and we definitely need better signage and i have spoke been this, i don't know how many years before you all were here. now, no turn on red, when people are crossing the crosswalks there. and nothing seems to be getting done, we have all of the construction going on in this area and more people are going to be coming to the neighborhood within the year or two years. and we need better signage as well as people obeying the traffic laws which pedestrians are trying to cross the street. so i don't know if you want to have more money for pedestrian an safety, out reach to the community or drivers because they raced upcoming up to manicia and you have the hills and the market there and they are looking up towards the

castro to cut across the pedestrian walkway, when people are in the crosswalk. so it is a very dangerous situation. and we have the corner store there where the instruction are unloading goods to the store and hopefully there will be another store with the new construction that is going on in the neighborhood, more stores in the area. and that is, you know, and that is all that i have to say. thank you. >> okay, thank you. mr. gilbert. >> are there any other members of the public that would like to make a comment? >> in general public comment? >> all right, seeing none, public comment is closed. >> and madam clerk are there any other items? >> item nine, adjournment. >> thank you very much. we are adjourned.

. >> the meeting of come to order.

good morning everyone. this is the february 12, 2013 meeting of the plans and programs committee of the san francisco county transportation authority. i am eric mar and i am the chair and happy chinese new years everybody. to my right are commissioners norman yee and to my right are commissioner avalos. any announcements? >> there are no announcements. >> can you call item two? >> item two is approval of the minutes. >> anyone from the public want to speak on this item? seeing none. can we move this forward?

please call item three. >> item three is a citizens advisory committee report. >> is there any presentation from the cac? >> good morning. >> good morning. >> i have a quick report from january 23 meeting of the cac. at the meeting we reviewed and passed action items five through seven from your february 12 plans and programs a agendaa. nature of the discussion of the items in your

cac notes. we were also briefed on information item eight from your agenda. additionally the cac reelected glen davis to serve as the cac chair for the upcoming year, and myself as the vice chair. that includes my cac report. thank you. >> thank you mr. flanagan and thank you for your service on the cac as well. colleagues, are there any questions? okay. seeing none do we need to open this up for public comment? so let's open this up for public comment? is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? seeing none public comment is closed. ms. chang please call item four.

>> item four is appointment of two members to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> thank you. >> good morning. i am a planner with the authority. this item starts on page 13 of the packet. the committee has a 11 members and serves a two year term. the program recommends and authority board recommends the members. neither staff or the citizens advisory committee maybe any recommendations on appointment. on page 16 of your packet you can see a list of folks who have submitted applications to be considered for the citizens advisory committee and on page 15 you see a list of with information of the current members. you must be a san francisco resident and speak before the committee. we have two requiring your action. the vacancies resulted in the terms

ending of wendy tran and joseph flanagan and with that i can take any questions. >> thank you. i see no questions. my understanding this item -- we maybe requested to continue this item while more district three or six people show interest. is that correct? >> that's my understanding as well but i believe do mr. flanagan maybe interested in speaking towards this item. >> okay. colleagues let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? >> i [inaudible] i have been gobbled up into district eight and i lived in district six for over 25 you'res but because of redirecting i am residing in district eight. commissioner wiener's district, and i want to know how that's going to affect the cac? and if that is taking

into consideration with the redistricting that their qualifications meet the new district guidelines, and i don't know how that is followed, either by you mr. chair or from the ta staff that informs people when there's a new districting that either people are qualified or not qualified anymore to serve in that district, and i'm really concerned that there's not enough representation in my district in the cac and there isn't enough gay representation for the cac and it's over looked and we're aging and we need good representation and the district is growing my leaps and bounds,

district eight, which is what i was gobbled up in, and district six with new people and we need representation on the cac and we have definite concerns with what the ta is doing with the plans and programs committee here, and i know commissioner kim tried to represent the district, and you know and the appointments that were made, but i feel that we were slighted being from the left over, the central freeway area, and we don't have representation on the cac or in this committee. thank you. >> thank you. i have been informed by our chair campos that we should invite any interested applicants to make a

comment if they want to, and we should limit the comments to two minutes per person if we can. mr. flanagan -- vice chair flanagan. >> my name is joseph flanagan and i appreciate the commissioners, all of the commissioners and the staff of the san francisco transportation authority for giving me an opportunity to speak. i myself am a disabled person, and i represent disabled people, bot seniors and disabled people. i

appreciate being on the board. i enjoy working with the staff. we have a very devoted san francisco transportation authority staff. myself has been elected as the vice chair. i am very honored in serving as the vice chair, and now for my -- excuse me, for my second appointment i am very interested in the transportation committee, and i would like to continue as the vice chair for the san francisco transportation authority. thank you very much.

>> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning commissioners. i am jackie sax. i have been on the committee since 97. i worked with mr. flanagan for the last two years. he's done an excellent job filling in when our chair could not attend the meetings, that sort of thing, and i strongly support him being repointed. he's an excellent job. he know what is he's doing. he knows what he's talking about and he's lead the meetings very well and i urge you to reappoint him. >> thank you. is there anyone else that would like to speak?

seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues, are there any comments? supervisor -- or commissioner kim. >> thank you. actually i was looking at the packet and i didn't see joseph flanagan's reapplication. does he need to reapply? he doesn't. great. that was my question. i wanted to respond to public comment and as you know district six gained thousands of residents in the census and because of that our district shrinked and taken by portions from other supervisors so the district did shrink and a number of residents are in different districts and we had too many residents and wasn't getting adequate representation prior but i think it's difficult just to select one for a

district and our includes treasure island and mission bay and when we select one that means we don't have representation in another district. joseph flanagan has been spent time in our office and on the committee as well, and i know it's challenging to if you find a person to attend all the meetings and from the disabled committee. we did look if there were other folks interested. particularly we note thrd are no african-american or latinos on the cac and we did outreach in those communities. unfortunate people didn't have the time availability to commit to the meetings but we were support of there flanagan and we support him today.

>> chair campos. >> thank you very much mr. chair and i appreciate all the comments made. it's always difficult as commissioner kim indicated to insure that everyone is represented. we want to have a diverse as body as we can, not only in terms of ethnic, racial diversity and also sexual orientation and other things and i think each supervisor tries to weigh and balance different factors that have to be considered, and i do think that it makes sense to provide deference to the district supervisor. i know that there are many people in district six that could be appointed and do a great job. what i can tell you from my experience with mr. flanagan is i haven't met someone who is more committed to these issues.

he actually in his own time makes a point of riding different buses throughout the city just so that he can see first hand the experience, not only as a disabled person but as a senior, and i think that having that kind of enthusiasm and someone willing to really look at the system and how it impacts the consumer directly i think is important. i think the perspective of someone who is disabled is also very important perspective, and i appreciate the fact that all of us even though he's not in district 9 we hear from him on different issues that identifies out there and i think that kind of enthusiasm should be reawarded and i am happy to support his reappointment. >> thank you. i wanted to to ask ms. geary we have district

three rep and a district six rep and i am wondering -- so mr. flanagan is in the mix of these applicants even though we don't have his application so he is being considered. there is a bunch of people in district three and six on the list as well. are we to defer to the supervisors for these appointments? i think we heard from commissioner kim for her preference. have he heard from supervisor david chiu of district three? >> no. we have not yet heard from supervisor chiu. >> okay. >> regarding the question the appointees are not district specific so they are traditionally have been to ensure that we have representation throughout the city, all perspectives are represented. traditionally i think we have -- our experience

has been that there's been some deference to the actual commissioner regarding their recruitment and their familiarity with candidates so that to date has occurred. >> okay. i did want to agree with my colleagues, commissioners campos and kim that i think diverse body that is representative of different ethnic, sexual orientation and gender and other factors and neighborhood factors is critical. i see nine are women and there is under representation of women as well. i think commissioner kim mentioned no african-americans or latinos. i see a number of limited asian americans as well but i thank you for the data that allow us to look at representation. my sense is that we should continue the one of the appointments so that we

can hear from our colleague from district three and let me go to commissioner campos. >> thank you. thank you mr. chair. my suggestion and i make a motion that we move forward the reappointment of joseph flanagan for district six and with respect to the district three appointment that we continue that to the call of the chair, so that we have an opportunity to hear directly from the district three supervisor so that's my motion. >> commissioner kim. okay. so we heard that motion and second. is there any objection to that motion? then it carries. thank you. ms. ching. thank you everyone. please call item five. >> item five is recommendation adoption of the fiscal year, 2013-2014 for the transportation fund for clean air. >> hello i am from the

transportation authority. first for background on the transportation fund for clean air program. this program funds transportation projects that reduce emissions from motor vehicles. these funds are available generally through two means. first is the county fund and the regional fund. the regional fund receives a surcharge on vehicle registration fees on cars registered in san francisco and that is administered directly by the air district and the program manager fund receives the other part of the surcharge and is administered by the authority, so the purpose of this is propose the fiscal 2013-2014 year expenditure criteria for san francisco program manager program. our proposed fiscal 2013-2014 are essentially the same from previous years. the criteria is fairly

straightforward and we have been successfully program every project applicant in recent years. before we consider any project for the fund each project must meet eligibility screening requirements established by the air district and those are project types, basic project type and cost effectiveness. cost effectiveness is measured by the air district and measures the cost of the emissions for each of the projects. if a project passes screening eligibility we use the local criteria that consists of five criteria of the first is project type and we rank those in descending order so the top ranking project is zero emissions non vehicle projects and bicycle improvements and transit improvements and traffic calming and other programs. then we have shuttle services that provide trips of transit. then we have alternative fews vehicles project and finally

any other project eligible to the governing legislation. the next is emissions reduceed in cost effectiveness. here we give priorities to projects that gain this and that is measured by the amount of organic gases and night gendioxide and prioritize these types of projects. the next is project delivery. we give fund to these that are completed within two years. we look at program diversity which means we develop a program of diverse project types and serves multiple constituents and we have other considerations and

we consider projects look to see if the project sponsor has fulfilled monitoring programs for any previous project and we look to make sure previous projects have been completed with scope and budget and the sponsor hasn't violated terms of that for those and we have $750,000 available for the projects in the fiscal year of 2013-2014 and due to these but a few of these and clean air taxis and in terms of the schedule we released it for the program on february 4. the applications are due on april 1 and we anticipate brings a program of projects for consideration to this committee at its may meeting. this timelines allow us to get these to the project sponsors on the due date. more information can be found on our website. and with that i can

take questions on the program or this particular -- any bit of the local expenditure criteria. >> thanks for getting so much information so quickly, but it's good to see our 4-dollar per vehicle dmv money going to great projects and this is for six to 10 projects? >> typically it's the amount of money from the past years and the number of projects we're able to partially or fully fund. >> and the criteria is similar to last year criteria as well? >> almost identical. any other questions colleagues? commissioner yee. >> my question is pretty much a process question. the content was okay. in regards to the criteria and one of the things that was stated in the criteria

that didn't pass yet is that projects, request for projects would be due on march 2 or something like that, which i didn't understand if we're passed it today how does one prepare for a request by march 2? >> thanks for the question. the way we set up the call for questions this particular year. we released two other project sponsors and the folks that do the funding opportunities and the social media and we had a draft call for projects which was last week with the note that the criteria would not -- we would anticipate approval at the board meeting and at that time we would let everybody know what the final criteria were. >> thank you. >> i am [inaudible]. i am acting executive director. to answer the question for the benefit of those watching. if

you have a project idea now is the time to get in contact with a likely project sponsor such as the sfmta or if you have an idea and get in touch with the authority staff we can hook you up with a sponsor, and the reason the schedule is going in parallel with the criteria is once the board approves the project we can get the funds out to the sponsors as soon as we can. >> thank you and thank you. so seeing no other questions let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone that would like to speak on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner campos. >> thank you. thank you mr. chair, i appreciate the presentation, and i make a motion to move this forward, the recommendation. >> so it's moved and seconded. without objection colleagues. thank you. ms. ching please call the next item.

>> >> item six is recommend allocation of $2,862,045 to prop k funds and conscience and this is an action item. >> thank yous. >> >> good morning again. this item begins on page 67 of the packet. we received three requests totals 2.8 million and you can review the applications received and pages 72 through 74 you can read brief project descriptions and notes on key issues that maybe of interest to you. the sfmta has requested this funds from prop k for the design and construction of the n-judah customer first and improvements to the light rail and around the corridor. you

can view a project map on page 98. these share similar objectives to the project and aim service reliability and customer increase and decreased time and increased rider ship. this includes dedicated lanes and selling signs and branding and install identification transit only cameras. this is matching a federal grant of about 4 million from the metropolitan transportation transportation commission. their grant program places a heavy emphasis on project delivery of 24 months of grant award. we are recommending a multi- allocation to meet the project

completion deadline. the sfmta has requested funds for the d of this project. this begins on page 96 and for future corridor work and signals and accessible pedestrian signals and other locations. you can view a map of the locations. the sfmta has has plans to review the conduit conditions at 10 additional locations along this street with pedestrian counsel down the signals but have deteriorated conduit. the sfmta is coordinating this project. the sfmta anticipates completion of this so the public works can