>> thank you, i wanted to thank from sfgtv, non-a and jessy for tell vi vicing this today. and would you call the second item? >> item two to four, comprise the consent calendar, these are the retune and the staff is not planning to present on these items or present, and any number may be removed. >> and oit ems 2 to 4, i see no comments. would anyone like to speak on items 2 to 4? >> seeing, none, public comment is closed. could we approve these without objection or a roll call? >> campos? >> aye. >> coen? >> ab accident, kim? abse absent. >> har mar. aye. >> yee. >> aye. >> item five, please? >> 5, state and federal legislative up date. >> you are not mark. >> he got pulled into a meeting with the governor, right before the senate transportation today and so he sends his regret and if was the world sitting and i would say that i am pitch, hitting and hopefully i will be able to answer the questions. it is a light, matrix, as far as positions and we are nearing the end of the session and so the things have to clear out of the committee by the end of the month and so we are seeing a lot of them drop off and hopefully they will be smaller next month, and we will be recommending two watch positions and the first on ab, 650, and this is and would be consolidating the regulation under the l california puc. and the sfmta and the league v cities have expressed concerns about this removing too quickly and removing the local control to the regulation and so be watch thanksgiving carefing it carefully. >> and the second bill, is it 1, and this is dealing with for the ward facing. >> what page is that on? >> i am sorry. sb >> you said 1051. >> 128 of the whole packet. >> and 41 of the matrix. >> yeah. >> sorry about that. and this bill currently as you recall, sfmta has the new authorization to do the traffic and parking enforcement on the foe ward facing cameras on the buses and this would ex-tepd equilibrium tend that. and that authorization to ac transit as well as making it legal for them to use it not just to enforce the parking violations in the transit lanes, but also in the bus stops. and so, sfmta is working closely with ac transit and to insure that it does not effect our current authorization as well. so, protecting our interests. and on the other topics, there are touching quickly on what happened in june with respect to the revenue measures and the on the top of our mind we will consider to move forward. and as you know, the prop a, parcel tax paid in the bay area and we also saw that san jose, approve the sales tax from among other things. and they listed the local streets and roads as eligible use. and there are general sales tax, that would have been partners with a charter amendment for committing it to the local streets and roads. did not pass, even though it reacquired a 50 percent majority. and there was a similar measure that failed as well and then san diego did approve the charter amendment to approve the funds and the parks and libraries and there seems that there is an appetite across the state and especially in the urban areas, and with respect to the budget and what is going on there, the governor may revise basically he did not change much from january. and transportation is essentially outside of the context of the over all discussion about the new revenues and it is cut a hole in this budget and there were a couple of tweaks in the revised and the first was additional 15 percent cut in transit, formula funding that goes directly to the operators or the operations. and this is due to the continued low price of diesel and since it comes from the sales tax on diesel and so that was just a statutory adjustment. and then, finally, last week, we got the pretty bad news that the cap and trade proceeds came in, at the auction for ten million dollars. when they were expecting $500 million and so it is an incredible hit to the program and so that they are optimistic that these is cycle and things will pick back up. and and it is the governor and the leg sleigh tower stepping back and thinking about committing some of that to transportation and the other uses. >> could i just ask, that is a huge discrepancy. how was it that they were so optimistic which it came in like that, what are the reasons for that >> well the projections that are always been a range and they don't really know when they started the program, it was like 250 million a year. with the energy prices what they are, there has been a lot v purchases of the futures so that the participants are stepping back a lilgs bit right now. and the administrators said that they expect this to just be a blip, we hope that is the case but they don't think that this is a pretence for continuing that level. >> thank you. moving forward. >> and then finally, the ongoing special session, and discussions of a larger solution to transportation funding, with the senate bill and the assembly bill and reconciling the governor's proposal and so not likely to move forward until after november. and the cap and trade part was the one that we thought might be able to squeak in there, but with the proceeds that is not moving either. with that i am happy to answer any questions that you have or go and bother mark to get you the answers after the meeting. >> okay, thanks so much, to the assistant deputy director for the report. >> yes. >> so let's open this up. commissioner yee? >> in regard to to the first bill, and i am just curious, and i know that it is, it is exempting i guess, the san francisco and the airport. are there, and just in regards to the taxes and elsewhere, like in oakland, for instance, they don't have any how do they get currently how does it work? if it is just --. >> currently it is, and there are regulations that are regional basis and so that these are defined he each commission has set up with the regulations and the bill is being proposed by the owners of the taxi industry, so as to under the theory of let's the family, and the other one to play by the same rules across the state to make it easier. and the cab drivers, actually oppose it. and the local jurisdictions and they are nervous because they have regulations that they would like to see as written. it does exempt san francisco, but sfmta has concerns that it is not written strongly enough that there are questions about whether it would actually allow us to continue the current program. >> i would imagine that if it is not written strongly enough, the whole program, and how it works right now might be in jeopardy. or i guess the medallion or whatever it is called. >> there is a number of different, components of the regulations and i am not an expert, but it would look at a range of things like accessibility. and fares, and requirement for drivers and all of that. right now, maybe this is not a question for you, but for san francisco, is under mta? the taxis? >> correct. >> and where are they? the staff? in regards to this particular legislation? >> they have, they have the city does not have an official position on this yet, but they have expressed to the author, concerns and requests for technical corrections that they think will better safe guard san francisco, but i think that given the fact that even the california puc has said that they don't have the resource to do this and i think that everyone is pushing them to not rush to get it done this month and let's have a longer discussion and i think that sfmta is working with them, and even without the advocacy platform. at least working on technical corrections that will provide more protections for our regulations. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> i see no other questions, thank you. >> is there anyone from the public that would like to speak on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and there is a recommended action on this item or mr mr. stamos. >> unless the committee adopts a new position this is an information item. >> sounds like this is an information item. >> okay. >> item six. >> item six, recommend adoption of the proposed fiscal year, 16, 17, annual budget and work program, this is an action item. >> we have deputy director fong. >> good morning and this is on page, 135 of your packet. and i am the deputy director for the finance and administration, and this is the second look at the fiscal year, 16, 17, budget and the full presentation was provided at last month's meeting but here i am today and back to about the present the one up date that we have to the budget. due to the recent discussions with the product sponsors and consideration from the advice from the financial advicers and a better sense he have the year end closing schedules we would like to add the next routine, payment to the credit loan agreement and in the past we have subsequently have been paying, the annual payment to pay down the debt. and the previous year was $20 million and this year we would like to continue to make that payment because cash will be available, once the city and the ta have closed the books. and if they were able to make the payment of $21 million, we will be able to save the additional interest costs and to be able to just shave a little bit more money. item one, went through the puc on may, 25th, with a vote of for the item, and this is the only change that i have on the budget. and with that, i am more than happy to go through the full presentation again on powerpoint or just take the questions if you have any. >> i don't think that there is a need to go through it again. i see no questions and so let's open this up to the public. >> is there anyone that would like to speak? >> seeing none, the public comment is closed. and the colleagues, is there a motion on this item? >> it has been moved and seconded could we take that without objection? >> the house has changed. >> well, with the commissioner cohen here, let's take a roll call. >> campos. >> aye. >> cohen. yes. >> aye. >> kim, absent. >> mar, aye. >> yee aye. >> item is approved. thank you shths, item 7, introduction of new items. >> i see no comments, and let's open it up for public comment. please come forward. >> on this one. >> okay, okay. and so, let's go to item 8. general public comment? >> commissioners, andrew, and the town and commissioner -- and the man in unity of the south origin can leak on one, and the success of one destination, and pathway and of such contemplation and reasoning. and on the television, and -- (inaudible) and unity of earth below, and the wealth of humanity and righteousness, and by heart and virtue and for the as per rations (inaudible) for the better management of the worried people, for the political leaders, can have a true spirit. with the mursy to enforce the true principle on the apology to maintain an accident, estate of personal, family and social well-beings. along one's destiny. and for ours are apart and the consideration, and one used to maintain once clear purity, and without the principle and tried to educate of our people, the system of leading along one destiny of progress, and the resolution beyond the object cell and to determine the winners he have the special force and would enable the aspiration, to the mercy and to the love and for all external wealths. and the leaders and actualize, and having the virtue and enforcing the true studies, and all expanding the teachings to the royal evil. for the objective rescue, and improvement, i would say of the west, and the usages and the pathway of the mersy, and for the wellness of the world. and with us and for us the destiny and progress, there comes the challenge for meeting the needs and to determine and demand, and in light with the truth assessed beyond the reason and dispairs, thank you. >> thank you. >> i see no other comments and so we are closing public comment. and thank you. is theany other business? >> adjourned. >> thank you, everyone, meeting adjourned. . >> good morning, everyone and welcome to our plans and programs meeting of our stowers county transportation authority, for may, 2016, i'm kati e tang the chair, we have commissioner avalos. and london breed, and we would like to thanks sfgtv. mr. clerk, could you call the roll please? >> all right, the roll call, avalos. >> here. >> breed? >> here. >> farrell >> absent. >> pes? >> absent. >> tang here. >> could you call two. >> citizen advisory report. >> thank you if we could have chris, our cec chair, if he is here. okay. maybe not. maybe if we could push to this the agenda, and okay, great, we will come back to that and if you can call item three. >> approve the minutes of the april, 19. >> and seeing no questions or comments, if we can get a motion or the public comment on the minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. and if you can get a motion on the minutes? >> thank you. and motion by commissioner avalos and he with will take that without objection. >> minutes are approved. >> all right, thank you. item four, please? >> item four, recommend appointment of two members to the geary corridor bus rapid transit citizen's advisory committee? >> we have the senior transportation planner here. >> good morning, commissioners. so this is item number four, page 19 of your park ket and as you know the project that we are working to improve the transit travel times and reliability as well as implement the pedestrians along the corridor. and so we are in the environmental phase and so we published the document last fall and we working to incorporate all of the comments that we have received and released a final to bring to the board this fall. as the project has a dedicated citizen advisory committee consisting of 13 minutes who serve in two year terms and you can find a list of the current members in the attachment and those meetings happen every two months. the structure of it is shown in the attachment as well. the number served, either appointed to serve, as the section of the corridor or at large. and there are currently two vacancies of the two members terms and neither is seeking reapoinme reapoinment appointment, and one is for the rich manned district and one is at large. we received, 35 applications for the cac and of those, all of them are eligible serve in the at large seat, 30 of them are eligible serve in the richmond seat and we have encouraged all of them to come today to say a few words, which is optional but not required. the information on all of the candidates is be found in the enclosure which are in the packet and as a reminder, the staff does not recommend the candidates and that is just up to you. and we can seek appointment to the cac. >> thank you and so at this time, i want to see if there are any applicants who happen to be here today for item four, for the geary corridor vrt, vac, if you are up, come on up and make a couple of minute presentation of why you would like to serve on the cac and please remember to state your name when you come up, thank you. >> yes, if you can line up over there by the wall? >> i'm nooel johnson and i have been a resident of the bay area since i was 7. and i have been in san francisco since 92. and i am a daily rider of muni and i also drive a car in san francisco and i walked halfway here and i am also a pedestrian. and i was encouraged to apply for this to put my input in to the planning of the corridor. and what i have to offer is that i am smart and i can read the eir and documentation and understand what they are talking about and i have a lot of different insights into different roles that the people play along geary. and i would like to get involved in this because i want to stop complaining about muni and i want to do something constructive thank you. >> thank you very much. next applicant. >> all right. my name is nelson. >> if all of the applicants could speak into the microphone. thank you. >> my name is nelson bunia and i have lived in the richmond district for the last five years and i am a daily muni commuter and i took it to get here to 38. and i work downtown. in the past i have worked in morin and so i have driven a car and i drive and take the bus and so that gives me input into the different things that are trying to be managed my family is from la and there is a successful line there called the orange line which i have ridden men times and so i have the experience with the brt form of transportation and i want to give my input and bring a perspective of a commuter and a driver to try to make this be best project possible, and make the transit times as fast as possible for you know the thousands of people that take the 38 every day. >> okay. thank you. next applicant? >> hi. my name is osher, and i have lived in the richmond district the entire time that i have been in san francisco and i don't own a car and so i am dependant on muni. and i really think that it is important to make this line work well. and i have been working with a number of different transit advocates in district one over the past couple of months. to really try and make that people get excited about this line and i think that it is really important to make sure that everyone's voices are heard in the process. and i think that i could do a job representing the riders of the line. >> hello. my name is renee, and i believe that i am number ten on the list and i am here for a few reasons. number one, i have been living in the richmond and raising a family for about eight years now. my son is in school so of course, i am interested in providing the quickest and safest transportation system for him. in the richmond district. secondly, i have lived overseas in a lot of countries and cities where they have fantastic transportation systems. i think that is an area where i can add some value to the brt program. and thirdly, i do have some experience with the public transportation and the city traffic engineering. when i was at grad school i worked for the city traffic engineer and provided a lot of help to the staff there and coordinating meetings and working with the community and it is something that i enjoyed and i would enjoy getting back into. and i believe those are all of the reasons. i understand that there are two positions. one for the richmond and one for at large. i would prefer the richmond if i do get appointed because that is where i live. but the at large position would be fine as well. that is all that i have to add here, i hope that you will consider me for this position, thank you. >> thank you very much >> good morning, my name is stanford kingly and i am a native san franciscan and a life long resident of the city and 32 years in the richmond district and life long on the muni many years on the 38 including yesterday, this is an important project, 50,000 people a day ride this bus, the richmond district is one of the few neighborhoods that does not have access to a high speed form of transit like bart or street car. but it is also very complicated project. it -- the median strip issues, the underpasses, the rest of -- and most of the businesses that are on geary boulevard are owner operated and they are mom and pop businesses. we have a few banks and some chains. but most of them, 80 percent of them are owner-operated. and it is important to this be a sustainable project that is something that they do in the ride off during the construction phase. and have that still becomes an attractive place for people to go for to take care of their needs for the dry cleaners and go to the restaurants that line the boulevard. >> i am a lawyer by training i now have a full time medation practice. one of the things that i do as an immediate aa mediator is that all of the par papts have the voices heard. i think that it will add to the process in that manner. make sure that we can get the fair process, where a lot of constituents want to speak and be heard and come up with a solution, idealy that meets the needs of all of the parties concerned. so, i urge, you know, urge your support for my candidacy and like the previous speaker i would be happy with either position. at large or richmond. >> thank you very much. >> my name is thomas, and i moved in san francisco? 1962 with my parents and sibings and i went to elementary and junior high and the high school in the district and the city college and uc berkeley. i got an engineering degree. a botachelor and a masters degr. i have been working for a corporation in the downtown san francisco continuously for 37 years. so, right now, i commute every day in the 38 blocks to work. and on the weekends, i drive through the geary street and so i need to have the driving and the bus because it goes smoothly. and in the company i have been working on the regular projects both design build projects and i also have some experience in construction support. so in summary, i grew up and educated in and near san francisco and i work in san francisco, and i have experience in and related to construction projects and i guess time is up. so but, i have the vested interest to improve the daily street traffic now and into the future and based on my education and work experience i hope that you will be able to understand and analyze different proposals thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good morning, my name is alexander post and i am from the heights and i appeared before this committee last month at the april 17th hearing. so i will try not to repeat myself too much here. but you got my application materials. but in summary, i am very passionate about public transportation and i have particularly interests in the geary street corridor because i am a regular user of the 38, and the bx, and i am excited about the prospect of rapid transit along the corridor and so i think that that passion along with my legal and policy experience will make me an effective ambassador, both for the project and to the project to bring the city wide concerns to the advisory committee. and i just want to pass one down, i attended the advisory committee meeting on april, 28th. where they were actually one number short of the quorum, which forced the significant delay and they actually then lost the quorum before they were able to complete the agenda. and because one of the agenda items was neighborhood out reach, and you had many concerned citizens who take in the time out to come to the meeting and including representatives from two japan town neighborhood groups as well as representatives from the planning and association for the richmond. and who all understandable are frustrated at the process. so i think what this committee may need most of all is someone who is willing to take the committee and the projects seriously. and if you appoint me, i will be that person. and just a final note. i know the previous at large position holder was a richmond resident and so i think that it would be good to diversify the at large position to other neighborhoods. thank you for considering my ka dancy. >> thank you very much. last call for any applicants who are here for item four? okay. seeing number we know colleagues, i know that it is in our hands now, commissioner breed? >> she wanted to say something before we go to public comment. >> i wanted to ask a question if i could be reminded of the people who were here at the last meeting? as well. do we have that information on the minutes? and if you want to go to public comment you can. >> thank you. and just for the public we are also joined by commissioners aaron peskin and farrell and we will go to public comment first, this is item four for the cac, if you would like to come up and speak, please do so. >> good morning i am on the cac but there is one individual who has this application in your packet and you have seen it before and that is brian larkin and he is also on the cac. he was a chair person that that you have seen many times give the cac report, and then it had to be done and this sort of thing. he was on the original cac for the geary rapid transit. and for this geary project and in fact, i have known brian since 1986, when we both, and a group, where we were with a group of people that wrote prop b. the sales package that became prop k that i helped to pass later. and if you look at his, and if you look at his experiences of brian has had, working with -- and with -- and you know that he is a very, vocal in our meetings regarding anything, regarding the bus rapid transit and wanting it to be light rain, i think that you should consider him as your richmond appoint ee because he is the one that really knows what is going on out there. i have known brian for many years, i have known him since 1986 and i was appreciative if you would appoint him for the richmond representative because he was on the original cac. years ago. >> thank you. >> and just one question for you just only because i have not heard from that applicant directly. do you know if he still wants to? >> i don't know if he wants it. but i know that he is very vocal. and he has a very, he is very vocal in this project as well as i am. >> okay. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker please? >> >> and to the supervisor mar's office, and to send the support for butnic for the richmond seat, and the brtc, and asher the transit advocate who has been working on the period with the district one transit. riders group. and that has been formed with the transit rider, and leaders who have been really strat strat guying what it means for the richmond and feels that asher will work for the voice of the riders to make sure that the voices are heard. and he is knowledgeable about the geary corridor as a whole as well as other brt and cities, and he has been taking the time to look at the transits in seattle and all inspiration to enhance the project here in san francisco. and he has been an advocate that really is looking not just the transit benefits and adjusting the service gaps and connectivity and liability but he is able to think critically about the impacts. and what that looks like for the neighborhood and how this project can be about development without the displacement. he is passionate and has a vested interest both in the neighborhoods. and so, supervisor mar would like to extend his support for this candidate. >> thank you. >> any other members of the public who wish to comment on item four? >> seeing none, closed. >> commissioner avalos? >> thank you. and i want to thank everyone for their interest in wanting to serve on the geary bus rapid transit, citizen's advisory committee. and with the at large seat that we have the number of people who are very, very qualified and very interested in serving and it is a hard decision to decide what to do. but i do want to make sure that the supervisor mar he wanted to see asher and that is fitting for the supervisor to recommend his appointment and i know that he has also done a lot of work with supervisor mar in the transit and he has familiarity with the project. >> and it will be great to see that. >> i would like to recommend that position that we accept him for the richmond seat for the cac. other people that stood out for me. nelson, who actually has some experience relative to and thomas as well, and i think his engineering for the background and as well as worked for the committee. and posts are the ones, and i am not making a motion, but engaging on a conversation i don't want to wait longer to keep these seats open. >> thank you, breed. >> thank you >> i would like to ask asher a question. how long have you lived in san francisco? >> three years, and how long have you been taking muni? >> the entire time. >> can you tell me specifically what projects related to transit that you worked on with supervisor mar's office? >> so, i have worked on helping notify residents and getting the input on the muni forward changes that have happened insurance since i have been volunteering with the office starting in last august, and that included working on the 28 r, and the two reroute, and it did get postponed and kind of talking to residents and making sure that they understand the project and kind of make sure that they understand the purpose of it. and i have been working on and talking to local businesses to make sure that they understand the project and the concerns are heard and also, talking to a lot of local residents. and both in the d1, transit, and advocacy group, and also, other times that the people that contact our office and are reaching out to the different people. >> and before that, you were involved in transit related issues and in cities and can you give me some examples? >> no, i have always been a transit ride sxer this is the first time that i have gotten involved in organizing the advocacy. >> thank you. >> thank you. farrell commissioner farrell? >> yes, i wanted to echo. >> i am sorry, commissioner breed. thank you. and you know, actually, i would like an opportunity because it means a lot to me that so many people came forward to speak and i would like an opportunity to even though i have read through the applications, it is great to associate the applications with the comments of the people who came here. and i am definitely more inclined to support someone who came here and i would like an opportunity to maybe review those after mri indications based on not only the individuals that came here today but the individuals who came here last time. i definitely would say that you know, from my perspective, although, i definitely will honor and support the recommendation of the district one supervisor, here we have a number of candidates who have taken muni and been in the city and some cases their entire lives, and we are chosing no disrespect, someone who has only been here and taken transit for the past three years. and i do think that it is a mistake. and again, you know, and in this particular case, you know, normally our process is to honor and respect you know what is suggested by the district one supervisor, which is the only reason why i plan to appoint or support that recommendation. but, i definitely don't think that it is fair for many of the applicants who definitely have significant engineering experience and significant experience with understanding of the actively engaged and transit in our city and this is going to make this choice even that much harder. but i will say that definitely a number of individuals stood out. mr. renee. i am sorry if i am butchering your name, because i am really terrible with pronouncing names. and stanford, kingly and thomas and post, and as well as yeah, those are the main people who stood out for me. and i would like an opportunity to just which will take some time to just take a quick look and make these appointments today, of course, but take a look at their applications as it relates to the folks who showed up here today in order to make a good decision for this committee. and i will say that what i do appreciate most are individuals who express a sincere desire to serve. but more importantly, to show up at the meetings and to respect i think, it was alexander post and was at the last meeting and there is business, and we take that seriously and when the people take the time to attend the meetings and i do want to move forward with this process today but i would ask the colleagues if it is possible to make the decision, and later on in the agenda as i review this to decide what exactly i think is my preference is. >> so, i am going to go to commissioner farrell first. and you can discuss whether to postpone this. >> i would say, echo supervisor avalos about supervisor mar, for the richmond seat and i think that is appropriate and we want to honor that. and then in terms of the at large seat, i will say, that especially to me i think that it is kingly, and mr. post, have come now twice in a row and i think that does demonstrate, some commitment level here that i would like to honor as well. so those would be my thoughts in terms of discussion for us. but happy to do whatever the committee likes in terms of moving forward right here. >> all right, thank you very much. commissioner avalos and peskin do you have any objections of continuing this until later in the agenda? >> okay, we will continue this until later. and thank you to all of the applicants here, and i do agree that for at least the at large seat it is difficult and because everyone has varyed backgrounds and i see attorneys here, and i see mediator and i see engineers and advocates and transit rider advocate and there are so many different backgrounds that we could choose from. so we will get back to that. shortly. so, at this moment, then i am going to back to item two because our chair chris is here. welcome. >> sorry commissioners for being late. i forgot my bike lock key. >> the 9.6 for prop k, peter sacks regarding the bike lanes was given assurances that the highest degree of safety was applied to the streets by and inside the bike lanes, and what he considereded a buffer protected lanes. and my concern with that project was with the spending of so much money on paint treatments that would be reapplied within a year or two and for the paint costs and but, public works needs to have that delay. and supervisor mar apparently requested that the stripes be, or the bike lanes be put in place now, as a safety precaution and the extra cost is with it. and then jackie, sacks was given the assurances on the signal timing on the crosswalks that will be taken into consideration. and all of the intersections will accommodate the speed of 2 and a half miles per hour. and during the public comment it was suggested that a 1.5, mile per hour, be considered that is what cal train uses apparently and so it is only that we may want to think about. for s disabled members of the community, especially around the churches or senior homes where we may have more disabled people. we also heard that the churches in the area may not have been contacted i want to make sure that out reach is being done on these projects. regarding the charlie bus purchase, they wanted assurances that the buses will be able to make it up the hills and read that the previous models could not make it up the hills and she was given the assurances that they could. item 6, and the replacement project on your agenda. peter sacks describes problems in the air traffic industry, where harris that is mca, contractor seems to under bid and expand the scope of these projects that they work on and thus, increasing costs. harris was the only bidder and came 40 percent over the sfmta estimate and this caused about a year's worth of delays in getting the contract out that is all that i have. >> great, thank you for your presentation. and i can see that the district four member is very vocal. >> yes, and this item which is great. >> yes. >> and any questions, comments from colleagues? >> okay, seeing none, we are going to go to public comment on item two. any members of the public wish to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed and that was an information item. and now we will go to item 5. >> allegation of 9,559,451 in prop k funds to present to the plans and program's committee and this is an action item. >> thank you. and it looks like we have a different today. >> okay, maria. >> okay. good morning, and i think that i can work three here with three allegations that you have before you. so that the first allegation i would like to start the vehicle allegations there is nothing left that we can do to improve the service and buy new vehicles, whether replacing old ones which is the project that is before you today or buying expansion vehicles and this is why the largest category and in prop k is for the vehicle replacement. primarily from muni but also, bart and cal train and so this project before you is a combined allocation recommendation for $5 million in prop k funds. that will average, $20 million in federal funds to replace, 14, 60-foot, trolly coaches. and then there is also a commitment toal kalt, $6 million and, that is a commitment because the commission has yet to program the matching federal funds that are anticipated to take place this fall and the meeting will come ba back to us afterwards for the rest of the allegation. and because there is a great deal of interest in because muni is in the effort to replace the fleet as well as the light rail vehicles. this chart shows you from left to right. if you can't read it, the top of the bar is the number of vehicles planned to be replaced. and then the purple part is how many have been ordered already and the dark blue on the bottom are the ones that are delivered to date. >> and you can see how we have a lot of new motor coaches and the trolly buses are comeing in and there are 36 that have been accepted and the vehicles and they can correct me if i am wrong here. i think that the prototype is due to come in at the end of the year and so we have not started to pay for those yet but it is soon. >> i want to thank, mta for helping us to confirm the data. we average an enormous amount of did you understand, in the 300 million, that we allocated, about 1.7 billion, and we will keep this up to date, if not monthly at least, quarterly on the website. the next allocation is for a merry go round that is happening that you have seen in the board of supervisors where the mta is planning to vacation, 1401, which will become the new location for the an monthly care and for that happen, the long term project is happening at a quick pace and that is renovating the facility, and the project right now, the building as essential warehouse for like main nens and they ship them out to the other shops as-needed from here and about half of the building will be renovated to be more efficient and effective for that central warehouse function and the other half will be wrote troe fitted to have the over lines, and which is currently working on the 1401, bryant location, and the 4.4, million in prop k funds recommended and most of the rest, of the cost will be paid for by the mta, general share of the property general obligation bonds and we just note that the project does face a couple of challenges. a tight time line and it also has to undergo the construction work while keeping the facility open for use. we have got a few stocks on the staff that are developing in this delivery area and they are going to support the project team by serving on the project team meeting and we have, i can do this right. one is the first district one is the capitol project, and it is forced on this request and the bicycle improvements between fulton and west the faive tick avenue and these are the things that there is already the bike lanes and adding the striper to make it two foot, and the daylighting and intersections and adding the crosswalks. there is a paving project, that could happen as soon as 2017 but that schedule is a little bit in flux and so the mta and commissioner mar has supported to go ahead with these improvements. and add additional improvements such as the green paint in the bike lanes. >> one question regarding the safety of the bike lanes this is what we have typically seen. so after the repaving is done, is there a plan to create a buffered bike lane or keep it the same? >> the later touch and this will be buffered but it is paint buffered as opposed to physically separated. and that is the comment that you observed the question that the committee was regarding installing or physically separated or the parking separated and it is something that we investigated and it is just, was not deemed feasible and we are looking at an upgrade to the stripes on the painted buffer zone on the existing bike lanes and promote the visibility and to narrow down the over wide, vehicle traveling on the streets? as a way to take up space. >> okay. >> there was also another concern raised by the cec, regarding putting in the paint before the paving which 2017, but we never know if it is going to be pushed back further, could you tell us what the cost is for the painting of the temporary ones before they have to be removed. >> about $190,000. only making changes that can be made with a bear minimum of cost at this point. >> and during the time before the road resphrasing happens, will there be a trial observation or how the bike lane was working and to make sure that it is safe for the bikers there. >> yeah, and we are making, you know, several improvements and the bike lanes are one of them and some other, you know, pedestrian island, and the safety up grades, to the south. and we are going to be hon tore and evaluating everything that we put in and making the changes as-needed until after the paving project. >> great. thank you any colleagues any other questions or comments on item five? >> okay. all right, seeing none, i would just say that you know, since this is a funding request, and it is coming to mar, and i would support the choice to put in the bike lanes before the road resurfacing occurs. so, at this time, again i guess that there are no other further commen comments. going back, and i appreciate the laying out of the chart of what we have planned and what we have ordered and what we have already received. thank you for that information. >> okay. so at this time, what i am going to go to public comment on item five. any members of the public who wish to speak come up. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> all right. so now it sounds like you can go back to item four which about the cac, commissioner avalos? >> we will take a vote. >> okay i am sorry. let's do that. >> recommended. >> the house has changed and we have a second for that >> yes, seconded by breed and we can take a roll call on item five. >> commissioner avalos? >> aye. >> breed. >> aye. >> farrell? >> aye. >> peskin. >> aye. >> tang. >> aye. >> the item is approved. >> thank you. yeah, and now we will go back to item four, the geary, and commissioner breed. >> thank you and i want to thank everyone who came out here today and thank you so much for your patience. we have so many wonderful applicants and often times it is really hard to make decisions about really important committees of this nature. and what i try to look for is commitment and i also try to look for you know, how long people have been in the city to understand it and spshlly around public transportation. how long they have taken it and what, and how can they lend the kind of voice that we need in order to make it better? it is not just going to be made better because of the board of supervisors or because of the transportation authority. or because of the advocates. it has to include the people who ride muni every single day as well. and everyone with different knowledge whether p anger, lawyer bus driver, or just you know regular citizen. in our city. you know, all of those opinions about their experiences are important to have. or to make sure that we have those individuals seated at the table and making the decision but also, respecting the process, and serving in a way that respects the public, and is prepared to come and roll up your sleeves and do the work necessary and because it is a commitment and i am truly grateful and this is why i am always, appreciative of the people who take the time out of their schedules to come to these meetings and to the present before us to express an interest in serving and so i am more inclined to support a candidate that shows up here today and i take this really seriously, and with that, i am wondering definitely, stood out and i would like to for the ad large seat make a motion to move forward on alexander post and my colleagues, supervisor avalos and farrell both mentioned this individual as a stand out candidate and i would very much inclined to move this name forward and i hope that my colleagues will consider supporting that. >> thank you, commissioner breed. i would supportive of again, commissioner mar's suggestion, for asher butnik, but out of the did i have reference for the supervisor and i would happy to support mr. post. i did like that he has been showing up to the cec meetings even though he is not even a meeting there. commissioner avalos? >> thank you i did motion on supervisor mar's recommendation and i don't think that it was seconded. but i did motion that. >> and i am and will do, commissioner farrell will second that and can we take that one without objection? then? okay. so, we have confirmed asher butner to the district one seat. and now for the at large seat, do we have a motion? >> i make a motion. >> breed. and seconded and by farrell and we can take that without objection. >> congratulations mr. post. >> okay. so we are that was item four, and now we will go to item six chlts up date, and this is an information item. >> thank you we have luis. ; is that correct? ? >> that is correct. >> good morning, chair tang and commissioners i am project management over the sight conduct ant to the authority. and i am joined here today by the project manager for this project from the mta. the radio project is intended to modernize the system, the systems that are in place now are 30 years old and as you know, in this age in which technology becomes obsolete, muni is forced to be working with the technology that is for the 70s. and the project is a lot more than just radio. the video, is treated in the back bone, but it is used to overlay transportation systems such as the vehicle, health monitoring and the vehicle locater and incident management and then such that are intended to improve the service and the defend bltd of the system. the project is being delivered by the sample contract. which was award inned 2012. to the heritage corporation. and right now, the project is in the study and the investing stage and that testing is under way. and they are hoping to start with the vehicle equipment installation in june. and those vehicles will start in september. and finally, the fleet, will take place between january and march. the budget as we see here is $126 million. and this is an increase of 11.6 million only the 2012 budget that was set at the time of the award and that number was 114 million. the custom, his a variety of issues and some of them were of the conditions and they were the project that were more complex because of the variety of the vehicles that muni utilizes and they also have some contracting, i am sorry, they have staffing issues. apparent apparently we have the technology sector that are approaching of the contractor. and this project represents a 5 percent contingency. prop k is the biggest contributor to the project, contributing 48 percent of the budget and 61 million, and 61.7. to date, mta has only, incurred 24 million in expenditures of which only have 4.4, million that have been invoiced to date. and in addition to the delays that the project has had, there is also the structure of the contract, the contract is schedule in payments that are based on milestone achievements. most are based on the monthly progress payments. but this contract is based on the notes. and so until the contract that reaches the milestone, they are getting paid for that work. >> and also the transportation authority has been no, because you know, munichlt, has elected to use other funds first. which have the use of the funding and such. and which is a practice that the transportation authority encourages and so it allows for to reduce the prop k financing cost and allowing for more funds to remain for the projects. the system is expected to be free of -- in march. this coming march. and this is 18 months later on the schedule, and already talked about the problem that they are having with the delays. as far as the disadvantage, businesses and slow business problems, i am happy to report that the public has a goal of 15 percent, however, up to date, 34, and 32 percent of the buildings have been for the small businesses. the remaining challenges of this project the service date is 18 months later than anticipated. which basically has affected the final transfer of operations to the new transportation management center. and that facility has been completed for a while now. and it will come into full operation, only after the radio project is completed. and in order to meet that date, the bus installation has to start in june of this year. mta has schedule a series of testing and tracing because they want to make sure that the roll out is smooth. and that concludes my presentation and if you have questions i will be ha py to answer them >> thank you, this is an information item. but i am just a little bit confused about since there is an increase in the project costs, where was the approval that came from the transportation authority? commission, to amount for that cost increase? >> the budget went up but not the contribution from the prop k. the funds they came out from the sfmta revenue bonds. and that is where the eleven million dollars showed from, was, and so we had approved that the board of supervisors, that increased to the revenue bond? or those approvals? >> it was part of the revenue bond, yes. >> thank you. >> commissioner peskin. >> i just wanted to say that this project is a long time and coming and it is amazing that that has been kept together with the shoe string and bubble gum and it is long overdue and it is time to bring it to the dawn of the 21st century. >> hear hear. >> thank you, commissioner peskin. if you could explain the significance of this project and how it will help to impact or improve the experience for transit riders. >> well, the main, the main benefit for this project is reliability. right now, for example, the system that is in place, you cannot buy replacement parts for. muni has to buy equipment that is decommissioned from other facilities in order to down for parts. and in some cases that is not even enough. they actually have to make parts at their shop. which is like commissioner peskin said miraculous. >> and they have been using the old parts and canabalize the parts from the old system. >> but in addition to that the different systems for example, they bring in the locater and it will allow the control center to go at any time, and where each vehicle is and basically when they, for example, see the bunching, and they can alert the drivers as you are bunching up and you know you should back off to get more separation from the vehicles and the same that i think with some that are behind schedule. the vehicle that will have the reliability and they will be able to jump in real time, from the control center. and if there is an issue with the vehicle. and so that they can pull it out of service before it causes problems for the passengers. >> thank you for that up date. and again we are looking forward to this project completing next year. all right. so commissioner avalos? >> just a reminder, my office had requested a tour i think that there are other offices as well. and would like to get a tour >> thank you very much, are there any public comment on item 6? please come on up. they were alive, and what happened on 9/11 took place. i know that you are making ramdz that this is overdue and the person who gave the presentation, never once mentioned safety. and that is what is happening here. and so, the mayor and there are some supervisors and they vouch for the buses, and the modern buses. but our communication system is primitive and wlfr the presentations are given the evaluation from the experts and so we know that we have to go to the other agencies as far as la and other place to get parts. but the people at home should know how stupid we are that in the year 2016, we don't have a mun indication system that works and so the responsibility of such a thing kind of falls a little bit on the board of supervisors who represent. and now we have today, is a very hot day. and we have had five, six, 7, buses break down. new buses. i would like the mayor to know this and the supervisors who bought these new buses on board to know this. what we are having here is the san francisco county transportation authority, and spoke about some candidates. and this candidate should know about this. i have been accounting this weekend from, i don't know, maria, will tell you from i don't know when, and this is not just attending it, it is about doing something, about it. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> any members of the public who wish to speak on item 6? >> come on up. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> and colleagues that was an information item and now we will go on item 7. >> item seven, up date on the san francisco transportation agency bike program and this is information. >> we have jamie from sfmta. >> before we start, just this that i called for, especially as we are seeing that the boik share program start to expand across the city. and i will make sure that we are linking up our building out of our bike strategy and our facility across the city as well. and i think that this presentation is timely as we see the bike share program starting to proceed. >> colleagues, any other questions as well? ement emily is also here from motivate. thank you. >> i am the section leader with the street and the sfmta and manage the bicycle program. and i am hear at the request of mr. avalos, and the bicycle program that we have currently, and with the particular focus on the results of the prop k allegation that we got for the strategy, and last year and, how that is figured into our prog m program. before we get started i have been with the city for six months and i came over from the city of oakland and i am sessexd and learning a new city and on the personal note i have owned a car for 15 years, i get around by walking and biking taking it seriously is personally gratifying to me. >> i would like to start with the strategic plan. and everything that the sfmta does, the bicycle plan does the guy ans from the plan. the plan, lays out four core goals. two of which are important for the bicycle lanes. >> one of those, is to make sure that less than 50 percent of the trips taken in the city of san francisco are by private automobile and those goals and especially with that, and say that in order to do that, we think that 8 to ten percent of bicycling is a key part of that goal and it is increasing bicycling is the key of reducing the private. and the goal about safety, is a little bit general in the strategic plan and we are lucky to take the guidance from the vision zero to eliminate the serious injuries on our streets by 2024. and just, by the major role in the bicycle program in two different ways. one is that analysis shows that 70 percent of the grasses on the streets, take place on just 12 percent of the network and so we are thinking about focusing our engineering resources that is where we look. and it is really important for us to remember that these are not just lines on the map. each of these lines represents multiple real people who were killed and mamed in traffic. and so what i think that is more unsuddenly is that represents the future people that will be injured unless we do something that is really a focus for everything that we do. is looking at this map and figuring out what we can do to improve the safety. we may have a project that is a bicycle project, whatever street we are on, we need to make sure that we improve the safety for everybody. and you know, the pedestrian group or the transit group to make sure that any time that we touch a street it is not just the buy sicking safety, it is pedestrian safety and the everybody who is using the streets. >> vision zero as the guiding framework and we are also lucky that we are not starting str scratch, and a lot of the work that we are doing right now, more, and the bike lanes, and at least, there is the bed rock foundation of the bicycle network in the city and that is the sub-stan hally complete, and it has resulted in 120 lane miles of the bike facilities and one of the highest rates of lane miles per square mile of any city in the country. >> we have identified, 69 new corridors and it just went out in the loosely defined term in terms of the streets were not identified and that is where the $2,000 of prop k money that we allocated last year came in. that allowed us to be in each of these corridors and understand a little bit more what each of them could be so that they become more than just lines on the map. >> what we did with the exercise, is about ten hours on each corridor and that is not a lot of time but it is enough time to bring every single corridor in there up to the same level of information and which included a field visit and the data that was available, and to understand what they limit on the corridor are likely to be and if there are parallel routes, and it may since that the types of facilities that make since in the constraints that were likely to face as we move forward. >> and that really figured in to a prioritize of the corridors that allowed us to move forward for the 17, to 21 cic. and so what we tried to do, is come up with a balance project and focusing on the network and what we can do the most to improve safety and also making sure that we have a mix and we don't want to take on the complex projects at once, because we will not have anything to built for the next four years. >> and the comr complicated and also mentioned the goal of trying to create a network of facilities that connects the city. >> i am sorry, by facilities you mean, bike parking? >> so, right now, i am just talking about corridor projects in terms of like the on street facilities but i also want to mention, the bike and share and as later on as well. >> i will get back to you on that. >> so the map here generally shows where we anticipate. and the other projects that we have in process. are and so you have roughly 20 corridors that are included in the cid that will begin the planning soon and representing about 90 million dollars of work by them. and so in particular, it is a little hard to see, but the green lights represent what we are calling the neighborhood green way and that is a relatively new concept in san francisco to something that we are promoting more and going forward. and it is the use of the low volume and the local streets that are parallel to the major routes. and prioritizing them. and that will be 20th avenue, rather than trying to shoe horn and instead making 20,000, the nuclear connection and so we have a number of those green lines and if we think that those makes sense with we are calling those neighborhood green ways. >> the question on that is that i know that there was a huge interest in creating better north, south, connecters and using the boulevard and using 34th avenue in state. but is mta going to be doing more to highlight the fact that it is a bike route instead of putting these white painted on the ground? >> yes. so, 20th avenue, is included in the safety for the significant investments and so there are chairs and but also, cropping improvements but all of our bicycle network will be getting new signs and we have about 1200 signs that we will be going out to cover the network. including 34,000 and other streets like that. >> what is the timing expected for that? >> we just put our first 12 signs in the inner sunset last week. and at that case for working with our shops and rolling out the process, but the entirety of the program will be rolled out in 18 months. and they will be going in in batches starting later this summer. >> are you doing anything different in terms of the ground treatment, i mean right now, you can barely tell that it is supposed to be the north and south connector on 34th avenue. >> right now, 34th avenue is not programmed in terms of the near term, but it is part of the over all network and 20,000 new in the sunset is the street that we were going to focus our resources on. >> okay. i would like to follow up with you on the 34th avenue. >> okay. >> issue because we had brought this up internally. last year. or before that. so i would like to put the movement on it. >> okay. >> okay. and you were talking about some of the other efforts that make-up the bicycle program. and many of which are funded by prop k, and the fund for the clean air. and it come through and request that we get from the coalition and the citizens and deal with that immediately, rather than waiting years. and so f, the recent lanes that went on harrison street and near 16th, and just a few weeks ago. and the left side bike lane on page street and things like that, and that is something that we are continuing to do to make sure that we are not waiting years for the major improvement and we can get out there and do things quickly as well. >> bike share, as, you are pretty familiar with this, and we want to mention that we have had a pilot system in the ground, but we are preparing for a major extension of over, 1,000 percent that will bring, about, 4500 bikes and 300 throughout san francisco. and emily, from here as well and can answer the additional questions about bike shaur if needed. >> bike parking is an important part. if you don't have a place to put your bike, the trip will not work for you. we have a sidewalk rack and on the street program that is by request, and so this is request, and the rack and the corral on-line so that we can get out there and typically in 90 or 120 days and install those racks. and we are also just getting in to the pro-actively and going out to the communities that may not know about the program and identifying gra it locations as well. and the long term biking is something that we are talking about for a while. and we are starting the evaluations of the sites including the west portal for the long term bike parking station to figure out how we can create an operating model that works, with our revenue stream. bicycle and i talked about this a little bit. we want to replace the existing route number signs that are out there throughout the city and they were a great idea when they started and the people don't really think about bicycling in terms of the route number that they are on, they think about it in terms of the definition and where they are going and how long it will take to get there and learn bg this and 1200 signs over the next 18 months and that will cover every route throughout the city. ? ethat sounds great. >> yeah. we are really excited about that project. >> and then, last, and this is not just the portion of the program that i work in, most closely. but in addition to the capitol improvements we do spend, a fair amount of time working on education and encouragement to make sure that the people know about the bicycling and that they know how to do it safely. and so tclasses for children an adults. they are all part of what we do. >> and that is a quick overview. and in terms of our next steps, i did mention that we do have a lot of projects that were included in the cit that will start on july first and so, a lot of the community work that is coming up to plan each of those corridors to make sure that each of those facilities and the projects reflect the neighborhood needs and so that planning effort will throw you to the corridor will be kind of getting rolling later this year and next year and so there is a lot of community planning coming up. >> thank you, for your presentation. and one of the things that i did want to follow up on is regarding the bike parking and so our office had sent over for example, an example a list of the places that we felt like could use the bike parking in order to further encourage the bicycling in the district. and we have not heard back or seen the movement in a year and so i would like to, i will send you the list and also, i am hoping that we can follow up given that you said that the turn around time was 90 to 120 days for installations. >> we did start a contract, so that is just a couple of months and should be able to turn things around more quickly. >> commissioner avalos? >> yes, my request, my question is very m similar on the bike racks and parking. is there a place sfmta remember sight, where you can apply for those? what is the interaction with the public? it seems like our offices don't quite have that information. >> yeah, that, and i can provide that. and there is a link on-line, that you can either e-mail or there is a form to fill out and you can request. and we also just created some new brochures that are in the process of thinking several thousand this week and also in the languages to describe the program and how the businesses can interact with it and get what they need. and so happy to provide those prosu brochures as well. >> that will be great and i am just trying to find, okay we have the bike racks and i am just looking at the web sites and trying to find where i can find easily, the links to apply. >> yeah. >> it does not quite seem to come up. >> okay. >> here we go. >> it is fine. >> thank you. >> all right. >> what happened to the goal of our 20 percent rider ship by 2020 i heard you say we are idealy we are at 8 to ten percent. for the rider ship and are we still looking athe that 2020, goal that was a feel good resolution that we were doing for the board of supervisors and i am not sure that was one that the mta saw as realistic. and so, the thing that the bicycle and we identified aid number of scenarios and the giant circle there is the most aggressive and that is what will allow us to get the full out of the system. >> all right. and just to kind of like i guess, a locked portion for this, and i know that it is kind of built on why commissioner avalos called for this hearing. and in the first play it is how that it is that our city is existing and the new infrastructure that we are creating for the bikes, connect with the bike share or other modes of transportation such as muni. and i am sure that you have it mapped out, and i want to make sure that we are being very explicit with our goals for our bike network. >> yes. >> and we are working closely with motivate, and to understand where, it is like, what it is and we are making sure that we have safety improvements that are going in to support that system as well as investments to get the people. and those are all things that we are coordinated. call, eight. and for the plan of 2040, and and across from the deputy, director for policy and programming. >> she is pulling it up, and thank you, good morning and so barely, in the sake of time, go quickly through these, but i will be happy to answer any of the questions at the end or speak with anyone later, and so when i get further into the details. and today we are going to be talking a little bit about the project performance evaluation which has been going on at the regional level, since october and then a little bit on the recent performal for the mta and put together regarding the regional housing action >> all of the input from us and the other regional and county, entities and we pulled out the largest in the capacity increasing projects to do a performance assessment fechlt but to identify, which projects rise to the top and which need an additional amount of explanation of why they should be included. one is the benefit cost. assessment. and it is quantitative, and a model that mtc has. and and the targets that the mtc adopted last year, and gauges how much each project advances each of those targets and there is an equity lens where they look at the project and determine, what is providing for the low income community and so the projects from san francisco, that were evaluated. and this includes, both the ones that we set the priorities but also, the ones that touched san francisco, and that other regional entities submitted. and there are increasing and they found that the state that are prepared for the local, streets and roads, and the transit performed well, and the highway, congested corridors and kind of the back bone of the transit infrastructure and also performed well. and then, congestion and the projects out performed in general. with respect to the san francisco, there is kind of good and bad news, up here is the 2013, area, and the list of high, performers that are highlighted in yellow and the hyper formers th, high, performs and we have one project added and that is for geary and the low performers that were identified, there is six of them, and the good news being that only two of them were locally set. and so that is the south east, transportation improvement project and the gene va, project and the rest of are the projects that touch the city but other people are priorities outside of the city. just wanted to point out and i will go into this in a second. but these projects are on the list because they are low, performers in the benefit cost assessment. we also and again as i said, being a low performer is not the end of the world. it justifying where you can approach mta and make what they are calling a compelling case in order to have the project moved forward and be considereded for inclusion. and so in the case of these two projects they both served low income, communities and so that is kind of automatic. and move on to the next level. >> and the key to why these projects are performing lower, and that we believe that there are flaws in the mtc evaluation, and mostly due to the model and not picking out the important, benefits like relating the transit crowding and improving reliability and it does not capture any benefits for the bicyclists and pedestrians and we are giving a lot of investment and safety as part of our larger project. and all of that is dismissed and it under estimates the trips compared to other transit operators. >> is that another flaw in the mtc's formula? or --. >> yeah. >> evaluation. >> it is actually identified as you go back to the sight here as a high, performer. oh, gene v, so right now, we are planning what is going to be much more dense, population. and we are not necessarily by having a huge impact on the current rider ship but we know that it is going to be dramatic in the future, and the mtc's evaluation, and capture what is going to be done in the future? rather thatn what the current positions are? >> they do look at the benefit that is based on projected in the area of 2013, for the area and so it is based on the last times and assumptions which i believe is probably likely to be lower than what were currently anticipated and the issue or one of the issues is that the model issues of a lot of the cost is related to safety improvements and the complete that go along. and so it is a little bit of extra cost that is not reflected in the benefit cost assessments. the other issue with that project is they have bundled it together and a road extension and that is necessary to complete a later phase, and so we are working with them to rephase the project to get the number up above one which is the requirement to pull it off of the low perform s list. >> it makes the sense and it is connected to part of i don't you are development areas that we would want that to be one that was score well and get support and funding. >> right. and that is also a reason why they had a compelling care argue. is that he they recognize the case and even if perhaps it is not the most cost effective project on the list. >> yeah. >> so, really our feedback to mtc has been emphasizing what we think that their model is flawed and playing up the performance assessment on the target side, which we perform better. there is one that i wanted to flag. there is one of the target that has come up in conversation. as being some what problematic in hindsight the way that it was set last year and that is the displacement risk target and we have been in the conversation. and especially when i set the target and it is everyone acknowledges that the displacement is a problem and there are risks and you don't want to make investments and they are going to make that worse. >> however, the what i that it kind of ended up in the evaluation is that they look just at risk and not at what actions at local jurisdictions are taking to combat affordable. and so essentially, san francisco got dinged across the board for all of our projects and even for treasure island that is doing the one for one, replacement and guaranteed right of return for displaced. and so we have been talking and i think that it is counter intuitive and -- in the communities that are experiencing displacement, when all of them are low, where the region is looking to build. and so we will be working with the commissioners moving forward to identify some other way of measuring displacement pressure and moving toward the solutions to adjust it at the regional level. and it goes into the second part of what i wanted to share with you, is what mta and they have been talking about with respect to the housing action. and because those get into the touching on the displacement problems that the region is facing and so not surprising we are in the housing crisis that the strategies is what we know already is the new housing protective the existing housing on the newer term, it is the most pressing things that is moving forward is the strategy and mtc has found an additional 70 million through the grant program that will be provided over the next five years and is putting together a recommendation for how to proceed with and spending that ininvolvement. one of the proposals is the housing program and the options that they have put forward as rewarding the jurisdictions that are creating housing. and provided additional funding, that are adapting the policies, and the displacement concerns and perhaps the direct investment either in the one program or some kind of a direct purchase trust funds and for existing low income and median income housing. they have come up with some really interesting ideas in the medium to the long term and beefing up the infrastructure and the two options that will require the legislation at the state level that will be a jobs fee across the region and perhaps, entire housing bond across the region. i will come back with more and next month will be talking if we hear what the proposal is for the 72 million in housing funds is, and with the revised list for san francisco. and with that i am happy to answer any of the questions that you have. colleagues >> questions, comment? >> now. >> thank you for your work on this. >> all right, so, do we have any members of the public that wifsh to speak on item eight? >> seeing none, public comment is closed that was an information item. so we will call item 9, please. >> introduction of new items. >> we have no introduction, any public comment on 9? >> public comment is closed and now general public comment, number 10. >> yes. >> good morning, commissioners we see, the (inaudible) people >> thank you, very much, any other members of the public wish to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. are there any other items before us today. >> item eleven, adjournment. >> all right, this meeting is adjourned thank you. >> good afternoon i'd like to call the san francisco board of education it is 1:308 p.m. roll call.

Related Keywords

Stanford , California , United States , Berkeley , San Diego , Japan , San Francisco County , Richmond District , Oakland , City College , London , City Of , United Kingdom , San Francisco , Asher Butner , Brian Larkin , Nelson Bunia , Kati E Tang , Eric Mar , Ka Dancy , Steve Stamos ,