johnston. >> good afternoon. i'd like to start by thanking the supervisors today for their leadership and vision as well as recon park for their community outreach. my name is cell chicago -- chelsea parrish. i'm with the trust republic land. it works to con serve land for people and create parks across america. i support the parks bond because it is necessary to maintain san francisco parks in order to fulfill open space needs for the residents. the state of disrare that many of the parks fall into is a testament to their heavy use. restoration is required for the continued quality for both san francisco residents and visitors. thank you. >> thank you. thanks for coming. next speaker. >> i have some slides.

>> i'm a frequent user of the natural area, mcglarne, glenn canyon, sharp park, spring grove. and i just want to talk about why it's so important to address the national areas program as part of looking at the bond. the 2004 assessment showed that people used the walking trails and biking trails as the most used facility and the most important to them. as well as when you look at what the voters or the residents have said is the most important thing for improving in the parks, that's the walking trails and being able to visit nature, which is just exactly the opposite of what the natural area program is doing. so if you actually -- so there's another slide. so if you actually go to the natural areas, basically we've taken 24% of our park land,

which is basically everything other than golden gate park, the golf courses and like the soccer fields. almost everything else has been designated to the natural areas program, and basically those places where they talked about kids playing, instead of being that it's an important habitat that everyone has to stay on the trail. the trails are being closed. you're getting fences put up. it's executed from proposition c for the maintenance standard. turns you see the pesticide signs, which is not inviting for visiting nature. then to add insult to injury, you have a 2008 bond which was supposed to be about restoring trails. when you look at the plans, almost all of the money that has been used nor that program, which, by the way, has to be used in the natural areas program, was for deconditioning the trails. i just think it's really important because these

programs are important for people to put that language for the natural areas program. >> thank you. next speaker? >> i'm representing chinatown community development center and also representing the committee for better park and rec in chinatown. i urge you to move forward the bond ordinance. we are very excited in our district three. the jody imagineo playground and those are included in this bond. it is the most crowded area in the city. i'd love to talk about trees but unfortunately ill be happy if we get a piece of open space. the playground in the heart of chinatown is often overused. but improving, renovating joe dimaggio and chinese playground will be of great benefit to the

chinatown community and i also want to acknowledge the bond and recon park statue and are leading a very con ten shouse but interesting and productive bond process, both in the community and also throughout those meetings. it is not easy getting to where we're at at this point. we have something that should be a legacy project, if it will be before the voters in november and get passed. i think in five years' time, as we have seen now, looking back from the 2008 bond, we have a lot of legacy that we've created because of the trails and bond. so thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hi, my name is elisabeth my meek -- di meeko and i'm a resident of she wood forest, mount davidson and i think i speak for my fellow neighbors when i say the big attraction

to us owning a home in that area is the forest. it's where we walk our dogs, children -- from where we sit, it seems to be a misguided initiative. i don't understand why money would be spent to remove trees when there are places like mcclaren park which desperately need those funds. i don't understand the native thing because there are palm trees lining market street which aren't native. the trees on mount davidson, they hold moisture, which addresses the water conservation issue, it enriches the ground, provides wind protection. there hasn't been any research done demonstrating that any of those trees are dangerous or that there's any benefit to getting rid of them other than returning it to its native state. we're against it, all the people on robin hood drive.

that's it. >> any other members wishing to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues? supervisor elsbernd:? >> i would like to say a few things. i think it's important to respond to some of the things we've heard in public comment. no pun intended but to the folks who are frankly threatening this bond over less than 2% of the total bond, i think you are losing sight of the forest through the trees. i absolutely hear the disagreement, i hear the frustration. i hear the anger and disappointment about natural areas. natural areas has not been approved. there is an e.i.r. coming. there is a public process on approving that program. to put a gun to the head of this program over something that amounts to less than 2% of the total bond ask -- is --

that's one of the most significant threats i've seen in the 12 years i've worked here at city hall. and to the folks in glenn park who are here. glenn park is going to get $12 million for its rec center. i spent a lot of time in glenn park. that park needs it badly and i've heard from more people in that neighborhood who desperately want to see their park taken care of that are concerned about there. to the folks in miraloma park, you all know i've lived this. -- there. born and raised there. both of those playgrounds where prime candidates for the $15 million pot for di lap at a time dad -- dilapidated playgrounds. to think we would deprive the tens of thousands of citizens from those redone playgrounds

other something that amounts to 2% of this bond when you have so many opportunities to express your frustration and to make change to the program really blows my mind. that said, i'm happy to work with supervisor weiner to try to find language to amend this. there is a part of me that wants to call your bluff because i think this is so bogus, but this is the process and i'm more than happy to work with you on this, but to let less than 2% of a bond stop it from going forward is one of the boldest things i've ever seen. >> ok. thank you, supervisor else bern. excuse me. public -- else bernlt. public comment is closed for right now. we were talking about holding a special meeting next thursday. so c0u8d i entertain a motion

to continue this item to a special meeting to be held on the 21st? >> i'll make that motion. >> and we can take that motion without objection. so moved. madam clerk, are there any other items? >> no, there are no further matters. >> ok, thank you. meeting is adjourned.

captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- supervisor wiener: welcome to the transportation authority finance committee. are there any announcements? >> no announcements. supervisor wiener: can you please call item no. 2? >> this is an action item, approval of the previous meetings minutes. supervisor wiener: any discussion or public comment? seeing no one, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes? second? done without objection. that will be the order.

item #3. >> item number three, information item, state and federal legislative update. >> i will give you a brief update and then introduce the legislative advocate in sacramento. several issues are circulating around the budget legislation. conferees have been working on bills to reconcile the house and senate versions of the reauthorization. they're making formal offers between the chambers. it is unlikely that we will see a bill that is final by the june 30 deadline, meaning it is likely that we will see another short-term continuation and not

a longer-term bill until after the november elections. many of the senate proposals are said to be the same as included in 21, the original senate bill. house republican conferees have been reviewing and plan to respond in pieces, but at this point the democratic conferees do not appear to be included in the negotiations. somewhat undermining the process, john boehner announced that if the bill was not completed by june 30, he would prefer a six month extension to december 31. that would push considerations into a lame duck session following the november elections. pushing the trust fund to the brink of insolvency.

these conversations are leading to complicated discussions around the federal fiscal year 13 budget. the house and senate passed the full committee. the senate subcommittee passed bills that would continue appropriation levels at fiscal year 12 levels, which would not be sustainable with highway trust fund revenues anticipated throughout the fiscal year. the house and senate bills include different funding levels for the new starts program. both the house bill and senate bills are cut to the current proposal of budgeted amounts. with that, i will introduce plans for high-speed rail, cap and trade, and other issues that the state level. thank you.

>> good morning, chairman and commissioners. i feel like i am testifying in front of a committee. apologies, a mental lapse. but keeping that has changed legislatively is that the date has passed four bills to come out of the house. a number of the bills that did not move are being washed out of the matrix. we are not recommending new positions on bills. i do have a couple of bills i want to highlight for your interest. 8057, of which we followed all year, has not been changed. that is the measure that allows or requires the representative on mtc be a resident of san francisco. >> is that a separate -- supervisor wiener: is that a separate hearing? >> yes. supervisor wiener: do you

anticipate that moving forward? >> i do. the only entities opposed at this point remained bcdc perspective and solano perspective. no one else seems to have emerged in opposition. talking to the chairman about it, he believed that he could support it as well. could be a surprise, but i think it is on a good path. i am going to wrap up two budget items. cap and trade is the sale of the additional balance is provided o regulate -- regulated industries auctioned in the open markets to see if the process works, they plan to have a full auction in november. they anticipated about $1 billion in the first year coming

from that resource. the legislative analyst said that it could be between 600,000,003 billion. the governor has expressed a path -- preference of maintaining a great deal of control, with at least have dedicated to offsetting general funds, greenhouse gas reduction programs. the legislative analyst to look at that did not see half of the billion in that kind of expenditure. we are not sure how it will turn on the budget. the legislature has instead said that they would like to do something different. that they would like to have the resources board adapt to an annual program in certain categories, bringing it to the legislature, rather than beating in the government's hands. that will be sorted out this week. the government made his part -- governor made his proposal in

the budget. however it has been negotiated as the budget moves forward to a conclusion this week, i believe that it will probably be more in favor of the governor's approach. at a later date, the legislative approach, program allocations will be made, subject to the third, fourth, and fifth year of cap and trade. the stakes are big. 1 billion is the first year. so, we will have to see how that turns out. in terms of the state budget, in the area of transportation, because of the work we did in the field tax, i mentioned this before, things are favorable in transportation in contrast to

prior years. the state transit assistance program is still projected to receive over $400 million to be distributed throughout the operators in the state and there has been no change to that estimate without a proposal to redirect. one interesting area for cities and counties over the last few years, the amount that was supposed to go to local roads was not quite the amount projected. we could not figure out why, but we now know why. the department of finance is sequestering money attributable to the gas sales tax. motorboats, off-road motorcycles, and the like. that has amounted to about $300 million. it is not subject to the article 19 protections. the legislature seems ok with that. i think that that is going to happen. they also proposed that that

continue for several years. i worked with them to impose a sunset on that redirection there for a three-year sunset was imposed and will be imposed, which allows for a new conversation. the budget is clear in three years, when not keep the money in transportation? there has been a long series of discussions surrounding northern california mou's and how they interfere with the construction projects. the governor said that he would provide funding, but only if his construction segment is funded. i believe that we are at the press of this the day of seeing several things happen in terms of funding for high-speed rail. the assembly budget committee is scheduled to meet sometime today

to the call of the chair. it is my belief, and i think i am correct, the governor will get his 5.8 billion federal and state money for the initial segment, allowing that to go forward to contract. i also believe that the mou's will be funded. the no. 4 this region in the southern, to the tune of $1.1 billion, largely for the electrification of caltrans, with 500 million for a series of projects in southern california that would facilitate the blended service concept that the high-speed rail authority has adopted. a more direct, near-term importance to san francisco is a convergence of two things. the transportation commission has been looking at the 1 8

transportation connectivity funds. they were presented on friday. they have been requested and they intend to adopt a program. on that program would be central connectivity funds. i believe that the governor's budget, or the one put out by the legislature will contain the full appropriation for the connectivity money. it will be presented and appropriated by the end of this week. it looks like a high-speed rail business plan change has facilitated a better reception in the legislature for the different funding strategies. that would conclude my report for today. >> thank you. that is very positive, about high-speed rail. specifically senate bill 878, as related to the metropolitan transportation commission, the mtc i believe will be coming out

in opposition on grounds. can you give a brief description of that? >> apologies, i had intended to raise that, as well as bill 49. it was amended during the process by the senate chairman, with much consternation in the region. he eventually agreed to hold the bill back. creating a regional commission that would have laid over dcdc and the like. he agreed to hold that over with conversations in the interim and come back next year to address where he is trying to go in a more collaborative approach. surprise, june 4, we woke up to see the amendment to provide for the joint -- i always forget the name of it, the jpc, established

under legislation a year or two ago. under the new bill, that would require them to develop economic strategies, in essence what the bill would require. there is a feeling for those working on 1149, we thought that the entire discussion would be put off until next year. the appearance of 878 midstream, with timing for a committee meeting, has brought consternation in the region. >> -- supervisor wiener: i have asked the staff make a full agenda on this for the mta and i hope that staff recommends opposing 78. >> i will write an analysis of that for the staff.

supervisor wiener: questions? supervisor mar: i know that the senator presented to the joint policy committee a few weeks ago, where he said he would withdraw his legislation, a 1149. i think that he held it in committee, which pretty much killed it. but 878 is still moving forward and there are still questions over the relocation of the empty building to san francisco. is that right? >> that measure is still in play. i forget the number of the top of my head, but that measure is alive and viable. he is pressing for the auditor general's report. the financing structure and the appropriateness of that investment. so, that is out there. 878, as i indicated, is alive. was in position when he gutted and amended it. 879 is formally dead by virtue of not having passed the june 1

deadline. which does not mean that i do not think he would at some point, but he would not have the parliamentary ability. i think he is not going to do that in an occasion other than what he has done with 878. >> any other questions or comments? any public comments? supervisor wiener: seeing no one, public comment is closed. this was an information item. please call item no. 4. >> item #4. recommend affirming the executive director's prior authorization to substitute the existing credit facility for the $200,000,000 commercial paper program, and approving and authorizing the execution of a new credit facility agreement with wells fargo bank, national association, the amendments to the associated legal documents, and all actions necessary in connection with such amendments . this is an action item. >> good morning, commissioners. as you may remember about this item, before the committee in

february of 2012, it was to allow the director to substitute the 200 million commercial paper line of credit. at the time, we were concerned that the current line of credit was not at its best. we were expecting it to be downgraded and we anticipated it would need to go out for rflp. we went out for one in december 2011 and received six proposals from various banks in january of 2012. the following six were partnered with the bank of tokyo. goldman sachs partner with [unintelligible] corporation. wells fargo responded to our rfc. bank corp. responded. bank of the west, jpmorgan partnered with u.s. bank. each offered a one year or three year term, with fees ranging from 45 to 100 basis points.

each offered liquidity or a letter of credit -- credit. we were able to negotiate with wells fargo bank for a lower basis point on fees, but wells fargo had the most changes to their authority. we were able to negotiate fees down. they have the highest credit rating amongst the six banks. with the letter of credit, wells fargo bank's would be responsible to pay for interest and principles on the investment holders. with a lot of credit that is an investment, the investors would be looking to the authority to pay when the commercial paper rolls come due. we are also providing enclosures to the item. the letter of credit reimbursement agreement was reinstated and include in the item in update.

with that, i am looking to reaffirm the executive director authorization to substitute the commercial paper program, allowing the authority to amend and update the associated documents with commercial paper programs. supervisor wiener: thank you. colleagues, questions or comments? ok. is there any public comment? seeing no one, public comment is closed. colleagues, can we move this forward with a positive recommendation? >> i had one item that i forgot to make. they had an anonymous support with additional impacts and a line of credit for 90 basis points. with entering a letter of

credit, we are merely cutting our costs on the line of credit by 50%. this will be a cost savings of $3.3 million over the next three years. this new letter of credit will cost $3.2 million. supervisor wiener: colleagues, can this be forward -- move forward without objection? that will be the order. item #5. >> item #5. internal accounting report and investment report for the nine months ending march 31, 2012. this is an action item. >> this starts on page 31 of your packets. a quarterly update to the authority financial statements. as of march 31, this is the full fiscal year. we have a balance of $150.5 million in cash on hand,