with which children are left without a vice. the bike coalition is very organization is left -- my number one concern is safety. i've seen a lot of accidents also down in the henry adams circle right on the northern part of my district where they joined each other and there are a lot of lessons that can be learned from this particular process that we can take all across the city. i am really concerned and glad to hear that commissioner breed is thinking about mitigating the loss of parking and i think that's critical on peoples'

quality of life. we need to be con sit rate about the entire population of san francisco, not just our young people and our able body, but those that are articulated their opinions here that have challenges. i am interested in hearing and incorporating more thanes with disability, some kind of their concerns in the e ir process as we begin to evaluate many processes as they come on board. as i think about the southeastern side of the city as it relates to economic land use and development -- how it compliments with our infrastructure conversation. that's it /t-r me. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner wiener. >> thank you. i'll be supporting this item. there are a number of really good and important projects on this list of obag grant resip recipients.

i know we've been focusing on masonic but trans/pwa*eu and second street and a number of other projects are very important. i will say that when we get lists of projects that come through the authority we don't understand district eight as receiving zero dollars of investment despite the fact that a majority of the district is pry torety development area. i'm just under a lot of reasons for why projects and not others pick it on to the obag list, but i think that geographic equity is always something that should be

important to all of us. i'm very supportive of projects around the city. we have some significant needs in this district eight, particularly upper market which is a complete and utter mess. it is unsafe for pedestrians, unsafe for cyclists, bad for muni, has many problems and requires a lot of attention and i would like the ta to focus a lot more or the upper market and how can work with the mta to address this troubled stretch of market street, which was left out of the better market street plan, and needs a lot of attention. putting that aside, this is an important list of projects and i'll be /su /poring it. >> thank you. commissioner kim.

>> i appreciate certainly the come /phrebgsty of a lot of [inaudible] and appreciate the work that supervisor /pwroed and mar are doing on the masonic street improvement plan. i wanted to note some of the other projects that are [inaudible] really happy to see second street street /skaeup improvements as part of this and i appreciate the transportation authority for working with us to ensure this project moves forward so we're really excited about having a corridor that connects downtown to the ballpark with the cycle tracks and widened sidewalks and additional plannings in the neighborhood. appreciate your work with the transbay power authority and ensuring we move forward with the bike and ped improves through [inaudible] of the list of projects that are moving forward. happy to see that two of our schools were included in this as well. one,

the broadway street /skaeup improvement with [inaudible] parker element stair school which does that the highest number of pedestrian collisions by a school so i think it's important that we do improvements there and of course [inaudible] elementary school. happy to see these on the list. thank you. >> thank you. colleagues, anymore comments or questions? okay. i want to thank par /teus /paeubgs /paeugs from the public today. i want to thank transportation authority for their work in bringing forward these list of projects. i want to respond to commissioner weaners comments. i do see that /tkpwraoe graphic equity has been considered in these allocations, especially my district has not been able to receive a great deal of funding support for our needs for many years and we have some pretty good projects here that i think will be useful for the district. i do see there are incredible needs also in the areas that commissioner wiener

has addressed. so i do see that we're making [inaudible] as we put this list together but again, i want to thank the trans/por /taeubgs authority on this and let's take this same house, same call? this item will pass. next item please. /stkpwr >> item number 12, closed session. this is an information item. >> this is actually scheduled as a closed session but due to -- we're still making deliberations as a personnel committee that we're not ready to have a closed session. we can have a brief update abour progress so far in the selection process for any executive director. i want to thank the personnel committee, members who have devoted a great deal /aof time over the past couple of weeks in interviewing nine candidates so far. we spent two days a

week-and-a-half ago and last thursday interviewing nine candidates, about an hour each per candidate and we actually look forward to the full commission -- the names of two, perhaps three finalists that we would like to have considered together all here at the board. and that discussion won't be able to happen until july 12 at 3 o'clock is our next scheduled personnel meeting where we'll go over the list of con dates for the position. so we'll be working with staff to -- after that to schedule meetings here at the ta. we could have two meetings before the end of this month to make sure we stay on the schedule of deciding an executive director before we go on our recess. we have been working on a very aggressive

schedule to identify executive director and i know that's put a lot of pressure on the the personnel committee to act quickly, but i think it's very y deliberate about thought for in making the choice in executive director. with that, if there are no other comments or questions we can go on to public comment. >> the person nel committee is meeting july 12 and then you'll give us instruction at the next july meeting? >> we will be looking at scheduling two board meetings of the transportation authority to be able to discuss, interview candidates here before us. on july 12 we

we'll be discussing who will go forward so it's not quite a certainty yet until we have that meeting and we determine which names go forward, but i expect that on the 23rd and 30th of this month that we will have full board commission meetings to be able to -- sorry, exactly. of july, 23 and july 30 to be able to finalize the list of [inaudible] one will be discussions with candidates, which will be on the 23rd and then between the 23 and 30th will be a finalizing what a package will be for the executive director and that will be finalized on the 30th meeting before the entire body. >> i want to thank all the members of the personnel committee. i know that personnel committee spent an awful lot of time in

deliberating and meeting with the whole list of candidates and i think we all appreciate your work. i also know i would guess that those of us that have not been on the personnel committee would love to have an opportunity to have brief conversations with whoever the personnel committee feels strongly about. the last thing i will mention is the chair had sent a letter to our city controller asking for at least an expedited review of how our county transportation authority compares with others from a government standpoint and i understand that initial review is due out in about a week or two so i am looking forward to getting that information because i think it will inform how i feel about future leadership of the ta and how we move forward but i want to thank all of you for you work. >> i want to acknowledge the personnel committee who have devoted ha lot of time for this -- commissioner mar, cohen, our

two chairs for finance committee and commissioner campos and wiener as well. just having a five person personnel committee is a bit challenging to schedule, but we've done well together and it's been great to have the work to the interviews together with you all. okay. so this item is an information item so we can go on to our next item, which is -- that was scheduled -- we can take public comment on item number 12 related to process for shrekking a new executive director. and seeing none come forward, we'll close /p-b lick comment and we can go on to our next item. >> item 13 allocate 12.406 in prop k funds with conditions for annual requests subject to

attached fiscal year [inaudible] and amend the prop k traffic calming and [inaudible] fife year [inaudible] programings. this is an action item. >> good afternoon. sorry. this item has two enclosures that were attached to your packet and i will highlight the allocation requests very briefly. most of this request is for the para transit operations program and we fund about half of the operating budget for this. this is also a funding re/kw*us for public sidewalk repair from the department of public works primarily around city street trees. there is a funding request from bart for a civic center bike station. this will serve bart and muni patrons in the portion of the bike station that the external to bart and also there's a portion /tp-f bart patrons. it's 190 new

spaces. this will fund tree planting and maintenance. this is done in empty basins and also a year of operations of the commuter benefits program. two of the applications i'd like to high /hraoeug are the sfmta's request for the local application based traffic calming program. this is the first portion of the roll out of the new revised traffic calming program. mta spent the better part of 2012 revising its program and the action you will take today is to approve the allocation of funds and to approve the fine work for the revised program. this framework includes the residential and the arterial and [inaudible] however it does put more of the funds on the arterial track, which is in line with city policies to fund

more projects on high injury corridors. [inaudible] would fund the residential program, used to be the [inaudible] planning effort, now it's funding evaluation of the hundred requests that they're anticipating to come in as far as the new application period that we are now in. evaluation will be done by august and this will fund the design of those 20 locations that would be /shroebgted from this new batch of requests. one of your enclosures -- i want to draw your attention to the traffic calming materials. these are considered the backlog for the traffic [inaudible] and slot improvement areas projects and you can sift through and hook at the specific locations

recommendations. the walk first investment strategy will fund the planning /tk-p and other stakeholders and they come up with a city wide process for prioritizing pet safety improvements and also a recommend pry ortized list of safety projects. the controllers office will be engaging with a consultant to do some of this work. agencies are here to answer any questions. >> any comments or questions on this item? we can go on to public comment on this item? any member that would like to comment come forward. seeing none, we'll close public comment. colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? the item passes. our next item please. >> fourteen, this is an

information item. >> any new items introduced? okay. we can go on to public comment on this item. seeing no one come forward, we'll close. our next item. >> item 15, public comment. >> our next item is general public comment. anyone can comment on any related related to the transportation authority. okay, we'll close. and our last item. >> item 16, adjournment. >> colleagues, we are adjourned.

>> good morning today is june 28th, and what a fine morning it is, this is the local agency formation, of the city of san francisco, and we would like to thank my colleagues for being here, my name is john avalos i am the chair and to my right is david camp os and london breed and across the aisle is eric marr. madam clerk, could you call the next item? >> call the roll, or the commissioners who are absent, or some are on the way and we will excuse those who are not here later on the agenda. and if you could call the next item. >> approval of at proval from

the april, 26th, 2013, regular meeting. >> colleagues any comments or questions on the minutes? >> okay. we can go on to public comment. on the minutes? we will close public comment. and colleagues could we get a motion to approve the minutes? >> so moved. >> the question from commissioner campos and seconded by breed and we will take that without objection. >> item three, authorizing the agreement and june 30, 2014. we have a presentation from jason freed. >> jason freed's office staff, which is now what is becoming the annual update to the contract that we have with our legal services/interrum director, to continue the contract and it is expiring at the end of the month and the staff is recommending to

continue it one more year, if at any point in time, the commission wishes to terminate the contract. they do wish to terminate the contract whatsoever, as long as we give miss mill and her her law firm notice of that transaction occurring. we are no ways bound for the entire year. and we will see that we recommend $95,000 and i will use the same formula that we used last year for the contract, but, we don't spend nearly that amount of money, so if that was the desire to lower that amount of money it would be done as well. >> what we actually spent on the contract? >> sure. for, i did look those numbers up, for the fiscal year, 2011, we spill, 116,000. >> last year, we have the full fiscal year, is $75,976 and this year we are coming in at 75,000 and we spent about 63 through the end of may and we

have one more month to go and if you average it out it will come to 75,000 by the time this year is over. >> if we lower to 75. >> this year we will be 5,000 below that 75 and we should be fine with that, and i notice that there are other items on the agenda. >> and we only use the services as we need it and it is as-needed services if we are getting close to, you know, a high amount that we could usually just cut back on the hours that we asked her to utilize for us. so you could very easily fit within 75. >> okay. >> and well, i would like to do that, but if we were to actually do, lower that contracted amount to 75, and to

reflect what traditionally we spent, where does that portion of that, where we are lowering from? that stays? the over all budget? >> most of her budget, is currently spent comes from the cca side of the budgeting this last year we spent over $2,000, and in the current fiscal year for non-cca related items for her to do and so most of them come just over 2,000 so far as come out of our general fund account. >> okay. >> so she bills according to whichever account she is working on. >> great. >> i am not sure colleagues if we have a sense. and i will lower that amount, to the actual spending or keep the same amount? i want a motion to move to $75,000. >> so moved. and that is seconded by mar and

no objection. >> we have public comment on this item and we will open the floor to anyone who wants to come and speak of public comment is open. we will close public comment and recind. >> and we move to lower to $75,000. >> and we can take that without objection. >> and our next item. >> item number four, authority sizing the agreement with the management conducting llc, two, to extend to june, 30, 2013. >> and once again we try to have all of the contracts with the expires at the end of this fiscal year and this one does the same. this one is asking for an extension of the contract although we are not asking for any additional money. this is just the background, mr. dedesy has a very good

policy and regulatory background and he is actually helping sonoma with their policies and risk assessments. and the pec staff and lasco staff are asking for an extension of the contract but we are not asking for an extension of any amount of money, we currently have $25,000 and so far we spent $7,000 and he is currently doing risk assessment and review and normally most of the time over the course of the year, we are honestly, spending an hour here and there and that is mostly the pec requesting his time. and so the pec and the staff is requesting an extension of the contract but not asking for any additional money at this time to do so. >> okay. >> and this item, we can open up for public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment on item three or four? come forward. seeing none we will close public comment.

>> and colleagues, on this item, we can motion to approve? >> so moved. >> motion from commissioner campos and seconded by mar and we will take that without objection. >> thank you. >> and item number five, please? >> item five, resolution to the board of supervisors regarding... >> so, colleagues, this is a resolution that we want to approve, and we want to approve today and forward to the full board to request, the changes to the scope of work for the one staff position for the senior committee development specialist and it is actually combined in the scope of that work with the current interim executive director for lasco, for cca, and we won't be actually hiring that executive director, most of all we want to be able to give the kind of flexibility for the current

community development specialist to carry out duties here and a chance of the senior community development specialist. to carry out the duties of the office that they are aligned with what is being done beyond just the cca and to extend that to the position's work for three more years, and we will actually coincide with a lot of the still, the developmental work around cca to provide continuity for the work that has been done heretofore and to make sure that we have the staff also, watching cca through this process. and but also, continuing with the work projects as they come up, as they do. and so this will come before, and it is before this body and it will be a similar measure that we will be doing at the board of supervisors based on the result of the vote today.

>> campos? >> just a quick question, does that mean that the existing position would essentially be or become the executive officer position? >> that is the current configuration and we are not looking on bringing on, the current officer and the current will remain on as a consultant. >> and so i am very supportive of this. and i have always said that what we are very appreciative of the great work that miss miller has been doing, and that it is always, been odd to me, that the executive officer is an outside consultant for a government agency. i think that that makes sense for that role to be played by an in-house employee. and to me, respects is that is already happening in a way. and so i think that it is, it is sort of a common sense

change, it does not really add anything to the budget. and so, thank you for doing that. i'm very supportive. >> thank you, commissioner campos. >> any other comments or questions? >> this item we can open up for public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment, come forward and seeing none we will close public comment. >> and so, colleagues this item is live before us, could i have a motion to approve for the resolution? the motion from commissioner mar? seconded by commissioner campos and we will take that colleagues without objection. >> okay. madam clerk, could you call the next item. >> item 6, executive officer's report. >> okay. >> miss miller could not be here and not much of a report.

on the 9th at ten a.m. we will be having a meeting up in room 400 for those who are interested. not-to-exceed rates are on the agenda for that meeting and hopefully they will approve the rate and for our july meeting we are still planning on having the meeting at the end of the month and we are doing the educational type of workshop types of presentation done and so to talk about the ways to finance and so to better educate ourselves on what are all of the options that are available for doing the most robust build out as possible. >> july 9th will be a tuesday. >> correct. >> and very very good. colleagues any comments or questions. >> i will definitely be there on july 9th and it is really a critical meeting and we have been trying to line up this joint committee with the pac, for several months if not more than several and so i look forward to that discussion on that day.

>> okay, on the executive officer's report we could open this up for public comment? and seeing none come from the public we can close it. >> madam clerk, could you call the next item please? >> next item is public comment. >> okay. we have public comment open. and i'm holding our breath waiting for any member of the public to come and speak and we will close public comment. and the next item. >> item number eight, future agenda items. >> any ideas or issues to raise for any future work at lasco. >> this is something to keep in mind, it is as we are moving forward, and in this city, it is you know, doing its reenvisioning of the housing authority and lasco has stepped in a number of areas in the past where we have funded the studies or additional analysis or reports and i think that to the extent that there may be a

need test, test, test, test, test test >> good morning, everyone. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance meeting for friday june 21st. that i'm supervisor mark farrell. i'm joined by other supervisors. i would like to thank the members of sftv who are covering this meeting as well as the clerk. clshg any announcements >> and completely silence any electronic