@pp.

>> good morning today is february 10, 2015 welcome to the san francisco transportation authority finance committee of the transportation authority i'm supervisor avalos and the clerk is steve item one roll call vote. >> supervisor avalos supervisor campos supervisor cohen supervisor kim supervisor mar absent we have quorum. >> great we have quorum on to the next item. >> consent calendar items 2 to 3 those items are considered route and staff is to the required to present if anyone

objects they can be removed. >> colleagues questions or comments on item two to three arrest public comment for those two items public comment is on on the consent calendar and seeing no members of the public come forward we'll close public comment and have a roll call vote for our meeting minutes. >> supervisor avalos. >> oh, i'm sorry oh and supervisor avalos. >> supervisor campos supervisor cohen supervisor kim supervisor mar absent consent calendar passes. >> very good the items passes on to the next item and item 4 federal and state update on action item. >> great, thank you good morning chairman and

members happy to be here i have a brief presentation on one particular bill we're recommending the masking support we're taking a recommendation i wasn't planning on covering those and couple of other things to update you on transpiring no sacramento. >> you want to identify user. >> i'm mark watts recommending the transportation board in sacramento. >> ab one 94 on page 4 of our masking mr. the gentleman is the chair he introduced this is as the rerequest from the coalition pardons to the and hot lay currently treasures a statute that the authority the statute is not effective a new sunset

date has expired that rethat status and defines the regional definition for the san francisco bay area that authority resides with the m t c and must excludes the requirement they must consultant with the county jurisdiction in which the proposed project is located this is similar to legislation that emerged last summer that failed passage about had quite strong support if the coalition as well as the administration quietly behind the scenes we've run into a chairman of the committee that was opted to tow so that bill state we're recommending a support position the requirement for regional agency with the

loophole transportation authority parole needs for strengthening we've been working on that we would like to have our endorsement to support this measure so we're folding that b 2, 3, 4 with our self-help county coalition. >> great supervisor kim. >> thank you. can you explain specifically how this would impact the specific hotlines here in the bay area how this legislation. >> yeah. so the authority would be grant to m t c so let's yeah. let's take their h o v system they'll be required to approach the state transportation system inform approval to proceed with that approval is the imposing of

tolls for the hot lanes. >> i'm sorry it this for the existing hot lanes it's preliminary our golden gate bridge i guess a specific example would be helpful. >> it's intended to authorize the conversion of current h o v lanes to potential 84 lanes and go beyond that to construct additional hot lanes. >> giving me an example of that i'm sorry. >> thank you tilly change through the chair supervisor kim that state legislation will authorize the entire state for the express lane development in san francisco we have expresses lanes in alameda on the 580 and

here in our san francisco in our part of the networked we have no carpool lanes touching san francisco the as far as i am concerned, first is to establish hot lanes and there after consider the express lanes if you have enough capacity in the carpool lanes you'll offer that to yellow drivers who will be willing to pay a fee to enter the lane in our district it the golden gate and the 280 and 101 to the south and freeway management study to look at the carpools and eventually go potentially express lanes. >> this is exciting so this something we'll around the downtown congestion that sfmta has been exploring our office so we'll be putting i know you've mentioned h o v lanes with the

101 and 280 we have h o v lanes. >> we have one that's it no other facility on that on ramps. >> that will give us the discretion to increase the number of - >> yee correct the nuance is this is a new approach to managing froidz ochltd it requires a strong partnership between the state and sclts that owns the facility and the designated operator to operator and the local government both our agency sfmta and others will be heavily involved with a new concept for the public to understand. >> this is important i think with all the growth with employment and residential we're seeing the congestion impacts on the south of market to having

that capacity to implement more of those on the 101 and 280. >> you know who our representatives m t c i'll suggest we have further dialog with our counterparts with san mateo and st. clair are interested in seeing we have a facility and stakeholder outreach to the business community and the employers and residents are seeing strong demand for the express lane development as well. >> thank you for the explanation. >> i apologize for not being able to directly answer our questions. >> just quickly last year assembly speaker tony shublg shock up the transportation community by interrogating a new concept with splult the state

and local highway system essentially she called on a series of steps to be undertaken the bill was not drafted but has in mind what the transportation wonder world is pleased with the leader of the assembly move forward essential they'll recapture fund to balance the general fund the truck way fees are paying for the transportation bonds so her measure will contemplate freeing up one million dollars into highways and back to the general fund by encompass a new fund that raise one billion dollars 8 so the net program will be about close to 2 employed and the general fund will be held

harmless this is a navel first step i don't know how it will be particularly when we see the los angeles's we'll be bringing back before you. >> just a cautionary note speaking of language we have to when we're talking about impacting those taxes legislation imposing puts people against something but impacting a new license fee or a user fee that is the way we want to discuss implementing them versus taking a personal responsibility versus the burden that the right is using to try to make sure that people don't want to raise taxes or increase the government

spending that improves our lives. >> i'll take that to heart thank you very much. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you mr. chairman and the presentation i want to ask you about ab 61 which is a bill by a i guess mr. allen that was basically how private shourlt services like the you know so-called google buses and textbook buses to use basically bus stops the same way that school bus and i'm just very concerned about this bill and one question - well, first of all, i'm wondering what we're doing in terms of of that bill i think it would be important for us to take a position against this bill but one question i

have is would this bill actually supersede the pilot that san francisco has? the way i read it it will not it will allow only ann on a volunteer y basis they enter into the agreement so the agency 2, 3, 4 my reading provide that assess they wouldn't be compelled to be >> i would certainly make a motion that we take up a formal position opposing this bill. >> just a followup question would ab 61 is there any language that prevents local control in terms of setting up a fee for using our - >> it's a sketchy bill no restriction on fees or direction as i read it for an imposition

of fees i've been in touch with the office in case they're making expansions or clarifications so you think the eater will be in late march i think if you're considering taking an opted position at this point in time that will give me time to work on your behalf on the measure in sacramento. >> for me the main issue is it is the privatization of public space allowing those private companies to use public space without requiring any kind of payment obviously led it up to the jurisdiction but it is dangerous to at the time set this precedence that's the problem with the pilot if they could do that in san francisco it about be the show will be

taken on the road, if you will. >> i understand. >> this year's nothing that the bill that gives away any of our assets. >> that's what i can see. >> thank you so is and a motion so i second that. >> before we - we will w we'll have a public comment and presentation. >> the only last thing when the governor announced his budget he highlighted the need for the protective you are to work with him for supplemental fund and bryan kelly who has been conducting 2 years successfully a workshop on different aspects of funding in sacramento and the

different aspects of managing transportation called an initial meeting called the california structure proprietor workshop and the purpose was to be underway with the governors first step of outreach through the secretary so there's not a lot of development but a scene setting meeting we're starting to see a framework that the governor might want to work in its early to share that pubically we'll be involved with the process and keep you appraised so if you take a step back you'll see the leadership in the assembly that is addressing transportation and looking at the road and administration is stepping up and the senate won't are far behind. >> thank you that concludes my presentation. >> still waiting for the federal government to do it's

part it's a tough time i expect to be able to by the people we keep on vicinity new enemies all the time. >> a question. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i having had one more question on ab 24 and i was wondering if there's information beyond the summary in the legislative round up for the requirement for the liability insurance for the f t and we're waiting for them to address ailed language that has not come out yet. >> i'm very interested as the legislation develops it is certainly an issue with one of

our fte drivers killed a pedestrian and it was an insurance fight i'm interested in seeing how the bill will be developed at the state level. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> tilly chang really it is quite exciting to see so much action we'll we're going to see the puddle you've selected and in addition driving vehicles regulations from the dmv shortly and the performance of the ceqa type of performance there's a lot of going on at the state level i appreciate mark keeping track we had a visit from our federal agency mr. fox he visit good looking and mother-in-law view and attended along with a number of people from the san

francisco's and your director of transportation bryan kelly was talking about the state of our system transportation unfortunately, the news was grim we're from a state of criticized with our international structure this is as supervisor avalos pointed out we've invested in our from to begin a national dialog will the state transportation we have a highway trust fund heading into the red and funded inadequately by the federal gas tax it funded not only highways but surface transportation across the modes and bicycling as well as and the pedestrian involvements investment so we rang the bell and called on everyone to paying attention e pay attention and particle with the new dialog in

washington and congress to recognize this is a bipartisanship issue with the labor groups calling on congress to move for the funding for transportation by 20 thirty we're expecting to see 40 percent of the population in upper in his places this is wherewith he have sustainable global and social equitable development we want to make sure that particularly where we have older transit systems like in san francisco with our muni is over one hundred years old we're or partnering and supporting what ever way we can meanwhile we're not witting we're seeing experimentation secretary fox talked about that over 2 dozen

states are raised their own state gas tax we have not done that we're looking at this thing meanwhile as mark mentioned looking at a stating fee program the program that is based on what oregon and washington have done and we have cap & trade so we're seeing carbon based fuel that is generating revenue for transportation it isn't enough the lack of federal violation was a little bit disappointing we've seen commitment on the issue but not time and didn't what can the federal government do about safety and strengthen our transit system nate he said we can partner and holy for much

stronger federal role and leadership without the ability to fund it he couldn't say much he very much wanted to move 2, 3, 4 a positive direction about the issue of funding and we think that would be important to continue work at the local level we cannot do it alone secretary fox mentioned the strong partnership around the land use the better land use we plan the more ability to travel by bicycle and transit we recognized this is a partnership are the states and the locating locality we expect the federal government to come through with a major consensus on the next bill and barbara boxer has announced to leave the senate we hope with her colleagues before she leafs deliver a of municipal

court year bill with that i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you, colleagues any questions or comments okay. on to public comment on this item is there any public comment on this item on the legislative agenda seeing none, public comment is closed. and we have a motion on the floor. >> on the motion to amend the masking. >> supervisor avalos supervisor campos supervisor cohen supervisor kim supervisor mar masking is amended. >> okay. the motion is amend the masking 83 is amended and the underlying can we take that without objection? okay. so we'll >> i also wanted to amend the eric mar so. >> thank you leo. >> next item. >> state road charge p