bonds with respect to this, and we have spoken with the treasurer and this has gone to wall street to talk about the appetite that they have to have the california bonds without the passage of the budget. we will be working with the treasurer's office, in getting periodic updates. with respect to what we're getting from the authority, we have 76 -- parking and the maufas bill. this is page 25. this would cap prop 1-a for the amount that is already available. and this is already the high- speed rail program. both of these have been held in committee, and now they come to

the offer and the committee, the committee into each other to work on the next step. the next bill, the stills with the transit visit development, and it opens a leave of the law for government infrastructure by eliminating the requirement for approval of the infrastructure plan. this bill is on the assembly floor, and i don't see as having any problems with this, and the next bill i want to highlight, a this is-- this is ab-- >> this would give more flexibility for infrastructure financing, for trarnsit village development, with affordable housing?

mr. elsbernd? >> and eliminates the requirement for the election. >> i would follow up on how supervisor mar characterized it. the bill would require a certain amount be spent on affordable housing. >> it does set up criteria -- >> it makes it more flexible, but less flexibile by specifying how it will be spent. >> to use the revenue for the purposes of improving moderate income housing supply, for moderate income housing? thank you. >> and next bill is ab-1041, another bill. this would permit -- this will

extend the current law, that allows sentences to to use the support it -- enforcement of the transportation lanes and the issuance of citations based on the photo evidence of transit and parking. this is phase six of the handout. this will be taken up at any time. this bill provides provisions for the content, and it allows and authorizes the local agencies for the bidders with 60% more domestic content and

the united states. this bill is on page 18 of the handout, and the assembly appropriations. the next bill -- the latest amendments change the bill, for the caltrans project. it will delete the initial prior version of the bill, and have this sent to the assembly. and we will bring this back to you. the next bill that we have is a bill that provides the local red light cameras, with the automated traffic enforcement system to make certain that the red light programs are efficient. and we have this in senate

appropriations. the next bill -- this is similar to a be 41, to extend the conflict of interest requirements for high-speed rail. this would require the high- speed rail official to identify any conflicts or potential conflicts that they may have. and this is on the consent calendar, and it will be taken up on the assembly to the next week or so. this would update the 1990 law with using private financing and infrastructure, and they currently remain exclusive. the private financing -- that is the idea behind this. this is on the senate floor and

available for them to take up. >> thank you for the great presentation? are there any questions? >> you told me to put you on the spot, what is generally going on with the senator and high speed rail. the various hearings -- not just him, but gordon and all that has been going on. i am just curious from your perspective. >> i am not certain what is going on but this has to do with the available money that is out there. this may have been today or yesterday. another state declined money for the high-speed rail. in california has taken a percentage of that, that has been targeted for the valley.

these are the dynamics occurring, with respect to who is getting the money. >> thank you. >> and there are no other questions? >> i just want to talk about the bills that we have the position on today. this should be on page 29 of the package. this would free up the funds for the tax account, for the annual restriction. this goes to the state and local governments, to fund the state highway account. and this allows for the gas tax -- gas tax revenues for the budget and the local railway projects, and also their ability to manage state contracts. >> and this is the highway users' tax account. >> this references the fair

amount. the other thing we recommend taking a position on -- this is 517. this would move the high speed rail authority under the business transportation and housing agency, the state of california has a very complex transportation system and it seems like they would have a more integrated approach to bring this funding under the current transportation. this is a very large department and it is important to integrate a high-speed rail under this. >> the action items are to support this? if there are no questions, we open this up for public comment. >> the high-speed rail authority -- we have a condition of support on this.

i have only followed the politics of this on the periphery of, but i know that they have not been the biggest fan of high-speed rail. this may be a question for the lobbyists. but are we thinking of taking this to the high-speed rail and supporting this? and supporting the terminal and all of these issues in and around san francisco? is it worth send the city and county of san francisco support this bill? >> we are just thinking about going forward with high-speed rail, and how they will function as part of the transportation. the intent is not to be picking any kind of fight, as far as streamlining the process and making certain that this function is the most efficiently. >> and the right policy, when i may be looking for is the right politics?

what is the cost benefit analysis for the city and county of san francisco to say that we support this? inari alienating the chairman? does he like this? is this worth it? >> currently, as you may know, there is a law that goes back and forth that was authorized, and this would be one way of streamlining everything around that. not having a completely independent high-speed program. making certain that we get this under a single entity, to handle the magnitude of the program. with respect to the politics, i do not think of supporting this bill would put us into any compromise with any of the other

parties. they are governed by a larger agency. we will make a few phone calls -- between now and the authority. >> this is for sb-517. >> we will soon decide on floor without recommendation. >> thank you. we will open this up for public comments. is there anyone who would wish to speak? we will close public comment. can we move this forward without recommendation? without objection, thank you. the next item? >> this is for the nine months ending march 1, this is

information item. -- is an information item. >> this is the quarterly update of the financial position as of march 31, 2011. the authority had $193 million worth of assets, with $214 million of liability. this includes $150 million of outstanding commercial paper, and in terms of the revenue, the authority has selected $50.1 million of revenue and we are on target with what we expected to collect for the fiscal year. the expenditures of $54.8 million, as of march 31. they have already had cash deposits and investments. this amount is 93% of the

funding and this is the city and county treasury report. we are in compliance with the california government code, with the liquidity in the funding for the next six months. with that, this is an inflammation in and there is no action for this. i would be happy to answer any questions. >> seeing no questions, we will openness for public comment. is there anyone who would like to speak? public comment is closed. the next item? >> this is the information item. >> we will openness for public comment? public, disclosed. and other any other items before us? >> item #7 is public comment. >> and other any comments from the public? are there any other items?

>> item #8 is adjournment. >> the meeting is adjourned. supervisor mirkarimi: good morning and welcome to the san francisco transportation authority meeting my name is ross mirkarimi. i want to thank sfgtv for their

ongoing excellence. madam court, good morning. could you please read roll call? >> [roll call] we have a quorum. >> very good. item to please. >> item 2. approval of minutes of march 29, 2011 meeting. this is an action item. supervisor mirkarimi: any public comment on the item? public comment is closed. we will take this without objection. could we take another roll call? there has been a change in the roster. >> commissioner campos?

commissioner carmen chu? commissioner cohen? commissioner elsbernd? commissioner farrell? commissioner kim? commissioner mark? commissioner mirkarimi? commissioner wiener? supervisor mirkarimi: please read items 3 and 4. item 3. chair's report. this is an information item.item 4. executive director's report. this is an information item. supervisor mirkarimi: last thursday the executive director and i'm joined edwin lee and federal highway deputies director to officially kick off the sf park program. scott wiener and members of the mta board were also at the event which marks the culmination of a

four-year process to bring real time parking information to san francisco. it was a great event recognized by the press around country as a major milestone in terms of how technology can structure solutions for common urban problems like finding curbside parking. the entire demonstration was funded with $20 million of urban partnership money which this authority was able to obtain from the federal government in 2007 as part of the negotiations over the funding plan for doral drive, now presidio parkway, which at the time included a proposal. the proposal was a forward- looking idea and this is a forward-looking program, which is now on the run for san franciscans to use on a daily basis to help us perfect. in a few months, there will also be very impressed and components to the program. congratulations to our mta for getting the project on the

ground after four years of development, and to this authority, for having the program funding at a time when the local jurisdiction in the country would dare to consider congestion pricing, even coupled with a promise of free federal money. this is an important step in the right direction but there is more to be explored. i am looking forward to seeing the congestion pricing program evolves. i want to make you aware that at an annual meeting of the coalition, a coalition of counties that have local sales taxes for transportation like san francisco, will be taking place november 13 through november 15 at the st. francis hotel in union square. this is the premier transportation conference in california and will attract hundreds of representatives, including the lifting officials. -- elected officials. i think it will be an excellent conference an opportunity to show the progress we are making.

it is also a great opportunity to share san francisco as a place to do business. i am hoping that you will all clear some time on your calendars. you will be getting updates from the staff as the planning and conference evolves. this concludes my report. mr. milosevic. -- moscovich. >> good morning, jose moscovich. i have a few things to highlight. first of all, we have been engaged in the process of sorting through the plan and sustainable communities strategy that will be guiding the region's efforts in investing in

transportation over the next 30 years. that process has resulted in several presentations that you have participated in. most recently, at the plans and programs committee where we had a lovely policy debate about big ideas and how we are moving to the future. particularly, in terms of how san francisco can lead the way and do its share for what it will take to reshape this region to absorber the kind of growth that is projected for it through the planning process. that includes population and employment, and most importantly for san francisco, production of housing, affordable housing, in particular. we have been sharing this

information and have been getting feedback from all of the sister agencies and city families, as well as from our own cac, from you at committee meetings, meeting with other department heads, and so on. we have two messages that are important to telegrapher around the region. the first one is the amount of growth targeted for san francisco, was consistent with san francisco's own vision, should not be taken for granted. it will require significant amounts of policy and funding support from the region in order to achieve it. secondly, development of the samaras should be accompanied as plans and programs chair campos made it clear to the regional representatives the other day, in a discussion of regional transportation policy

and funding, to clarify the link between regional transportation and land use policy and providing incentives for local jurisdictions, including san francisco, to achieve the goals of housing and greenhouse gas reductions that are ensconced in the sustainable community strategy. these are not efforts that can be taken for granted, nor which can be accomplished without money. we also have a call for projects on the r t p, community strategy. that is another item we will discuss briefly at the plans and programs committee. it is headed for a set of actions in may as we need to get over 300 submissions which we have received so far to the larger regional sweepstakes. one of the key contribution will be making to that is our own

proposal to you for next month for how to prioritize, make sense of those emissions. some of which are duplicates, some of which are in conflict. general reporting in the following pages. we received $750,000 in a grand award from mtc. it was intended to help us develop a management process. we finally put out an rfq for consulting services qualifications and we got a may 10 deadline for those seven bills to be coming into the authorities. we are looking to get underway. -- submittals to be coming into the authorities. we also have the planning grant

from caltrans the last couple of years for hunters point bayview. we are looking forward to working with commissioner cohen and their reorganizations in the area to try to shape the types of services and improvements that are likely to happen out of that follow-up. these are things like shuttles, bands, an organization of volunteer drivers. this is something we have identified in the study as gaps in the mobility of residents in the area. it is a large area and often the typography makes it difficult for people to access transit. i am looking forward to seeing an effort move forward. jesse is the point person on that.

contact information is included in the report. the van ness bus rapid transit draft environmental impact report and environmental impact statement have been in circulation for a while now. we need to get agency comments on that. we are looking forward to getting the document circulated this month. the report that was released confirm the project cost estimate, which is a key thing now but the federal level, as well as its limitation time frame, as well as identify key interests to guide our annual submittals to the fda. i will remind you, the van ness brt project has been number one in the nation for receiving

federal funds, so we are looking forward to seeing that move forward. about the s.f. parks program, i just want to add my commendations. i am looking forward to seeing that project evolves as it includes a brittle pressing for a time of day in the next few months and i am looking forward to finding parking when i need it curbside. i would like to report, on april 15, i join commissioner abel lows and a number of distinguished guests at an event at the balboa park station where we had the pleasure of finally ribbon cutting the west side walkway, which is a product that has been a number of years in the making. the authority had significant funding contributions to the project from prop k. also, over $1 million in

lifeline transportation funds. its total project cost of $6.3 billion. the event was a great event, classy. there was even a string quartet and other music. just a great sense of a celebration for this community, who for too long, has been separated from its ability to reach the station without having to walk perilously along the streetcar tracks of the geneva maintenance yard. now that is over and the east side connections are coming. it is interesting to see how long it takes to essentially do a sidewalk project. but this is not just a sidewalk. there are complexities to the station itself. east side product will have complexities' itself, but we are committed to getting that done. authorities are provided over $3 million in funding and staff support. we submitted two caltrans

planning grants. one is a follow-up to the balboa park station that is already being done. it is for two important things. one is to study next-generation improvements for circulation. this is marginal investment to get maximum performance out of these multimillion dollar investments made in transportation over the last 30 years. and also, to fund staffing of the cac for the area, so the people of the bell ballpark area can have a better opportunity to produce it in the process. on the 19th avenue corridor, we are funding a study of potential stranded investment, including the shifting of the m line to the west side to improve connections to major activity generators there, and also,

better connections to the bart station. we are looking forward to getting the nod from caltrans and then we will be on our way with those major planning efforts. we are also making progress on the bike county study. we have had a meeting recently with the new chair of the mtc to coordinate the next steps up analysis in that area, including changes to the interchange, brt that is being proposed for geneva avenue, crossing over 101. we have got some information for you on bicycle improvements to market street, next steps related to that. in the interest of time, i'm going to skip over that for the moment i want to highlight for you the fact that