support for this funding. there are two projects that are specifically geared towards the residence. they are development of community gardens and the expansion at the family resource center. also, the community health programs with a variety of other partners in the community. both projects have had significant involvement with the beginnings of programs in place now. guaranteeing their ongoing suspended -- viability. thank you. supervisor chu: the next speaker. >> good morning, madame chair and members.

i want to speak in support of the uses of this settlement. it recommends projects that have some hope of going beyond the three years that we have to spend the money. this way we are not relying on one time projects. this will be ongoing and helpful to the community. in terms of getting these power plants closed, i do endorse this project and i thank you for your consideration. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning.

my name is the douglasyap. i would like to thank the supervisor for delivering the $1 million to this neighborhood. we have to give her credit for the differing the goods. i thought that it was interesting that in this discussion, we were talking about cutting. i have not seen any community developments in the rich neighborhoods. i question why we need them in a low-cost neighborhoods. this is the experience, in detroit, michigan, for they were at such a low level that they were forced to stop community gardens in detroit. hopefully this is not what will happen in san francisco.

i hope that the department of public health, number one, is not going to waste funding and, number two, is not going to waste -- is not going to increase costs on the department of public health. also, rather than teaching people in this neighborhood to be gardner's, why not try to teach them to be doctors, lawyers, and nurses? i was told that third of martial was to be equivalent of low wall, but obviously it did not happen. is it because the residents came from different neighborhoods? thank you. supervisor chu: thank you.

were there other members of the public that wish to speak? seeing no one, public comment is closed. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, madame chair. in reference to public comment, it is an incorrect representation of supervisor maxwell. she very much facilitated the shutdown of the power plants so that it could then be processed. fortunately, supervisor cohen is here, but supervisor maxwell did a hell of a lot of work in the community. this is not accurate, what i heard. supervisor maxwell does deserve a lot of the credit. supervisor chu: thank you.

i would like to thank the department for bringing this item forward. given the community outreach that we have heard, including the members of the public that have come to testify, given that there were areas that we talked about back in 2009 and the fact that we have multiple budgets, it includes expenditures in these areas. i am not to take -- not inclined survey at this time. this will be sent to the full committee before we take action. and the closing remarks? supervisor cohen: no, you have succinctly articulated my position. supervisor chu: is there a motion to send this for were

supervisor mirkarimi:? motion to accept -- send this forward to? supervisor mirkarimi: without objection. supervisor chu: thank you so much. mr. young, are there any other items before us? >> that completes the agenda items. supervisor chu: thank you, we're adjourned.

- supervisor chu captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- supervisor campos: good morning, everyone. we may want to change the finance committee label on the television. this is the sentences go county transportation authority plans and programs committee. [unintelligible] we have been joined by

commissioner david cheiu. we want to thank the members of the rest of titis -- as a tv step for joining in the meaning. >> item #one. -- item #two. approve the minutes of the september 20, 2011 meeting. this is an action item. supervisor campos: if we can take that, without objection? can the clerk please call for item number three? >> item #3. citizens advisory committee report. supervisor campos: 90. >> [inaudible]

there are three items. cac at it's last meeting reported on 7 items. item #4, before us today, bicycle-related requests. in item #6, the update on the central subway. let me say that item number for past. as i recall, unanimously. it was not controversial.

although there were a number of questions this -- discussed regarding the timing of the bicycle improvements. but this citizens advisory committee recommended this particular action, for your consideration. item number five, the recommended approval of the san francisco bay area block grant advocacy principles, was not on our last agenda. there is work to do, particularly updating the progress of that. the last item on your agenda is the update on the subway project. let me say that a number of questions were raised during our meeting on this item. many of them had to do with the

recent grand jury report that has been made public. three of the questions, actually, came up during and before the meeting. i not only want to relate those to you, but staff and consultants have been very thorough in their response to the citizens advisory committee. we want to commend you for that transparency and factual discussion. the third question released by the committee during the staff report on this information item, first, what is the estimated cost of the cancellation of the central subway project? what is the estimate for redesigning the project? thirdly, we wanted to know how the phones were used.

and how it served as a portion of the local match for the federal news funds in two. staff has been provided by the cac with a response to these questions. i wanted to share them for the purpose of putting them on the record. the cost of the central city subway project is at approximately $215 million. the estimated cost of displaying the project, and i assume that all of these are pursuant to comments in the report, $348 billion. essentially, the value of the third street, phase one library on this project, about 648, if i

understand this correctly. the total, local match, and i think i am looking at this wall, 2,226,000 -- looking at this wrong, 2,226,000. we have submitted this information for your consideration. yet we continue to look for better ways, throughout our meetings, and we will be back to you after our next meeting but some of those. supervisor campos: thank you. supervisor avalos: i really appreciate cac's work on all of these items. i am just curious, is it your belief that these were actions

that the cac would recommend? >> to answer that question, it was strictly information on the part of the committee members. there was controversy on the committee on around what was anticipated to be a cost associated with the recommendations that appeared. recommendations from a grand jury. there was no recommendation behind the cac that this item be dropped in any way, nor should the city backed down from the amendments made on this project. it had been a public vote of prop k implementation with

residents voting on the item. supervisor avalos: the position was taken in the grand jury report as well? >> no position was taken in the grand jury report. staff will provide additional information to members of. -- members. i would not want to prejudge, but i find it unlikely. >supervisor campos: thank you very much. is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? if so, please come forward. you each have three minutes. >> supervisors, my name is francisco dicostra.

i was at a meeting sometime ago when there was not a representative from the cac. i had made some comments. to the best of my recollection, there were three or four times that this happened. after i spoke, other comments were made. some by a supervisor who is sitting right there. some by others. commenting on, and someone makes some comments, just because you have the authority to put down a comment. having said that, it person coming here to deliver a from the cac rarely substitutes for someone else. you stated that.

especially when it comes to big projects, we need, through accountability and transparency, either the san francisco government transportation authority needs to find out whether the citizens advisory committee has the right of representation -- for other people who are in the know about transportation issues and environmental reports. other data is linked with transportation. they could give that input. i have been following the project. more or less, it was supposed to cost $900 million. suddenly, it will cost $1.6 billion. it is very good to represent, but what i am looking at for the

citizens of san francisco is to leave the ship. there is a big difference between being a representative and being a leader. when statements are made about huge sums of money, we do not want people paying from the constituents. we vote for you. they could meet -- good leader knows their way, shows the way, and goes away. some representatives are in the pockets of big developers. if you read the newspaper, there was some mention about so and so and so and so, talking about this. i am saying that the cac is not aware of that, they should be made aware of that.

[tone] supervisor campos: thank you. is there any other member of the public that would like to speak? seeing no one, public item -- public comment is closed. clerk, please call the next item. >> item #4. recommend allocation of $135,000 in prop k funds, with conditions, to the san francisco municipal transportation agency for two requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules. this is an action item. >> this item begins on page 19 of your packet. both of the projects being described this morning are included in the amended prioritization program category, which you heard at the september meeting. the project presented today is the same as what she would have seen in a september.

this is a quick selmer -- summary. the two red are the projects that will be presented today. the current request is the masonic avenue streetscape antiquity project. in may of 2011 there was an option called the boulevard option. with curb lighting and a raised cycle track along the project, there is an addendum to the bicycle plant eir. the final draft will be available by june of 2012.

public review of this document would be between the final release and the mta meeting, set to take place sometime in the summer of 2012. the overall design for this project, the sf mta continues to work on the overall project. we have included in the recommendation section of this request updates on the full project plans and schedule. the estimated dates of this project, as it moves forward. supervisor campos: before you continue, commissioner? supervisor wiener: masonic, there would be no on street parking on either side? >> let me confirm that really quickly.

supervisor wiener: there would no longer be any street parking, whatsoever? >> i am with at the san francisco municipal transportation agency. -- i am with the san francisco municipal transportation agency. supervisor wiener: how many spots are there? >> 150. supervisor wiener: the folks that live there are in favor of removing that parking? >> it was approved at one of the local public hearings. supervisor wiener: how many people with her? >> between 75 and 100. -- how many people were there? >> between 75 and 100.

supervisor wiener: is there anyone here that can speak to that? >> i do not think so. supervisor wiener: it caught my attention that that is a fairly large stretch of roadway. >> it is a difficult stretch to park on. it is not an attractive place to park right now. depending on the side of the street you are parked on. the boulevard option was a direct result of engagement with the community. supervisor wiener: was there a petition in the area? >> no. supervisor wiener: [unintelligible] >> down at fulton, there was a supermarket and a corner store that we worked with. supervisor wiener: ok, thank

you. supervisor avalos: on masonic, many of the streets are perpendicular. id is more or less a major street that cars go down. it is thought that parking would be essential to make that happen. >> that is right. supervisor campos: great. thank you. please continue. >> $94,000 in funds for the construction of a cycle track, located on the southern side of cargo way. there are several existing traffic circles for that segment.

requested funds equal almost one-third of the construction costs. 70,000 from the grant, as this segment occupies the greenway, with $185,000 being construction management. the work associated in february of 2012 showed last one month or two. full project completion is estimated to be march of 2012. supervisor campos: colleagues, any additional questions from state -- for staff? thank you very much. would any member of the public like to speak on this item? please come forward. >> good morning, mr. chair. commissioners.

we are very supportive of both of these requests. masonic avenue is a great example of a complete street. this is a rare case where a community came together, repeatedly -- hundreds of people, actually, participated in the planning process. this is a good example of how a city agencies can work together. this was not just thrashing along, but it was a real partnership. this is by route -- bike route 55. many in the city already regard it as a bike route. staff recommended looking at the federal review. there is federal money floating

around. not as much as there used to be, but it breaks my heart when i see a call for projects. you probably knew that this was part of the bay trail greenway. a really nice update to the trail. putting a separate and comfortable bike way along the trail, visiting the south these waterfront, harris and park, what research that is. both of these are great examples of how the city can work together. supervisor campos: next speaker, please. >> let me talk as the director of environmental justice advocacy. first and foremost, we need to

pay attention to some empirical data. any way you look at it, no data regarding [unintelligible] the ongoing contamination sites [unintelligible] san francisco county transportation authority knows that we are across the street. there is a pathway.

supervisors, you need to ask the right questions. there are other people involved in this project. how many millions of people travel on that for a fair? from the various industries and types of operations? you can say whatever you want to say. it was next to the old power plant for 60 years. over 120 tons of pollution was dumped on the side. there may need to be report of how clean that contaminated area it is. we need bicycling and restoration facilities in areas