, with increasing numbers of people biking and knowing the rules of the road, including pedestrians having the right of way, use your lights at night, etc.. the top-10 safety tips. we are getting these out in 10,000 bags in bike to work day. going out to 30,000 people electronically in the next few weeks. in the first three months of the year we have heard the first nine adult bike safety glasses, these people are taking an four hour class on bike safety. we have also been working with you all to educate taxi drivers in muni operators on how to share the road safely. thank you for your help on that. i wanted to let you know that, adding that up, we have directly

educated 1600 people. taxi drivers, many operators, and folks in the operators. they have been stepping up in a way that is unprecedented in my 15 years. we have a great partnership with the mta and the police department on enforcing, educating, making sure that folks know. thank you so much. happy back to work with. thank you for all your work. >> moving forward, directors, you have had a request for two items to be severed on your list. 10.3 and 10.4, leaving 10.1 and 10.2. motion to approve? >> second. >> those in favor?

aye. i would also like to announce that we have rearranged the agenda, slightly, to take no. 12, which should be cpc issue. some of those folks are here for that issue in particular. >> item 10.3. authorizing the chief of the bureau of claims investigation and administration of the city attorney's office to settle and litigating claims against the sf mta for an amount not to exceed $25,000. >> in my opinion, this power should not be delegated. when you review the claims not exceeding $25,000, it gives the board the opportunity to review circumstances, ask questions, clarify procedures, and seek to avoid or reduce those circumstances that lead to these

incidents. i think it would diminish your ability to do so. i do not think that this type of action takes up a lot of time or burdens the parties in any meaningful way. i would encourage you to not delegate this authority. >> is there a motion on the issue? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> discussion? those in favor? >> aye. >> 10.4? >> supporting the issuance of revenue bonds to serve as assurance funding in the event of any delay or other shortfall in central subway, face to of the third street light rail project funds. >> good afternoon. >> commissioners, my name is bob

with save muni. we are very much opposed to this. this is a desperation measure. you are $61 million short because the governor of california had the good sense to veto non connectivity bonds for the central subway and high- speed rail. as you know, high-speed rail is a very, very chancy proposition, which may or may not go forward. therefore, what you seem to be doing is obligating the city to have least $61 million in revenue bonds by this measure. and since it is an open-ended measure, ladies and gentleman, it does a very clearly that are up -- all the shortfalls are attributable to the central subway. you might be attributing the

city to a lot more than that. management won a one says the you do not finance short-term cash flow with long-term bonds. seo's in the private sector get fired for that. this is a terrible idea, even if you happen to favor the central subway, which i do not. i urge you not to authorize this. i know that the board of supervisors has to approve it, but it is your responsibility to look carefully at the whole issue and see whether this is worthwhile. thank you. >> next speaker? >> david [unintelligible] . >> good morning. we are a petitioner in the abington high speed rail

authority case, and i am personally the coordinator of this litigation, as well as assisting in the litigation. based on extensive involvement with high-speed rail legal issues, i would like to inform you that the chances of the authority getting funded in passing judicial muster in terms of claims on bond funds, there is little likelihood that high- speed rail will get the money it is requesting right now. i have read each of your bios, which are listed on the website. i have been extremely impressed at how transit support of this board is. you may very well be the most transit supportive board i have seen in 30 years. given that, i am suggesting to

you that there is no feasible source out there for funding these proposed revenue bonds. so that what is called a cash flow shortage is a cash shortage. with respect to your responsibility to keep muni afloat financially, i strongly urge you to not assume that these funds are forthcoming and that there is a reasonable basis upon which to ask supervisors to issue revenue bonds. thank you. >> next speaker, please? >> how long. >> good afternoon, mr. long. >> good afternoon. we would like to ask you to delay approval of the revenue bond until there is a bond statement clarifying exactly the

intent of this bond, the maximum amount of this bond, the bonded indebtedness, and the impact it will have on other muni services. in april 2012, april 8 -- six. the california transportation commission sent a letter to the sf mta and other transit agencies saying "this program has not been supported because the project appears unrelated to the high-speed rail project or a comprehensive statewide rail plan. it later says that clearly the current program of projects remains unacceptable to the administration and will not be funded. this was very clear. the governor vetoed the initial $27 million previously. this letter indicates that there will be no approval of prop. 108

funds for the entire year. contrary to the language of the resolution, this is not assurance funding. it is funding that is being requested. we need very clear language that this is an attempt to be funded through revenue bonds with debt. as you know, the subway proposed does not go to the trans bay terminal. in fact, it believes the current loop to the 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 n