we have a public assist where having a strategic community is great but not the same thing as coming to city hall and having officially sanctuaries method to approve or veto or give official advise on those projects. that's what i want to see and that will going a along ways to getting compromise if that's what we're doing on a lot of the issues. again, this is not an action item for today. we will be more activity involved in the negotiations so if there's no future questions or comments and a

>> yeah. i like the design but at the same time i don't want to lose the space for the children. >> i agree. >> next item is the item of any public comment on non-agenda items. oscar james. >> good afternoon again oscar james pr two things. first of all, i want to thank you guys for coming out to bayview hunters point it's been a a long time since i've been out here but the community is pleased you guys come out.

the other thing i want to talking about moscone center. a lot of people's both filipinos and mexican-american and blacks out of the most moscone center when they were first building it. a long time ago i worked at a the veterans administration where the people areing there. i don't know if they got certifies of preference this is something this agency should look into they should have gotten certifies and also no stipends from that. the other thing the first moscone center i had a trucking company that ran 3 hundred

trucks and i had 13 people into the trucking from the down payment from the trucking company i own but that was the first big project that was done we ran 3 hundred and 13 trucks. thank you >> mr. washington. >> listen i just want to reiterate i hope you ail don't get the notion i'll just pound on you all i'm trying to get you to realize i have no point out by to seek legal action to try to get y'all's attention. i've been coming up here as a

activist i'm rode now to regulate. you guys are brand new you guys are controlled by the state or jerry brown and you have our board over you the successor board has has been missing for meetings in city hall in their inception whether their case it is. but i'd like to notify them to your community since i won't come i want to come before our board to have a workshop on the western edition since you wouldn't come and let me testify. you guys will have to do that sooner or later. you talk about stakeholders and i want to give a shout out to ms. reynolds i pound on her, she

doesn't deserve. the point out of the matter i'm beyond her what is you guys motion in this ocean. if the ocean was in the situation you have you've got problems are michael johnson. by the way, i've been back and forth to the board of supervisors but the thing about it i want to say we need an update on fillmore center sporadic. right now. right away. you guys are in the correspondent procures & i called michael the other day and he hung up on me. i'm going to have to do something that is going to bring eyebrows to everybody i'm going to file an injunction.

the city as disrespected fillmore. it ain't no mystery why don't you say ace if you put a workshop together i'll come. anyway, i want to say that the impact on fillmore is no mystery. hopefully, i, come before you with more than 3 minutes >> thank you very much. are there any other speaker cards >> okay. next item please and the next item of business is the report of chair >> the next is the report of the madam director. >> commissioner you have in your informational memoranda in our packets there's a report from our yerba buena gardens a consultant as part of the

transmission of those sixth assets from the city whether the recommendation for the public ownership similar to pikes place we can scheduled further meetings on that topic if you want to discuss on a ongoing basis the yerba buena have been meeting to continue the dialog and conversation primarily through the city's administrators office but it's a convening through the arts commission who may have opinion the department of real estate and public works really the umbrella to con videotape we're continuing to participate and

the last meeting was last week on the potential ownership model and the next stage we're pending the department of finance review open is property management plan is role for the implementation mode how to take the data we've provided and take the research and really take it to an implementation mode one that the city can accept with our recommendations and the compounds recommendations. we'll continue to keep you updated and posted. the second piece of information we did receive feedback from the state department of finance recommended to a narrow portion of our housing project. as you recall the state denied the millions for 200 and 6th street and the hugo hotel on the fact there was no funding in

place. the city took that would be that on step we have a global inclusive recommendation and the judge pointed out the total debtor on our recognizing rocks is $2 million. the recent letter we received is to deny again, our final clefs for 200 and 6th street $2 million but the chair identified a determination of the several billions of that's identified on the rocks but they choose not 0 address that in their letter so we're continuing to work with them to try to better understand is this something we do building and they've held firm to the contract standard as they had in previous raps statutory & they

said they do excited and this is a specific obligation as certified by the state. we're not there what all the implementations mean by the way, they didn't opine with the rest of it. but it certainly has impacts on our program so we'll continue to keep you posted on that matter. that concludes my report >> thank you very much madam clerk. >> this is commissions questions. >> madam chair. >> thank you very much. i don't think does anyone have any other questions or matters. one question i have been 0 moscone item. yeah. i didn't ask this was the general timeline i know they've sent ata out a preparation of

the eir i forgot to ask >> well, yeah i guess i don't know. i guess this is a question as to what is the extent of our authority to impact the design and the implementation of the project in the manner that's been brought up you. two responses president fong in terms of the timeline i'm reviewing this to spring or april of 2014 that the moscone team will publish the eir and as was in the presentation moscone north the additionally agency

issued the revenue bonds to build it which is leased to the city but the agreements provide and they're paid for by moscone revenues. the sources of revenues is the moscone receipts. it's expected that the bonds on moscone north will be paid off but because of the initially financing there are may the record show payments that are did you for a few more years but the city will own the moscone north where the radiance are north even if howard street the city will own moscone north if the bonds are paid off. we don't know did timing when that will be or that nicole there's no permit it enter or

lease in that case the city - it's a city facility. so your entity on the captains of moscone north so what is not yet a city facility is the cafe spaces the property beyond the north. there will be various agreements that will be noted in order depending upon the construction timeline we're expecting the approvals that will be note for the commission whatever you own at the time in the winter of 2014. we're during this trial down the the scope of the drizzling it's

complicated we'll work with the team. their construction is scheduled to start quickly thereafter after asking you the approvals necessary from the commission and the completion is in the summer of 2018. so it's on fast track >> i don't have to answer it but i'd be interested if the board jurisdiction that we have to impact any of the concerns that have been raised by the members of the public. >> is it approved honk will it take to complete that. >> presidential 4 years for construction. i'm looking the mayor's office

staff to confirm >> hi, the construction schedule will be api for a dark period over the holiday period at the end of this calendar year to do the first phase of the work under howard street. one of our many challenges on the construction is trying to keating keep the center in continuous revenue generating. so this goes into the summer of 2018. we'll pay off the bonds in july. the antiquestion is the remaining lease payment that the director mentioned i believe is a two year roughly 2 and a half million dollars demolition we're looking for the authority to solve our goal.

it's to make everyone's life easier and have it be a city asset by july so prior to the beginning of construction but it's not yet revolved >> what's the total expenditure. >> we've issued $2 million in bonds through two revenue sources which the moscone dissected on hotel rooms and the public-private industry in the hotel industry and some expiating general payments to moscone. so the hotel assessment is about 2/3rd's of the assessment sources and the remaining third is through thank you funds >> definitely i have the same

question that commissioner rosales has. i don't have any double we'll get but what does that mean if we don't agree. i have that same question >> at my house can i delicate. >> you're either the lessor or the prosperity owner so it's your house today. can we determine that in the future >> (laughter). >> i guess that's kind of to be determined. >> hopefully on a more day to day. >> i move to adjourn. >> thanks see you later we're adjourning in a second. >> the next order of business closed session. and the next order of business

is adjournment. thank you very much we're adjourned at the good morning, k you for being with you us for this special melting the meeting will come to order this is the san francisco transportation authority finance committee. i'm supervisor cowen the chair and to my left is supervisor chiu and to my right is scott wiener and mark farrell and before we get started thank you

sftv thank you gentlemen staff. madam clerk >> no unanimously could you call items it through 4. >> those are the consent calendar and those will be acted upon by a single vote and any content item can be removed. >> anyone want to serve any items. seeing none, would any members of the public >> we don't need any public comment? >> i have a first and second the consent calendar is approved

without objection. >> thank you next item. >> item 5 recommended state and federal program this is an action item. >> thank you very much. good morning >> aaron this item startsz on page 45 this is the state and legislative packet for general prince for advocate for council participation. the 2014 program is with our partners at the sfmta and the other agencies throughout the region. this year, the program is similar in some regards to prior programs for preventing revenues for transportation and seeking new revenues and maximuming new

controls and have the gas reduction goals. the biggest opportunity as you mark it is looking good for transportation and it has shifted to the cap and trade revenues the governor has contributed the stockpile for the cap and trade and a good portion is going to transportation, however, the governor's proposal puts that money in the hands of state agencies and sfmta set a number of priorities for the cap and trade for the region for key san francisco like the bart and transit vehicles so far as significant increase in the obeying that's the

transportation that we administer and all of those don't matter if the funds don't work in the region we'll be working to get the funding shifted to the region and a number of constitutional academies to 50 percent and we'll take support positions on several of those items >> a quick question what is a the background of changing the threshold. >> excuse me. >> what's the background or reasons their changing the threshold from 2/3rd's to 55 percent. >> it comes up every year for the locals to meet the majority

2/3rd's but there was a possibility of having s it reduced for school bonds and local jurisdictions who are struggling as the state support for local programs gets smaller and smaller and making that more possible for us. the constitutional all the times cover a broader ranges of local funding and mark can speak to this but the intent is all issues are still on the table and we'll be psyching hi seeking consensus >> thank you. >> y0rd cap and trade with respect to those measures as well as seeking new state

funding for affordable housing this is new on our elective program but something it's increasingly important and we want to make sure we have support between affordable housing and transportation. finally, we'll be getting support for bicycle programs and for number one infrastructure like education that are rising to the top to help protect bicyclists and pedestrians. at the federal level it will be for the transportation bill it expires on october 1st, we'll be continuing to work with the mayor's office and the other stakeholders to advance the priorities in that area. with that, if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them about the legislative program and mark will talk about the things

happening at the state level >> a little bit a question about the new federal transportation funding. i understand part of the program is the advocate for federal funds for the san francisco transportation prongs is this list they're the currently ones we're working on, you know, bart >> yeah. we have been coordinating with the mayor's office but looking at the priorities in corporate k and then looking at what are named as recreational projects for sfmta support. >> i'm wondering if muni is it on the list. >> so far as i know we're seeking state other local levels

i haven't heard about federal level yet. >> inch got no further questions. thank you for your time >> okay. thank you. >> good morning happy to be here. have you had a chance to review the matrix a number of measures are going to be dropped for the matrix to get out of their house of original that's the reason for the delevitations. we have a b on page 8 of the matrix recommending the post position another attempt by a will you ever to freeze the program >> this is actually a separate

item. >> oh, i'm sorry. >> i'm going to take comments for item 5. open this up for public comment on item 5. okay seeing no any public comment? for 5 it's closed item 6 >> item 6 state and federal updates. >> thank you. oh, for number 5 we actually need on action >> oh, okay. >> sorry about that. >> well, is there a motion that i may entertain on the item? thank you. all right. second moved by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor chiu. this item passes >> this is information slash action item. >> now i feel lethal. oh, just to repeat first bill of

5 i want to talk about a b 501 with the recommendations you adapted last year that will halt the high rail bond we also have a bill recommending watch a reintroduction that will prohibit transit employees from striking a similar measure was taken up in january and failed to make failed to pass the committee this is another attempt to try to deal with the transit issue 0 they perceive. and the last 3 are a package of bills by newly elected central valley senators. be s p 901 through 4 on packages

15 and 16 relate to the high rail system. this will act similarly to freeze the high-speed rail bonds and the second to identify all bonds for the eminent domain procedures and that's not sxhivenlt with federal law if you move the funding through a due diligence process through eminent domain we're recommending it to stop because it will stop the construction seethe and finally, the next we're recommending this to have caltrans who are attempting to assess an individual's property for studies and analytic

progresses they have to identify themselves even though it's part of the overall package to kill the speed rail we've taken a watch position because we don't know where the author is going to go. those are the recommended positions to the matrix. i have a couple of other things on policy areas and you may have read about them the the first item i think you're aware of the attempt by the contractors allied labor to qualify a measure for the ballot that will have a imposed tax on vehicles so far local road