the extension of the f-line to fort mason. pointing out the need for some more transparency and the system impacts and especially impacts as far as muni service and so on. i just remind you that the potential future allocation of funds to support this project, which is eligible for prop k, is dependant on the full funding plan. san francisco transportation plan will have a second round call for projects in july. we have been doing outreach on this. and i just anticipate that we will be back to nujuly with more information. further progress where the two teams are exchanging ideas, looking at three different alternatives.

also a significant amount of activity where we met with land development interest and talked to them about the process so far and to talk about the calculations of fair share contributions from private sector to the projects identified. this is a good time to be doing that as the various developments move towards the agreements with the local jurisdictions. finally i would like to announce the incorporation into our staff. our engineer has been a resident of the bay area since 2008, a degree from northeastern university in boston and masters degree from uc berkeley. he joins us after an internship where he worked on the central subway. he is knowledgeable about the

big dig project in boston where he worked as an engineer for eight years. now that project's reputation has been cleaned up and the project is functioning quite well he is happy to talk to anybody about that because he used to give tours. that concludes high report. we are happy to have him with us. >> welcome to the mta. welcome. colleagues, any comments or questions? seeing none? any public comment? >> item five adopt the proposed fiscal year 2011-12 annual budget and work program. >> any discussion on this item? seeing none, public comment. public comment is closed. roll call, please. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye.

>> aye. >> aye. >> absent. >> aye. >> aye. >> absent. >> aye. >> absent. >> prevails. item six. >> adopt positions on state and federal legislation. this is an action item. >> discussion? seeing none, closed. public comment? public comment is closed. take this without objection? item seven please. >> adopt alternative 2b as the locally preferred alternative for the berba buena island ramps improvement project. >> discussion? none. public comment? none. take it without objection? so moved. >> program $579,000 in san francisco safe routes to the school capital funds to the san

francisco municipal transportation agency for the sunset elementary school and apgiannini middle school project. >> take it out obligation. so moved. >> approve local project screening criteria for the regional transportation plan. this is an action item. >> any comments or discussions? >> thank you mr. chair. to the executive director in terms of item number nine, i see from the memo and the attachments, i believe three and four, that the authority received over 200 projects from the public and over 100 proposals from the implementing agencies. question to you, how are we going to fund all of these needs given our limited

resources and how do we prioritize? and i am especially concerned about investing in good projects that are fiscaly responsible and provide the bang for the buck we are looking for in terms of the dollars and supporting the long-term growth of the city as we project that. >> thank you for the question. couple of different tracks here. first of all, we are doing this as part of the regional process for generating a regional transportation plan and there are certain methodologies we have to follow in order to stay consistent with the region. but those are still evolving. one of the questions that we have when we met last week is when are those rules going to real jell so we understand the type of criteria and money

likely to flow through for our priorities in san francisco. it is still evolving. we are pressing for performance-based measures so that it is not just a cookie cutter based on population for the different counties, it is really based on bang for the buck as you said. we have a lot of that here. we have the land use, the density, transit infrastructure that can support more pedestrian lifestyle. we think we can do well provided the rules are right. we have the support of all of the representatives on the regional body on. a separate track there is the san francisco transportation plan, the update of the plan in the city, that you adopt and that you bless when we get through the process.

that has its own set of rules that are focused on creating not just bang for the buck but the highest leverage possible so we get state funds, regional funds and federal funds. when the all of that is said ask done we don't have enough money to pay for all of the shigses made. not all of them are bang for the buck submissions. more things that duplicate stuff already being done and other things are advocacy but they don't have plans that exist. another set of categories need to be vetted against things like the neighborhood plans that this board already blessed and that was developed over time because we need to maintain consistens and he keep faith with the neighbors that have participated in those planning processes and come up with their own priorities to make sure that those are at least reflected in our own list

and then reconcile priorities from one plan to another. not everything will make the list. it is a fairly complicated process. the best we can hope for is consistency among the city agencies that are providing comment on this on the criteria. also transparency. when we see how far you can go down the list people will realize everybody is being treated fairly. >> i appreciate the comments and we look ford continue working with you to understand the priorities and evaluate them. it is something we very much need to do. so, thank you. >> thank you commissioner. >> thank you mr. chairman.

through the chair i want to first of all, echo my sentiment that the issue of funding is a key issue. the regional look at creating suddenable communities. i think they cannot occur or take place unless we have fund to support them. we are being asked to adopt that the principle that there should be a nexus between affordable housing and transportation. so, i certainly want the region to adopt this principle but i also think that it is important for san francisco itself to make sure that we lead by example and that we lead the way in that area.

i want to know how staff believes we can invest in a way that encourages and promotes affordable housing production. >> thanks for the question. there is a lot in that question. let me just briefly answer that one of the fundamental criteria that m.t.c. is pushing as part of this sustainable community strategy is the concept of the p.d.a., priority development area which are supposed to be areas where there is density supportive of transit and pedestrian trips and alternatives to the automobile. the entire bay area has been identifying where these

p.d.a.'s are. thanks to have that we have a new acronym that we have to remember. and fundamentally a p.d.a. is an area of opportunity where there is more density and mix of the people that live there and more of a chance that there will be a mix of users of different kinds of components of the transportation system and of course fewer single auto trips. there are local governments making stronger commitments. it is the right type of density and the right mix of people.

the transportation field does not have enough money either. but that is the mechanism. you know getting the regional agencies to recognize the local jurisdictions are making on a policy level and investment level to have affordable housing and rewarding that with transportation infrastructure. >> thank you. >> colleagues, any more questions or comments? seeing none, public comment, please. public comment is closed. we will take this without objection. >> item 10 appropriate $55,000 in pop k funds with conditions for the us 101 candlestick interchange project study report subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedule. >> i just wanted to bring to

staff's attention that i took through a couple of minutes to go through the minutes and there was interest that was expressed for having a mechanism with a greater public involvement in the transportation projects and i would like to ask staff at this time to begin to explore, and i will help you with my office, cutting together a c.a.c. that would i would like to commit to bringing a different voice from the ones we normally hear. bring voice to a lot of the transportation needs happen negligent southeast. i would like to see a bi-county approach. i think it would bring experienced people. thank you.

is that a question for staff? >> more of a statement or request. thank you. >> i think the request is clear mr. chairman. we will be happy to work on that. >> any other comments or questions? seeing none, any public comment. public comment is closed. and director and staff will be back in touch with the commissioner cohen. without objection? good. so moved. >> number 11, introduction of new items and information items. >> any introduction of new items? seeing none, any public comment? no public comment. very good. next item, please. >> public comment. >> and one last time for public comment that had not been utilized in the previous 11. seeing none, public comment is

closed. madam clerk. >> adjournment. >> have a good rest of the day. meeting is adjourned.