really need a way to more easily and systematically measure that time. so we'll certainly incorporate that here and welcoming on ways to make that easier in future to report on any given time point neuter. >> if i could recommend or ask, whatever the right word, is that we take a benchmark of mean distance between failure, on-time performance, number of trains into the system on a daily basis and if i may ask west portal to embarcadero and visa versa, which i think is the single most important measure for your average rider and benchmark those to-date and schedule the hearing in the fall, after john has worked the magic with the few wands we have given him, which i

realize aren't many and report back. if it's making a dent, we'll stick with that, but if it's not, we need to tell our citizens and riders he needs a bigger bag of tricks and go after those. >> we have three of those four measures already. the data for the travel time analysis, we have. so we can get that baseline data in place and report back. but it's not an either/or. and aside from this current bag of tricks, the other thing that john is doing just on the light rail, two other things. one he made reference to is in the overhaul of the vehicles, that initial overhaul was somewhat limited to the door and step systems. we were able to get some funding to do some of the truck infrastructure underneath the vehicles on a smaller number of the vehicles. but what john and his team have done is identified all of the different component failures that we have on the system, and has laid out what an expanded

problem of overhaul would look like. as he said, some of the vehicles are in the offered of 15 years old and they have a 27-year life. so we're not going to have the luxury, as soon as we would like of mid-life overhaul that we should be performing and one of the things we got into the city's capital plan which has since been approved by the board of supervisors is ongoing funding for mid-life overhauls of our transit vehicles and since most of our bus fleeted will be replaced in the next five years, initially a lot of that funding we would direct to the light rail vehicles. and the other thing john had has been working on is the replacement of the entire light rail fleet. we have a requirement as part

of the central subway, a demand for an additional 24 vehicles, bringing us from 151 vehicles to 175. so that procurement we're starting now. but since we do have a fleet that will be aging out, the way john is structuring the procurement is start an initial procurement and he has put on rfp and soon we'll be issuing request for proposals and we'll really be teeing up the procurement and we have expansion needs identified in our fleet plan of another 50 vehicles. as those come online, our current 151 will start aging out. so we'll already have teed up the replacement of those as soon as they their useful life comes to an end. it's not just let's try some

short-term fixes and cross our fingers, but we're doing that and in parallel, doing the longer term and capital projects that john talked about on the communication side and we need do all of these things, because i think john's presentation made clear it's a very complex system that has a lot of different variables and we don't have the luxury to try different things at the same time. >> that is great and my final point is that i appreciate the attention to it. again, i he echo the compliments for john on this, but i think the public deserves and we as a board need to have a measuring stick. so throw all of your trainsing do whatever you can the next six months and measure the dent we're making and in we're making a dent, we can keep

going and if not, we need to reevaluate. >> thank you. we're at capacity in the subway during the rush hour and the mechanical failures exacerbate that. as we continue to make improvements on the surface, because we have talked about this, so many of our lines spend time on the surface and they are not in the subway and we have so much opportunity to speed them up on the surface, as the pilot project only church street is doing for the jade church. if we don't get our mechanical issues under control, we're almost making it worse. i mean i know we're not making it worse, but it feels like we would be making it worse and we have the trains moving more quickly to the subways where they have greater opportunity to back up. >> right. >> so it really does make the mechanical issues and the stacking in the subway issues

even more dire. >> like putting lanes on the east shore freeway and making the bay bridge lanes narrower. >> they can also compliment each other and to the extent that the improvements that we're making on the jay church and through our customer-first initiative and the tep, to better space the trains, parts of the reliability is eliminating the bunches and gaps, so that they are better spaced. the other thing that happens during the delay from church to van ness is not just failed portal, but trains stacked up. when i ride in, three in a row, because of delays in the sun sets because we're mixing traffic and stopping at stop signs and to the extent we improve the reliability and have the spacing better. that could have positive impact. >> i am still 100% in support of getting our muni metro to the point it's on the surface

it only stop to drop off and pick up passengers and with 4th and king with signal priority, doesn't stop at stop signs, because we know from the tep presentations we need fewer train cars or buses when we do that, when they complete their route more quickly. so it is almost like expanding our fleet, if we can get them moving faster on the surface portion. people's trips are shorter and more comfortable and less delays due to overcrowding. as we know, it's incredibly important that part of the system is just frustrating for people and when it's not frustrating it's brilliant and it's a great system. director ramos? >> i just want to -- yes, i want to express my gratitude to director for all of his great work and i understand you are doing so much with so little

and i imploring the different groups and elected officials looking out for resources for us to hustle that along and make it work, so we can actually address some of these concerns. you know, i know there are conversations all the time that are happening in sacramento, at the federal government. i know there are some underway right now, but to me, we can only do so much with an old system that lacks reinvestment. and i thank you for your patience and tenacity in doing what you can with what you have. probably build the case in six months and figuring out that we have done all we can. i have a feeling that director haley has done all he could and there is just not a whole else we can do without major overhaul of the system. the only couple of questions that i have, that i mean, i would support all of this. i really like the idea of the proposals that i have seen in the tep, to really make the

lanes for dedicated in the sunset, particularly, where i typically catch it. i had the pleasure or the privilege of living along with the dedicated lanes exist, and experienced that bottleneck when it mixed it you, once it hits 9th avenue and comes to a screeching halt there. so whatever we can do to actually help expedite that idea of dedicating those lanes past the avenues. because it goes away from having its own dedicated raised median in the outer sunset also. to expedite that i hope that is something that we could pursue because i know the wear and tear on your vehicles from starting and stopping in mixed traffic contributes to these issues. the other thing i would really like to hear a little bit more

about and inquire about is whether or not you have considered the idea directing traffics for these rlvs when they come owl out of the tunnel. as someone who rides a bicycle frequently through the interchange, i see cars and traffic in the peak hours at least and slowing down the j from the tunnel and getting a handle on the traffic at that particular spot. >> coming on. >> yes, one of the things that you also enabled in your budget is the hiring of more parking control officers, which are also traffic control officers. so one thing john's folks have done, they have identified and made reference on the slides to this, made reference to the most critical locations, where

traffic, be it bike, auto, pedestrian is impacted impacting the muni flow. because you authorized the additional pco hiring we have resources that we can start deploying those. i think they they started that a few months ago and we'll evaluate that as well. as far as speeding up the surface, the draft report should be out on-track for january and the other part of the city's capital plan is a general obligation bond proposal for the ballot next november. so with that, with the capital fund plan revenue

for mid-life vehicle overhauls that will work. to both of your comments to the larger resource need, those are targeted at our very kind of most critical, either service needs or optimization needs such as the tep. that the rest of the infrastructure -- you know, we're focusing the resources on the most critical sections of rail. but that is a few miles out of the 72 miles of rail that we have for the light rail. so in terms of making the case that we're doing the best with the resources that we have. i think that is absolutely incumbent upon us to do. but then being able to artic articulate to the voters and policymakers in washington and regional lawmakers that we need to investment in the

infrastructure and vehicles and we'll hopefully be in a better position to make that case. we need to do those things and make the case for that much more significant investment that we as a city have failed to make over the last 20 years. >> director lee. >> thank you director haley for that report and i think director heinicke had great questions and concerns and i don't want to rehash a lot of this and i don't know if i'm oversimplifying it, but on your presentation, where you identifies some of the problems and here are some of the solutions that we have on the way. can we get more defined dates of when we planned to have some of the processes completed? i know some of it may not, like the technology issue, but i want to have a feeling like

okay here is what we identified and here is what we said we're going to do and when are we go to get it done? >> happy to do it in the interest of getting it out on time and i think the other thing is that as ed was saying, as we are putting these in, and we can report as best we can, but you will see the progress or non-progress immediately. i will give you a case in point. this morning, systemwide, both the bus side and rail side, we had -- we exceeded our yesterday's on-time performance by 13 or 14 points. and especially both sides were improved, but yesterday in the

morning rush hour, we had on the order of nine failed entries. this morning we had two, and all of the lines were much more balanced. so in terms of where we are in the mean distance between failure, what we are doing and we need to present it effectively is not just show you the overall number. because if we go back over 18 months, you begin to see the little uptick. but cars that have been rehabed, systems that have been fixed and part of the rehab, it's the right systems, but we left out key components like propulsion. that is one of the biggest problems that we have. and it wasn't addressed, and even something like doors, and the rehab program, part of the doors were addressed. but we have also used our own forces and we're able to go and work with ed's help and support

and the help and support of our colleagues to get modest capital funding money to finish like the doors and the additional trucks, which both stabilize the ride, as well as support the brakes. both of which, obviously, are key components to the safe ride. so my point is that we will -- we should be able to, as we indicated, report on the progress and we can give you specific dates on when we expect to -- on each of these items. >> thank you. >> director rubke? >> two access disability related items, one the focus of overcrowding and i know just wheelchairs in general and other mobility devices take up more space. so those folks are

more likely to be left behind on the platforms and the second thing i want to ask about is the facilities especially in the sunset. i know the platforms, there are not so many accessible stops on the n lines and the other sunset lines. so i know that is a space issue and kind of a streetscape issue, but it does again kind of affect the service for our people who need level-boarding out in that neighborhood. so i would just be interested in any funding sources to go after in terms of making the facilities happen over the years. i know it's not exactly right in what the presentation is about, but it's related. >> i think we have had funding to put in some of the elevated

stops that allow for level-boarding. we have a project now that i think is going to add another three or four of those, which in the big scheme of the number of stops isn't a love. but where we can get them at the key locations we'll do and continue to expand that, so we get more accessible boarding throughout more of the system. >> thank you. it just makes such a difference for the folks waiting for trains. >> thank you. i think we have public comment. >> one person has turned in a speaker card, john decastro. >> good afternoon again john de[krao-frts/], castro. i used to ride montgomery to mariposa and 35-40 minutes is

the meantime. it's kind of ugly, i could work it almost as fast. the cris in potrero hills and dog patch, so you need to pay attention to us and i realize the subway is the backbone of the system and for bay view through political reasons and parking reasons, and this and that a few years ago and that eliminated the dedicated right-of-way that somebody told me cost 8-10 minutes of travel time through bayview. i think the other thing too on

the communications, the thing that commissioner heinicke was talking about, if there is a delay in the subway that is running more than five minutes, someone from the ops center out to come on and say there is a problem and have a train out of service at civic center or whatever, rather than letting us stew in our juices and wondering what the hell muni is up to? the electronic sign board, the tvs in the subway at powell and montgomery are hardly ever accurate. if you look at them, i have learned how to read them and figure out where the train is, because i don't believe it when it says 2 minutes to the next end or whatever. i am a common rider. so anything you can do to help bring this around and last comment, would i love to get you to 18th with the e line or n line to have better service. >> thank you, mr. decosta.

>> mr. reiskin, i know it says signal priority repaired on 3rd street. >> i think some of the points mr. decastro is making and some that folks made a number -- a couple of meetings ago about the t3rd line were valid and that the signal system along 3rd street was not functioning as designed and it was in part a maintenance issue and some other issues that we have since been able to resolve. it's something that i was made aware of when i first came here. we got things -- we got -- i think more than 90% of them functioning properly. then it fall into disrepair again and they have since been put back into working order and now we have our traffic engineers evaluating to make sure that not only is the hardware working, but the design is work as intend and

also looking at places, where we might improve the design to enhance the transit priority. because there are some locations that still have more auto priority because they are intersecting main streets such as cesar chavez, 16th and 3rd, where we might -- where i am eager to make adjustments to give stronger transit priorities. so that the folks on the hill won't choose to drive downtown, but find the t to be more reliable. i think is there lots of opportunity for improvement of the t on 3rd street to get it working. at least as designed, if not better. >> thank you. i know i for one am eager to support those adjustments along 3rd street. we all rode those and experienced it firsthand. thank you very much. this was not an action item and i think we can move on. i know we have still our next agenda item and people have been waiting for a while. >> item 13, authorizing the

establishment of a commercial paper program to temporary finance the design acquisition and construction of sfmta approved projects and for other sfmta-related purposes, apointing state street bank and trust as the letter of credit bank. >> what is maybe less exciting, and what might be a little bit of a dry item here, but important and apparently also a legal requirement that we walk through an actual presentation is a mechanism that will help us move these projects faster. sometimes projects aren't moving as fast as we would like them to for cash flow issues or waiting for a grant agreement to get executed or wait if anything anew fiscal year to

start. this is a very important effective mechanism used by the city, other city agencies, other transit agencies with the authority that we got by voters to issue our own debt. and this is something that i think we previewed for you sometime last year. a very important tool that will help us better, more eventually deliver our capital projects, our great cfo will lead the presentation. >> thank you, director reiskin and i have a whole team. the department of finance, attorney's office, and two financial advisors, and are public financial management and bond council. so it's taken a lot of effort to get us to this

point. so i indulge your patience. we have to go through this to get it on the record and a appreciate it. there is an overhead, if we can get that on. not powerpoint, but overhead. we're in front of you to authorize the issuance and sale of $100 million and to issue one or more tax exempt series and we're asking your consideration to authorize three major documents, and ipa agreement, issuing and payment agreement with u.s. bank. a formal letter of credit embureau of alcohol, tobacco, reimbursement with state street and agreement with luke capitol and morgan stanley and authorize director of transportation to make necessary modifications.

to give you background, proposition a is a really helpful tool for us because the capital intense terri intensive agency [speaker not understood] a great additional tool to our kit. and commercial paper is really interim financing vehicle and i think we went through that last time, but let me repeat it and it's basically the interim basis where we figure out long-term financing strategy. that has been sorely missing from our portfolio.

we have been basically pay as you go and wait for the grant and this will really allow us to stop projects and move on them. it's only issued and funded when they are needed and commercial paper is maturity of 270 days compared to 30-year revenue bonds that you authorized a year-ago. on the maturity date, rolled over and subsequent issuance of subsequent notes and ultimately will be retired either through paying back the commercial paper through an alternative revenue source that we're waiting for or take-out through long-term revenue bonds and those are the two methods we'll be using to retire the commercial paper. they are all use it to fund

capital programs. so we're a little bit behind the curve on that. so the documents before you -- where are we here? let me just talk a little bit about this slide. i am losing myself here. so once again we're diversifying our source of financing and the reason we want to include it in your program we t includes the efficiency of our debt program by reducing the number of times to go out long and gives us short-term, interim financing vehicle and minimizes and eliminates the need to pay interest while we're doing construction. so basically we don't start paying debt until the construction occurs, because the short-term vehicle, the cp allows to us do that. it also reduces borrowing cost because short-term vehicles are

much less costly than longer term and you will see the great rates we got in a little bit and simplify ours tax compliance. these are the four major reasons to incorporate cp into your program. the team behind us helped to pick the bidders and negotiate the agreements. it's an agreement between mta and the paying agent and the paying agent them to issue paper notes and the agreement includes security interest on the general fund revenues, the revenue fund and create secure by subordinate interest of

revenue bond and taking a second tier position on the same set of revenues. the agreement provides the draws and letters ever credit as i mentioned that we'll need on the 270-day basis to secure the paper notes. the reimbursement agreement covers the principal interest. the term is five years. and the interest rate is not to exceed 12% per annum and the banks require a cap as we do. it is expected that the bank will repaid for the remarketing of commercial paper by the long-term revenue bounds or other sources of revenue that we identified. we could terminate the reimbursement agreement at