Her head. That would be ideal that is similar to the london mobility congestion plan. When the pricing went into place they had invested in Public Transit options. That is for people who did not want to pay the fee there was an option on day one available to them. In the plan study i was shown yesterday, it is not a tippuous express continuous expression lane going north until the end where there is congestion on the 280. The hov lane is focused on southbound in the p. M. Hours. You know, i know thi this is thn the study place. I would like to see the outcomes. Yesterday it asked about the hov lane. That would have a tremendous negative impact on the 101 for the traffic coming south of San Francisco and an that is why it is not stud died. I dont know if that is the concern you expressed and that is why we are not moving forward with that. I very many interested in the outcomes. We want to see less vehicles coming downtown and more people using alternatives. I am struck by a fact the ca
Bringing to you. We would like to ask private employers to match to help supplement. You are taking this from street resurfacing funds . Does that decrease ability for street resurfacing . No, we are adding 4 million. It goes from 4 to 6 million total we would give to public works to do resurfacing. Where is the money coming from. We had 6 million of public money. Then they would give the 4 million to us four managed us. That leafs them up 2 million. So they are taking it away from Something Else . They are to receive 4 million of prop k for resurfacing. This keeps that hole and 6 million adds two more. It is a funds swap. They would release the 4 million to allow it for managed lanes. It is not officially eligible in the prop k program otherwise. Maybe it should stay that way. Since you are swapping money. Leave it and not use the money in that manner. Commissioner yee. It is a moment where i really do appreciate where this is going in terms every surfacing. I notice quite a few stree
In fact some are already on the street. And heres probably the most interesting aspect, the Public Utilities Commission Charges 0. 33 Gross Revenue tax on companies that operate in california and we have estimated that based on Public Comments by the cos of the companies, theyre probably making upwards of 10 million just from San Francisco trips alone. And thats pretty interesting. The San Francisco Airport Charges a 3. 80 trip fee and our document identifies how much money they made last year, about 30 million. Relative to the point, the puc considers that to be highly classified information and wont tell you how much money they have and how much they are spending it on. I was just about to say that. Were unaware of how the money is spent. It goes into a fund and we ask them how its spent and didnt get a clearance. It is just the height of lunacy that a Public Agency will not give this information to the public. It boggles the mind. You dont have to respond to it. Its just obscene. Im