this convergence of housing and employment. in san francisco, your experience a different pattern and san francisco coaleses in the financial district which is no longer a case, the set of jobs that you are absorbing in the region is a lot more complex and it really varies across the professional services and it is closely linked to entertainment and retail and that defines a new economic profile for the city in a new relationship with the rest of the region that we are hoping will be able to facilitate and are teaching this with the plan b area. so let me stop here. and i will let him take over. >> i used to work here when the dinosaurs, and this room as beautiful as it was. i am here to tell you about the

money and it should not take long, there is a lot of it and that is certainly the case and as you can see on this chart, close to 300 billion dollars in this plan that we forecast will be available over the next 25 to 30 years and the principle take away is that most of it is generated in this area. between the funds and the local funds that are primarily sales tax and transit fares and it is two-thirds of the money. and the down side of course is that has been some what of a necessity because of the lack of investment and sacramento and washington and the good news is that when you raise your own money, and you can write your own rules and that is something that we have done to the benefit and not done a lot of highways in the area and you tear them down more than you build them and we need to

invest in the transit and we need to invest in the bicycle modes and when we generate a lot of money we have a better time doing that when we deal with the federal or the state rule book. and we tend to divide this money in this planning exercise, into two different pots, pretty much just to cut to the chase because a lot of the money about 80 percent of the money that we call committed is committed to the specific purposes by law and long standing policy as most of the money that you can see in this slide is main nens of the existing system and 90 percent of this money is going to maintain our existing infrastructure that is filling pot holes and replacing buses on a resonable schedule. we don't thifrpg that we should have a big argument about that every four years and the argument that we have is how much more discretionary money that we can bring to that very vital activity what we call fix it first and because our

infrastructure in the bay area is frankly not getting any younger. and we need to take care of it if we are going to have the kind of straggy that this plan suggests. and the discretionary income in this plan is where we do tend to have the arguments and that is where we should have the arguments. and i want to spend a minute on where we have wound up on this one and what the board has been asked to consider in july. maybe starting at noon here on the clock hand and going clockwise, you will see that after spending 90 percent of all of the available resources in the region on maintenance, this plan proposes to spend an additional quarter of all of our discretionary revenue on those same activities. and that is because of the importance that we place on these issues and i will say, we could spend this whole pot of

discretionary money on maintenance activities and still not fill up the tank for shortfalls to maintain our state highway system and local transit system and road networks, i would call this a down payment, and working your way down toward 3:00 there you will see the one bay area grant program that i know quite a few of you staff certainly were very involved in hashing out and that plan, that program, again, is our attempt to match what you the local officials are making to try to grow smarter and grow around transit. this is not a ton of money and we hope to do better next time but i think that it is an indication that we do want to incentivize and reward the jurisdictions that are taking on more of the growth and san francisco and the other two major cities in the region are certainly doing that. as you round 6:00 p.m. there at

the bottom you will see a couple of regional initiatives to build the next generation of transit capacity through the bay area, quite a bit of that is happening within about two miles of this room right now. and as well as boosting our transit and freeway systems in terms of efficiency and not new capacity but squeezing more capacity out of the existing system. much like your transit effectiveness project with muni and finally we acknowledge that not all good ideas emanate from the region that each individual county in this case the city and county have a lot of local priorities that the money needs to be tailored to and that is better done at the county wide level and here it is done right here in front of this board and so, we leave about 30 percent of this discretionary money for those purposes. when you add it altogether, given that heavy maintenance

emphasis you will see that 80 percent of all of the money that we will be spending over the next 30 years is to take care of the system that we have built. in one way that can sound frustrating because we have a lot of growth coming in the region and a lot of new prioritis that we would like to take on. but i do believe that this heavy emphasis on maintenance and operation of our existing infrastructure is probably the best thing that we can do to support the stralgy that this plan outlines, i have often said that we have had an infill transportation plan for a long time and waiting for an infill land use policy to go along with it and i think that what the plan bay area does is represents the coming together of those two things. san francisco, as i mentioned earlier has a lot of this action. and in terms of infrastructure investments and none of these projects are small. and many of them top a billion dollars, and they are very

important investments that we are making the drive is an example and now the procidio parkway is a rehab project and it is a glorified rehab project but what it is really about is having the capacity in that corner that is not susceptible to earthquake and that can get people through when that major event occurs. and the downtown area with the cal tran extension and the transbay transit center and major facilities locate $in san francisco and they are not just yours, they are really regional assets xh is why we think that it is important to invest in them. this plan, i think maybe not for the first time but to this ex-sent, certainly for the first time is focused heavily on performance. and we took every single project proposal over 50 million dollars and subjected it to a benefit cost analysis and we have done several equity analysis of this plan to make

sure that the benefits and burdens are shared, evenly around the region and at the plan level, the commission and the abag board adopted a series of measure and they were not bashful in doing so they were quite aggressive in many respects and i am pleased to report that in the case of 6 of them as you can see here, we either met, or exceeded the targets. the most prominent is reducing greenhouse gas emissions per capita and we also made progress to an additional five targets where we did not get there and we certainly made a good first effort and we hope to get the red of the way in the next plan and i think a worrying sign is that in the case of four of the targets we not only didn't make it through we did not head in the ride direction we went the wrong way. in the couple of these cases we may have picked the roning

metric, i think not having per capita standards is a difficult thing to do when you are growing because the cap ta keeps growing, what you want to keep track of is how much per person are you making i am movements by these are areas that we want to focus the greater attention on in the next plan as we make the progress on all of these objectives. in closing we acknowledged that this plan under 375 is a first effort. and we do believe that it is a good start but very much is a plan that we need to build on i think in two significant report respects. not just to take the plan and take a breather. this plan aoe peneds on a lot of active advocacy in sacramento and washington to try to make the progress that we need to make here. >> the most obvious on the land use side is the fact that the same legislature that gave us

this charge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions through smarter growth is the one that took away the redevelopment authority which might have been the best tool to achieve that and so we are working closely with the senator's office on trying to fashion some kind of a redevelopment and framework and some replacement or series of replacements so that we can get that roughly one billion dollars of investment that was occurring in the bay area