additional. if the commission decided i didn't want to go in this decision staff would very quickly have to come up with an alternate and we wouldn't know what to do. >> we could say this isn't working for us but it is. >> what about the cost? >> for the first time we've maintained costs for 6 years static. in this it's going to go up. i think that net file has been for bearing to ask for more because the city has made strong

pleas to the contractor of the city to recognize the budget and they've sort of recognized that. and another one is that by working with us to develop several different platforms set of xablts we've enhanced their ability to sell the product in other cities so it's compensation for it but the reality of inflation it's not really feasible for them to give us what is ultimately a discount. and what we're looking at is we're asking for more so the costs will increase >> and do we know how many? >> i don't have the numbers

here but the initial contracts what between 1 hundred and 40 thousand per year. >> i think it's 1 hundred and 17. >> it's reasonable. >> and my final question on this is do we just begin to negotiate the contract? >> well, it's already been negotiated and we - we could have had the price the same for 2 years and then a steep increase but we decided to have it remain static. we need our approval and there's

17 different departments that have to sign off >> we need to see if contracting is the most efficient system. that's on the civil service report >> we're not here actually approving the contract. >> right. for example, the human rights commission has already approved it but we still need you to approve it >> i'm supportive of it. i believe 1 hundred and 17 thousand though it seems high is less than a programmer in this city so if we did this in how is it would cost more. not that i'm giving a general

assessment of the department of the technology. but >> - >> no comment. >> i think this is the best course of action. they really do have all the documents their subject to redaction and all the filings there's a lot we have relatively at low-cost. i'm very supportive of this. thank you. did i mention steve is doing a great job? >> is there a motion? >> so moved. >> the decision is that we determine that this is the most effective way of filing electronic filing system that

meets the needs of the commissioner. that's my motion and i approve that >> i second. >> all in favor? >> i should state that the department of technology cooperates with us and is very helpful. >> now next up agenda is to consider the minutes of the commissions special meeting on april 1st the minutes of that meeting. comments on those amendments? any correction?

changes? >> approved. public comment; right? >> i found no errors the record will show that it was too early in the morning. >> he watches the reruns and a motion to approve? >> second. >> all in favor? okay moving right along >> there's two highlights in the director's report. i want to remind everyone that the regular meeting is on memorial day and the building is closed >> that's going to stop us? >> the meeting has been rescheduled for thursday the

30th. i'll send you a reminded in that. we also plan to address the board of supervisors report that was conducted last year and we expect that that that discussion any take some time it would be a longer meeting. and there's an attachment about an information port all that they've been providing to the city of san francisco. 70 is trying to get the information out there for sort of a one stop setting for data. they've endorsed this product. it speaks well, for us and again

steven left but for stevens work in keeping the information that we have out there and easily available and assessable to the public. i mean, it's not about us but it certainly sheds a favorable light on some of our efforts. any questions? >> okay items for future meeting? oh, comments? >> under item 2 apparently, the staff done as i asked and noticed where gentlemen agreements have been approved and so i thank you for that

thank you. >> finally items for future meetings? okay. and finally public comment? public comments from public on future meetings? no public comment? what about public comments on information not on or on the agenda? well, i want to thank the staff and the public for making my first mooeft as the ethics committee as chair very easy and fast. this is the shortest meeting

i've eve i've ev i've ever attended. okay. the meeting of the ethics committee is

>> chair nolan: here. >> director ramos: presente

>> director rubke: here. >> please know the director lee will be absent but you have a quorum. please be advised that the ringing of cell phones and pagers and tectonic devices are prohibited. any person responsible for the ringing for the one going off may be asked to leave the room. cell phones and vibrate decisions the cause my perform interference. >> motion to approve approval of minutes, may 7 regular meeting >> motion approved. >> be advised item 10.2 p q r s on the consent calendar have been removed from the agenda the request of staff. >> thank you.

>> item 6, introduction of new and unfinished business. >> i believe director heinicke -- i'm looking forward to hearing from staff about market street ahead of the paving project several years ahead in the future. i have noticed for myself as a pedestrian as a transit rider and as a cyclist, the street is getting difficult. cross traffic is really causing problems now with traffic blocking intersections so the buses can't even get up and down market street. i am looking forward to hearing what we can possibly do about that. >> chair nolan: i would like to

report the past weekend i was part of a group visiting mexico city; it was not paid for by the city, about 17 people from the transportation authority, people from spur the planning commission went along. the purpose was to look at the bus and transportation system, an amazing system that carries 850,000 people today. last line they created took eight months from design to implementation which is amazing. it was amazing to see, moving extremely fast, cuts down travel time by 40 percent for much of the city. 850,000 people on four lines, building a fifth one. wondered if anything can be done to move this project along.

i don't know second where we are with it, environmental review out there arrector reiskin? >> director reiskin: expect in july and august complete the environmental review, at which point it will be transferred from the transportation authority to the mta. >> chair nolan: there is also bicycle sharing, they're doing the bicycle thing first with little infrastructure; in the city of 18 million people is daunting to write your bike around but at any rate it was very inspiring to see that one as well, very popular program, 70,000 people a year use it. we are close to ours as well. if we can get --

an interim report in order mr. reiskin on where we are? >> director reiskin: i think the final action will be going to the transportation authority commission, the board of supervisors wearing a different hat. sometime this summer, maybe in advance of that we can. >> chair nolan: in particular - not eight months - but whatever we can do. i was thinking about how city departments work so well together on pagoda theater situation. possibly suggest a model, any kind of time could save is worth it. any thoughts on that. director heinicke? >> director heinicke: two meetings ago i did something --

i got a wonderful memo from mr. haley, to the whole board for you director reiskin explained that this is not my imagination, explaining what the issues were and explaining most importantly what he's doing to address them which is most appreciated. i think some of these issues persist; they persisted as early as this morning when my right longer than it should have and i'm hearing from a number of people about this. while i realize that cannot wave a wand, it is important that the people know, and the public is aware of it. i am requesting that our may 2 memo be turned into a brief presentation perhaps in the directors' report so that we can publicly acknowledge the issues particularly in embarcadero, acts issues; and talk about some of the things

that mr. haley and his staff are doing to address these. and that would put on, if i may, fiercer questions which i noticed during the peak time commutes there are a lot of single car trains when there are certainly enough passengers for a two car train; a two car train occupies the same space and i wonder if that is just an issue, are we short trains? the question would be, what can we do to maximize two car trains during peak time? where do we stand on double boarding, two-train platform boarding and where do we stand on shuttle service? a lot of people, not my, but people in castro and church are bypassed the country because of the peak and the same is true in the thing for folks from palo to --, and wondered whether civil service would alleviate that. the city says we are doing a

little better, i will not rest on c or c+, the very least i want passengers to know how much work is to haley has done and what he is doing and in addition i would like to talk about some of these other issues. >> chair nolan: these are good i get to idea to me. with members consent. >> we have good answers to all of those questions. >> did you say 850,000? that's just the brt lines. that's amazing. >> i forgot to mention headways are one minute. >> that's phenomenal. i am looking forward to that day. building on director heinicke's

point, i heard from several people as well. i think that it would not only be great to hear an update to all the work that director haley has been doing but also it would be great to get an update on the communication systems as well. i think it's been a while since we have heard about that. >> that's in john's memo, and i will say that work superbly today; there were announcements every two minutes and letting us know what was going on and that is absolutely part of this and should be part of -- >> thank you director ramos. >> item 7, directors' report. >> good afternoon chairman nolan, members of the board, staff. a few items to update you with today. starting happily with the new website.

we have received a lot of feedback from everyone who has ever looked at it that our website has passed its prime. given that we have such a public presence in the city, and so many different ways in which would touch people, it can be and should be a very important way that we communicate with people, not the only way but an important way. we have about 3 million visits a year to the website. i am happy to announce that on may 29th, next wednesday, we'll be launching the new sfmta.com. the current site was built back in 2007, when the internet was just starting by the looks of it. we had a lot of feedback from