to prevent uplift. this slide is a high-speed station that will be serving the olympics this summer. the station is in a trench, and the base slab would have been subject to uplift, but the water table has been artificially lowered to 30 feet below the slab to a permanent watering system, which discharges water on the river and on the left. and it is right there on the left. and should they use such a system, there will be no tie downs, and the dewatering system may even be capable of generating water to support the entire terminal great water needs. thank you. >> thank you.

that does include members of the public that wanted to address you under this item. we can move to the regular calendar. chair kim: we do have item 7 before us. >> approving the fiscal year 2012-2013 capital budget in an amo 223,671,000 and fiscal year 2012-2013 operating budget in an amount not to seed -- not to exceed 4,427,000. take of this budget has no changes from the draft budget presented last month, but i am happy to answer any remaining questions that you might have. chair kim: i know we had a presentation last month, but to you think you could do a summary again? >> absolutely. the capital budget is not quite

$224 million that is largely construction and professional services, such as continuation of design, but the majority of that is for continued construction. the operating budget is $0.4 million for the terminal, largely transit operating support and facility management contract. as well as trying to fund operating reserve, which can be used when the transit center goes into operation. continuation of the professional and specialized services, along with design. it does include 8 million in the budget this year for continued preliminary engineering on the downtown extension. that would move forward if funding is identified for that as part of the discussions with mtc and the new start process. design will continue.

construction documents should be finalized later this year. but storage, engineering and design continue. -- bus storage, engineering, and design continue. right of way acquisition, there is little over $5 million for conclusion of the eminent domain process, although according to the state budget situation, that may not conclude this fiscal year, but this would include it and it would carry forward to fiscal year. this would be for claims that would come in. most of the deadlines do occur this fiscal year, so boats should be wrapping up this year. on the revenue side, we divide the budget into the committed

revenue, so those of the allocations we already have, and then there are the planned revenues allocated throughout the year. there are two later on in the agenda. as they become committed, we move them to a committed section for the portion that is planned to be spent during the fiscal year. for instance, capital allocation is on the agenda today and over $73 million, but just abortion is included in the fiscal year budget for next year. >> is that portion 7.5 million is that -- >> i believe it is 16. 10.9. the same with landfill proceeds. while they are significantly more than the $12 million included in the budget, it is

the $12.3 million we would anticipate spending this fiscal year. >> are these the planned revenues included in the budget as revenue stream? the land sale of block 6, and then at 16 million. >> that is correct, as well as the grant used for environmental ones that is awarded and more capital contributions. chair kim: can you remind me again. i know we went over this last month, but with the fta grant, when will we have final confirmation? >> we do have notice of a war, it just has not been executed. we're working on the timing and process for all of that. director ortiz: dtx preliminary.

at the last sentence you say in addition to the budget excludes costs associated with advanced preliminary engineering should new revenues be found. should that 400 for this project, would it cover that? >> no, the 400 million is funding the train box, but not actually funding in the engineering or continuation for the downtown extension. >> ok. director ortiz: ok. >> any other questions from directors? chair kim: i do appreciate the detailed budget narrative that accompanied the budget itself and very helpful to get an explanation of the planned revenues that have not yet been committed. it seems to be a good balance of what we've been able to put forward in knowing much of the revenue that is coming in is

very helpful. a motion to approve? a motion in the second. -- and a second. >> we will go ahead and do a roll call vote on this. [calling roll] five ayes. item seven is approved. next item. item eight, authorizing the executive director to execute with conditions of of random of understanding with the california high-speed rail authority, the metropolitan transportation commission, and six other local and regional entities to establish a funding framework for a high speed rail early investment strategy for a blended system in the peninsula

corridor. >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity to present this morning. i am here to present good news related to phase ii, dtx. as you are aware, the high-speed real recently revised their business plan, and that vision relates to funding for theseii an phase ii and the memorandum you will be considering today. this is the full build up scenario to what is referred to as a blended system approach. with the full bbuild up a scenario, dedicated tracks up and down the state all the way from l.a. to san francisco and the accompanying the expansion of right away. with this approach does instead is the northern and southern book ends with utilize existing

infrastructure and right away. that means caltrans infrastructure and caltrans right of way. that shift was really essential for addressing the very strong concerns that have been raised by communities up and down the peninsula. those concerns were focused on the prospect of building a separate dedicated tracks and accompanying expansion of the right away and the impact on the communities. the shift to the system created an opportunity for regional consensus, and what the high speed rail authority did to capitalize on the opportunity is a date initiated negotiations on a memorandum of understanding with the city of san francisco, city of san jose, caltrans and a number of other regional entities, and what that specifies is it lays out the list of needed infrastructure upgrades that must occur along the caltrans corridor in order to make ready to accommodate high-speed rail and then to a

can -- continue accommodating freight service and high-speed rail. you see on the list of projects included, most importantly, it includes dtx and the number of long-standing regional priorities you are all familiar with. and new stations, and so on this slide we have a list of the parties to the mou. you can see going down the list listed in yellow all look the other parties, with one exception, have already gone through the process to approve it, starting with mtc on march 28 and including the city and county of san francisco and transportation authority. the only entity that still remains to approve is the city of san jose. there city council will take that up for consideration on june 19, tuesday. what the high-speed rail

authority brought to the table as part of the negotiations was an additional 600 million in early prop1a funding related to their projects specified in the mou. what is laid out is taking the 600 million and combining it with the 600 million already designated to the region, and that combined 706 million and would go towards two projects, electric of vacation and positive train control. the total cost is just under 1.5 billion, just over 1.2 billion for electric fication. this is being combined with the 600 million arbillion already committed. the combined total will totally fund those projects. some of the benefits, 90% reduction in greenhouse gas

emissions, trendsetter faster, quieter, cleaner, more efficient, and therefore reduces travel times and is able to increase the frequency of trips, and therefore allows for increase readership, and therefore increased revenues. of course over the lifetime of the project will create thousands of jobs. the bay area council just recently came out with a report, and their report estimated approximately 9600 jobs will be created by this. most importantly again from their perspective is those projects will lay the groundwork for proceeding with completion of those other needed infrastructure upgrades that are identified in the mou, specifically the dtx. this resolution 2424, the resolution were it was first identified as a priority for

transit expansion. it reiterates the new transit center will be the authority for high-speed rails. it commits all of the parties to work together towards fully funding the complete list of upgrades that are identified in the mou. the key point we wanted to emphasize for you today before you consider this is as part of the negotiations, we agreed to move forward with designating dtx as a regional priority for the federal restarts. these are articulated and the regional transportation plan, or rtp. the rtp has typically carried t wo regional priorities, based on past experience on what an estimate they can reasonably expect to receive during the life of this.

and for many years the region's two priorities have been the central subway, in the first part of the san jose project. both of those projects are at the tail end of the new starts progress, which is a full funding grant agreement. it is a guarantee from the federal government's for a certain specified amount of federal funds and significant federal funds for construction of the transit expansion project. they receive sfga and april, and the central subway is on the cusp. it is expected to occur later this summer. in this we have a little bit of background about this program, but the key point is that it is up by far the largest discretionary funding stream that exist for funding base ig

ii of the project. this is the most significant opportunity that has been out there and something we've been targeting for many years. getting this designation is a major step forward for phase ii. getting this from the region metropolitan planning organization, getting this designation is essential to move forward in the new starts process. it is a prerequisite. with this, we are now on the path towards a guaranteed amount of federal funds for construction, and we also have a fully-formed a plan with the regional commitment for funding phase ii. what you have on this slide is the current funding plan, and on the lower left-hand corner are the amount of funds that remain to be committed for phase two, 1.94 $7 billion. what they laid out is at least

650 million. 300 million will come from future bridge tolls, and the combination of funds from future high-speed rail funding, new or augmented local sales taxes. as i mentioned earlier, this is a party to the mou. 350 million in that area. 100 million from joint development and other local sources. that represents a very conservative estimate of the amount of funds that will come to the dtx through developer impact fees. this was approved by the planning commission on may 24. director ortiz: new bridge tolls. what does that mean? an increase in the current price? >> it is to be determined. it is a commitment from future bridge toll funding available, they will commit 300 million to

phase ii. director ortiz: this means the current price goes up based on the current price, correct? >> that is my understanding. >> it could be an increase from what we understand. >> dooming taking into consideration the current price. to go it is my understanding it could potentially be an increase in the bridge tolls in the future. >> and very quickly, the next ups in tsteps in the rtp proces, they finalize the draft and is still technically in draft form, because it now goes through an environmental review process, and this is not an environmental review of individual projects,

but the review of the plan overall of the cumulative impact. what it will assess is the ability of the plan to meet the region goal in terms of emission reductions and increased access to transportation. our project is a plus on both of those accounts. there is no danger or prospect of the new starts designation being removed during the environmental review process. the real hurdle was getting included in the draft ftp. it is anticipated that the draft eir will be released for review. they are anticipating there will finalize in april of next year. then it goes to department of transportation for review next summer. with that, i do have with us here today, nancy wheeling, who has been working on the financial plan for many, many

years. also, brian to answer any technical questions about the blended system approach and how this impacts high-speed drill. chair kim: i do have a question for you, scott. i notice in the recommendation that you suggest our approval is contingent upon mcc's approval at dtx for not less than 6 million. i want you to explain that a little bit more. i know we also passed something very similar, contingent upon funding, but we did not list a dollar amount. >> this was a contingency also included in another resolution, and it is essential for us that that amount be a commitment going forward, that it be at least that amount. what typically happens on

negotiations is many years past. i think central subway has been in the new storage pipeline 49- 10 years or something like that. part of the reason it takes so long as all of the other funding sources have to be finalized. we want to specify a ththat the amount would be of the 650 million. we want to make sure that commitment was maintained going forward. >director reiskin: first, i want to commend the director and staff for their work to work with the region to get to the point where we are with the mou before us. this is a great thing for san francisco, the region, and california. i think this is part of what will help advance high-speed drill statewide, so i think it is a great thing. i am glad we're here to support

it. there is no question that having the dtx in the regional transportation plan is essential, and at least 650 is also essential. i did not look at the cta approval of the mou. it did seem a little strange to condition the support of the mou on that. i think is certainly needs to be recognized and is essential to us. i do not know what the practical impact is. we are in the draft tp, as you rtp, as you mentioned, and at some point that 650 would slip, it would obviously be a big problem for us at the tpja in san francisco, but i do not know what practical support it has for regional cooperation and

support. >> to answer your question on the practicality, when we were all at the table negotiating this, the city and county of san francisco's stepped up to the plate. the city and county agreed to put in approximately or even more than $60 million towards this. it is a huge commitment by san francisco moving up to the plate for the upgrades to the caltrans corridor that end of fourth and townsend. it was very important for the party's that if we were going to support this and not give any money from prop1a, because remember we are not getting any money, that there would be a strong commitment that we would be in the new starts pipeline, and a commitment of no less than 650 million in new starts, because i remind you, while it is an agreement that we all agree to orally in verbally, it

is not stated specifically in the mou, other than to say we will all work together to fund the dtx. so because of that, because anything could happen while we are in a draft form, and up until april of 2013 when this is approved, we thought it was important that if there were giving up not getting prop1a monies, and sentences go was putting up some much money, that we would have -- that we would condition our support of this on being part of the rtp and no less than 650. that was verywe felt it was impe condition our support on a minimum dollar amount. it really does not hurt anybody. it is falling and tracking what has been approved. we're not doing anything contrary to that. it is a safeguard for the authority. >> sf cta did specify the

amount. >> they put a dollar amount. >> and the ta conditions their support. >> yes, they conditioned their support of the exact same condition that we put in our document. supervisor kim: i appreciate the clarification. i thought it was contingent on continued funding, not a dollar amount, but the ta put a dollar amount. >> it says at least $650 million. >> absolutely. we have gone this far because we always insist that everything be in writing. good intentions aside, let's be clear. so that is what we're doing it. director metcalf: ok, this is really exciting to be talking about phase two, and it is really impressive what you have pulled off in the last season at to get all this done. i have two questions. one is, what is the best case scenario timing of moving the

dtx into construction? and then, related to that, i would like us to be thinking about contingencies in case the federal money is not there. it is one thing to have it written down in a bay area plan document that we're going to get $650 million. it is another for the congressional republicans to fund a transportation bill of sufficient size over many years to actually fill up that bucket. so it is related to the first question about timing, because if it is going to take years and decades to get the $650 million simply because of the size of the federal transportation budget, that is another reason for us to have a contingency.

>> i would like to start with the second question, because, obviously, the last couple of years, last couple of a federal appropriation cycles, have not been good in terms of domestic discretionary spending, new starts has continued to do well. the threshold that applicants for the new starts program typically bring to capitol hill is seeking approximately $2 billion for the program. we have not reached that benchmark since the fiscal year 2010 bill. but the 2012 bill was at $1.995 billion. the senate had the bill for fiscal year 2013, and there's is $2 billion plus. even though the negotiations on the surface transportation reauthorization have dragged on and on and it looks like there is a real prospect that those will get extended again beyond

june 30, at no aspect of those negotiations have involved backtracking from the new start program or anything that would threaten the federal commitment to this program going forward. i think we're on solid ground in terms of the future of new starts. in terms of the best case scenario for the timing, the factor that will really determine how quickly we move is how quickly we are able to line up our local funding sources. if it is a question of how quickly future new bridge tolls come through the original process, how quickly we are able to move forward with the new or augmented local sales taxes that are mentioned, how quickly we are able to move forward with the trend -- a trend since interdistrict plan, which is in the process of being finalized -- you cannot move forward in new starts and tell those local funding sources are finalized. you cannot get a full funding grant agreement.

but once we have those lined up, we're actually able to work with the federal the permit of transportation ticket what is called a letter of no prejudice, and that will allow you to start spending bills local funds while you're still negotiating your full funding grant agreement. so it is a question of how quickly that funding can be lined up. >> that is right. we're so far advanced with our engineering, we could start construction in 2014 if we had the money. that is how far advanced we are with the extension engineering. on contingencies, director, we're not just, all of the seven because we're now in the draft rtp for new stars, not continuing to look at other options. we have to continue to be responsible and see what else we can do, because anything can happen. director metcalf: i hope you're right about the future of federal funding for new starts.

i continue to think we would be wise to have contingencies in case you're not right. >> that is what we're looking at. we're absolutely doing that. it is always good to have a plan b, c, and d, and we're working on that. >> the largest option that has been out there and that is really on the table has been in new starts. to be on a path forward with that is a great step forward, while we pursue other options as they become available. supervisor kim: any other questions? ok, thank you. >> no members of the public indicated it wanted to address you on that item. supervisor kim: do we have a motion? we have a motion and a second. >> roll-call vote. director lloyd: aye. director metcalf: aye. director reiskin: aye. director ortiz: aye. supervisor kim: aye. 5