gentlemen, the board will come back to order now, please. here we go. >> okay. the next item, item 12 presentation and discussion regarding the work of the mayor's 2030 transportation task force to develop a coordinated set of transportation priorities and identify new revenue sources. . >> thank you. director. >> as i've been informed the board since the beginning of this calendar year, the mayor state of the speech identified transportation infrastructure and dealing with the funding needed to resource it as a priority for him for this year. he soon there after established a task force bringing together a wide range of stakeholders to tackle this issue in the same way he brought people together to address business tax and

pension reform and affordable housing so this comes from a string of successful collaborative efforts to solve difficult problems. fortunately he tabbed two people in the system and monique, the city deputy controller who really has done the lion share of the work on top of a big day job to have this thrust upon her and really taken it on. that has been a great thing for the city. we're lucky enough to have monique here and i'll give you an over view of where the task force is as it finishes up its work and it's a tremendous thing that's happening for san francisco and the mayor has been able to on reconvene that.

i want to introduce monique. >> thank you for having me here. it's nice to be here. as mr. reiskin said the task force was created by the mayor and we have members of the task force who represent the operators in the area represent business and labor advocates of transportation of streets head by transit of course and we are trying to come together with consensus to identify the needs for transportation in san francisco and develop an investment plan and come can up with a planning strategy in order to make that a reality at

least in part. with that, the task has been coordinating to the transportation authority. we have looked at the county wide plan. we've reviewed the mtct plan bay area to determine what the needs are for transportation. in taking a look at the needs assessment, as you know the organization of transportation services that you are in charge of are vast as director reiskin said in $13 billion. they're in repair or need improvement. we've also learned from the planning

department and from plan bay area about the future needs and the estimates are that by 2035, a 93 new housing units will be built and 191 new jobs will come to san francisco and that our population will grow to over a million in the city and county. so in looking at the streets, looking at the transit crowding, the vehicle life span, regional capacity, and bicyclist and pedestrian safety, the task force developed a needs assessment product that resulted in what kinds of improvements and investments we should concentrate on. so the needs investment in the area of street says the city past a geo bond a few years ago to provide

some money for a three year period to repave our streets in a more ongoing basis. we're trying to maintain an index of 70 which is in the good arena. when we started our streets, we were in poor condition requiring in some instances hundreds of thousands of dollars to repave and replace them rather than repaving them when they first needed and so that's an area of investment that was identified. in looking at transit crowding, you've probably seen these maps before. in 2012 the red line signify the routes that are currently over crowded and within the next 25 years or so, many of our major roads are going to be over capacity. in looking at the state of good repair, as you know your vehicle fleet needs to be

replaced in its entirety just about and we're finding that the miles between break downs and service occurs every five hundred miles. that could be three to five-days. one of the things i must say, the members of the task force deliberated and debated quite a bit about where to invest dollars and really the mta and the department of public work convinced us that we need to invest first in the core and in the state of good repair. we have a lot of needs and there's a lot of expansion going on in the city and county and i know one of the mayors charges to us as a group is to meet that demand but we do find in looking at the data and hearing from the experts both planning and transportation experts that we need to invest in what we have now because the bottom is crumbling under us. and so i

would -- the biggest take away from learning about transportation and the needs in san francisco, i think is that we need to invest in the core before we enhance and expand our system. bart as you know is near its capacity. they have 400,000 riders now, expecting 500,000 in the next few years. at 750 now, they'll be well over capacity and they're projecting up to a million passengers by 2026. so there's a lot of improvement that is required by bart as well. bicyclist and pedestrian safety, i know that this agency has done a lot in the number of years, starting to roll out the strategy and the plans for bicycle and pedestrian safety. the mayor has requested a 50

percent reduction in casualties and fatalities and we're nowhere near reducing the percentages of the fatalities and injuries and so this is an area that absolutely needs additional attention. so the needs assessment funding gap. these figures have been adjusted. this presentation was developed a couple of weeks and since we've gotten updated numbers from mta and others. they're roughly the same, but i can give you a little bit of changes s. the total need has grown to 10.1 billion. 10.1 billion of investment is required over the next 15 years. the fund identified is $3.8 billion leaving a gap of almost $6 billion. since our adjustment to the total need,

that amount has grown. the unfunded need has grown to $6.4 billion. so there is a big lift. the findings, the current infra strauk tour is inadd quit to meet the current demand and transportation in the next several years will decline further without a huge investment of capital. and the second finding is making required improvements to the city's infrastructure is required at around $10.1 billion. i might also note there was quite a bit of discussion and debate about funding, infrastructure and capital as oppose to operating. we do have advocates and others including individuals from your agency that continues to advocate for more operating dollars, however, we found that the -- much of the problems and

reliability and performance is because of the infrastructure is crumbling. the buses are breaking down, and there's not enough of them and they're not large enough and the streets aren't well paved. the rails and infrastructure is failing and the operating budget even if it was increased would not result in the kind of improvements that are needed, so this task force is focusing on its work on the infrastructure requirements of the transportation system in san francisco. we recognize that there's an operating gap. i know that the director has mentioned the gap and he continues to work with you as its gerning board. the mayor is working closely with the leadership of the mta and the controller's office in ways to bridge that gap over the next

five years. although we're not addressing the operating needs in this particular work, we do recognize that there's an operating short fall that must be addressed. we also believe that many of the improvements in the infrastructure will result in operating savings and sufficient see that can help that deficit. recommendations, it's investing in the program with the greatest positive impact. we're recommending to pursue three revenue sources and i'll go over that in a second. and finally to recognize that we can't meet all of the needs. we can't close the entire gap. and therefore, the city leaders -- will need to continue to urge regional state and federal

policies that will increase further the transportation funding to san francisco. the next slide, the upside down triangle that we fondly refer to it identifies about $1.6 billion of investment that we'll recommend going to the core. 925,000,000 or 31 1 percent of the funding enhance your current system and began to expand the system at around 14 percent. the investment plan that we're suggesting would improve all of the areas listed on this list streets and signals. the streets is mainly paving. the signals belong to the agency to see sequence.

the expansion program is to increase your fleet and expand it. rapid enhancement and market street and the effectiveness project and improvements on the gary proposal. bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements, more accessibility, every time we do construction, we have to bring that to ada compliance and they exceed that level of compliance. the complete street pilots that have been completed are beautiful and makes a difference to the

community cohesion. our partners require matching funds from the city and council. some feed money toward bart expansion within the downtown corridor. so there's a number of potential programs that have been identified. oh, and i should note that the identification of which projects to fund was brought to the task force by the mta staff, by the transportation staff, and by bart and cal tran. the transportation members aren't identified what to fix, but more on a policy what the priority should be and then taking in the information that we've received by the experts in the field. so again, streets and signal

improvements, muni vehicle expansion, rapid network enhancements, bike and ped safety, accessibility, safe and complete streets and cal train bart and regional connection. this slide provides s -- you probably can't see it well, i don't know how well your screen can display this. the numbers have changed but this is a condense version of the projects that are being recommended. i wish we had more than $3 billion. if we had $6.5 billion, we probably would be able to meet most of the demand. the new revenue, so this is the tricky part. where to fund the money? the task force members looked at probably 20, 25 different proposals on how to raise revenue for transportation in

san francisco. and we landed really on three options that we're recommending be posed to the voters if not at the same time, very close together. the first is a go bond. i've been in the city of san francisco for 31 years and i haven't seen a go bond. mta has the ability to do revenue bonds and you're starting to do that and do it slowly and the agencies are looking favorablely, but the city and county have a great credit rating. we have the capacity and the task force is recommending $2,500 million --

two -- >> there is significant debt capacity to have a $500 million bond in november of 2014 and it won't crowd some of the other priorities within the city and county, so there's an earthquake safety bond and as you know the city is in the planning stages for replacing the hall of justice and those would continue on their schedule. the other thing that the transportation task force is recommending is that transportation being added in the regular ongoing capital planning process. and we have parks bonds every five years or so. we've had two health department bonds in the last five to seven years. museums and now criminal justice,

transportation should be apart of that ongoing response with our property tax. so that's the first recommendation for revenue. the second is the vehicle license fee. so for those who remember in 2004 when swartznegger, he reduced the parks to point 5. the balancing of the state budget, the car tax was then replaced with property tax and then property tax was replaced by a state general fund and other discretionary revenue. in san francisco we used to use our vehicle license fee to pay for

health and welfare services and in what we call the triple flip which is the movement of revenue within the state budget to local governments, we got the same amount of money as we received in the past and we gave the health and human services agencies the same dollar amount. but the state loss out on those dollars and in the end some of those dollars would have gone to transportation. in the state legislature, a couple of years ago on the urging of san francisco, the legislature passed the ability of local governments to raise the vehicle license fee up to the two percent maximum so that's what we're proposing and again the dollar amount over a 15 year period is $1.1 billion and although it's supposed to be a general tax, there's a proposal. we have three members on the board that's on

the task force and wiener is sponsoring transportation. that will require a simple majority of the voters and the go vote requires 2/3. and finally two years there after, the task force is recommending a sale's tax increase of a half percent. that would bring our sail's tax of a rate 8.75 to 8.95 percent. it's high, but it's not the highest. jurisdiction, like i heard that stockton is raising their sale's tax for their operating budget and this will go for

transportation infrastructure. it would grow with the economy. that adds up to $2.955 billion over a 15 year period. and then the third recommendation is for the city to continue to on seek additional funding. this have been proposals in the various plans. total increases, congestion management fees, changes to the transit, development fees and others that can be considered. we in san francisco, policy makers in san francisco cannot control those decisions and therefore the task force is recommending that the city leaders continue to advocate for those funds. but we at the task force didn't want to depend on someone else being able to raise the money to fund the san francisco improvements that are required. so the next

slide here are projects that have been deemed to be very important, but there's not enough money to fund and so again it's a reminder that even with this big infusion, there are many needs that go unfunded and it means our work as a city is not over in order to properly fund transportation. the impacts of this directly to the mta for public works will get the money for paving, cal train and bart will get a small amount over the 15 years, approximately 1.7 billion of new funded would come to the mta, facility expansion. the go bonds paid for improvements and building of real property. it can't be used for vehicles but it can be used for the rails and replace your maintenance facility and can be used for any equipment that is

fixed within the real property. and the money would be also used for the transit effectiveness project and ped improvements. the next steps, this past or about a week ago we presented our final recommendations and findings to the task force. we received consensus. in many instances from the entire task force and some instances from the vast majority. i will tell you that there are concerns about the vehicle license fee being devoted to transportation and so there has been some request that some of that money go toward health and human service. the task force recommends it twos to transportation. there's also been some comments about whether or not this is too downtown centric. in looking

at the dollars, about 80 percent of the dollars would go to city wide or neighborhood improvements. the better market street and a few of the other bart and cal train improvements will go toward downtown, but the vast majority of the investments is for city transportation. the process, there's been comments about not everyone being around the table. the members of the task force met with advocate groups to explain the process and also to hear what some of their concerns and their requirements are and we are incorporating that. in terms of future process, as you know with the building of any major construction project, there are citizens advisory committees, there's the capital planning committee, there's the board of supervisors, there's this board, there's the

transportation authority. we will be having more meetings, more focus groups, more opportunities for people to comment and to weigh in on specific proposals. so with the task force is doing is providing some buckets or some groups of improvement categories and it will be up to your staff at the mta, the staff at the public works and the other transit operators to further define what neighborhoods and which order they'll come in. and then finally, the mayor will be meeting with us one final time. that meeting is scheduled for the 25th of november, so it's the monday before thanksgiving and we tend to present the reports and the recommendations to the mayor and after that,

once accepted by the mayor, the process will move to the city's capital planning process and incorporate the transportation improvements within that process. the board of supervisors will need to amend the plan in order to include these improvements if it so wishes. i think we're going to have support on the board of supervisors, but they'll be comments about neighborhood equity and the improvements. i'm happy to ask questions. >> i like to ask a question about cal train. issy lek ---y electrification is $90 million and they're to fund the

balance that's to be identified. the city through sale's tax dollars identified 20 something million of that 60 and they recommend to use that to fund the balance to we can fund the 60. >> that's for the downtown extension, that's listed? >> no, it's probably on that small slide with the fine print. >> i'm looking at recommendation three for the fund. >> that's what's not funded but the slide that has the -- all the full numbers includes funding the balance of the $60 million obligation for cal trainee lek trickification. >> that completes the obligation? >> yes. >> i'm looking at page 27. the recommendation for new revenue.

you did clarify that the general obligation bonds requires a 2/3 voter and the license fee is a majority and the point 5 is simple owe. >> it depends. if it's dedicated thank you 2/3. as you know the san francisco has on two occasions now raised half cent sales tax for transportation. we believe that once it's defined for transportation, the support for the sale's tax goes up, so it really does depend on what the policy makers and people who watch the political tithes better than me should decide if it's dedicated. if it's not dedicated, i would expect the political leaders this city

would increase the baseline. >> one more question, for the vehicle license fee, you mentioned that that used to be used for health and welfare service, but we got that same amount from the state as part of property tax? i missed that clarification. >> it's complicated. the govern took the money that used to go to the counties and gave it to the counties to fund the via left and took money from education to back fund the property tax and used his money to fund the edges and it took three years to balance everything out, but the point of the comment is the health and welfare programs and health human services programs were made whole even though the car tax was cut. >> okay. thank you.

>> other members of the board. councilmemeber ramos. >> i appreciate the update and i wish we could have had more of that and i wish i cad -- i wish i was apart of that task force. people are looking at this from an equity prospect and they want to know to get any kind of support that could demonstrate that's was an equity lens put over this so we can work toward like what you said earlier, restoring service or expanding service and what has been lost and i understand wholly that even if we throw money at service and operations right now, it would burn up because of the lack of the course system, the functionality and what have you. i want to make sure that there is