Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

tv   LIVE BOS Public Safety Neighborhood Services Committee  SFGTV  July 21, 2016 2:30pm-6:01pm PDT

2:30 pm
is going through i believe $8 million of planning money over the next two years to address the seawall in the embarcadero. for both seismic and sea level rise adaptation strategies and i think the dollars that the port gets personal from its own development as was hopefully eventually from the infrastructure financing district to be a down payment on what is going to be a thing to-$5 billion project. suddenly not anything that sort of us of the problem in april, but it's one of those things that think were not cobbled together sources like this to address the magnitude of the problem of the city surrounded on three sides by water. >> can i ask is so much fun in the might get generated from any those mechanisms might any of that funding bill towards some of the transportation infrastructure that's talked about as well in addition to the climate change mitigation? >> yes. i think we very much want to do that. i think of three buckets mentioned, we would love to see those tools in the near-term first finance what's needed now in terms of those better connections to the local networks to the extent
2:31 pm
they can $12 to help with the extension if that's possible. i'm not really sure that works with the taxes, but may work with other funds, not of these developments. i think what we are doing now is try to sort of cats a wide night over what useful and try to match up the sources with things that can pay for each one and come up with a more knitted together picture based on the slide that ms. payne showed late in the presentation >> i would hope that as those conversations mature in progress that this board in this agency would remain supportive in whatever way possible. i can't stress enough how important i feel all that work is now critical it is the start thinking out and have this in place of that even people coming into the area to not yet quite familiar with it have some certainty as to what to expect as would be the cost of operation and development in this ad. so i plot your efforts and deeply grateful for all of your hard work and looking
2:32 pm
forward to being a supportive as possible that we can be. >> thank you. director 10 >> i have a question along the same lines. i've just been wondering you're working without portthe ayes have it. let's make these accessible. but i mean that's a key connection special in the warrior state of this and they'll be greatly zero connection for a lot of folks to come in on. some wondering if a conversation with our along those lines as well as with the port and other regional transportation providers from the waterside because i know there used to and [inaudible] and back to see the 16 street but mentioned that i'd also be interested in seeing other places where we can support in terms of water taxi service making sure that service is accessible. things
2:33 pm
like that i wondered with those conversations are sounding like? >> you cast a wide net in a question and i think it's great because we realize that although muni does an mta does a huge amount of moving people around the slot other potential resources we can grab. coltrane and 22nd st. station something talk a lot about special in the neighborhood is best with peers 70 going and how those interact. i think out of electrification in general coffee moosewood because the increase in frequency there can provide another north-south spine in this area. then water transport, i mean it something that's on the tip of everyone's tongue because in so doable but i think this can help grow that critical mass for something like a scheduled water taxi service that takes you around the waterfront because right now it sort of a demand a system that doesn't quite have the confidence level i can say, well, if everything is gridlocked on when i can go by
2:34 pm
water. i received the transbay connection with the 16th st. ferry terminal is something that would be very intriguing and is moving forward although those are challenging to get done. i think one of the things that mission rockets talked about the giants actually operate a very ferry landing for the ballpark. could we make that a more year-round thing not just for special bands. the development there to help another pressure release these are definitely conversations bid you appreciate the leadership of your agency get into those conversations. but were always the gun on one of come back with that is part of the picture were drawn. >> director borden >> thank you for the presentation made there's a real lack of improvement in the waterfront in terms of actual infrastructure. we have the t-line and we have a few things going on, but we still are really lacking in true infrastructure given the amount of housing and density with
2:35 pm
peers 70 and the shipyard and whole area. i look forward to further conversations about additional things we can be doing with area because the look at the map it really is lacking when you get to the southern bright bayfront. so i mean i look forward to working on that and figure out some the solutions are so we can already see come i think the challenges there will be if we don't address that. >> thank you. members of the public >> no member of the public return and speaker card on this matter but it looks like there is some interest rolling forward. >> after this will take a short break. >> just just a few little comments. voluntary tax. let's paid dollars for a tax. i think it's going to slide to quickly.
2:36 pm
30 years after the transportation bonds are paid for we can use that money for the seewald. bart is four years old and they are in meeting the more money. i don't see the transportation bond after they expire. we will need new transportation bonds. there's always been a be in expense. the central underground, amen. let's keep our fingers crossed. the dollars from homes, dollars for developers, dollars for four for housing, is the tail wagging the dog was that dog wagging the tail by developers saying the big dollars, the big profits that they can grab it right now they're in a hurry to grab it because we don't want another recession because that takes everything. downtown, we have got five muni lines. we have express buses galore. that's
2:37 pm
the downtown area. how is that going to compare to what work you put out in this new wetlands ? basically, that's what a lot of it is. the two-$5 billion bill just for the embarcadero seewald is expensive but that's a small little section. the cost of defending these developments from the sea rise, it was in this room, 9.5 foot search. that's what we need to protect. that's probably conservative the way things are going. you guys in planning this should be interesting >> thank you. the board will take a short recess at this >> ladies and gentlemen were back in session now >> item 13, >>[reading code]
2:38 pm
>> good afternoon board members staff and members of the public. my name is--project manager with capital programs construction at mta. i'm here before you today provide with an update on the geary bus rapid transit project. before coming back to for full board action. before we start, i want to make a point that in the venice corridor project this prt project developed into more of a corridor project than just transit improvement project. we will get into details in later slides. geary bus gary geary boulevard is one heavily used transit corridor in san
2:39 pm
francisco. it's over 50,000 people date the judy's too many neighborhoods and dozens of other attractions and institutions. that adversity the people and places along the corridor require more than just pete period and express bus service with over 60%, again but me reiterate 6% of riders boarding during off-peak riders geary needs a 24-hour seven-day week prt solution illuminates transit conflicts, traffic on key segments and makes the street safer everyone. data shows that pedestrian was a time more likely to get into a vehicle versus pedestrian conflict on geary compared to others some comparable city
2:40 pm
states. as you may know bus traffic transit is globally recognized and cost-effective solution to address increasing transportation demand and i collision rate long san francisco busiest bus corridor. the city decide to pursue prt back in 2003 as part of the proper or k extended japan because of its low cost and comparison to rail. high-impact, and fast-track implementation. roughly, prt is a third of the price tag of rail. the proposed speed geary budget would benefit not only transit riders but people walking, driving and the community at large transit features like bus only lanes were expected to improve transit reliability by over 20% and offer a 10-to the mid-time savings for both the rapid and
2:41 pm
local in each direction. traffic conditions would improve to driver habits and riding the bus because we much more efficient and more reliable and other features like traffic signals being synchronized and protected go as high injury corridor geary also getting the full fleet of pedestrian safety implements to reduce the number of collisions and traffic along segments with her is frequent speeding. all transit traffic and safety features would be corrugated with infrastructure upgrade repairs to roadways and utilities to minimize future construction impacts and reduce costs. environmental document is that potential impacts and first on the list is no build which served as the baseline to measure the potential benefits or impacts of the project under four different prt scenarios. the no build alternative includes improvements in movement as part of the munich and for program such as the red transit lane in the downtown area and also the tensile
2:42 pm
signal priority short for tsp along the corridor. alternative two, which the side prt west lesson cost because it does not require reconfiguring the street however, to accommodate more buses and stops parking would be eliminated or removed and be more opportunities for the bus to get delayed in traffic because of right turn conflict" vehicles violating the rules. alternative three offers the most transit benefit to protect the center running busway. completely eliminating traffic conflicts. however, it would require reconfiguring the fillmore tunnels and underpasses to it, they'd station and bus only lanes and also eliminate the majority of left turns along the corridor. it would allow passing lanes to allow continuous local and rapid service but again a
2:43 pm
significant amount of off street parking would be removed those old one of the main concern we've heard over and over from community members is try to preserve parking is much as possible. moving on from alternative three-c is the same old tired of the rate without the passing lanes. and consolidated rapid and local service between golf and 27 street. consolidated service prisons more parking [inaudible] in the manager number of stops in closer space [inaudible] that brings us to the last alternative, which is the sra short for staff recommend altered hybrid option. which is the best of alternatives two and three and this would staff recommends. was chosen because it address community needs and concerns and reduce cost by preserving masonic and fillmore underpasses for the tunnels and allows operating prt and five
2:44 pm
running lanes east. one of the main concerns with the design of the project was parking availability as i mentioned early. consolidated service option center running bart enrichment preserves parking and maximizes transit benefits on the commercial corridor condenses segment of gary boulevard. i usually move [inaudible] there you go. these two images represent how prt would look along the center and the side burning segments of the corridor. as you can see, the top rendering shows side running at geary and fillmore. then you have the beautiful side running portion at gary and 17th with a dual median and this area will talk about a little bit later but were actually increasing 13% of green infrastructure. increasing it by 13%. again, new platforms for safety enhancements, tvs. a lot of improvements. leading up to the
2:45 pm
entire mental document the team solicited comments and encourage people to give feedback on the project. over 200 people attended the public comments meeting is a mary's cathedral in over 300 comments wer since the releae we posted over 50 means and again over 50 meetings since november of 2015 . we have done extensive engagement of the public and the numbers show it. but 50 min. with stakeholder groups around the question that even meetings were held to address specific concerns project proposals. in three of the specific cases, we developed working groups to try and identify new design solutions addressing common pics concern. several changes were made to the projects for the better result of the working poop meetings. in addition, the right photo or, it has a
2:46 pm
picture of a virtual reality kiosk, which aims to paint a better picture of what prt would look like at webster street and 17th st. this machine residents, merchants, interested parties could go and look at it and streamed down that segment of the roadway they could easily see what type of improvements slated to come down that area with implementation of the geary prt. over 6000 read the kiosk the overwhelming majority of individuals for the project. we had a mild survey and majority of the feedback was in favor of the project. ongoing outreach as we approach for action includes engagement techniques that aim to include a broader audience which is being used for van ness improvement project and mailers, and just to make sure that we get to
2:47 pm
everyone will actually incrementing the door-to-door ambassador throughout the corridor measure no one is left out. throughout the outreach process, the summarizes of the general feedback budgeting hazard. to address these concerns over changes made including consolidated service enrichment of local stopping at spurs. successful in retaining the bridge. additional safety woman's and carefully placed bus stops near schools and senior centers. this photo or map represents geary prt proposals that existing transit only lanes between poland and golf street. the bus would operate on the side of the street between downtown or market street got to palm avenue. in the ctr., street that [inaudible] and 20 fifth avenue. as you can see, the transition points are circled
2:48 pm
in both of these locations there will be a queue jump which allow the bus safely pass through the intersection ahead of other vehicles given at start like a safe start. so going in and out of the center run to side running to be fully sick because though get the first opportunity were good priority. several local stops would be eliminated in the richmond to allow the bus to operate in the middle of the street without passing lanes. the bus would stop at all of the same stops along the segments. careful consideration senior centers and health institutions determine the proper location of the bart stops along the consolidated service area. to existing rapid stops when i existed mentioned at spurs and the other laguna on local only stops it is there low ridership, location and new transit point to other bus routes. i say that is being proposed because the community has requested we further
2:49 pm
evaluate laguna and we are in the process to look at the capital and service impacts to see that even a feasible request. again, this is in an effort to continue engagement in refining the project as we go forward. the total time savings round-trip for the project is 30 min. that's 30 additional minutes of transit rider to spend with their loved one's family friends they might even say a work and work 30 min. late. in addition, debbie significant less budging and gaps in service. but 20% making it easier to get to the destination on time and by bus. just last friday, we conducted a tour for supervisor ease office and brother tour was consistently windows budging. we noticed overcrowded buses actually we got on the buses to show other humans withstanding capacity and we were right next
2:50 pm
to each other with no wiggle room were moving. so it was a great opportunity for supervisor he stop this [inaudible] throughout the day as needed so bad. while in addition traffic condition with the drivers chose to take transit and to improve transit i'm sorry- signalized traffic lights. the city influence in almost every intersection collision rates would drop and pedestrian exterior is what improve. the geary corridor become more pleasant for people walking with pedestrian scale lighting and as i mentioned earlier, 13% increased green infrastructure. other foods like repaving and new utilities the package and with a project minimizing future construction impacts. just the initial sewer survey indicates that we have sewer
2:51 pm
network pipes that almost 1 139 years old along that segment. as you guys can tell, it's time to replace them. hopefully with this project once it gets approved will definitely part of it. to achieve division for prt and safer streets rise in some cases mobile parking gate of the project team is than a great job because of keeping our numbers high and hearing the public as far as parking and their concerns of loss of parking. overall, 97% apartheid would be retained. the majority of the parking loss occurring would actually occur along segments with off street options on street parking options. to maintain the bus only lane through the tunnel areas are questionable of steiner bridge. this location has surface crossing to be enhanced as part of the project and we have data to show that 80% of the current pedestrians at that intersection are a cross the service level crossing.
2:52 pm
just like we were successful at what a lot of time and a high-level effort by staff, to a valuate webster bridge to see whether we can retain and design around a commode with the same process into steiner bridge. unfortunately, given where the structure of peers are for the bridge for the outbound direction was no way we could actually design and not take will say from hamilton recreational park facility and that's on a desired path forward. the geary project has adopted a phased approach to deliver city permits assumes possible prior to the center running portion in the richmond district. the basic session about jesse minogue allows design implementation of the two phases to have it concurrently supporting a timely delivery in getting improvements to the public as
2:53 pm
soon as possible. based to detail would design will be ongoing for the implementation of phase 1 and would occur actually in three sub phases. the first of phase that includes doctors the striping the street with bus only lanes between market and defending division ii lane narrowing between golf and cross to get the second sub phase will include signal phrase upgrades and followed by the last and third phase which includes several improvements to the sewer, water, roadway infrastructures was transit and pedestrian. [inaudible] yet to be determined as we talked about these two would require more extensive construction and utility replacement is requires reconfiguring the roadway to accommodate to landscape center medians and getting the center running us aligned. at first glance the cost of the project may seem a bit high. but we have to remind ourselves these are quarter wide improvements that will last decades. not only make by service more
2:54 pm
efficient at making utilities people use everyday more liable in the street safer for everyone and not just transit improvements. the final environmental document is already in review and we are on schedule to release the documents to the public in september with a response to comments. all the release of the final document sfmta board is scheduled to take action on early october and the sfmta board soon thereafter get the design for phase 1 is ongoing and the project team is finally legislating phase 1 improvements the same day as bringing the document in front of you. for approval. we hope to move this important transit and safety project forward as quickly as possible pending project review. with that i think of your time and patience. be happy to take any questions you might have. >> thank you very much. we are members of the public who wish to speak to this yes. we do >> first world to that >> >>[calling names]will do
2:55 pm
that >> gene identifies the premises sure thank you for your consideration my previous requested is greatly appreciated.i can tell you make things are wrong with this but at the remainder 1 min. and 50 seconds. to facilitate that i did submit to ms. boomer a copy of the letter i wrote to the sf cta who is the principal in the draft eir. some of the comments that i don't have time to make are included in that document. let me say, first of all men enthusiastic muni rider and i support improving transit.
2:56 pm
i've also been following this project for years. for some reason my first impulses wait a minute give what impact is the gap on geary and neighborhood i live which is near 25th and geary. got a better chance to look at it for many years, very concerned about that. you just heard what the trade-offs are for this. then i think you were given the whole story. if you look at the cost and benefits, i hope you get a slightly different impression based on what i am saying. downside are it's going to cost over $200 million and by the way, i'm focusing almost exclusively on the center lane segment. which is between 27th ave. and home which is a block after. that portion of the project alone will cost somewhere between 150-2 and her million dollars. it's going to have a significant impact during the construction and small businesses in the neighborhood. that hasn't been an economic impact study on that would support in order to determine the extent of that. the amount of time it's going to be saved in return for this increasing money impact on the businesses,
2:57 pm
removal of 200 trees and diversion of traffic to acquire decisive as well as impact on the geary boulevard itself, in that particular strip will be at best, 2 min. in a might even be 15 seconds >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> thank. bob szell. a member of the planning association for the richmond. the planning association for the regiment has taken the position with the sector the gary geary prt that when easily done first is divided do all those things except have a red lane that is 24-hour bus lane on a street that doesn't need that. more than that, when they put in a
2:58 pm
red lane going to ways that going to strip out the center. the center is populated by mature trees. those trees were put in place by mayor christopher, back in 1959 as a major speed for station after. with a doing is they provide a quality of life for people living the richmond get its enormous. it's very very important to them. now we been told that they can plant new trees. that's fine but saplings so just come up immediately into a mature tree. there isn't impacted by resources there that serious. there's an impact upon the quality of life. and we believe there'll be an impact on the businesses that are there. there's a lot of small businesses that employ a lot of people but they are not necessarily robust. the gary is a corridor that is a shot corridor. the restaurant corridor is an auto corridor but if you take away the time that could be taken away when
2:59 pm
they're putting the construction of we think this can be real damage. now, there are a lot of things that have been said that are not exactly accurate. we dealt with cta and mta representatives for a matter of 20 hours and you, sitting here, i think need to have those 20 hours per week that you give them to you. we would like to tell you what went on in those 20 hours will we actually did. >> let me interrupt you can you summarize that fairly briefly spewing the commission got a little time to answer that question.. yes, thank. >> yes, thank you can i go november 5 it was a first public hearing about the plan. it was at the st. mary's cathedral and it was a public
3:00 pm
comment meeting. but nobody was allowed to make any public comment. the but he was allowed to ask a question. that unfortunately, has been away this is been handled by pr. these statements, which you see in the slides that were just before you are often inaccurate. they are just not accurate. for instance, when we asked to find out how many people were actually commuters, all we could find out was how many people got on in certain places but of course there is in a system now and probably should not be a system for they get off so we don't know how many people have the long run. we've done our own surveys and we're all writers of muni and we see no reason for the statement that says buses are slow and reliable. they are not on speaking. the gary geary 38 ought. the geary 38 bay x are
3:01 pm
very fast. people are very very pleased by what they see. there's no reason for mta to be denigrating its own service. so, there are many many more things to talk about about that and what i want to propose was that we have a meeting at which we have an opportunity to set forth what we think is important before you are forced into position we have two approve this. i mean you don't have the time. you have the time to investigate even though you're the duty of care to worry about this you don't have the time. we put the time into and within seven opportunity to come up for you with that >> thank you. suggestions the board will consider. so the meeting with the richmond association. thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> i represent the holy virgin cathedral, which is on 26th ave. between 76 and 27th ave. on geary. our membership is
3:02 pm
about 1200 people. we have senior housing facilities at their. we have two schools there. we believe this disposal is very dangerous to the seniors and to the students, and we very much are opposed to the proposal. it's been said by the project manager that we've met and they heard our concerns and came back with incorporated our concerns into what the proposal is now. i can say that is not true. nothing that we said, expressing our concerns, was incorporated into the proposal as it sits now. i think this is a dangerous costly unnecessary and i do believe that the board nor the
3:03 pm
staff realize the intensity of opposition to this project. on the merchants, from the residence, the mother people visiting the area to this plan. i sincerely hope that if you talk about $200 million i think is much better ways to use it them to create something that will be a real detriment to the living conditions out there. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. i'm a parishioner holy-which is located between 26-27th ave. as previously mentioned we have a lot of concerns but this project going forward. the school of course as mentioned there's two schools operating out of that church and right now the parking they have no parking at the carbon services like a buffer to protect the kids in case they run out, if
3:04 pm
the bustling is put against the curb that buffer is gone. so that opens a lot of possible incidents with a kick and run out on the street and get hit by a bus. the second concern is loss of parking. that area, especially on weekends it's almost as right difficult to find parking. one time i circled literally for 40 min. before i found a parking spot was probably was about seven blocks away. with all this loss of parking stock to get better it's going to get worse. we asked mta to look for options that the locate additional parking in a believe they look into that but at this point, we have no valid reasonable solution to provide additional parking that's needed. a lot of our parishioners come from other locations. east bay, south bay and so on. taking
3:05 pm
public transportation in a lot of cases is not an option so they're forced to drive. with this situation a parking were going to lose a lot of parishioners which we already have due to other reasons but with this implementation this project were going to lose a lot more. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> eileen-zero in solitaire with the geary residence and merchant. public comment residents and merchants concerns were characterized as cold-unquote complaints. we this characterization is condescending dismissive and patronizing. i'm hoping the board does not share this perspective for the propose caravelle project mta has stated they did not do an economic impact study. the mta could also not do a cost-benefit analysis. this is also true of the proposed geary
3:06 pm
prt price. the following is an exit from the gary residence and merchant statement and i will quote: this prt project seems to just justification other than transit improvement. indeed, the budget shows it would take pay for major infrastructure improvements. it's not clear how many of those investments will be of the tubes by the city where developers make use of them. it is obvious the developers will begetting a freebie here under the guise of infrastructure improvements are required when did you the street for the prt. what assures assurances do we have the cost incurred would be anything less than a subsidy for those who will come along and build more units along and near the corridor? is this the hidden subsidies. they should be discussed openly but it's not been raised by muni itself. there's been a strong policy framework density in the richmond. people are suspicious
3:07 pm
given serving a little time for these small minority of writers will commute to downtown does not justify spending $300 million or more. they're curious about the fact that down to money seems to be behind this project." >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon commissioners. mary eliza. this board has not been a very good job of listening to the public if we believe the were saying here today and heard otherwise. you're not responding to the needs of the public. when not sure what you're responding to but it's not the needs of the drivers, the riders, would the general public. neighborhood groups and merchants are meeting tonight in two separate
3:08 pm
meetings to discuss alternative to this geary project. in case you did not know. merchants from castro to polk street and mission are losing business many are closing due to bad traffic and parking problems and the caravelle and geary merchants do not want to become part of that group. of lost business. the merchants will not support a sales tax increase that will further reduce their profits and i'm really not sure the citizens of the city are ready to support that either. we just kind of wondering which of your many projects you're willing to give up if you have to. you don't get that sales tax increase. thank you >> thank you. and you must to address the board seeing none, at the pleasure of the board? >> there are people. >> you want to stand up and speak? >> good afternoon jim and is
3:09 pm
david hurston, long-time richmond resident living in san francisco since 1960. controversy is no stranger to projects in san francisco. but as a long-term residence am very alarmed that the amount of controversy, the mta projects are generating. when i get to a public meeting in people are screaming at each other and yelling at each other, beyond the scope of the project, this tells me that people are not being heard. if i had to characterize this project, it would be a steamroller that's copying her. not being heard by the residence and they are really the feeling for my
3:10 pm
perception is, it's all about the sales job. the virtual reality kiosk is a good example that. he was stated in their presentation that we have spent hours with them. i'm part of the geary merchants group. basically, in those hours they put their powerpoint presentation. we prepared our points and there was never any dialogue. i think that's what's missing on this project is a positive dialogue and scope of the project forward but not and in a lawsuit, not end up in a ballot initiative, not end up with people screaming kid i think it's possible to move the city forward without hurting small businesses. without hurting the 20% of the people in the richmond district that are senior citizens and over 65. so you do the math over 70,000 people how many that is good i just think there's another way is not necessary to rush this project as an emergency. this guy is fun. i urge everyone to take a closer look, sit down, work honestly and hear what the people have to say in a honest fashion and
3:11 pm
also [inaudible] because other people of submitted points and it's like talking to a black hole. so when somebody request something say yes or so note >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> we been trying we've been asking the mta and cta for years and i have to certificate to prove it more than 10 years
3:12 pm
economic impact study it lets do a study. we been rebuffed by the mta and the cta. when i testified in front of them and i mentioned parking, i was given the answer of if i'm really so concerned about parking maybe i should consider moving to a shopping mall there's plenty of parking over there. i think that you really have to locate into this matter. we have light rail on geary boulevard from micah 30-50 and by taking it down we have more certificates from every branch of government giving us the foresight to remove it and to create a boulevard, a commercial corridor, and now you want to take that away and kill it. not telling you the truth. they cannot tell you with the prt there was a gas line over there. that's not in the plan
3:13 pm
but there is a gas line there. if they say they don't want you to know it scored to take 5-6 months per block the construction of the prt. but where talking about the block is not just one block because you got that right block and a half and a block can have. how can we go to survive? people on a mission or going out of business. people on federal are trying to ongoing business. we cannot let you do that to us. and we ask you to be compassionate and be sensitive to it you can. we are not against improving transportation on geary boulevard but don't put us out of business. thank you so much for your consideration >> thank you. anyone else care to address the board? >> i have a lot of compassion for this argument because the special because of the money being spent for this project. on van ness i don't know how
3:14 pm
much i one is costing but that one could simply been solved by having a shuttle bus running between aquatic park and the mission and were frequently to take up the problem being that there was not enough frequency of buses. without spending the millions of dollars that we spent in the disruption involved. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> sylvia johnson. i say i know that exactly the problem is is that [inaudible] needs to be on it is a kind of old way of doing work a lot better and the efficiency that's been going on i have [inaudible] causing the rails. i'm telling you this is not [inaudible]
3:15 pm
putting people out of business and talking about other things that [inaudible]. i mean, it's really [inaudible] that's not going to work [inaudible] we have problems in the [inaudible] and take care of [inaudible]. our main problem [inaudible] i am tired of this, you know, [inaudible] because some politics is better [inaudible] and trying to run [inaudible]
3:16 pm
this is where the issue is in the police department. i'm going to make sure housing and equipment [inaudible] because a lot of [inaudible] it will be [inaudible] >> thank you. next speaker, please. just, come on up. >> hello. if i understood correctly, i was very heartened to hear you said you would meet were overhearing with the richmond people? did i understand that correctly? >> bestows what you want,
3:17 pm
>> the people are terrible the merchants and resident roots that similar problems with sfmta. that had meetings with us but it is not been well advertised in the community. when we finally managed the leaflet the community ourselves to tell them what actually was happened because as of the third and final meeting, where the staff was announcing what changes they have made based on community input there were hundreds of people who didn't have any idea the stops were being removed. according hours were being booked because the sunset when upset come to an open house on the old sourdough. the make the capital more efficient and safer >> this about geary prt >> we have something similar but i want to know the next time we come to officially be presenting their proposal to you for final approval. or hopefully you would adopt a terrible plan that would just do it as a trial permitted i was wondering if you'd also be
3:18 pm
willing to meet with the caravelle merchants group and residents groups before you get to that point so we can avoid the problem that happen elsewhere where it's implemented in most people still don't know what about it because it's such anger and dissension in the community. >> thanks. next speaker, please. anyone else was to speak to the board? seeing none, members of the board >> i know mr. chairman from our agenda this is a presentation on. we have no action on this item. i've no follow-up questions but i would think mr.-for the presentation and for keeping this board up to date on the progress. i'm gary prt >> anybody else on the board? director ramos >> i just want to state up into a part of this process. actually this is in my second term as a board member here the reason why i was actually appointed to the sports because i was serving on the citizen advisory committee for thegeary
3:19 pm
prt and i was five years ago and we were hoping that would project would've vastly been implemented by now. so there's no rush here. this is long past due i think. there are 50,000 riders on that line every day that i feel, by not doing anything are ignoring the fact that that line were having a hard time getting anybody upon the line anymore. i mean those buses are so crowded now that if you're a person with the ability issues or have any kind of it-if you can play twister, and having a hard time getting on a bus and i know because i ride it. i so know that is an auto oriented corridor. a lot of business were set up their to be auto oriented. as such,
3:20 pm
we should be as sensitive as possible to doing whatever we can to protect and preserve the small businesses that are doing business there and we cherish. so, i'm hoping that going forward that we are not necessarily we that we as a city, we as a part of the minutes of howdy are working with the economic development agency to make sure putting in place whatever measures we need to make sure the small businesses are taken care of in a way that would help transition to what really should be started off as, in transit corridor. i won't say more because is a long meeting but looking forward to having these conversations going forward but i certainly am very concerned about making sure the businesses stay afloat both in preparation for the construction during construction, and after
3:21 pm
construction. in the same way women able to do with essential subway i think we've done phenomenal job working with the businesses and making sure that they stay afloat in that capacity. so i look forward to the conversation. >>the whole goal is to make it easier for people to access your business, not to make it more difficult. so, i know this project has been under i was the vice chair of the bank may for prop k and 23 in geary prt was in that consideration back then. we been having this conversation for very long time. i think what's hard for us is that it doesn't seem like we have been able to come together the community and mta,
3:22 pm
to adequately feel comfortable with the project did i know that was a mention of 20 hours, 20 meetings were 20 hours of meetings that might be helpful if there were a list of the top five things were the 10 things that were the pain points of the community that we could address because i think it's going to be the easiest way for us to tackle those things. we have a very clear list of suggestions that these of things would make it better. i've always believe is important to be proactive and resolutions rather than point out the problems which we all can easily do on a number of things but i think we have a lot of great minds and community leaders in the community across from us as well's people at mta working hard on figuring out how do we also talked about earlier plan for our future. our population
3:23 pm
is growing and even growing in the richmond district as well. i think i saw housing prices are gone up in the richmond district because of greater demand. no people living out. we know the system is stressed and we do we can't transport many more people on that system today. so we have to come up with a solution. so, i look forward to working with all of you. i know we've been all been working together and i'll begin figure out how we can better communicate with each other and hear each other so that everybody feels like we are doing what's in the best interest of the city and in the community overall. >> director borden i think that's extremely well stated argument the positive positive suggestion the top 4-5 things that are problems as opposed to having 24 hours of meetings. similar group c or c those before we put four. i definitely support that again this is not an action item. i want to thank our staff for the presentation all the public for being a. let's move to the next item >>item 14 >>[reading code].
3:24 pm
>> how many? >> maybe we can ask the public to give recommendations. when we call on members of the public who want to speak on the shuttle bus issue and in the board will talk about it. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon mr. thomason >> hi my name is david thomas. almond with in building manager at 7001 bush st. me on behalf of our tenants especially tenants who now have the doing windows that face the new
3:25 pm
shuttle stop those put in a couple of weeks ago. i missed into something of a pilot which is why we are here. i just-i would like to point out that when these buses pull in as a diesel engine in the back of them. those mega-doesn't that diesel engine sits about 15 feet for the bedrooms of some of the tenants in our building and they're being very negatively impacted could i like you all to consider what it would like to 150 people, 200 people directly outside your bedroom window and have idling diesel engines 15 feet from your bed. this is what our tenants are going to especially on the first and second floor where those buses-with this new shuttle stop has been put in. i know are small number of tenants and i can hear from a lot of people benefit from this program. i'm not inky-shuttle in any way but this new stop is literally forcing our tenants
3:26 pm
out of their beds start at 5:40 am every morning. so i ask you to reconsider we are in the neighborhood you would like to put these shuttles. the places that are not that close to where people sleep so thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon. >> hello members of the board. i want to speak first of all, i want to support the shuttle okay shannon at bush. as either standard, you can correct me if i'm wrong, this is a temporary stop to replace one that used to be at then asked neither california were segments oh while the banas bus rapid transit is been constructed. i'm not too familiar with that neighborhood and that's on my stockholder am glad the board is working to identify your placement stop while the brd is under construction and accommodate those who get on in that area. i think some of us have had complaints over how
3:27 pm
stop changes have been made in the past where stocks were moved without there being a proper replacement provided good i'm glad that's not happening in the case of cost and bush but one place where that is still the cases near the former stop at 18th and church three. we don't have an option for those buses living in the neighborhood. i live at 20th and guerrero. there's no stop within a half-mile. it's almost 3/4 of a mile to the nearest one at 26 to 25th and valencia. in the evening drop-off. so, speaking to item 14-c grade asap at cesar chavez and bartlett, i think this is i think it's reasonable to create a stopped there and i think that
3:28 pm
it would be reasonable to relocate the 25th and valencia stop there if that stopped like everybody go to the stock were well served by that stop. however that's currently serving overflow traffic from people who would prefer a stop your 19 and dolores. so, i would ask you not to move the 25th and valencia stop until an alternative internet even divorce can be established. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] >> good afternoon >> grew sparsely. i lifted the corner bush and cost. 1701 bush for 21 years. i am in favor of the shuttle buses. i'm not thrilled about the buses idling 15 feet i measured it from our windows. for my bedroom window. the diesel tossed is not a lot of fun. they start at 5:40 am which is a little earlier than i used to wake up. we've always slept with the windows open because it's great weather in san francisco. we don't do that anymore. the biggest were some
3:29 pm
of the safety problems are that there is a street trees next to the parking where identified for the buses. but they don't pull in there because they can't. the trees are not tall enough to go over the top of the buses. and they're not able to-they're not able to park in a parking zone which actually takes out a lane of driving rain, two. on golf. also, it has a problem with people turning from bush onto golf because they're actually out in the driving lane. [inaudible] i think a solution like would suggest it be to move it to go off and geary. next of the catholic church, there, there are no apartments or buildings next. there's actually a lot of
3:30 pm
room. there's not that many people dr. overnight either. there's no cheese in the way. it's also no further from the van ness than your geary and bush is. there's no [inaudible] i think i would be a good alternative >> thank you, sir. next speaker >> >>[calling names] >> are any of those folks are? >> hello again >> hello, again. thanks for the opportunity to speak about the good i'm another person that currently rides the shuttle from the 25th and valencia stop. my understanding is the cesar chavez location will potentially be a
3:31 pm
replacement for that stop. so i really appreciate again that there is replacement and not just removal. as a huge impact on my quality of life being able to take the shuttle from our location. i have seen i want to echo what scott said. i've seen a larger influx of riders since the stop was a limited your church and 18. so, it's going to add to blocks to my commute. i'm okay with that. i think have stronger affect on people who already becoming further because there stop was moved. so, i just applied you sort of making a replacement and ask that it be consideration for adding a stop closer to the dolores park neighborhood. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >>[calling names] last person who's turning a speaker card. >> hi. my name is mark hurwitz. i live again on farrow street 23. the stop that valencia 25th is one i use. i
3:32 pm
think that moving itself to make the school saver is good but actually having more stops will actually improve the pocket when the big problems is about congestion but i think overall the reduction of number of sauces increase congestion at various places around the city. see more stops would give the people the opportunity the fewer shuttles acting individual stocks and reduce congestion people say around that sort of thing. so assuming charge the urgency of replacing the other stops in front instead of delete one at one. it's only not reducing the number is very good. josie on our topless communication. there was agenda for this meeting said it indicated we would be removing the stop but in fact, there was no communication posted around the location and the agenda for the meetings for this previously discussed adding the stop at cesar chavez and bartlett did not discuss any possibility of removing the stop at valencia
3:33 pm
and 2050 or so i think that's something that perhaps we can do better communication with people who are the writers and affected by this >> members of the board spewing >> i do feel the matter where we put a stop or move the stop on were running into problems. i don't pretend to be an expert in any of these locations but maybe the way forward to today always is to approve these people should be willing to
3:34 pm
walk a little bit further for once you ride to the destination, but i think there's a limit about people are willing to work. the one with the bus idling outside of people's bedrooms, i absolutely feel you on that. there's nothing worse that diesel smell right outside your house so maybe on about one it looks like here's a big we are located at good releases in a fantastic step out to look for an option that won't be outside which may not exist. >>
3:35 pm
3:36 pm
provide just a quick overview of the key points you need to snow. this is largely the material you have been seeing all the along and the good work of moe neek and her staff have... . >> terrific. thank you. >> thank you. i want to ask quickly roberta presentation on the -- [pause]. unless you brought it? did you bring it? so sorry
3:37 pm
about that. okay. so we'll just do a quick summary of the points that we're going to make today. so good afternoon i'm moe neek webster with sfmta* finance division. and what we're bringing before you for adoption today is the... capital improvement program. the program is a rolling 5-year road map... to advance the strategic goals of our agency all while keeping -- all while being focused, efficient, and effective with the money and resources we have to us. some of this information will be available to you... capital budget but what's different today is we're presenting the overall comprehensive 5-year program, which we bring to you for approval every two years. in your materials for today is a 200-page document that describes in detail over 250 projects and all their funding sources. and
3:38 pm
there are many many people who are involved in the development of this program. and it's led by the capital financial planning and analysis team. and i'm going to turn it over quickly to arial as par tiew santo* who is the leader of that team. thank you. >> good afternoon. >> thank you. and thank you monique. and thank you for your patience as we deal -- it reminds me back in the day when we had the [indecipherable] in the classroom.* so as monique mentioned, you already seen a portion of this presentation as we presented the budget. so i'm going to move through it quickly.... first two years of that are the capital budget that came to you folks in april. and as you remember, what we think as cip is, it's really the implementation tool for all of the strategies and plans that the city has and the region and the mta. so we apply the
3:39 pm
financial constraints to our capital plan to come up with what set of projects we're going to deliver with the revenue we expect to see over the next five years. some of the main goals that we're pushing for through this plan are vision zero, transit first and state repair.* we're very focused on safety and we're also looking at investing in areas of concern. so building on that, one of the things that we're very proud of is that we've been able to include recommendations from the muni equity strategy in the... so as you recall our 2-year budget is implementing all the recommended capital project that came out of that strategic effort. so we're really happy to be able to see that reflected in here. we also want to talk a bit about how we've taken into
3:40 pm
account the potential ballot measures this year. so as you're aware, there was a major effort through the mayor's office transportation 2030... citywide... so several recommendations came out of that, one of which is the gee owe nn bond passed in dwiewrn.* potential sales tax measure... we're looking at putting on the ballot this year. so we have assumed assumptions related to that ballot measure in our cip. we put 45 to 65 million dollars* per year starting in fiscal year 18 moving forward. does a bit of involving process getting more information about what that measure would actually look like. we've weighed out the details here based on the latest information. so they -- based on where we're seeing the proposed charter amendment now, it looks like there would actually be somebody
3:41 pm
available... stwent million dollars for transportation and then $100 million for every year after that. those dollars are split within various categories in the sales tax measure ranging from muni service, investment in suite facilities, infrastructure, investment in regional projects, investment in vision zero and a portion for street resurfacing. all of those various surfaces combined, yo look at our 5-year picture* you've seen a slide like this before, but we're happy to show that our 5-year program right now is 17-21 is in fact large rch the previous 5-year* program from 15 to 19. and on top of that if you were to look at the course [indecipherable] and exclude the central subway major project we're actually increasing our investment by over 20%. for later for your perusal, you can look at this
3:42 pm
very detailed chart which breaks out our expected funding and expenditures by program level across the five years. so you'll see again those two years capital budget and they add up to 3.4 billion over the five years. and we do want to call out that for the first time we're going to be actually investing a portion of our fund balance in capital projects, as you approved there's over 75 million dollars in those* first two years being focused on priority projects coming out of our fund balance reserve. the next few slides call out some of the key projects in the different program areas. again, these are fairly similar to the slides you saw with the capital budget. so i'm not going to spend time on them individually. if you have any questions, we're happy to speak in more detail. i think we will move on to the
3:43 pm
last slide, which shows that this developing the cip has been almost a year long effort for my team. there's a lot involved in terms of vetting it internally and externally. and so, we want to highlight that we did significant outreach, spoke with many different stakeholder groups, spoke with you several times. additionally, the individual projects that are represented in this program also have their own outreach strategies. and with the hopeful adoption of the cip today, that outreach doesn't end. we're still planning to do some additional poat-adoption outreach and add this is really a living document. you have the beautiful pdf look to look at now, but as of tomorrow it's probably obsolete*. we're always updating it and keeping it so it reflects our most recent budget and is priority. as those change, we'll continue our efforts to keep the
3:44 pm
community informed. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. [indecipherable]. >> yes, you have one member of the public. >> let's hear from one member of the public. >> we have turned in the speaker card on this matter. >> get the screen back? >> it's been a long afternoon for all of us. car man historic*. i'm very pleased to be with you here today. i will just take a short amount of time, because it is approaching the cocktail hour, right? i'm here as a private citizen, a resident, long time interest in transportation. and a lot of experience in planning and financing projects at the federal level, at the regional level, and here locally. more importantly as the former -- one of the former, several executive directors we've had at the transportation authority. what i wanted to talk to you about today is the fort mason
3:45 pm
extension. you heard at the beginning of today several people testify* about the need for that project and how important it is -- not just to a bunch of people who are streetcar enthusiasts, let me assure you, okay? but to people who care about mobility and access in the city and about opportunities. and this project is definitely an opportunity. it is, i think, one that meets the policy criteria that are outlined in the staff memo. and i don't know why it is not specifically included in the capital program. because funds have been identified and a public planning process, however different it may have been from the way muni goes about business because of the coordination and collaboration necessary for the national parks service, we are at a point where we need to begin preliminary engineering of this project. and the window for the validity of the eis is a limited window. the funding has
3:46 pm
been identified, not committed, but identified, and so, i would encourage you to, as you go forward with adoption to look at ways to include this project. time is of the essence. thank you so much for the time -- for your time. >> members of the board, closure? [indecipherable]? >> sief as part of the cip one of muni fort's goals is service improvements. and again i want to improve... reduction in service and not an improvement. but another goal under the cip is the 5-year layout of implementing the rapid network serving nearly 70% of all riders to promote to provide more frequent and reliable service. we have asked that rapid buses
3:47 pm
be put on the [indecipherable] corridor so people who are commuting during busy rush hours can use rapid service and without eliminating the bus stop that so many other people need. so that would be a win-win situation for sour community -- make it, put on some rapid buses and let us keep our bus stops. and i have lived here in san francisco for over 38 years. and i was always proud of the fact san francisco has had a reputation for taking care of its elderly and disabled residents. and part of that is we have bus stops -- at least in my community -- every two blocks. now i understand mta's goals spacing bus stops up to 1500 feet. that just doesn't work for our community. and for a lot of san francisco where we have so many elderly residents. and even though a lot of younger people are moving into the city, we still have a very large aging
3:48 pm
population and long-term planning, in 30 years a lot of those young people are going to be aging. and i want to tell you briefly about mary. she uses the alter ra* she's 100 years old. it takes her 10 minutes to walk to her stop. because that stop is there, it gives her the freedom, independence, and dignity to be able to get around san francisco independently. we convinced mta not to take away the stop. but there are people like mary all over the tar raville community* who need their stops. >> thank you. address the board on this one? seeing none, [indecipherable]. >> i will be happy to make a motion to approve. by i want to ask since this is a living document, do we have the ability to add things in such as the fort mason extension. >> yes. so this is a living document. what per charter amendment you approve the capital budget every two years. and within that we
3:49 pm
have authority up to 5% of the total budget to make changes. so we could add other projects into it without requiring additional approval. >> and what would sort of the process for that be? because i don't want it to be that, you know, we mandate what goes in there and in this one-time fell thing. i think it would be good to look at that project. because i think including that in our cip would help that project move along. it sounds like there's some pretty good support for that. >> i want to note it is included in the cip. we have almost... prop k sales tax program to that project in the cip right now for preliminary phases. we don't have a funding plan for the full project. and baz the cip is a fiscally constrained... * we can only add things in we have funding identified for. we can fund projects phase by phase and in this case have the preliminary work funded now and continue to look for solution for future phases. >> and i would just add, if
3:50 pm
i may, that absence of funding beyond what we've have is reasonably able to commit such as the prop k funding, would not at all preclude us from seeking additional funding to advance project which is our intent and i heard from the board chair his direction as well. for example, the federal whrand access to parks program that one of the earlier speakers mentioned we anticipate notice of funding availability in early 2017 is what we understand. we'll certainly be aggressively pursuing that for this project. so i wouldn't want folks to be kurnd because we just want been able to identify funds for the project it's not guilty something we'll try to advance*. but we just need to find the funding source for this... we'll be pursuing that as soon as that notice comes out. >> thank you. that's excellent then. i have no questions. thank you
3:51 pm
both for not only the presentation but for sticking it out for the length of the meeting. >> ... i have a question -- did you say this was built on the assumption also the additional sales tax we're seeking in the fall or all just based on the baseline right now? >> so we have included assumption from the sales tax in the cip -- yes. >> and in the capital budget that we approved. that same slide is what we've shown you. so where -- we are assuming that. >> so what happens? god forbid -- obviously there's things going on before it and separately we have to get this before the public. what is our default or back position if that doesn't come through for some reason? >> well, but primarily we won't be able to advance some projects in those category that is we showed on the slide that we are hoping to advance. so on the order of -- i don't know -- $12 million a
3:52 pm
year vision zero funding. there's similar amounts for transit state good repair funding. that much less we'd be able to do -- if we don't have another funding source to come in behind it unfortunately. >> ... what would we de-prioritize if unfortunately didn't work out for us. >> essentially in every category we have prior toization criteria we're using*. we go as far down the list of priorities as we can given the funding we anticipate. so if there's less funding, we would just have to dial back up categories say vision zero or muni state repair or some of the other muni forward implementation that we are anticipating potential sales tax revenue to help augment. >> thank you. >> motion to second. all say aye. thank you very much. >> .
3:53 pm
>> item 16... amendment 3 contract with al ston... inventory services to extend contract additional two years for additional amount of 41 million... total contract not to exceed $80 million 698,000. mr. chairman there's no members of public who wish to address you on this matter. >> good afternoon. good evening, it's a pleasure to be the first one on the second shift to make the presentation [laughter] >> i will in fact you i could speak for hours on this topic -- and i'm sure you'd appreciate that. but let me make a couple of points that we'll share with you in the highlight. first of all, i wanted to come to celebrate with you for what has been a tremendous success. success in three ways. when you approved on this initiative some three years ago, what the results have been have been improvements in the service -- in the
3:54 pm
reliability, in the availability of the rail service. when you take the lrvs today, when you ride the rail service, l, m's always have 2-car trains. because we've been able to stabilize the availability. a key factor has been this major management initiative, which also leads to a second benefit that we've realized from this process. when this was introduced to you three years ago by brain child of our finance and materials management people, what they did was introduce a blended concept or a hybrid concept for management that would allow us to both take control of the way we manage the inventory. that's very important when you think about the range of cars, the type of equipment you've heard a lot today about different types of modes in cars. so no. 1, we've got a strong contract. no. 2, we've bfn able to -- as the
3:55 pm
charts indicate, we've been able to reduce the stockouts, reduce the value of inventory. we've saved real money. that's the second. so from a business standpoint, it's the second measure of success. the service, the business practices, and the efficiency. third standpoint we've really drawn a new paradigm for the business model. and by that what we've done is develop an ongoing dialogue with our existing work force and civil service to preserve the jobs, to preserve the system. build on that by introducing best practices from the private sector. using a firm al ston nn with* experienced car builder, experienced car manufacturer who understands our system, understands the industry, has access and contracts to parts. what that's been able to do is allow us to improve our planning, make sure that we're
3:56 pm
focused on the critical parts -- 50 critical parts. things for brakes, things for doors, things for propulsion system that you've heard us talk about. so with that, what we've seen over the last three years is really a spectacular success in terms of the performance. and what we ask of you today albeit very briefly -- and again, i'm very happy to expand on this -- is to continue your support, to extend this contract for two years and to put additional money in the contract to allow us to do this. so that is the 30-second summation. i'm happy to take additional questions, or i'm happy to go back and walk you through the 21 slides that i have prepared. >> [laughter] >> thank you for the presentation. thank you very much. members of the public here to speak on mr. haily's presentation? are you speaking on this one?*
3:57 pm
[indecipherable] anything else, right? >> managed inventory. well, i'm [indecipherable] johnson. and i think this goes to a deeper subject, you know, because on a lot of issues why things haven't been done is because they've been playing games. i think we should do something about this, because the issue that they did before that was another game. [indecipherable] in here and they set me up for a [indecipherable]. took it out and then some stupid things. and i think this is, you know,, because i had -- when i got out
3:58 pm
[indecipherable] and i went straight to washington, d.c. and what happened when i was there is that, again members were absent. and when they come after me, they couldn't handle it. they all went crazy. and they couldn't believe it. they put ne in prison for it. and this is where i'm talking about the supervisor* is real serious [indecipherable]. because this is already happened before on me [indecipherable]. i think this is a big issue. you know, we need to keep this war going [indecipherable]. make no sense now of these issues. because what we're having [indecipherable] new ideas, new
3:59 pm
success. during process and business. [indecipherable] we need to make room for it and you know get this issue. >> thank you. anyone else want to address this board on this subject? seeing none, motion? >> motion to [indecipherable]. >> all those in favor say aye. thank you very much. >> whether to conduct a closed session. motion to move to closed session. >> is there a second? >> all those in favor say aye. >> thank you mr. chairman. put the roll into closed session.
4:00 pm
4:01 pm
>> okay welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget & finance subcommittee for wednesday, july 20, 2016, my name is mark farrell i'll be chairing the committee and joined by supervisor yee and by the supervisor tang.
4:02 pm
>> thank you clerk linda wong and mark as nona melkonian from sfgovtv for covering the meeting madam clerk, any announcements? >> yes. >> yes. board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you, madam clerk we were here quite late madam clerk call number one. >> the approval for the calendar year 2017 to remove the rates from ohio and colleagues this is something i sponsored on the health board and the representative i want to welcome the amazing director katherine dodd. >> thank you. good morning
4:03 pm
members of the board brown today a administrative code for the health service and calendars year 2017 this the stacey a monthly contribution the charter requires the employer contribute towards the health premiums for the 10 couldn't average based on the 10 months populous counties they use the average amount to the retiree rates asia to a couple of unions not adopted the percentage contribution this year's 10 county average increases 4.4 percent and all health service insurance have increased substantially this - only which of - the first cost driver the cost of the inhibitions and out-of-pocket
4:04 pm
cost driven by large hospital consolidation this is the rapidly cost increase for the drugs to treat cancer and cure hispanics c and other anti viral drugs and others anti you mean minute drugs although we have many drugs as generic for several years the mustards are increasing the costs of generics to get a profit late cost driver that the services is hss members the utilization will considers unfortunately, our membership depresses chronic illness our well-being program is so important health services is in compliance with the characters passes in
4:05 pm
2010, the health service board approved a second opinion for all members estimate 44 percent of medical diagnosed are incorrect and financial and human costs the hss manage care of plans have less second opinions and now renowned experts and a with expertise in certain areas all hss members will be able to call or e-mail the doctors and release their records to get a second opinion this has adam $1 to the cost and within the trust by $0.95 to pay for communication casts and well-being per the charter this is calculated into the health premium and the rates are decreased with the rate
4:06 pm
agreements guaranteed through 2019 you may recall that kaiser permanente decreased if 2017 and held them flat the katrero park increases 4.7 increase and added a cop structure to match blue shield neither of the plans changes the premium costs it is important to note it hiv drugs are excluded in the drug charge adding best doctors for the fund and the kaiser permanente increases for the actives amount to 5 percentage the kaiser permanente medicaid advantage increases 8 percent for the sustainability fund with the premium increase for medicare is 8.76 percent the blue shield for active uses and others retirees
4:07 pm
are 3.79 percent we've funded blue shield the employer takes the risk up to a certain dollar amount we pay the pharmacy and the other costs we continue to work with blue shield with significant success to keep the costs down adding the best doctors and sustainability fee bring the blue shield to 4.682 percentage with the retiree there over 16 percent working with blue shield and the proposed lowered to 10.2 the actuary recommended to accept the proposal and expand the ppo that was offered the first time and the medicare decreasing the rate increase by 11 percent
4:08 pm
our self-funded ppo administrative code by the a.k.a. would have increased by 48 plus percentage for actives and early retirees and the health service board used the rate stabilization to reduce those from 12 mrs. percentage the ppo ac was calculated at the 29 percentage with the actuary voted to - the new city plan ppo rather than continuing the self-funding this as fundamental change not a benefit change the reduction this reduces the ppo increased to 14 percent the overall increase for 2017 would have cost 14 plus
4:09 pm
$9 million by adapting the ppo instructions only to 2 want 5 percent at the 5.3 those amount to a million dollars our active self-delta ppo increased by .8 were reduced by 6 percent for 2016 over 2017 and are the same for 2017 the pacific delta plan for the retirees that adam an additional service lifelong disability andtions for the actives is florida inchanged in 2019 beginning in - smoking on the status of insured and this again decrease the premium
4:10 pm
by an average of 7.1 percent overall a total increase for the benefits is overall the total average compares favorably with the 9 percent i realize i may have received concerns from the medical retirees i want to assure you the plan will payal plans through by physician that accepts medicare and we believe the concerns are unwaeshtd the new ppo has a broader plan than the old city plan it has additional benefits and the lower premiums through kaiser permanente and low co-pay we hope to dispel the confusion what is covered along with our kaiser permanente there will be
4:11 pm
20 members of the committee to help to educate and 5 town hall members that can't attend because of timing or that distance during and before enrollment- i also know that representatives from kaiser permanente and blue shield and united health care are here i urge your approval thank you director dodd's. >> supervisor yee. >> good morning, ms. dodd i have a related question i noticed that your reserves for the trust fund has been dwindled quite a bit from 11 millions to 3 million or so i'm wondering are there any plans to replenish to grow that back up are we in
4:12 pm
any danger you know of a shortage. >> we've spent the reserve amount over the last two years to buy down the early retiree active and rates to make them comprehensive with blue shield and capillary this year the board went through two rate deliberations what to buy down our policy is to set aside 1/3rd of any excess not excel by premiums over expenditures and to amortize any decreases over 3 years that amount would so been 3.679 millions the rate increased 48 percent plus to
4:13 pm
further decrease those costs and i don't believe that we are in - we still have what's the balances pamela? whatever 11 millions plus 3.79 is. >> so there's 3.79 that should be adequate nonetheless we have a tremendous number of sick people and if it isn't we will amortize any loss over 3 years but increase the premiums obviously. >> i'm curious what's the average autumn that you've had in they're for the last 10 years. >> i think. >> i don't have that
4:14 pm
stabilization we implemented this policy of amortizing both blue cross blue shield and the delta dental and the city plan we implemented it i think 6 years ago but we could go back and get that information to you there was a period because the premiums went up so high a lot of people left and left us with a surplus in stabilization we spent down the surplus last year. >> i have one other question regarding the long term disability insurance i noticed a decrease of 7.1 percent over and over something like that which is curious to me. >> the decrease was based on our agreeing to give a
4:15 pm
percentage to the insurance company with a low amount of smokers so they decreased our amount and luckily only 2.7 percent of our employees are smokers the national average is 22 percent. >> i'm happy to see the decrease. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you colleagues, any further questions okay mr. rose, can we go to your report. for number one. >> yes. on page 7 shown in table one of the total estimated city and member costs for delta plans and long term disability and life insur is 63 million dollars plus in 2017 which is a
4:16 pm
4.79 increase in the 2016 the fidelity estimated cost for the health and dental plan as well as the long term disability and life insurance for the city itself in 2017 is $581 million approximately 24.3 or an increase in the 4 hundred million people in 2016 we recommend that you approve that ordinance. >> thank you mr. rose any questions for the budget analyst anyone wish to comment commissioner or hss fellow commissioner ms. breslin a hero and want to recognize here if there are any other commissioners, i apologize but
4:17 pm
anyone want to comment you'll have 2 minutes and additional people want to speak please line up against the wall with 2 minutes to speak. >> good morning my name is karen breslin i'm a member of the benefits and on the health service board they voted 4 to 2 to remove the existing city plan and blue shield for the eligible retirees they'll be put into the new plan a special meeting held at a different times and place teleconference rushed through with little notice to our members and the board member i was kept in the dark until 3 days before this roams removes a choice for the city plan employees that is a self-funded plan and all assets and liabilities blink to the city or
4:18 pm
trust the plan is a united health care plan and calling this the new city plan a misleading and will confuse the members when the medicaid retirees are removed the only members remaining will be actives and early retirees they're the highest cost and there will be little subsidy left for the next year there are under 2000 members there has been no explanation how this plan will be sustainable the only plan the retirees have available to move out of area it only covers methodology retirees no explanation of how medicare of employees living outside of the u.s. are covered they cover the
4:19 pm
medicare retirees seeing local dollars it is a good choice as last year but not a mandated. >> one more statement. >> sure. sure. >> to the rushed many questions have been met unanswered this causes a lot of confusion and distrust and will you put a lot of staff at extra work thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is july 4th kit are retired city employee and a resident of district 7 i have here letters from the protect our benefits president larry on his views and oath copies for everyone. >> i just want to say i have for many, many years been in city plan one and want to continue in that plan the city plan is important to keep
4:20 pm
because not all decreases take medicare the highly skilled decreases treating a serious disease didn't take medicare the differences of quality of services the city plan allows access to all decreases and freedom of choice that is the plan you want to do away with it is a self-plan administrative code by the united health care that provides a visit to all an actual decrease for a second opinion not the case in what is proposed in the change thank you thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> chief financial officer i've been asked by director dodd to read into the record a letter that she received from greg the
4:21 pm
commission on the health service board dear kablth republican thank you for your offer to remain on the finance committee for the fully funded medicare ppo plan that replaces the blue shield 65 plus plan and the self-insured plan for retirees as a commissioner and former chief financial officer for the department of health and former acting chief financial officer for the health service i studied the issues thoroughly and took time from meeting with our actuary before voting i remain convinced the plan will have broader geographic come over and a lower cost than the plan that replaces i understand the concerns of retired members that worry about access to theory physicians and hospital i too am
4:22 pm
a medicare eligible retiree and will be losing my blue shield conform i was concerned about losing any says, however, i'm satisfied this will not be an issue u h c has data indicating 94 percent of physicians already participating in this plan and those physicians current provide 95 percent plus of the services in addition no changes in the covered services member cops are lower and an importantly the total monthly cost is lower than the blue shield 65 plus plan city plan and even the kaiser permanente medicare advantage plan plus - >> i have plus a fully insured plan no risk of under funding that will require the retention
4:23 pm
reserves for a self-funded plan adoption of this plan was 4.5 percent increase in costs to the overall medicare population versus and 13 plus there from the continuation of the preexisting plan in terms of cost containment it reduces the liability for forced employment retirement i urge the budget and finance to support this plan seller greg health system. >> okay. >> next speaker, please. >> herbert wiener first, i want to announce i hold shares in united health 98 of them. >> my concern is about the city health plan for one thing it is a very good health plan the enar very of the rest of the country a comprehensive plan the people who are members are
4:24 pm
satisfied with that now, one concern i have is that okay. you're going to eliminate this plan for retirees eventually and eliminate for actives and retirees 65 years of age this is a road to that the other concern is okay. you will have we have two new plans now as retirees either kaiser permanente and the united health plan some people swear by kaiser permanente and not everyone is happy with the plan and the only choice you have is united health the ppo, now the rates are very low for the ppo for united health however, there is nothing to stop them from jacking up the rates and the only alternative
4:25 pm
is kaiser permanente now suppose that kaiser permanente and united health jack i am the prices like the other ribbon barons in 1998 the rates went up for the city health plan sky-high and people fled as a result of that if the rates go sky-high where will people go maybe san francisco general hospital i don't know. but this is really a disaster in my opinion that was rushed through i think the message was pleased you have to approve this and make the wrong decision quickly this is the wrongs way to do business and i think we should protest is this should be perpetual this is on outrage
4:26 pm
thank you >> okay. thank you very much anyone wish to comment. >> okay seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues if any questions or comments. >> otherwise let's entertain a motion. >> through the chair i mean i appreciated ms. defendant's deposition explanation not only in committee but the information i'm comfortable with moving forward i have to hear from the members of the public or the health commission i'll move to send to the full board with positive recommendation. >> motion by supervisor tang and a seconded by supervisor yee and without objection madam clerk call items two and three together. >> the resolution for the san francisco municipal transportation agency on behalf of the city to execute a grant application all the time and recommended documents from the state of california housing and
4:27 pm
sustainable community program as as joint applicant with the the mercy housing and item 3 a resolution for the san francisco municipal transportation agency on behalf of the city to execute a grant application a grant all the time and related documents under the state of california affordable housing and sustainable community programs as joint applicant with the tenderloin neighborhood for the project on eddy street. >> thank you very much welcome back. >> thank you chair farrell and supervisors sophie hayward from the mayor's office of housing and community development the two resolutions before you are each associated with an application for cap & trade funds for the affordable housing and sustainable communities program we call it go a-6 for short each the projects contain affordable housing with a transit oriented improvement to
4:28 pm
make to competitive and to achieve the maximum must be of points those two projects on fell and eddy have requested that the city the sfmta sign on as as joint applicant those resolutions before you authorize the sfmta to officially sign as planners for the cap & trade fund the two resolutions were originally heard at the land use committee, however, after the hearing the state released on application which provided specific language that must be included in its final resolutions indicating the transit agency has the authority to sign on as a joint applicant those resolutions have been amended and i have distributed the amended versions essentially oh, and based on the changes their referred to the budget committee the two resolutions
4:29 pm
function as a apply forceps and expend grant approval if the applications are successful we complete the projects we're happy to make the candidates because the nature of the program the cap & trade program requires the successful applications seriously sooeshld be shovel ready entitled projects ready to go the emotion the cap & trade serve as a substitute so for other city funds and allow us to stretch our dollars further first on 55 fell street is as long as as parcel o a 100 percent accountable new construction approximately, six thousand square feet of retail commercial and community space the project didn't contain in any off-street
4:30 pm
parking but bike that concludes my remarks but have freeway parcel organization was kur7b8 vacate and low remain under city ownership and turn it into mercy housing for the travel the sfmta the grant application consists of 7 bulb outs and assessable signal upgrades along la go down and oak and other mediums along octavia boulevard the total application is over $16 million approximately 1 million of those will be a loan to mercy housing for successful and just over one millions a grant to the city for the transit related improvements and then the second projects is on eddy street and that project sponsor for the housing consultant is tenderloin and the total application in that
4:31 pm
project is for 5 millions and 4 million plus is a loan to the tndc and approximately 16 thousand a grant to the city for transit related improvements the sembly apartment built in the 19234 in need of a sustainable rehabilitation and the financing for the project of which the cap & trade funds are critical will insure that the property will maintain the affordability with the conditions and integrity for the long term the sfmta transit component to that project will economist of converting the painted safety zones on the corners no more the yosemite apartment to the concrete bulb outs that concludes my presentation. there are representatives from
4:32 pm
the sfmta here as well to answer any questions. >> thank you ms. hayward supervisor yee. >> thank you for your presentation ms. hayward can you explain the fact that we're applying for a grant and if we receive the grant that a big chunk the grant will be a loan. >> i mean didn't mean we actually don't have a grant just a loan. >> i can try to explain it's been a confusing process through the state and the nature of the program requires we that the affordable housing partner with the transit oriented improvement is actually comes in two separate parts by far the largest part is very long term loan to the housing developer for the affordable housing the try grant part is to the sfmta to support their transit
4:33 pm
work so the vast majority of work b will go to the nonprofit developer and the only true grant part is to the sfmta. >> is there any advantage of these organizations to take the loan is if later than usual i mean. >> the - i understand the loan is a loan that will be paid back but a very, very long term loan that functions as as grant at the end of the term they'll refinance it and do it again. >> so it saves the city money we don't have to provide the gap funding for that. >> okay i don't completely understand why we're doing this but - >> we'll far brief to use the
4:34 pm
state than the local funds. >> oh, okay. >> there's the answer. >> thank you ms. hayward all right. colleagues, any further questions open up for public comment anyone wish to comment on item number two or three seeing none, public comment is closed. so colleagues would like to accept the amendments and move forward >> so moved. >> motion by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee without objection and madam clerk item 4 auto item 4 a resolution approving the agreement with s p x not to exceed thirty force an initial term for a installation for post 5 years xhoens for the extension for a total term not to exceed 16 years. >> okay. thank you mta to speak in the presentation is that up on the - sfgovtv can
4:35 pm
we do the power point? >> there we go. >> great, thank you. >> good morning chair farrell and members of budget committee ami i work for the sfmta and the project manager. >> i'm here today to present the terms of our fare box contract that was a approved by the sfmta board of directors on june 2, '81, i'd like to go over some backward and rational currently all the muni vehicles residential design fare box that date back to 1991 and they're reaching the end of their useful life their refurnished but not upgraded and the fare box
4:36 pm
manufacturer cubic no longer supports those fare boxs for altogether there are also insufficient fare box sees and they don't - so some of the overall benefits of the in any fare box is the reliability and accounting and tracking for revenues and ridership they will also replace preprinted transfers with on demand realtime that printing of ios transfers and will go through that in a little bit the fare box hope with the security accommodating new policy changes in the future and provide information about the fair transactions the vendor we've selected
4:37 pm
through a procurement process beginning late last fall is s p x jen fair they're a contractor 5 years after initial installation busing plus options plus two options for additional 5 year for a total term. > all opposed by the same sign 15 years the cost is $21.9 million but 6 million for the annual maintenance on a slide in a moment with more details we'll have 13 hundred 36 fareboxes with spares on the cable cars and also others components of the fare box system in addition to the fare box system itself this is a project budget from mr. rose's report for not to exceed amount of 29 plus million
4:38 pm
dollars this slide shows what the fare box will look like this is a model we will have other speakers this is at the generic fare box from the manufacturer there is a transfer at the top which will as mentioned earlier provide on demand printing of transfers of bill and coin slot and bill for entering facing with the customers this is in compliance with the americans with disabilities act the transfers from muni you're familiar with the transfer the new transfers will have a consistent xroirgs as well as a fair price on the ticket the transfer is generic for all fair categories we anticipate the improvement of this operator
4:39 pm
through the transfer theft the transfers will have not value unless by the fare box this will anticipate fair transfer waste and other components of fare box include a cashbox when is will secure housing that stores the fair revenue this can't be opted by our revenue collections staff or others without the appropriate security credentials the cashbox is subdivided out into this orange housing which and the money goes into the mobile bin it is secured and the monies are transferred from each the sfmta divisions to our revenue collections facility at sfmta headquarters this is on overall timeline we are european
4:40 pm
july 28th for the supervisors for the full board of supervisors and have approximately half a year for installation on all the vehicles with the wrap up in spring of 2017. >> that concludes my presentation. if you have any questions. >> supervisor yee. >> i have a quick question i'm curious about the how much do we collect in cash fairs every year this is - i'm wondering is this something in the future will be sleet or not i'm not sure. >> so currently the sfmta has fair revenues of 200 and $5.6 million based on the anticipated 2016 budget the cash fair is $83.7 million
4:41 pm
some of that through clipper and some in the fare box right now we are looking at anticipate that we're doing everything we can to convert people from cash to other fair i clipper through the budget fy 17 budget calls for a regular cash fairs collected at the fare box we're doing things to move people away from that we recognize that cash is a form of currency that people use. >> i don't hear the amount. >> right now we're collecting $83.7 million for the fksz cash value. >> that's not the clipper card. >> some of that includes clipper electronic ash cash on
4:42 pm
the clipper card and some through the fare box revenues. >> my question the cash when i put a quarter that's cash to me so - if you don't know the answer you don't know the answer. >> it is approximately $40 million collected under the fare box i don't have that specific number with me. >> okay. thank you. >> supervisor tang. >> just curious the vendor that was selected s p x jen fair which other transit have they located those boxed. >> they have 80 percent of the fareboxes in the united states in fact, been installed on all the transit systems within the bay area over the last years. >> and in terms of the project budget i see there is you know
4:43 pm
quite a bit erupted for preventive maintenance in terms of ongoing service is that into the software equipment category i want to onramp how it works for the ongoing maintenance and repairs and so forth. >> so we have our the sfmta has its own fare box electronic maintenance technicians that work on all the box and the system they'll remain as first line maintenance the preventive maintenance is provided by the vendors they'll touch the fare box one per year and go through the parts to make sure it is functioning if the boxes are not functioning that's in included in the prices. >> and the contract is for 5 years initially with the option to extend not to exceed 16 years
4:44 pm
given this vendor has 80 percent of market in the united states for transit systems you know making sure that has technology changes and so forth that there able to adopt to that. >> absolutely they you are very well in tune with the trends within the industry so they in addition to the fareboxes and others fair equipment as well. >> thank you supervisor tang mr. rose, can we go to your report. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee on page 14 of our report we show the table i believe that supervisor tang received to the mta's budget for the proposed agreement is $29 million plus with a fare box maintenance costs and related expenses and it is that budget that was submitted to us is seven hundred
4:45 pm
and 35 plus less than the agreement not to exceed $30 million for that reason we made a recommendation on page 14 to amend the proposed not to exceed by seven hundred plus and $30 million to 29 and we recommend you approve the resolution as amended. >> thank you, mr. rose any questions for the mta. >> okay all right. opening up for public comment anyone wish to comment on item number 4 seeing none, public comment is closed. >> move we set mr. rose's amendment and move that out with a positive recommendations. >> motion by supervisor yee and seconded by commissioner chung madam clerk will you call items 5, 6 and 8. >> the release of the public utilities commission places on
4:46 pm
budget committee $21 million for the west side recycled at the water system improvement program to fund the costs for the project item 6 resolution under the california environmental quality act including the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and overriding considerations for the city of san francisco west side recycled water project and item 8 a construction of a recycled water pump station into ground water in golden gate bridge and welcome to the puc. >> thank you. good morning chair farrell and supervisors thank you for the opportunity to present and i want to see thank supervisor wiener for introducing those items those two projects are a concerted
4:47 pm
effort to strengthen our water supply i'm going to talk about each of them the water cycle and the even if and dealing with the budget and reserve funds that is phase 2 of the construction in phase one again and is issues related that the west side recycled water will produce one .6 million gallons of water and the peak pursuit of 4 million gallons a day it will be within the water pollution plant and the latter size for boulder nor production capacity the project includes $7.7 million of pipelines and
4:48 pm
golden gate bridge the projects are irrigation of golden gate park and linking park and presidio golf course and the potentially in the future potentially serving the san francisco zee and toilet flushing in the academy of sciences and the museum golden gate park is the largest and one of the purposes of recycling water to take the park off the ground water and those projects are linked the water quality objectives that were set to meet the park for irrigation and for phil the lakes there we have established specific target for salt and ammonia and worked through that and found the reverse osmosis will meet the goals we'll take the secondary
4:49 pm
water and treat that with filtration for the member before an and reverse the osmosis were the ultimate violet light this is an immense treatment for the recycled water to be used in golden gate park this is a render the recycle water in golden gate park located on the sites of composite fats with the temporary located in the dump area and relocated adjacent in the pump station the krooirgd water budget and reserve funds in this table the totals project costs at this time is one and $86 million we're requesting removal of reserve of one and $20 million we have it budget out for 2018
4:50 pm
and 2019. >> the san francisco ground water supply project is depicted ♪ map it will supply up to 4 million gallons for the - wale start out penalty of perjury slowly to make sure as we develop the ground water it didn't cause seawater intrusion or other probabilities but want to be careful one of the things to note on the figure the blue areas is the areas served by the water it will be blend in the sunset reservoirs to make sure we get a good quality of water on the order of 10 percent ground water for the splus surpass but from the blue area scheduled to 40 percent of the city so that will be a high quality
4:51 pm
of water that is delivered throughout san francisco the ground water project facilities that were enlightening are shown in the picture two locations and each of one is housing a ground water well and pump head to make sure we can extract the water from constructed wells to make sure we have the highest quality of water we can the ground water the united states is a high quality source we've been monitoring since 2000 and this high quality small quantity will be blended in the reservoirs with existing surpass water supply that will splaus surpass outline drinking water concerns we have the best taft water in the world after we blend in ground water we have a more diverse supply and still have the best tasting water even
4:52 pm
in any version we've had ongoing there the eir and through offerings for people to sample the ground water it really is very good quality water one thing i'd like to do recognize our two project sponsors barbara from the puc and the recycled water raised our hand barbara garcia and jeff managing the ground water ios two folks have worked tirelessly to make sure we have high quality projects to inclusive and protect our water in summary we're asking you adopt the krierlgdz project exhaustive the construction in golden gate park and the pimp station and the well water and release the funds
4:53 pm
for the west side project >> i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you very much colleagues, any questions. >> supervisor tang i don't have any questions i kink your been working on this for a very, very longed some that folks have a negative reaction to the potential blended water but certainly we understand your true need to be able to diversify our water source so again make sure that we continue to keep our community updated but the project as construction is beginning and despite the work you've done before i'm glad to see that puc is working with the fire department for example, to on the benefits and strengthening some of the pipelines that serve several purposes to thank you very much for that. >> absolutely. >> supervisor yee. >> you might have addressed
4:54 pm
this but my question is as our pumping water from the ground sometimes, i read about it in the paper we over do that and things happen to the land itself have you guys studied that itch much or think things low happen. >> that's an issue that occurs in the valley and the santa clara when we pump out too much water if there's a lot of clay layers they actually can compress and you have things substantial in santa clara county those 14 feet is the height it is a problem and can't pump it up open that west side of the san francisco we have basically sand virtually all sand so we looked at the
4:55 pm
situations and does not expect anything but keep on top of that and slowly increasing if we see signs of that we'll get on top of that. >> as your penalty of perjury water out as sand the sand will not condense and it is condenses all the dune sand we get from the thousands of years it's been there. >> okay okay no other comments mr. rose, can we go to your report. on 5 i believe. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee you stayed it is regarding item 5 of page 17 the order recycled water budget is one and $86 million blues that includes the one hundred plus of finance reserve
4:56 pm
on page 18 and provided us with the details we recommend you approve the requests and reserves. >> thank you, no other comments or questions we'll move to public comment anyone wish to comment on item number 5, six or eight. >> good morning, supervisors thank you for the opportunity i'm laura with spur and here to support the project we've been a long time supporter of this in san francisco this project is moving this long time forward it is important we difference if i our water supply to meet the goals of the sustainable city we have a wonderful supply in hetch hetchy but do more to have kiergd water san francisco is one of the last city to develop the water so mostly this project forward helps us into a
4:57 pm
leadership position i think that it is we heard you to adopt those findings to meet the goals to have 10 million gallons a day by 2018 as we supported in the 2008 with the water pe eir those plans get built and having a goal of appropriate alternative water supplies for the resilient city thank you for the recycled water project moving forward anyone wish to comment seeing none, public comment is closed. okay colleagues. >> i'd like to make a motion to adopt all the budget analysts recommendations that is including the reserve and sending forward the items to the full board with positive
4:58 pm
registration. >> clarification that is adding 6 and 8 and item number 5 to file the hearing matter. >> yes. i'll make a motion to file item 5. >> motion by supervisor tang seconded by supervisor yee without objection. >> madam clerk call items 7 and 9 the resolution adopting the california environmental quality act including the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding consideration for the san francisco west side water project and item 9 resolution authorizing the amendment of mission to reduce the size of the premises to accommodate the san francisco public works and consideration of the payment of approximately thirty thousand and investments thank you puc is here. >> good morning. i'm tony the
4:59 pm
assisted reality director of the puc i ask for your consideration of a resolution authorizing the amendment to the lease between the city and county of san francisco to the sfpuc and our charged supply hardware the amendment is needed to reduce the premises in order to accommodate the sfpuc regional ground water storage and recovery project in consideration of the payment of 4 hundred and 60 thousand plus this is the very same ground water project that mr. richie spoke about it i cac have the overhead this is a poly gone of the premises of our charged supply calling your attention to the colored portion that are effected the only impact on our
5:00 pm
charged is operation is that dark blue towards the back of the parking lot - those are sub services use that will have a less impact on hardware supply. >> so in closing through this resolution we ask the board of supervisors to approve and authorize this amendment and adopt the california environmental quality act finding super guidelines in the administrative code code chapter 31 and incorporate the finding it is consistent with the general plan and the 8 policies of city planning code section 101 point one and authorize the city director of properties or the sfmta general manager to execute and make modifications
5:01 pm
and certain actions in furtherance of this resolution. >> okay. >> colleagues, any questions for staff right now okay mr. rose, can we go to your report. for item 7 i believe the only one. >> that's correct mr. chairman item 7 on page 21 the report on the appraisal the net value of the reduction to the site table by the sfpuc is 4 hundred and 60 tell you plus in table two on page 22 of the report we recommend that you approve that resolution. >> thank you, mr. rose colleagues, any questions anyone wish to comment on item number 7 are 9 seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i'll go ahead and move the items 7 and 9 out of committee with positive recommendations. >> motion by supervisor yee and seconded by supervisor tang without objection all right. thank you. >> madam clerk item 10.
5:02 pm
>> a resolution approving the agreement with new comp with edison mccormick for energy and climate for a 5 year terms 2 thousand 21 for a total cost invited 25 mills. >> we have mr. rodriquez. >> good morning, mr. rodriquez from the department of the environment seeing to enter into 5 year contract with mccormick nooiftsdz $44 million for services related to the energy watch program the contract low provide a technical limitation of the program the budget is essentially million d the contractor was selected to a
5:03 pm
competitive bid service and the supervisors the payment is subject to available funds were we encourage our support for this item and want to thank the budget analyst office for their work and their report. >> and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much supervisor yee. >> in regards to the rebates is for both residential and commercial? >> correct supervisor the department receives a contract with pg&e and that program for our energy watch program is multiple levels we work with multiple housing building and work on residential buildings. >> all efforts to reduce energy salesforce for customers. >> do you have a breakdown
5:04 pm
residents to local businesses. >> we have this information but certainly we'll fortune to our office. >> mr. secretary. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee on page 25 of our report the estimated $14 million budget 40s for the contract over 5 years is shown in table one and in addition the contractor will pay cash redates baits up to $40 million to the customers for qualifying the energy savings upgrades and commercial and residential proposals we recommend you approve that. >> thank you, mr. rose open up for public comment anyone wish to comment seeing none, public comment is closed. >> all right. i'll make a motion to send to the full
5:05 pm
board. >> motion by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee madam clerk item 11. >> item 11 hearing to consider the release of the reserve funds in the amount of one plus for the carbon fund project. >> mr. rodriquez working with. >> mr. rodriquez from the department of the environment the department is requesting approval of reels of one and $20,000 from reserve those founded are specifically come from the san francisco carbon fund and again for folks memory that is essentially any travel that any city employee does a consider percentage goes to the carbon fund and our goal to try to reduce green house gas emissions and we went through a selective competitive bid process an rfp to identify the
5:06 pm
programs that we could invest in and specifically we have 6 projects one i want to brought to your attention because i think that is as very initiative a micro loan on the energy assistance programs in many cases the small businesses may not have the up front cash to pay for the program so we're creating a small micro program to allow them to assess the energies salesforce and pay that over time as a resolving account we're excited about that program and encourage your support for the release of funds i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you supervisor tang. >> thank you. i think that the project selected are great in general when did the funding or application cycle. >> the applications cycles will bece a year in the fall and again in the springs is the
5:07 pm
kind of the two opportunities we put together. >> okay. great because and then also how is the outreach in terms of our the rfp process i think there are so many projects that quality but kept in the loop of the opportunities. >> absolutely make sure that the supervisors offices will know about the rfp. >> okay. thank you. >> colleagues, any questions. >> mr. rose, can we go to your report. for item 11 please. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee on page 29 of the report there is table 23 details the grantees and the expenditures that will be paid from this requested one and 20 thousand release of retired funds we recommend you release those funds. >> colleagues questions or comments that move on to public comment anyone wish to comment on item number item 11.
5:08 pm
>> seeing none, public comment is closed. so procedural we'll file the motion and release the funds okay. >> i'll make a motion to release the funds motion by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee and item 12 the modification for the agreements to authorize the informational boat program between the developments and the city in a.m. an not to exceed $10.8 million from june this year to 2016 and welcome back. >> good morning actuarial keating waring with the airport this is accident final amendment to an existing contract with polaris contract for the services throughout the airport
5:09 pm
the airport has this contract in place provided information on airport facilities and services and ground transportation and public transportation and xhoomthsz as well as language for non-speaking english passengers things irresistance 2011 was a result of the proposal process and had an initial terms of 3 years and two, one year options to extend at the extend that through june 2016 in march 2016 the airport commission authorized the staff for a new contracted more information booklets and guest service assistance the new contractor with include additional services as much as customs and assistance and manage airport lost and found program this new
5:10 pm
contracts requires property tax not in place until the ends of april we're asking to modify to extend the term by 6 months through december of 2016 the proposed 6 month extension to the existing contract will increase the amount by $1.2 million for a new contract amount of $10 million plus the budget analyst does point out we need retrofit active for july of this year. >> if no questions mr. rose, can we go to your report. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee on the bottom of page 32 we report the proposed contract will there not to exceed one million dollars plus from the .6 to 10 and as
5:11 pm
ms. wagner stated from july 1st, 2016, through december 31st, 2016, we show a table two on page 33 of our report that summarizes we recommend you amend this for retrofit activity and recommend you adopt that has amended. >> colleagues if piano questions open up for public comment public comment is closed. >> i'll move to accept mr. rose's amendments and send out for approval with a positive recommendation. >> without objection. >> call will item 13 please. item 13 resolution approving the awarded professional services
5:12 pm
agreement to ss p for the management program, 2011 approximately $19.5 million and in june 2020 with one major extension. >> ms. wagner welcome back keating with the san francisco airport they're seeking your approval for a curbside for an initial term of one year option for june 30th of 2021 they're the airport that includes the limousine and the tmc holding lot not including the door-to-door vance and the airport issued a new rfp for the share ride will come before you for your consideration new ad
5:13 pm
ones is janitorial for the exterior and interior for the booths and graffiti removal as needed the first year contract costs are approximately $4.7 million for labor and operations costs and will increase by 2 percent for a contract not to exceed approximately $19.5 million for the term of contract this contract is the result of a competitive bid process and the budget analyst report recommended approval i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, ms. wagner. >> mr. rose, can we go to your report. >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee on page bottom of page 37 of the report table 3 on page 38 shows a detailed breakdown allergy fiscal year of the proposal agreement cost totally $19 million plus
5:14 pm
that is over the initial 4 year term of the agreement and on page 39 again, we recommend that the prompt resolution be amend for retrofit activity for 2016 and recommend you approve as recommended. >> thank you, mr. rose colleagues in confesses wish to comment on item number on 13. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. a motion to accept the bftsz recommendations and move forward as recommended >> so moved. >> motion by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee without objection madam clerk could we still supervisor tang. >> yes. i'd like to make a motion to go back to item 9 and rescind the vote there. >> motion by supervisor katie tang we have a presentation in the puc we'll take that without objection. the votes on number 9 is
5:15 pm
rescinded. >> great to be here. >> i'll make this very short. >> the second leased amendment that i'm here to discuss a lease between the city and county of san francisco and the public utilities commission and mission valley rock to reduce the premises to accommodate the long term project in consideration of the payment of 29 thousand publication and reimbursement of expenses incurred by mission valley rock for the mining plan i want to brief show you what we are doing here this is the quarry the areas highlighted and shaded in pink we're taking back on a temporary base for the starj the area highlighted in green are the area we're taking
5:16 pm
back permanent for a water shed the adjacent to the water item enkirtd by the red line pursue the lease buy out was vetted by the m i appraiser and in close to the resolution we ask the board of supervisors to approve and authorize the lease amendment and adopt the finding from the ceqa guidelines and the administrative code chapter three 1 and authorize the city director of property and the city's deputy manager to execute the documents and take action in futures of this action. >> colleagues, any questions be move on to public comment anyone wish to comment on item number 9 seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues now >> motion to send forth item 9
5:17 pm
i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation and >> madam clerk, is there any additional business to come before this body? >> there's no further business. >> >> thanks everyone we're
5:18 pm
5:19 pm
5:20 pm
5:21 pm
5:22 pm
5:23 pm
5:24 pm
5:25 pm
5:26 pm
5:27 pm
5:28 pm
5:29 pm
5:30 pm
5:31 pm
5:32 pm
5:33 pm
5:34 pm
5:35 pm
5:36 pm
5:37 pm
5:38 pm
5:39 pm
5:40 pm
5:41 pm
5:42 pm
5:43 pm
5:44 pm
5:45 pm
5:46 pm
5:47 pm
5:48 pm
5:49 pm
5:50 pm
5:51 pm
5:52 pm
5:53 pm
5:54 pm
5:55 pm
5:56 pm
5:57 pm
5:58 pm
5:59 pm
6:00 pm