seeing none, out objection, the motion is adopted. Colleagues, can we take item 12 as amended, same house same call. Without objection, that will be the order. Item number 13. Adopt a Transportation ManagementPartnership Project final report. This is an action item. Colleagues, any comments or questions . Is there any Public Comment on item 13 . Public comment is closed. Colleges, can we take item 13 same house same call . Without objection, that will be the order. Item number 14. Potential 2016 transportation revenue measures poll results. This is an information item. Staff will be presenting on the polling results. Mr. Chang. Thank you, im pleased to introduce polling from sf3. Very experienced. He was able to get our poll out on to the field in early october and is here to present results. Thank you dave. Thank you very much. Thank you chair members of the competition. My name is david mets. I will walk through the highlights of our recent completed survey on potential transportation ballot measures for the november 2016 election. The results im shear sharing with you are based on 801 likely voters. We conducted the interviews between 2nd and 10th of this month. In english, spanish and chinese in order to maximize the opportunity for voters to participate. The overhaul margin of error is 3. 5 . Theres numbers where ill talk about the subgroup and margin of errors. One of the subgroups we paid attention is different geographic areas of the city. Given different aways that residents in the city tend to get around, depending on where they live, we subdivided the city into five regions downtown north, sun set, richmond, southeast, central and southwest. Theres a couple of points were highlights differences between the wave of residents of those regions used some of the key questions. In most respect, there are american there were more geographic similarities. Set some context for the next novembers ballot here in San Francisco. We asked them to tell us how often they use variety of different means of transportation here in the city. Two forms of transportation really stood out. 69 of local voters tell us they ride transit at least two or three times per week. Muny being the method most often used, bart not far behind. A sleetly smaller portion, tell us they drive alone. As we look at numbers and its important to remember that were talking to the population of likely voters here. This differs from the broader side of San Francisco residents in a number of aways. The population is older, it includes more homeowners, longer term residents of the city, therefore probably under represent transit riders, relative to the use of tra transit. We also asked the respondents to rate the priority that the city might make if additional funding were available for transportation. Youll see here, the way they looked at eight different potential areas of investment. We asked them to rate each of these, extremely, very, somewhat or not important priority. Theres a couple of things that stand out from the list. First it fit all of these to varying degrees are important to local residents. We had clear majorities that rate each of these items as very important. There are some pretty clear tiers in their preferences and in particular, the top four items you see on the list all were rated as very important by at least 70 of those polled. Thats important to keep in mind, its a threshold when you think about certain finance mechanisms that would rear the support of at least twothirdses of local voters. All projects are important to a large proportion of the local electorate. It includes both transit and repaving and repairing streets. In addition to measures that San Francisco may consider putting on the ballot, theres a high likelihood there will be a bond measure for bart. Which will be on throughout the Service Territory for bart which includes San Francisco, alameda and contra costa counties. We asked people how they will vote on a 4 billion bond measure to support bart services. Given this question, we saw that 72 of San Francisco voters say they will be likely to support the measure. That includes 41 who say they will definitely vote for a bart bond and just 9 saying they will definitely vote against it. Its clearly a popular investment of residents of San Francisco. We see higher level of support here in San Francisco than in alameda or contra costa county. Because we asked this question at the beginning of the survey, spoke responses were answered in the awareness that there might be a bart on the bond as well. Looking then at a San Francisco specific measure, there were two primary ballot measure concepts that we tested in the poll. The first was a onehalf cent sales tax, which will require two thirds super majority voter. Its a special dedicated tax that will go only to transportation. We looked a the concept of establishing an assessment locally that would be a companion to the vehicle license fee. As the chair mentioned, return it to that historic level of 2 that was charged a the state level. By law that will be a general tax. It would not be dedicated solely to transportation but will require the approval of a simple majority of voters. We tested as a companion to that general tax measure a policy advisory measure, which would proceeded on the ballot. Indicating that advisory measures would not raise taxes, it would indicate the intent to dedicate the fund solely to transportation services. We took these two concepts we wantedded to test, wanted to test, we split the samples into two halfs. Which was a representative sample of local voters, we rotated the order in which they were presented. Once youve been offered one tax concept, your views of the second one are likely to emerge in the context of the first one youve heard. We put most emphasis on how voters react that measure they heard first. First for the sales tax, this is the bam language that we test ballot language that we tested. It details the diverse array of services that will be funded including streets and roads, bart and muny and pedestrian improvements. Given this language, we saw that 65 of voters indicated that they would vote yes. Its within the margin of error of this two third supermajority required for approval. This is fairly close to what we saw in the initial polling on the streets bond here in San Francisco and we see other measures polled at this level will be successful provided the public is educated about what the measure would do. There were a few demographics distinctions within the San Francisco electorate. Ive highlighted some of the striking ones here. Partnership as with any kind of tax measures where we see the biggest differences. Very strong support from dam Campaign Democrats and independents. They own a car. About three a five say they would vote yes. Among those who do not own a car, support was significantly higher. The strongest support by age came from voters under the wage of 30 and obviously in next novembers election, turnout is likely to be much higher than it is in any other election date for the next four years. Majorities of older voters were supportive but somewhat smaller margins. Geographically, the deferences were generally minor with somewhat higher support in the southeastern part of the city and lower on the north side. We also tested how voters reacted after they got more information about what the measure would do. That elevates support from 65 to 68 . The modest increase but its a critical one given that lifts support over the two thirds majority required for approval. So the second finance concept we looked at was the vehicle license fee. As i mentioned, this was presented to voters as a two measure sequence. The first measure we offered was the advisory measure. You can see the text of that measure on the left hand side of the slide. Then the second measure was the measure that would actually establish the local assessment, parallelling the vehicle license fee as a general tax. Respondents read the advisory measure. It won wide support. 73 would vote in favor of level of support, not different from the bart bond or for the sales tax. The unbelievable suppor initial support for the vehicle license itself was lower. With only 41 of voters telling us they would vote yes. 51 voting no. This is not a typical when youre looking at a general tax where the language of the question doesnt specifically dedicated to a specific set of services. Obviously as a funding mechanisms that is less familiar to voters than the sales tax. Anticipating that we might see this result, we had a follow up question to try to understand how different subsets of votes mites might react to different information. Those voter who are themselves car owners. You can see here that among the population of likely voters, roughly three quarters tell us that they own a car. 76 , 84 say they have regular access to a car, even if they dont own one. You can see those numbers not surprising are concentrated among older voters and affluent voters. When we gave voters additional background and told them specifically that the funds from this vlf assessment will be dedicated to specific priority that the sales tax revenue will go to, increase went up dramatically. Thats a 13 point gain. Simply telling voters where the money would go is a fairly striking one. Critically, it moves it up over the threshold that would be required for approval beyond that 50 simple majority. Obviously, this would require publicatio Public Education effort. Providing an explanation and arguments in favor of the measure elevates that support even a few points more. Lifting it up from 54 to 56 . On summary, we think the results are dredging. Encouraging. They show that making investment and improving transportation infrastructure is highly supported. To improve both streets and public transit. Also wasnt they have assurances about where the money would go, theyre supportive of establishing a vehicle license fee to accomplish those same goals. This is not to say that these measures would not require fairly Strong Communications efforts behind them given that both of them are right at the threshold they would require for approval. As i noted, theres ample presence here in San Francisco to suggest that these numbers can translate to success on election day. With that, id be happy to answer questions. Thank you mr. Mets. Very clear and really hardened by the poll results. They indicate what we i knew for a long time, San Francisco voters understand the critical importance of expanding and shoring up our Transportation System as we continue to grow by 10,000 people a year. That San Francisco voters are willing to pay for those improvements. We saw that last year with the overwhelming passage of the bond and these results are definitely encouraging. So thank you. College o colleagues any questions or comments for mr. Metz or for staff . Seeing none, thank you mr. Metz. Thank you. Any additional comments . I would just note, thank again dave and his partners for getting this out. Just as an effort informational update, there are other counties considering revenue measures in the region. Of course the bart district is also discussing potential bond testing the 4 billion level was important for us to provide another data point to the barrier Rapid Transit district. Santa clara as well as contra costa, exploring ballot measures and working on expenditure plans. Were aware other counties are considering 2016 revenue measure. This would be an opportunity for us to partner as we do at a regional level to help develop coordinate funding plan, expenditure investments across county lines. Thank you. Thank you, thank you for mentioning the bart bonds. We are actually involved in a conversation with bart and other regional partners to make sure that bart goes out with sufficiently sized bond to meet the agencys pretty massive capital needs. I think a lot of us are concerned, were concerned when we started hearing bart instead of going out what it needed was considering going out with something third or even two third less than what they needed. Which would result in a massive capital deficit of bart, would result in bart completing against mta, caltrans and other agencies over the next decade for other sources of funding. We know from the polling weve done and all the polling weve seen, voters around the Region Support bart and will vote for a bond. We are encouraging bond we need to be encouraging bart to go out with a bond that meets its capital needs. Is there any Public Comment on item 14 . Public comment is closed. This is an information item. We will move to item 15. Information item