looking forward to passing those recommendations and making sure we have a really engaged c ac as well. anyone from the public want to speak? >> great seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor kim >> i want to indict to supervisor moore's the transportation authority staff for responding so quickly at the last committee meeting and i'm happy to support this. >> colleagues can we move this forward. please call the next item and a number 11 a member to the action committee >> good morning this item begins on page 75 and there's an

enclosure an item to appoint one member to the citizen advisory committee and the transit project is in the environmental instantly. you'll hear more about this project but this particular item is about the dedicated c ac to - it meets quarterly although we've been making progress and so we've met bio monthly. there are one vacancy downtown tonight and they appoint the seat and given the approval of this item there's an additional 8 seats that are due for new appointments and we'll bring that to the next meeting.

for this application we have 3 applications found in our enclosure and a summary matrix. we know this is not mandatory i'll conclude my presentation today to see if there are candidates who have come to speak >> please come forward. thank you >> good morning commissioners i'm richard marshall thank you for your consideration of my application for the advisory committee in the downtown tenderloin seat. i've been in the tenderloin and i'm an active bus recipient.

i have been appointed by supervisor kim in the safety meetings. it's a great experience for me. i've made basically decisions that i wanted to get further engaged in future projects and the committee he seems like the logical step. although i have not had a chance to engage in the c ac meetings i've read most of the feasibility reports and i would be honored to advocate for the tenderloin neighborhood. the attained is a very dense neighborhood with a diverse population. i go to find a balance like public safety for example, while

many residents in the tenderloin choose to walk to their mode of transportation like seniors and mothers rely on transportation while juggling groceries and kids. the goal to get people from point a in the downtown to point b to the ocean is important but i hope we can find a way to transition. in other words, the number of stops and where their located is important as well as the seniors to be able to sit and rest with those things in mind i'm excited to work on this project in the future >> thank you, mr. marshall. >> anyone else who wants to

speak whose an advocate. >> thank you any other comments? >> so this is for the tenderloin downtown the vacancy of one of the two seats and i know that commissioner kim may have some ideas on this. >> are we going to do public comment first. >> is there anyone else from the public seeing none, public comment is closed. >> so our office did spend quite a bit of time recruiting hard for the members to represent the downtown tenderloin area and through this outreach r j marshall did apply. we've spent some time talking with another lady, of course,

she can't serve on the committee we would have supported her as well. she does a commute from chinatown all the way to the richmond and would have been a good candidate. unfortunately, the gentleman and i haven't been able to sit down but i'm most likely going to support him because he made a great presentation a couple of weeks ago. but being we have now made a revision to the c r.c. the seat will be open in september and i'd like to move forward richard marshall for this seat for the next full transportation authority commission meeting and will like to spend that time to

get to know peter and we'll be supporting his nomination in september >> any other comments colleagues. so can we move mr. marsh forward without objection >> thank you, mr. marshall. ms. chang call the next item >> item 12 for the geneva advisory committee this is an action item. >> good morning committee members this is on page 81 this is the project level c ac. the authority is leading project called the geneva feasibility study. it concerns a bus line on geneva and harry way connecting the station into san mateo county

connecting with the trans station and the new hunter point development. the line had been envisioned and the san francisco admission transportation has been focused on the infrastructure improvements and making that service face and reliable. the study is a collaboration with the san francisco agencies as well as the san mateo agencies concluding the government agency in san francisco. the study escape includes a dedicated community to provide information on the community it will meet quarterly and it represents the at large community. 7 of those members will be

appointed by the community board and two would be at large seats like pedestrians and bicyclists and the environment etc. and four of seats will be 30i79 by sea tag. if this structure and appointment process is approved then the staff would come back to the committee with a pool of candidates in september. we're trying to get the structure approved. i see no questions let's open this up for public comment. seeing none, no public comments it's closed. so colleagues can with he approve those without recommendations >> item 13 recommendations of the k prop this is an action

item. >> good morning. i realized i should have had chester present this. i want to say this is a big item i'll keep that brief. it's one the core functions of the transportation authority only updated every four years. i have a quick presentation followed by quick presentations by 4 of the major capital projects. so this item begins in your packet on page 85 by you have some power points before you also on the web. this is the heart the meat of the prop k strategic plan, which

projects have how much money in each of the years. i'm going to go through this starting on page 3 of the presentation. why is the prop k strategic plan in the programs plans important. the primary mechanism is by the public board and the committee is responsible for the projects to decide which projects get funded when we it provides a good process you'll see why some projects made it and some doesn't. the project sponsors can make

reasonable decisions on the funding. on the upside at any time about stashing a strong pipeline. the other federal and state money is available. having prop k sales tax is available makes things happen. very quickly proposition k is this is what was approved by the voters it's the expenditure plan it has thirty years caps for street and main projects like central subway. it's what the voters approved. it's the regional funding. and i am not going to get

detailed you can see the bulk of the project is mostly good projects like replacing vehicles and there's a little bit of money for that he had money and a few major capitals like the main drive project as well as on the transit side. there's the transit muni project that provides half of the service funding. prop k says who can apply for fund and there's a couple of remittance. it requires specifically that we develop a strategic plan our day-to-day plan. and it requires the advisory

committee that there be 5 year plans to be adopted. before we would issue calls for projects on the board and staff wouldn't know what project were coming down the pipe. so this is the plan it's highlighted in red was in the strategic plan. there are policies for how we run the project and we're not proposing any change boos but those i call good fiscal management let's try to manage depth. and the other teaming elements are revenues, fooeft the sales tax revenues over the thirty year program but the overwhelming bulk has to do with

each project and the fund for every year. and this is the one we update this ever four years it's time to match the transportation fund so we're making sure we are matching those programs up. ongoing so here's what we're doing today two easy slides. the process of the 5 process we can't do without the project sponsors or sponsors. we call that an administrative progress. we're looking at the past four years and adding into the plan actual financing costs and seeing where we stand. we're looking at all the allocations where the board has

approved and checking in to see that our schedules still make sense. we're moving funds forward and reducing financing. the second part is yptd the programming for the trans par. those promotions don't have a 5 year prioritization project. when do they need the money and same as the transit project. we won't have a presentation on the t third progs presentation i will notice that jackie sax mentioned that some of those are

grandfather projects. we see the two projects for the cash available project. this slide if you can't read the numbers shows for all expect the last two years the sales tax receipts the equalization fees the key thing is that sales tax is available. and actually we're projecting for 13 and $1488 million which will be the highest sales tax revenue. this next slide is about projections for the next year's. we have a 4.5 percent lead way the blue tier is the mta had done some sales tax rates it was

pretty low but difference we thought it would be prudent and it landed in the middle so we're reviking it down. you can see in the let's go box what this does is we're down about $150 million in sales tax revenue over the thirty years roughly arthritis about two years total revenues projected. don't get alarmed at the detail on here. we have a complicated model you push one thing here but i told you that revenues are down a little bit but because projects have come in at a slower rate

because finance costs have been repressed that means that revenues are down we have additional fund for some things but the prop k funds liv let me explain that the line items programs or projects have to carry their own finance costs. we had about 5 projects when prop k was put together all this projects were going to move forward and that would have been in the 5 year timeframe but if that had of happened we wouldn't have the funds. so if you advance those funds we take that out of the line female so we're basically giving that money back to the projects.

i'm on page 15. this is what we did to lower costs there are mentioned a couple of grandfather projects it's a carryover being grandfathered so in terms of adjusting the subway programming and this is the bay resource we pushed the funding out and this reduces the project >> thank you for using x graphics on your slide as well (laughter) >> and here's the listly the bottom line on page 16 i know i'm being kind of funny but this is good news because of the lower finance costs we'll be able to put an additional thirty

million and this doesn't hurt anyone else. and about 27 million more that's about 2.5 more years of service in the mid 20s it will end. i'll stop right there. you can go through this appendix d but appendix g shows you how much money in financial costs. the only information are for those major capital projects. i'll ask our sponsors to come up and give a quick presentation. i'll give us a status or instead of that i'll give you the two difference. i want you and the public to know we've updated our website and there's a good snapshot on

our we are talking about. we're providing this committee with the written reports on the status of all capital projects and on the agenda we provided the specific presentation but first, we're planning on doing this in september at the committee meeting. real quickly you can see the order that we're going to do this presentation in. and again two or three quick things. the first presentation will be for the capital projects on the doyle drive and when we approved the 2009 the eir had just been certified in 2008 and thank to working with the mayor's office we have a hundred million more

for the projects that were under construction and phase one is open as of last year so the public has a facility. and the government just passed a legislation for the partnerships. and thanks to a lot of hardworking cpcs we have the phase two under construction. i think it's very unlikely that phase two wouldn't be under construction now. the subway our second presentation will be from the sfmta we adopted the amendment and the amendment was concurrent on providing the series of thanks that the mta had to do to receive a grant from the fta and

that funding has been received from the oversight prospective we have the risk managements for the project and to get the alternative funding that the authority had commented to the promise but they're not going to be in time because of the budget. the 3rd of the figure out presentation is very quickly this project since it was in hibernation in 2009 but in 2012 was the high-speed rail and you're familiar with that mo e was the early investment project for high-speed rail with the signal system has allowed funds

to flow to the cal tarantula project. we have a million and 50 some thousand dollars for o from prop k and we're working with the mayor's office office to come up with 39 million. and last but not least the downtown extension to the downtown terminal is being built in two-phases phase one is $1.89 million. when we started phase one was in the downtown extension. there's been a lot of progress in terms of the benefits that we've had that are two scope to enable the underground structure for the future downtown extension.

and this is i should add intended to be the official high-speed rail in addition to housing the downtown extension. the project is having some funny challenges and not significant with the commissioner who sits on that adopted the revised budget that increased the project to $10 million plus and to reduce the financing costs and identify other funding sources. there is about a $200 million funding gap and we're continuing to work with the folks. it is very probable that we're shifting some of the funds from phase one to phase two. $20 million is small compared to the price of the project but

this action will indirect $40 million to the project and we've got other funds from last month. i would conclude that the phase two this is where we were in 2009. we're in hibernation at this point and we need to sit down with the mayor's office and see how we want to proceed with the project. all the major projects are ♪ form of construction. i'd like to answer any questions, however, i have the sponsored here on a tight time clock >> it would be great to start the presentation. >> gum i'm lee i'm the deputy director for the capital

project. i've be providing a brief update on the project. very quickly to cover the scope of the project and funding of phase one and phase two. some summary information on the damage small business and workforce program and any questions the committee might have. as maria mentioned phase one is being done actually was done as a traditional design project and for substantial completion and in 2012 phase two is a partnership to end the construction to be complete in 2015. the funding is for both phases,

phase one capital costs was around $500 million and phase two was specifically lower and it's interesting to note that the actual mount of construction in phase two is greater than the amount in phase one so this is relative to the private partnership of procurement. we did begin construction in 2009. this is a record 11 months from the time the document was certified which was pretty phenomenal and the service safety in april of 2012 when the sdpour was opened. phase one and two of the construction this is over the

calvary area approaching golden gate bridge. this was when the traffic was shifted and prior to opening the detour the new tunnel. this was for the presidio parkway. the contract was with regard to the bird and almost followed immediately by a lawsuit. it went it's way through the legal system and reaching the california supreme court in 2011 that awe affirmed the t-3 was the appropriate way to do this. financial closed a few months later and the construction to be complete in