but the voter gave us authority to issue debt roche our capital needs were great we couldn't fund those nooepdz needs with our operating budget alone. this indexing policy was one of the things that the loan folks thought was strong and we can get low interest rates to improve the assets we have so the indexing policy generally speaking is a very good thing for everyone not that the fees people want to go up. so our opening statements when we look at fairs the default is

to lit the index precede as planned you can look up we have online if not here posted every fee and fair what is it now and next year and the following year if we let indexing advance as we've let happen. there are things we have option about well, we have options about all of them but the option are on the table and we'd love our feedback places where it make sense it deviate from the index you may want to there fairs beyond indexing recognizing the levels of service relate to the rest of muni service and hold some certain fairs down or reduce them and recognizing the

affordability crisis in our city and might want to defer certain increases away from cash this which is expensive to process our so those restraining order 3 ideas. in terms of it will fairs there's special lines i agree would provide different services than our oofrnl muni line like the f line the f line is a historic a tourist abstracts a very spelled out service when we have a lot of when we want to run more f line we supplement that with bus services it's a dive kind of services because

the hand crafted restored vehicles i think some people will have a willingness to pay more for. one of the ideas is to raise the fair of the f line on behalf of the index like raise it to 4 or 5 or $6 like the cable car in the scenario a month passed you'll still pass the same money for the models pass. the single fair is praum tourist we have gotten feedback from locals saying i reside the f a lot and don't buy a pass. so that's the idea and the rash all behind that we've gotten feedback from that idea. the express buses those are the

buses the x, the a x's and b x's rather than making stops pickup folks in the express across the city it's a much faster and good ride. one idea here right now we have two different monthly passes one is just for metropolitan one for muni plus bart within san francisco it's about $10 more so one of the ideas is we say if you want to use to your pass on the express bus you pay the $10 or month regretting that's a better service. the last one and this is the stair products called passports

we could raise those up a lot of people use those for the f line and people are on vacation so maybe raise those up a little bit more. the next category has to do with affordability. we've been reading everyday it's real for people in the crisis in san francisco the mayor as tasked every department to look at ways to abstract to making san francisco more affordable two of the biggest costs s is housing and transportation. there's not so much we can do on the housing but on the transportation not just lowering the costs but the transportation

service we have a better and we're successful in implementing the - we can help people not rile on cars but ride muni. there's an inherent affordability. before google stepped forward diode and offered to fund free muni for a low to moderate use for 2 years that's been taken care of. and including the free murn to 18-years old because many 18-years old are still in high school. we could do the same for seniors

and people of sdabtd to low to moderate income those folks are being squeezed so we could bring that program to them as well, of course, those will reduce revenues. the lifetime fair is our half price fair for adults 50 percent we could discount it beyond 50 percent and if we were to the last point if we were to make muni free for low and moderate income use eir seniors and sdabltd folks we could there muni for the high-end up to 50

percent discount which is more consistent with how many other transit transportation doesn't it the revenue loss is trying to move towards a system where we're based on need rather than angle so high income kids or high income families asking them to pay half fair wouldn't be unreasonable. finally, i mentioned cash it's expensive for us to process some agrees i'm told chicago is 90 percent cash free and london is one hundred percent her in san francisco we're 45 percent cash free so to try to induce more people to use clipper card we could as an example let the cash

fair index to $2.25 where it's scheduled to go unless the board acts but hold to $2 with a clipper cards that's at the incentive it's a choice we have to make sure that people have access to them and be a way to create an incentive without creating a financial burden. we want to make sure it doesn't disproportionally effect any community we serve. so that's kind of i guess the other thing i didn't talk about role the big one is the muni service the other thing on the table we'd like to do is increase muni service. we've been undertaking a project it's been looking systematically

how muni operates and making recommendations how to make it better serve the people that ride it and maybe people don't ride it so the dp e will strife to have more service and to make muni work better in terms of the more services it's recommending a 10 percent service there about $50 million we would liquor to the extent we can start phasing that there in on the operating side 0 on the table for our board to consider before we go to the revenue side we could do something about the fairs going upside down and on the expenditure side close the

expenditure gray grandpa for more repairs and cleaning or just putting the money for the muni service as well as fund other communications and capability and services. the capital budget. we actually don't have sources but your capital budget is big chunk is through federal fund targeted towards transit and also state and local funds we have a half cent tax that goes to our budget and to the revenue bond i've mentioned. those are the priority we have the first is to invest in a core part of our system apparelly the buses and trains and the rails

and the overhead worries and signals and switches as well as our traffic signals and making sure they're in good shape and we've identified a need of $255 million a year to keep those in good shape and from a lack of investment. this is important especially, when we think about adding more murphy service. it's kind of like the capital needs the state of good repair you can think of it like our houses you need a strongest foundation an updated electrical system and insulating walls if you're plumbing is leaking and a

our walls are draft i didn't the next thing you do not want to add an additional on your house. this is important as we think about increasing service we want to get the system we do have into better shape it will effectively increase stiffer because with all the busses and trains we have out there the rails and overhead wires when those file it causes a demolition of service and wait for an emergency repair vehicle to show you. so we keep the service on the road and effectively there the service without adding a bus or derivative.

that's why this capital investment maybe feels like tangible that's why this part is critical and our top priority. our other top priority is building and maintaining save and a complete streets we talked about bike and pedestrian safety and our roads were here to move vehicles as quickly and efficiently has possible based on the amount of people walking and biking and getting around the city and a based on where we see the future of how people get around the city we need to design a way to make it safer for people on bikes and cars we need to make that investment to

make the changes in the right-of-way maybe at that allocate spaces that's what we do the traffic cohn and enhancing the crosswalks and adding the traffic signals and putting in stop signs that's a core priority. and finally and this is circling back to the project. part of it is adding more services and making the service we have move better through the city. that's dedicating lanes to transit and making more 2ri9 only lanes it would be widening the sidewalks so the buses don't have to pull out of traffic or replacing stop signs with signals and having the transit vehicles hold the green light

and it would be putting in turn pocket so cars waiting to make a turn aren't blocking a muni bus so there are changes we can make not only to make the street safer but making muni more, more efficiently through the streets and more attractive for the people who don't ride it. so the good news our 5 year project in 5 year chunks represents a pretty good increase from 2 years ago. you can see some of the elements the fleet numbers increasing significantly and f t w that's the rails and a overhead wires that support the trains and the trolley system and the transit

expansion that's some of the enhancements in the right-of-way to make the signals priority thoipz. the green you can see a nice there in bicyclist and pedestrian safety that's a tripling and the our big capital project is shrinking as that progresses through the city and the project gets built. one of the main reasons for that jump if you look at the right i'm not good with colors the at an nearly $600 million that's the transportation task force this it is an effort initialed by mayor ed lee he said he wanted to focus on addressing transportation funding nodes but

he revoked from hills work as the public works director something we've not addressed our loishz and rec and park and police stations and a fire stations we've started to turn around the trespassed of letting those assets decline. he proposed pension reform and tax reform and affordable housing fund we proposed to bring together a large group of stakeholders to come up with a consensus representations and what you can see they came up with in this 5 year window it represents nearly 20 percent of our new money. was it task force recommended they realties their recommendations in november and

endorsed at least the first phase the measures open the ballot this november but recommended 3 funding measures one, general obligation bonds much like we as a city approved for paradoxes twice in the last 5 years to fund general hospital and to build a new police headquarter and pave our streets so general education bond increase the fees before schwarzenegger cut it a number of years back and the new tax increase that will generate 2.9 employed that will help leveraging additional revenue this is a ones in a lifetime in

our transportation system restorationing dlaekz of years that help with our quality of life. it's a tremendous opportunity the proposal from the task force that's been endorsed by the mayor to advance those to the ballot a 5 homicide thousand dollars bond the increase in the muni fee and the cheater amendment that will direct alleged general revenues to transportation. we'll get it will allow us to implement muni to move better through the streets ease improve traditional times up to 20

percent of the lions it carry 2/3rd's off our ridership to make them more efficient and help us to expand our fleet we won't have to increase our demand in a way this will help start growing our float and upgrade the extra and add more pedestrian count down signals it's one of the most safeway to increase pedestrian safety and the things that are viably important like escalators a accelerators and help fund the

region overlook agency and the commission has stepped forward and said san francisco if you advance on the other hand, measures we will match in part some of the funding with the anticipated cap and trade and other right side so we have the promise of a match if he can deliver in november. those measures will help us meet the goals i've talked about at the outset the goal of our strategic plan and established by the board of supervisors 41 years ago and placed in the chaefrt it will allow us to ride in the city and a make transit work better and make those modes of transportation more attractive to get those cars off the road to people who need to drive can find of the parking space and generally move the

city nor sustainly and help us to provide funding for the big projects we have a lot of metropolitan service funldz into market street. so many of the neighborhood we serve the trip goes through market street there's a lot of condemn and safety issues and congestion issues we have convicted of different modes on market street. to fix market street we think it's for example,able would require investment to make the transit work better and safer for people to walk and those promotions will allow us to do this in corridors as well. so that's kind of the end of the capital budget and the end of where we are in the process. we've had public hearings with my board doing some of the

sections and making the information available to send out information electronically on our website to create channels for feedback in adding service and reducing and adding fairs and reducing maintenance and then a series of form board hearing we need to submit our budget by mayor first and the public defenders will review and approve or reject. that's pretty much all i wanted to say i want to try to lay out everything clearly the rest of the time is for you. i'll leave that up now is the

time for questions and feedback and recommendations and things i've missed the floor is yours for the rest of the evening. please come to the mick so we can broadcast this. >> thank you, mr. reiskin i have a question it's sort of a question what's the rationale and what's the next steps in terms of rolling back sunday meters. for the record i'm opposed to rolling book the meters that's a huge loss of revenue my boyfriend finds we can go to the richmond and the inner sunset on

weekends because the parking meters encourage turnover and the majority of transit people are important so this is stopping the necklace and a dimming and rolling book sunday meters is a great bound to wealthyer san franciscan drivers at the excepts of the dependent upon populations that will see our fires go up. there's still adults that don't fall into the categories. >> okay. thanks susan that's a great question. let me start by saying the reasons all of reasons you said that you think enforcement of

parking meters on the other hand, on sunday it was adapted to create availability to reduce congestion because many of the incremental is people looking for parking and when the parking spaces are full people spend more time looking for parking and that creates more pollution. it was put in place with the recognize that sunday are very much like saturdays when parking meters went in sundays were a sleeping i didn't day that's not true today pretty much everyone in the city the occupancy of those motors is or 90 percent. so this was the reason the mta board made the change in the basing last budget to add

enforcement of meters. what we can tell it has worked not spiraling that's why the parking meters are there that's why people liquor the parking meters. i will note that we didn't include the removal the elimination of the parking meters in the baseline budget so if the board were to change that that would have an adverse effect i think 8 or $9 million a year. in terms of of the rationale the recommendation didn't come from use it of the adopted and the recommendation came from the mayor i know he made his rationale pretty clear it's

something, you know, frankly a lot of people don't like and he felt like it was kind of a concession we can make to the public given the affordability issues we have we have to pay muni on sunday or pay to cross the bridge. that's something my board will have to consider >> hi, i'm peter straus on behalf of the sf riders union. i'd like to offer 5 comments you've heard before 5 tonight. first of all, i don't think it's any secret to anyone the muni don't in the have enough funding to operate the service that it needs to provide this is a

long-standing problem and there not many solution without muni securing for fund. there's no better demonstration of this than in the budget presentation that identifies over one hundred million dollars of nodes and the 15 to $20 million annually to address those nodes. there's no way that can happen. sf true feels strong that muni needs to develop the best source of fund and the best one is the vehicle license fee we understand the infrastructure improvements but the significant portion of the d l f it's at the annually occurring source and a significant source of money $70 million it