commissioner mirkarimi: good morning and welcome to the transportation authority. i am the commission in the chair. i would like to thank sfgtv for

their excellent an ongoing work. >> commissioner david chu. commissioner dufty. commissioner maxwell absent. >> thank you. please read item two. >> approval of minutes. >> public comment? public comment is closed. without objection, so moved. please read items 3 and 4. item three, chairs report. item four, directors' report. >> vercommissioner mirkarimi:

very good. my comments are a breeze. there's never a dull moment in transportation. especially here in san francisco. the main focus of activity this month was the sustainable communities process, which is being led by the metropolitan transportation commission. this is essentially the local implementation of the legislative mandate. it is very important to demonstrate that local jurisdictions working in concert with regional agencies can turn that into real actions on the ground. there are many dimensions to this challenge, such as land use policy, transportation, and other infrastructure policy, and other key policies related to schools. these work together to determine where people are located. we are moving in the direction more closely integrating all those areas.

it is a daunting task that is only the first go round. we can expect they will be far from perfect, but it's a great opportunity to look at things from a multi varied perspectives. the congestion management agencies around the region have taken the lead in coordinating county level meetings to ensure people are aware of the process. the authority has been very involved in actively fulfilling the role of these last several months. we have already had several meetings with the department meetings of mtc. i attended one of those meetings last week to emphasize that san

francisco department heads, the importance of this process of having san francisco taking a leading role in the region in this regard. i expect the process to intensify. it will have to. as the region debates alternative visions of how we move forward. finally, serious discussions about the funding plan for the central subway. interesting coverage lately in the press, and, of course, with in committee hearings. i'm delighted we've worked out what i believe will be with a feasible funding plan to close the $137 million funding gap before us in the mta. the way to get there is through a collaborative process. what we have is exactly that. i want to thank staff for taking the initiative, and thank you to the mta for coming to the table. it will be a huge benefit for

san francisco and almost $1 billion in federal funds secured, which she to happen in short time. i know that the solution we have at hand will have creative funding swaps including proposition k money. i hope the director will help us navigate through the steps. this is not the first time we're doing something like this with state and federal dollars. i'm looking forward to making a great case to securing the funds. with that, i will conclude my remarks. mr. executive director. >> good morning, mr. chairman and commissioners. i have a report on your desk that will highlight a few things. i think that the price this week goes to the high-speed rail

picture, where we have now had official guidance from washington to the fact that california must spend its high- speed rail allocation of over $3.2 billion. related investments totaling $4.3 billion. this is in one of two central valley sections. it will either be fresno or fresno to bakersfield. we're having trouble getting excited about the prospect of high-speed rail that is that far away from us. that has been the guidance so far to we are forced committed to working to continue to coordinate the segment that we have the most significant interest in. it has of course had its share

of challenges, particularly the mid peninsula section. it requires continued partnership. at the local level, the authority of staff continue to coordinate the city families and put into the high-speed process. we have been successful so far in getting the high-speed rail authority to accept a set of three alternatives that are the result of a consensus building process among the agencies. you're sure that will be included in the report. given the news that i'm sure you have all seen in the last 24 hours -- the incoming republican

leadership in the house looking at high speed rail and california's allocation of money as a target of deficit reduction. we have at least a reason to be worried. come the beginning of the year, we will most likely be involved in a vigorous advocacy process to help the state retained the funds that are already at the state level to keep moving this project forward. of course, there are implications for projects within san francisco that we need to be worried about. it seems as though this topic will require continued education and continued attention. we will continue to do that. i'm sure there will be some

demands for your time as the advocacy in d.c. demands that we all be there in demonstrating support for these local projects. we had a mixed bag in terms of transportation as it regards to the november election. we have proposition 22, which went long way toward securing transportation funds. i hesitate to say dedicated transportation funds, because they turned out to not be dedicated in years past when the legislature has seen fit to borrow those funds to balance the budget. now we have a proposition that says the transportation funds can only be used for transportation and cannot be used to balance the budget. that is good news. unfortunately, the election coupled that good news with proposition 26, which has now turned every user fee into potentially a tax, and raised the bar to a supermajority for

getting those things passed. without boring you with the details, i think there are some implications you need to be aware of, especially in regards to the funding deal that was approved as part of the initial budget approval, the one that happened 100 days after the deadline. that budget included a swap where the sales tax oreplaced an excise tax. that was on a simple majority vote for the simple reason that there was a net no change in the amount of revenue generated, but there is a reid already that prop. 26 might change that. it is retroactive for certain measures back to january 1, 2010. it may be necessary for the

legislature to reopen that deal and do it on a super majority basis. if it is not able to achieve that, that would mean a significant reduction in transportation money available around the state. and of course, we are talking about a reduction of budget that is already in the works. we're worried about it and we're watching this very closely. i will keep you posted about this as we begin to see it in the next month. there's an item on my report about the central subway, but you already heard from the chair. i'm delighted to say that we did come to a what we believe is a workable plan. i'm looking forward to continuing to work with the mta to make it happen. there are some of the sea items that will involve this board. there are some action items that will involve the sport in regard

to swaps of prop k money. you also need to do some advocacy with the california transportation division to make sure it is approved and timely manner. i will skip this item because the chair has recovered it. you should not be surprised to see some of the authority planners in your neighborhoods talking about the san francisco transportation plan. this is a 30-year look at transportation that it gets done every 30 years. we are in the middle of analysis in raising analysis around the neighborhoods on the importance of having this road map that will bury much navigate the sustainable community's strategy to we've had many meetings,

including the district 11 council, and we have a very long roster of other community divisions we will be in touch with. of course, we are delighted to take your suggestions for organizations we should be connected with in your district. finally, we want to rejoice in the fact that the bay area clinton program has awarded a total of $14 million for various projects that provide opportunities for innovative pilots in the area of regional like sharibike sharing, san frao city car share, and most notably, an electric vehicle battery swap program that mta will be doing. they are all exciting projects. the one that the authority is leading is management

partnership project that i think will be the colonel for some very interesting and innovative ways in mobility in alternative ways around town. it will involve employers and agencies around the city. that is a summarized version of my report. i'm glad to answer any questions. that concludes my report. commissioner mirkarimi: any comments or questions? any public comment on items three or item four? public comment is closed. >> we could go back to item one. i know that commissioner avalos is not here today. he has a sick child. he asked that he be excused for this meeting. commissioner mirkarimi: let me just finish on this item, but absolutely. item three and four is closed. we will continue these items at

the call of the chair. so moved. returning back, i'm hearing a motion to excuse commissioner of avalos. commissioner mirkarimi: very good. so moved. please read and item five. >> progress report on limited scope performance audit. commissioner mirkarimi: it was earlier this year, colleagues, that we recommended and then we pursued an audit of the municipal transportation authority. with the guidance of commissioner campos, we initiated a two phase process of the mta transportatiotransporta.

the first was by our own budget analyst and focused on compliance with state and federal regulation in identifying areas where there could be potential savings to the operating budget. that effort did identify some welcome opportunities, i think it would be fair to characterize those as marginal in terms of how much they could help with the structural deficit in our long-term concerns. when the phase was completed, we discussed the next steps. i proposed to move with a second phase, funded with proposition k dollars. there are opportunities to ensure through the capital program that the mta investment projects that result in better service for the people who take transit -- so we procured a second audit process with a

firm, cgr. the auditors are here today. it's still very early in the process. we are not expecting findings. a number of board members, commissioners, have been interviewed. this is an opportunity to further understand the scope of the audit and how it is proceeding and relevant to our ongoing concerns about budget matters and efficiency matters regarding the mta. commissioner campos and the staff have been working with cgr, as has my office. i want to ask commissioner campos if he has any comments before the presentation. commissioner campos: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i think you have essentially summarize how we got here and where the work is.

i just look forward to hearing from cgr in terms of the status and in terms of the process. i think it is good for the rest of the transportation authority to hear that. i do not have anything to add at this point. commissioner mirkarimi: thank you. cgr, will you please join us? >> mr. chairman, commissioners, my name is jim ayers. in a principal with cgr management consultants. my team members here are jim kennedy and keith kennedy. commissioner mirkarimi: i'm going to ask you to speak directly into the microphone. thank you. >> sorry. just to refresh