also be considered in the next phase of analysis. vice president clyde: for clarification, on page 10, you have a regional opinion, nonsan francisco and then regional. so it's my understanding that these were people outside of the city who were given a presentation, asked for their opinion before and after they were presented with this information. >> that particular one because we needed both, prepoll question and a post-poll question. we had enough regional folks that did answer that both questions, if you'll switch once again, i'm so sorry. vice president clyde: that's all right. >> to the presentation, i have a slide that shows how it breaks out by different markets in the region. san francisco is the first one. i'm not sure if that one is included. if it isn't, i can certainly send it to you. you can see that the opinion is more consistent across markets and again this is just people who responded to our feedback

during outreach which is about 400. vice president clyde: right. i just want to point out that anything that makes life easier for me i'm in favor. so if it means that it's easier for me to drive in and out, i'll go for everybody paying for this. so i just want to caution you about these polls because i'm entering san francisco three times a year and it's easier those three times -- >> we always caution by this is a summary of people who participated in our feedback. we have also conducted regional polls that are statistically significant that show the polls for congestion pricing. i want to come back to low income concerns and shopping locally. the equity issue on low income has been an issue, but it hasn't been as significant because in the bay area, a lot of low income travelers are already on transit. what we found is particularly during the peak period, not all

times of day, but particularly during the peak period and particularly to the most congested in downtown focused areas, a lot of low income travelers are on transit. 5% of peak travelers are low income drivers. it's certainly a concern. one of the things that we looked at is a discount for low income travelers as well that would be considered part of the program. vice president clyde: that i think would get back to why i would advocate for looking at our existing structures of revenue collection. again, thank you, it's a thorough presentation, so thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner o'conner: point of clarification. on this pie chart here, nons.f. regional opinions, what does that mean? does it mean tourists were interviewed at union square or something? >> this is from our electronic town hall where we invited people to participate in a web march and it's from a --

webinar and it's from a panel what is random digit selection. we wanted to know more about the regional opinion. most of the outreach has been san francisco-based and we wanted to know the benefits and impacts in san francisco obviously. because it's a regional market, if you go towards the downtown, we wanted to hear from regional travelers as well. they are not tourists. they are folks who work in san francisco or come to san francisco a couple of times a month. we did want to at least get people who come to san francisco. commissioner o'conner: got you. president yee riley: director. >> so you had mentioned that it is the state that is the authorizing agent for trolling vehicular movement so disprove 26 affect the c. -- does prop 26 affect the c.t.a.'s inability to act?

>> we are getting an opinion on that and other people are getting an opinion about prop 26. from what we understand today, if there is a vote when the implement takes decision comes and and that point the threshold if prop 26 applies. at this point there is no decision so it wouldn't apply at this particular point. it is something that we need to get clarity on and it sounds like through the legislative analyst's office it's going to take months if not over a year to find out how prop 26 impacts multiple different things, not just this potential program. vice president clyde: so if prop 26 does affect this, i guess, has there been any

discussion at the transportation authority about how the transportation authority will deal with this particular report in moving ahead in relationship to prop 26? >> again, because there is no implementation decision at this point of user fees of any kind, it's simply adoption of the report and a decision as to whether or not to continue study, it's my understanding it wouldn't apply. there is no mechanism there. if it does move to further study, that is something that would have to be incorporated into that study and we're obviously tracking the decision from the legislative analyst's office to understand. vice president clyde: i understand doing a report, that prop 26 doesn't affect doing a report. it's about who is implementing the fee and who is the decision-making body for implementing the fee. >> yes. commissioner dooley: you're saying then that the estimates are that you won't know for another year whether prop 26 will effect who makes the

decision on implementing such a fee? >> we won't know until the legislative analyst's office makes a decision on it. i can't say right now. again if the study moves or if the concept moves to the next phase of study, that is something that needs to be addressed. if there is an action and prop 26 applies, the threshold would be higher. it would be a supermajority. but i can't say at this point. commissioner dooley: and then i wanted to make a note when you were here before the commission, the commission had made a specific request to reach out to all of the merchants associations and provide a presentation on this that are in the northeast quadrant proposal and in the last review of the list on the website, still a majority of those merchants associations were not on that list. >> it was not an understanding that we were to reach out to all of them. we did reach out to several and

we did reach out to several community groups in that area as well. i apologize, i did not understand that you had requested that we reach out to all. we have also reached out to self organizations that are sort of umbrella organizations and also pulled in, discussions with others. you're correct. we have not made presentations to every single business organization. again, one of the things that we recommend as part of the next step is additional outreach so that more people have an opportunity to weigh in. commissioner dooley: and then in relationship to the next phase and you have heard from the commissioners that there is great concern about the economic impact and there is various ways to take a look at the economic impact and to take a look at jobs affected. i don't see that listed in the timeline as a key criteria of something to be noting in your

timeline. so between 2011 and 2013. >> on the next page, the presentation to the transportation authority and there are two major items listed and adoption of the report and then advancing further study, one of the things, in fact, it's the first thing listed is a more detailed economic evaluation. and those are the things that we think or rather that we have heard through outreach and would also recommend need further analysis and more detailed analysis in the next phase and we agree with you is essentially what i'm saying. commissioner dooley: ok. just note that it would be, if you're going to be doing this report it would be great to also see that economic analysis as a core component in that as well. >> thank you. president yee riley: commissioner kasselman. commissioner kasselman: i have

one last question and it has maybe a few parts. but commercial vehicles, like taxis, i don't know if they actually quality as commercial. they're fees are already very high. >> we considered an exemption for taxis in this phase of the analysis. commissioner kasselman: how about other commercial vehicles that are making deliveries to small mom and pop grocery shops? will they have that $3 fee that they will then pass on to the store who gave you delivery? >> so, again, at this level of analysis, we did consider that, but we also considered that the $6 cap would be a benefit to those types of commercial vehicles. this program is another thing that would help mitigate some of those. some some of the outreach that we have heard, one of the things that have come up is potentially considering a tax

benefit or a tax break for local businesses, particularly san francisco businesses or businesses within the zone or within a certain distance of the zone that would have some sort of tax break that is equivalent to some proportion of the potential fee and that is something that we would recommend be analyzed in the next phase of analysis as well. commissioner kasselman: how about a florist that delivers flowers in the early morning and he or she might have to do a number of trips between the floral shops and the hotels downtown -- >> they would have to pay the fee just once. commissioner dooley: just for the public, how much, what is the budget for the first study? what was the budget? >> it was about $1.3 million and it was funded $1 million through the federal government, through a program called the value pricing pilot program and that program is specifically

dedicated to having local, regional, or cities look at this idea of congestion pricing or other types of pricing mechanisms as part of a comprehensive transportation strategy. commissioner dooley: are any other bay area counties or cities doing a similar project? >> not of area wide road pricing. there are other cities that have high occupancy toll lanes which essentially is they price single-occupancy vehicles so they can use hotv lanes or they have implemented parking pricing. >> so $300,000 was funded by the city and county of san francisco? >> half of that was funded by the city and county of san francisco, but not actually through the city and county but through the prop k transportation sales tax which

has an expenditure line item that is specifically dedicated to demand management strategies. the other half was contributed by the bay area toll authority. commissioner dooley: the bay area toll authority. that's both bridges? >> the bay area toll authority manages all of the bridges except the golden gate bridge. commissioner dooley: it's the bay bridge, all of them -- >> except the golden gate bridge which has its own management district. commissioner dooley: this is funded by no san francisco dollars, just part of the sales tax dedicated towards transportation? >> no. commissioner dooley: and what is the budget proposed for the next phase? >> i actually don't have that number off the top of my head. it would probably be about $1 million for the environmental analysis and depending on how it's scoped, it would include additional studies as well and so that may either reduce or

increase the budget. we would also expect to be competitive for a different type of federal grant program that is aimed again at focusing on transportation demand strategies or pricing strategies. vice president clyde: is that next million dollars coming from the same group of funding sources? >> it could, but it doesn't necessarily have to. we would have to evaluate, we would have to apply for funds from different sources and hopefully be successful but there is no plan to use, i assume you mean general funds there is some funding still in prop k for again demand management strategies and so that one potential source that we would absolute seek to leverage other sources. vice president clyde: thank you. president yee riley: thank you. any more questions? if not, public comment, please.

>> at this time the commission is now taking public comment. public comment is limited to two minutes. >> good evening. since you're looking at this, is this going to be something that has to be, a report that is being adopted or being presented from the small business point of view, the areas that they're looking at, whether it's the northeast quadrant or the whole city or whatever, almost every merchants association within those areas that are affected has not been contacted. i know the polk street merchants, the two merchants associations have not been conducted, chinatown, chestnut street, union street haven't been part of this. you would think that if it's a basic thing that you go to the

basic groups, number one. number two is again you can't see it, i couldn't see it until i was online and going through 58 pages on line this weekend, even i have a life, but some of the things in there, there was a retail study. they went out and studied, talked to people going out and shopping three spots around union square. there is whole other parts to this. what about the people that are working and shopping within polk street, within chinatown, not coming from outside, but just within another area. you would think they would be talking to those basic people. that's what this commission is charged with. i think you should be looking at that. what really concerns me also is who is going to get exempt on this whole thing. commissioner o'conner talked about taking his kid to and from school. what about the teachers that have to come every single day

to school? are they going to be exempt or are they going to be charged? they shouldn't exempt. of course, this building and all of the state buildings and all of the federal buildings, will the state say all of our employees will be exempt and since the state, city, and fed workers comprise the largest amount of workers, what is that going to do? some thought. you're exempting whole areas of the city. president yee riley: thank you. any more? go ahead. >> if i could just respond briefly to those concerns? we have actually briefed mr. kordell so i'm glad to see him here giving comments as well. we did reach out to some of the organizations that were mentioned and in some cases also to community groups in that area and through the marina associations and to other groups as well and also

the retail study that was conducted was not limited only to the union square area. that was certainly the focus, but as i mentioned, we did include other areas so we could understand some of the other impacts including columbus avenue and we have also conducted the studies through parking, through our parking management study. the final thing i just wanted to clarify, we did not consider exemptions for city workers in the analysis. we considered next for emergency vehicles, taxis at this point. we would say that the discount program, much like other aspects of the program would need further study in the next phase of the analysis. thank you very much for your time. president yee riley: thank you. any more public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner dooley: i have to say the north beach merchants

association was not reached out to and they have been in existence for a long time. i'm not sure the north beach chamber of commerce are on the list as well, but those are the two main right in the center of north beach areas and the other just commissioners. the way word gets around, i mean, if we have an area -- i made a joke about drawing a moat around north beach. let's drawing a moat around north beach and the city is taking it seriously and they are going to draw a line around our neighborhood. the northeast section is just -- anyway, the northeast section is just, why it's being singled out is -- i don't need to know why it's being singled out. i'm just saying that giving people one more reason not to come back across into our neighborhood, it's not limited out in the wider world to oh, it's only during these times. it's a pain in the butt to go,

we're not going. i mean that's just how general public opinion will translate in my opinion. president yee riley: director? >> i just wanted to respond to commissioner clyde's comment. working with commissioner dooley the last time we were here we actually did a presentation in north beach. she suggested we go to the north beach meeting and we did that with commissioner dooley. president yee riley: director. >> i want to make a comment for the record and that is as our, we're beginning to hear from many of the businesses through the small business assistance center and taking a look at things such as this, not only do we have businesses that are subject to impact fees in this particular area and adding to

this, i think what we're beginning to see is that even as a business, well financed formula retail, i mean we're making it harder and harder and harder for low income businesses to come into certain areas. so in effect, it's a subtle red lining and i think that we really need to take a cautionary note of such things as how they overlay and i would like to see this in the economic analysis as to how this type of fee will affect a business in relationship to all of the other fees that they have that are unique to the particular area that they're in, that's in this area. so i just, i think that while i think we think it's well intentioned and well good, but also london is an extraordinary

expensive area to live in. the one where the congestion pricing area is one of the most expensive. some of the impetus was in protecting the art that was there, that was being corroded by the diesel emissions. we don't necessarily have quite that in san francisco. so i mean, while i think in the economic analysis, we have to take a look at what is going to be the forecast in 10, 15 years in terms of who can afford and live i terms of who can afford and live in these particularly vulnerable areas. thank you for your feedback. president riley: anything else? >> one last comment. the exceptions with you have, or the exception list, is very small right now.

the thing that will probably have to be widened a little bit. people who as part of their trade commute across the city -- i just do not think they should be all of a sudden subject to this new tax, if we want to call it that, or whatever. i would rather see it directed to people who were getting into their car on a whim because they can afford to do so, or whatever. but people who are doing what they are doing because it is essential and should not be subjected to this, in my opinion. that is to the comment i would make. >> thank you. you have heard public comment. you have heard all of our concerns. thank you for your presentation. we will continue to work with you. you have heard our request to outreach to all the merchant associations as well as the business organizations. if you need help to get a

contact, i believe our director can help you. >> i would like to take advantage for that. i appreciate your feedback. >> commissioners, you made a number of comments regarding things like economic analysis, putting emphasis on that. are we going to provide any comments to that affect, or are we going to just take this as informational and be involved in moving forward? >> it is up to you whether you want step to crack -- to draft formal comments, or the transportation authority, the authority board. >> let us go ahead and do that. >> the primary concerns i heard in terms of taking into consideration this initial step

would be in the next phase to put emphasis on economic analysis in terms of particularly small businesses. president riley: and i think commissioner o'brien had a good point in terms of the list of exceptions. commissioner o'connor: we are not assuming there is going to be a second phase study, if there is. >> ok. president riley: thank you. >> item 8 presentation by a member of the barbary coast conservancy and the center for the beverage arts. the barbary coast conservancy of the american cocktail, presenter a san francisco cocktail week, preserve the cultural heritage

of saloons and the cocktail in the bay area also breaking california's culinary philosophy and tradition with special events, publications, and educational seminars. president riley: welcome. >> [no audio[inaudible] what we have done so far and what we exist to do. i only elixir saloon in san francisco come here in the mission district. my partners own part of cantina and comstock saloon and the absence room -- absynth room. we came together for years ago to create san francisco cocktail week. we have run that successfully

for the last four years as a weeklong event to focus on the fact that the san francisco cocteau community and its history and culture are not only vibrant and strong today, but historically significant to the culinary culture of the city. we basically took our success in the last few years and kept it going by creating a nonprofit in order to run it and to get a bank account and to work with different companies across the industry in order to fund it year after year. we have become a leader in it, having created the first cocktail week. that is not emulated around the country by events such as the manhattan cocktail classic that happens in may and portland cocteau week -- portland cocktail week that happened recently.

honolulu does one. i believe boston is working on one. it is celebrating the cocktail culture. the evolution of cocktails in the last five to seven years or so, maybe as far as 10, has been quite rapid, and has fueled a big burst in small business evolution in the bar industry, and also the evolution of the bar portion of the restaurant industry. we have also worked with the golden gate restaurant association and sf chefs in the past few years. will we wanted to do was to engage the public in another arena outside of our bars, a non-commercial environment where we could educate sentences about the deep history we have the goes back to the mid-1800's and the saloons that evolved here.

that culture, up until prohibition and through prohibition and beyond, but significantly up until prohibition -- how that impacted the cocktails and cocteau culinary culture around the world, and how we have once again brought that back and taken a lead in the world as far as the advancements we made, the drinks we make, and the spirits we work with and make in the bay area, our cooperation with the winery's -- wineries and chefs to spur a lot of business, but also cultural impact. in creating that, we took that success this year and we signed a lease and opened a beverage education and events center, which recall the -- which recall

the -- which we call the boothby center for the beverage arts. he was a saloonkeeper and an assemblyman in the 1800's and wrote the first published cocktail book, the bartender's guide, back in that time. we take stories like that and many more, stories like my saloon, elixir, which is the second oldest continually operating a saloon location in the city, since 1858, or the house of shields, which is reopening this week. the comstock saloon has been brought back to being a saloon. those kind of things plus the characters involved in the drugs involved, in gauging the public. -- the characters involved and the drinks involved, engaging the public. we want events not just during cocktail week.