meeting its goals, including increasing writer ship, but it also gives us time to identify an ongoing funding source. what it also does is provide an opportunity to look at overall fare structure, which provides a very deep discount for people based on their age, independent of income or need, whereas our adult lifeline pass, which is meant for low income adults, is less of a discount. low-income adults pay $31 a month. youth and seniors pay $21 a month. we need to rethink our

structure. we should target our discounts to those who need it. >> that is important in terms of revaluating the structure, and i think it is a very strong argument your your -- id is a very strong argument. i am all about helping low- income people access to public transportation, whether through discounts or what ever is, but my concern is i think we all know this will not go away after two years, because once you have something like this, it is extremely hard to take it away from people once they have come to rely on its, and i do not see any plan to fund this. perhaps we will be able to cobble together the funding. but will not be there in the long run, and i am concerned it

will put additional annual obligation on muni going forward, and that means two things. first, we have to cut $7.9 million from something, and that means it will come out of the maintenance budget and that we will have switch failures and store failures and all the things said make it not work for poor kids and rich people and everyone in between, and the second thing is even if we are able to find sustainable funding source, that is $7.9 million going to this program so wealthy kids can have free muni. it could be going to address the structural deficit. we have to keep in mind the deficits we see for the annual operating is an operating

deficit, but we are so deep under water in terms of finding what we need to find, so i have a significant concern this puts me in another $7.9 million in a hole every year to make sure middle-class and rich kids in public school or private school are able to take new the for free, so i know i am not saying anything new. i just really wanted to convey that sentiment. supervisor avalos: i also would like to express another sentiment, and i think we make choices all the time about what is the best way we provide access to people in our community system, and we have

gone back to those choices in the past, and we are making new choices all the time. as the city we make choices about how we finance things we want to do. we just made a big choice about the america's cup yesterday, and we are moving forward a big chunk of money to support the of event. a lot of that is going to be going to parts of san francisco many parts of the rest of the city will not see, and that is a choice. i think it is a choice we can still make. we have decisions if we are able to implemente it.

i believe it should be universal for all people. given that we have lost the yellow school bus thoses, it crs a writer should as well as making sure we have mobility. i know the directors are grappling with this, and there is a great deal of support, and i know we can make it happen for years to come. >> i understand we have budget choices in terms of priorities,

and i think it is important we express our commitment to young people, and i think this is an important statement, and often we do that through our budget document, and that is something i would like to see. i am open to discussing something. my understanding is it would be expensive to monitor income levels. i know we talked about an honor system, but i do not know if we had a vendett -- have data for youth passes. i think the vast majority of youth are low income. i wonder where it comes from, if it is an estimate or based on data.

>> it is based on the eligible population, which is about half the kids. we are estimating 30% to 40%. it is a rough estimate. it could be the most of the cave are providing them for free, and the impact could be more than $4 million. gardnewe have talked to the schl district and could be something similar that would be very minimal. we would not do any verification. we do not have the means to do something like that.

>> i know there is going to be more conversation, but we do make a lot of choices. we have a difference of opinion. we have similar goals. i think there are smart ways to do if that are conducive to making sure the system is going to be run properly, and i really do share some of the comments laid out. it is a significant problem to see we have a 120 plus gap to make sure we have service. many of us here about how we do

not want to see turnarounds. why does the does not come on time? the five we may be switching it with other programs. whether there is a deep subsidy to help low income individuals, but i think that is much more palatable for me. gooi know we are going to grappe with this. >> thank you. supervisor wiener: can you made the comment on how the implementation for the bargaining agreement is going in

terms of reducing overtime. there is a concern over time and maybe maintenance-related. can you comment on that? >> it is the ability to hire part-time operators, which we started doing, and as fast as we can employ those, we are doing so. i think we are up to 80. we have the capacity of quite a bit more, but by putting a part- time operators in place of schedules but had still to in overtime, -- that had built-in overtime, so that is a big benefit.

we are spending a lot above overtime to do some of the maintenance campaigns. some of it we are funding on overtime, because in the past we have hiring freezes, so a lot of the civil services had expired, so we do not have additional staffing, even if we can find space in the budget, so we staff some of that with overtime. we also have 12 furlough days in the budget. some of those need to have a physical presence, so when we have someone missing on a furlough day, we are back with overtime, so there are a number of things driving our overtime up.

it generated a lot of cost for us as well, so there are a number of different drivers, and we are actively working to address in this budget, and generally by controlling overtime costs, so it is a significant reduction in with $37 million. those are pretty steep drops we are proposing. >> in the spirit of feedback, i know you have one more page of revenues, but in taking a look of the first stages, it would be my strong hope muni would continue to look at other opportunities, but to relatally

try to see where we might find concessions. i would hope that budget and negotiations are reflective of what we are doing. >> i met early on before this budget season started, and we agreed to work together. we have the same challenges, so we are negotiating together, so we will be working in sepp so we are all on the same page. >> in terms of additional revenues, i think it is not bad. i would not agree to taking it up to 22.50 khatami. -- net 22.50 at all. i would be open to got one.

regent -- to that one. the other areas i want to speak to in terms of parking and charging for sunday parking, those are areas i have been concerned with in the past, particularly because of what the impact might be on business, so while i am concerned, i would like to see what new nea would be proposing -- to see what muni might be proposing because they make sense a. >> it is pretty straightforward. goobut we will likely propose starting later here again we see that it would help spaces.

goopeople wanting to access thoe businesses have very little ability to do so. i think it is generally the residents who do not have to move their car from saturday night through sunday morning. that would be adversely impacted. in terms of evenings when we had our public hearing, the sentiment of the board was maybe that is something we should pilot in select commercial herriot'areas, where parking isd

up, so that might have been more, and if so, we want to work with respect of neighborhood commercial districts to feel where there might be stronger support. just a few other things we looked at a. there is currently part of the planning code says downtown for raw shows -- downtown garages have certain restrictions on the type of the rates they can charge, so one would be to modify not to apply to all or citywide. i think there may be some legal challenges or other concerns,

but it would be potentially guerdon parking management policy. it would also potentially generate some revenue. the budget does resume the policy will continue, so there are indexing of regular adults in the proposed budget, but beyond that we look at a couple of things such as charging 25 cents for a cash transfer puree good -- a cash transfer, or charging 50 cents more as we tried to move he ohm -- move people from paying cash.

finally, the bottom shows a little bit of good news from the joint report, and where would we get comes through on a formula, so where the general fund does better, we do better, so from the original estimates, they are improved, so this isn a possible revenue. this is one we will certainly take. as i mentioned in the beginning, we have a larger structural deficit to address commoso thisl is also looking at longer-term reductions. this shows what some of those are. the one folks think is the best fit for the mta is a vehicle licensing fee.

in order to bring those to the voters, we would need authorization from the state, which has not been forthcoming. >> a signature from the governor? >> the legislature has approved this three times, and all three times it has been vetoed by the governor commoso i know senatorn now is looking to bring these forward again a. -- senator leno is looking to bring these forward again. gothere would be a strong nexus for the use of the sea, but until the government signs it common it is not an option but is available to us, so we are looking at ways to continue to close the structural gap.

i will spend a minute on the capital adjusbudget. the big picture from an unconstrained perspective is a $25 billion need over the next 20 years. a big part of that is repair, and there is also an expansion and other supporting projects. this relates back to those assets identified in the first slide. our funding sources are a mix of federal, state, local. the federal picture is very much in play as we speak. the current transportation bill expires this saturday. there is not a reauthorization or an extension.

it may not come back until after the elections. goowe are more or less sure that our funds will continue. the things i will point out, you just saw the capital plan presentation and the city's nine plan, something i will be proposing, should there be space within policy constraints would be of bonds to implement the program. i mention we would be proposing to do some of the design work. the implementation is what we would need funds for, so $150 million is an estimate of the need to address the first set of

projects in the network of would be clear through the process. this would find expanded according platforms, replacing stop signs. there could be some wayside infrastructure, such as ticket vending machines and expanded swinish richard --- expanded signage, that might be a good candidate for voter approval. the other new addition to the capital plan from a revenue perspective our revenue bonds that are authorized to issue. this would be coming into the

budget committee in the week. a third and would-be old debt. that is more or less the capital budget picture. these are the priorities and we are using, given that our needs are greater than resources. good eveninin allocating funds,t of what the board will be presented with. this is the final form, which is about $400 million each year in

capital spending. that includes carry forward from previous years. we hope to get agreement within the next three months, but a dose allow you to achieve -- but it does allow you to achieve funding, so that is it, and i will be happy to take any other questions you might have. >> just a final one from me. i am hopeful this is an area where they might look at whether it might look like.

i do not think we have done enough work on what that might look like. i just wanted to youflag those. why don't we open this up to public comment? >> i am with power, and we are organizing transit-dependent bus roads. we have been supporting the staff, trying to deal with problems, and we have been very encouraged our willingness to reach out to the community, and beyond that, we are part of monthe youth coalition.

one reason we got involved is because of the cuts to school buses to reagan many of our members are feeling scared -- cuts to school buses. many of our members are feeling scared. the budget eliminates all funding for school transportation, so we feel the time is now we have to move forward, and partly because this came out of access to public school is why i asked for free knew before on -- free muni for all youth. it is not free if you have to pay to get to school. we do have some other concerns that it would leave out many working families, that now there could be problems with documentation, so we want to make sure all those concerns are addressed.

we also share your concerns about whether that would be able to be raised. we are committed to finding the full permanent funding beyond the pilot. supervisor campos is committed to black. we have met with the mayor. he islam -- supervisor campos is very committed to that. >> i am the community organizer, so part of the coalition working on free muni for youth. i appreciate you working with low income folks. although our focus has mostly been on that, we truly believe it needs to be free for all youth. i know we are very concerned about family flight and the

families leaving san francisco. it is not just low income families but middle income families as well. and know there has been a lot of talk about creating affordable housing for middle income families, and this is an investment in our families that is relatively cheap in maintaining residents of all incomes. i also wanted to say if we really want to start getting people out of our cars, one of the things in a presentation that was surprising is the 60% signeof travel is still done in, and if we cannot start to move our young people out of their cars to other modes of public transportation, we are not going to be a transit city.

it allows for the 16-year-old whose family might buy them a car when they turn 16, they will continue to use new the past the age of 16, and when they become adults they will have become accustomed to using new nikomuni want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. >> i am 17. i currently attends high-school to regar by bus. today i am here to show support and will continue to advocate for their cause, but also to show understanding you do not have the power to make new the free -- to make muni free, but you can create the