terminal and market street corridor. the subway reports to the fta and their own final eir states that 76,000 bus hours will be reduced on the corridor. >> jerry coffin, barbara schell. >> mr. chairman, members of the commission, i am a member of the save muni fund. thank you for taking the item off of the consent calendar. i will read a few questions that i think deserve detailed answers before any votes are taken. i have copies of a like to give your staff said they each have a copy. the first question, why is a central subway revenue bond issue needed? we do not think that the presentation is accurate.

what is the anticipated amount of sail, or sales? which categories of muni revenue will be tapped to cover the cost of servicing the bonds? what is the assumed annual costs of servicing and retiring the resulting deaths? -- debts? it comes right out the top, which is already under severe pressure. please give an explanation of the current concerns of the central subway project and the ability to successfully manage it that jeopardizing the remainder of the operation. we have concerns today. number eight, skipping a couple, according to the recent reports the annual cost of 2013 would run to $8 million per year in today's dollars. more in 20 $30.

it appears, depending on the amount it costs, retirement could have doubled the amount. is the mta concerned about the long term financial effect on the central subway? and in deciding to issue revenue bonds, did the mta consider the fact that cal train, was extended, many of whom elected to stay on the train is thereby reduced the objective central subway up to as much as 30%. >> michele, robinson, richard. >> ok.

let's thank you very much. my name is part michelle. i was requested to appear at today's meeting, as well as another meeting that follows this one. i am strongly supportive of the concept of a central subway. i doubt there is any investment we can make that will bring us as much return in the long run as the central subway. i am sure you are all aware of how superior the service is on the east-west subway. that is the subway that includes the m, k, l, n lines. but we have no comparable service north-south. now the central subway to a

large degree has been presented as serving china town. it is important to recognize, i believe, that once we get a bridge across the downtown portion of the city, which is a major source of conguestion that we can go on and serve the northwest quadrant of the city. now it is intended that this service would exist, in other words would tie together the southeastern portion of the city, including the large new developments in mission bay.

it will bridge the downtown portion of the city with three major stations -- >> union and china town. >> yes. >> thank you, sir. appreciate it. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> andrew robertson, richard hanson. >> good afternoon. i am andy robertson here in support of issuance of the bond. we see the increase in public transit good.

by our count, 5,000 by the last census. we hope it will mitigate issues we see on third street. we see it as a welcome invitation and are excited by the name. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. commissioners and director, i think that it is perhaps time to consider whether we will have the money to run the central subway. new details say it will cost $15.1 million per year. you are considering revenue bonds. there is debt service. i believe we can end up with a perfect central subway but a broken muni.

i would like you to think of it in those terms. can we afford to operate the central subway without hurting the rest of the system. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. i am the senior field representative from local union number 34. yesterday we sent our first members to work on a central subway. then i get the shock of my life that maybe this job is in danger. got a good job last month when pier 32 was cancelled. we would really like to see this project go through for the jobs and the city needs its transit. it is definitely important. i would urge a yes vote on this.

>> karen flood. steve taber. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. my name is karen flood. i am the interim director and i am here to speak in the measure of the contingency fund. we have been in support of the subway since 1996 the merchant association and since 2009 our motto has been no pain, no gain. we have certainly felt the pain but we feel the long-term gain. we realize that it is an investment in the future, future of transit and the future of the district. i understand it is a continuation of the third street light rail project which will connect to the southeast corridor and mission bay, south of market, which i know is developing rapidly.

we want to be connected to that. later if there is funding on to north beach and fisherman's wharf. we see a huge investment in our transit and in the city. we urge you to support the fund today. >> i am the chairman of the central subway task force. we strongly support the subway and extension to the north to serve the northeast part of the city. the northeast part of san francisco is the densest in the country not serve bide rail rapid transit. san francisco is the slowest of any of the systems. the northeast has the slowest

in san francisco and the stockton and third street corridors have the slowest transit in the northeast, 3.5 miles per hour. we desperately need rapid transit and a comprehensive system for the city and it is an essential element of that. we are just about there. we need to get the federal funding. we need to be able to show the feds that we have the ability to do this project. we are just about there. we urge that you support this additional commitment so that we can move the project forward, get it done and get it extended. >> good afternoon. san francisco chamber of commerce and the alliance for jobs, partnership of business and labor organizations. we testified before in favor of

the project. we will continue to testify in favor of the project. we believe in the long-range interest this is the right project. the right funding sources. it is the right project for today. and as you expand it. if i thought it would end up in portssmith square, you would have a different argument. years ago we took our kids to europe. really the first time they had an extensive subway experience in london and paris. they said why don't we have this at home. they are planning a new subway. that is what you are doing here today. as a former co-chair for high speed rail the funding that is set forth in that proposition will come forward to this and

other projects around the state. you are guaranteeing an alternative source. it is safe to say the odds are against them ever being sold. so, please approve this. approve what the federal government needs as a guarantee. move this project forward in a timely fashion. thank you. >> thank you. where are this is not the first time i have been testifying in front of this commission in our support for the central subway project. the motion in front of you today we think is really critical at the end of the phase of what we have been pushing for i urge you to

seriously vote in favor of it. thank you. >> patrick collins, david dellatory, michael yaki. >> good afternoon. i am patrick collins with the operating engineers. we are the union that operates the large equipment that helps to make this project go forward. we near strong support of this project.

connecting local communities, increase transit capacity to relieve the crowding. it will reduce the air and noise pollution that we currently have. improving regional connections and the future high speed rail at fourth and king streets, relieving service conguestion and encouraging developments along the fourth street corridor. serving a low auto ownership population of transit customers. tell put to work dozens of out of work construction workers, workers that are desperate to get back to work and believe in projects like this that will help our city. the federal funds allocated

cannot be redirected to offset another san francisco project if the central subway project were abandoned from the federal transportation authorities and it would be redistributed throughout the nation. san francisco would not receive any of this funding. any hesitation from san francisco would result in immediate redirection to other cities. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioners. local 261. i am here representing the over 3,000 members to speak in favor of this project. i am also here on behalf of the institute which i am a board member of. we do a lot of community outreach and t

anticipating projects like this coming down the road. we get a lot of the collaboration with the union, put them through the training in order to have a sustainable career. so, i have been asked to come out here and strongly encourage and urge the commissioners to vote in favor of the project. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. i think that i probably have the longest connection with this project in a lot of capacity. the central subway was a project we started on. i was on the board of supervisors. we started the actual application process. of course i wrote the measure that created the m.t.a. you got stuck with it after i left. i wanted to make a quick point.

it is critically important that the measure get passed. some alluded to that this is not an issue of can we do this and maybe something will happen. you should do this and you must do this. there is no question that if the funding for the central subway was taken away it would not come back to san francisco. it would go somewhere else. the idea that it would help another project in the city is a fantasy. it is gone. it is forever. what you are doing right now, providing the assurance, just an assurance that we are committed to the full funding agreement is important. i thank you for your leadership and i would like to add one quick point. i also have a private interest. i work with a business affected by the central subway in union square. there is a lot of pain.

there is a lot of gain. i would urge you to continue to monitor and ensure that during economicicly fragile times we ensure that businesses stay healthy. look at creative solutions to keep them going while this worthwhile project gets through. what you are doing is the right thing and it is on the right track. thank you very much. >> good afternoon chairman, members of the board. i support the issuance of the bonds in the event of delays or varibles that come across us. the construction workers rely on these jobs. we are in phase 2. the people of china town deserve the continuance as well. being a fifth generation san franciscoan, strog take two

buses to high school every day. the needs of the many san francisco residents outweigh the needs of the few. let's keep this project going. i thank you for your time. >> charles lavaria, last person to turn in a speaker card. >> i am with the operating engineers union. i would like to commend the sfmta for promotion of the central subway and other projects. we represent surveyors, construction equipment and crane operators and mechanics and soils and material inspectors. i just checked. we currently have 896 people on our out of work list. all operating engineers. fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, providers for families.

896 have depend ants at school, their health care patients. they lose their homes and health insurance. we need to keep moving forward with the central subway. the need will only increase and the cost will only increase. i am not a native but i did grow up riding comprehensive subway systems in europe. we need to maximize the impact of the investment, get the infrastructure and the jobs we need. >> that's it. >> mr. chairman that is the last person to turn in a speaker board speak on 10.4. >> on the issue of revenue

bonds to pay for central subway. >> john diamente. native resident. businessman in the city and county. getting my breath, walking up the stairs. honorable commissioners i am here to address you as representatives of the city that once knew how. in the context of a list of tricky projects that we have in the stheans all of the money we are spending on the bay bridge, bike paths, no train accommodations. all of the money we are spending on the presidio freeway. speak to you on the matter of

the central subway as a former muni operator, and not just any operator but a cable car gripman. i will speak about the maintenance for a minute. your car, if you have a flat tire, maybe you can blame it on maintenance or maybe not. maybe a downed electric wire. cable cars. maintenance. dead risk to passengers, operators. to take money from muni, which is traditionally so short, so sorry on a capital basis, on an operating basis, vehicle by vehicle, barn by barn, year by year, budget by budget. to rescue this central subway process it is outrageous.

you will see the proof of this on central subway, especially for the end user for whom it will take so much more time. please do not raid muni's budget to bail this project out. >> public comment subpoena now closed. >> i think it is a confusing but somewhat straightforward issue. what is at issue here is not really the overall project which this board, as well as the board of supervisors

consistently and unanimously supported over the course of the years. the concerns in terms of the overall muni system, which is a concern that we all share. our ability to manage the project. the performance of the project in financial terms and operating terms and environmental terms and any other technical measure. any and every concern in all of those dimensions has been addressed numerously. and at this point we have very strong support up and down the line for the overall project. there is one outstanding concern that this item is narrowly meant to address. and that is in the context of a $1.587 billion financial plan that has been approved by the board and by the f.t.a., there is $61 million programmed in, i

believe the year 2018, so this is six year in the future. $61 million that rounds out the approved funding plan. that $61 million is the legislated share of the high speed rail connect festivity fund that was approved by the voters. as one of the speakers said this is money that will be coming to san francisco as part of the voter-approved initiative. but as others pointed out, there is uncertainty surrounding the state's high speed rail program and particularly the timing of it. the uncertainty around the california high speed rail project. its impact on that $61 million of that funding plan that has

the f.t.a. seeking some assurance from us, from the city, the agency and the city that if those funds are not available when we need them that we are providing a commitment through this resolution that we will ensure that the project can move forward. one other point of context, this is $6 million and the contingency within the funding plan is somewhere around $240 million. these are funds towards the end of the project that might not even be needed even with the connect festivity funds in place. another thing that is reported to you in february when you heard an item on the high speed rail and adopted unanimously a resolution in support of the high speed rail that included the issuance of the funds in question is that the city and

the transportation authority and many other cities, counties around the region entered into an m.o.u. with the high speed rail authority that among other things includes a commitment by the high speed rail authority. this is done with their support, to advance these connect festivity fund to the regional operators like muni that will have a direct connection to high speed rail. it was approved by the high speed rail authority and does have the support of the governor and the chair of the high speed rail authority who is his appointee. so, what we are seeking here today is a backstop.

it is part of the belt and the suspenders that the f.t.a. is looking for in terms of comfort and assurance that we have an iron clad financing plan. this is based on a very positive review of the project that we had with the f.t.a. last month where they are very eager to see this project move forward. this being the one remaining item of concern they would like assurance for. we are not asking authority at this time to issue bonds. we are asking the m.t.a. board and the board of supervisors that should funds be needed that we could include in a future planned revenue bond issuance, and this is an issuance that is already in the approved five-year capital improvement program, that we

could include those funds if necessary. it is very much a contingent commitment. letters of no prejudice that allowed us to advance the work. i think you heard about it. i made reference and one of the speakers made reference to construction work that put out of work people to work this weekend. that work is continuing. we will reach a point after which we will not be able to continue to advance and put people to work and build this capacity that muni will meet in the future absent the full funding grant agreement that we believe this is the last piece believe this is the last piece of security that we need to put