that shows the training coming at, i think you will have a lot less opposition there but certainly with the children's park and some of the educational signs i think you will definitely get some critical feedback and get some feedback directly from the area residents and sf beautiful because there is a key stakeholders in this issue. >> we did present to the advisory committee on tuesday. got good feedback. but that point was made. there was an appreciation for seeing the details on our advertising policy. there are parameters to consider.

>> about the timeframe and all of that because i think it's a huge effort. but it's an exciting initiative. i'm wondering what we can take back . i had questions about the advertising policy and restrictions. i know at the jpb we have challenges of even though there are policies it's the interpretation of policies. so things like -- what we are trying to do is not have something obscene out there. they are going to start to interpret things differently. what sort of mechanism do you have to deal with

those kind of disputes to get really can be time consuming. >> well, i was paraphrasing a bit when i was describing the goal of not violating any community standards. but in the, i don't know if i can bring this up again on the crime scene. -- screen. but in the advertising policy there is details and those restrictions i put in place but i imagine the goal was to be as clear as possible and i will defer it to maria but i believe the tjpa would have the final word. >> this is considered after thoroughly reviewing them and before we put out the advertising package at the terminal. that these policies have really served us well to date. we have no problems with the advertising at the station. at the end of the day, we would bring all of these

components to the board. offers we would be looking at closely the advisory committee would have input, the community as director kim mentioned. today it worked well the way it's worded in detail. >> i would suggest that it maybe get relooked at because it's venturing into a new area of being artistic and freedom of expression. it brings all these terminology and different scriptures of what this means. it might be worth just looking at existing policies and seeing how effective it will be in dealing with those issues that you will deal with when you go through rfp. i know from the jpb that if the right mechanisms or dispute management or the

claims, it could be, very small things could move a very big issue. i ask the staff to relook at the policy and make sure the structure is there so that when there is a dispute, it's contained in whatever structure you set up to manage those types of disputes. >> if i could, director, lee, one thing that's different about this sponsorship opportunity from the regular advertising is that sponsorship it wouldn't change every month or some period like you might see in some advertising with the sponsors name. we may at least not confront this with questions about does this or not meet our policy.

>> i think it is something that at first glance, charge ahead but when you see it's a lot of complexities. what is the external. the idea of there is a lot of public places that have a lot of different external characters. time square in new york has an iconic external character. whether that would fit anything like this, we don't know, right? it might be interesting to work with the citizens advisory committee. here are some examples. that's what we are thinking. do we want digital screens in just advertising in digital crime scenes and get that to a

policy >> if you are talking about the major terminal sponsor, that's a long term. you have to get senators and congresswomen and all sorts of people involved in that if you are going to maximize it. it has to be done very well and i don't know if rfp maybe isn't necessarily the way to start. i don't know, i have never done it and we are doing it in the brp and oakland. that is a much smaller scale. but we already had targets. we knew that kaiser was one that we really wanted and we have been working with them for several years and see if we can nail that. there are

other comparable things like that. i think the one thing that i would holdback on because i think it would be to our advantage is the wifi sponsorship. the reason being is the public's attitude towards the wifi they expect changes about every 6 weeks in terms of, i remember an initial. just a few years ago you couldn't get wifi unless you signed up for so many months and they would bill you and people don't tolerate that anymore. so, and apps can be constructed very fast. so almost, we are going to build a wifi network that's fine, but it could be anything from ours, but we want it sponsored. the nature of what passengers will accept for a

place like that for getting wifi will change in the next 2 years. it's moving so fast. if they can sit better in peach coffee in terms of of the terminal. it has to be a very subtle thing. the other thing is i view advertising versus sponsorship very different. advertising will be taken care of by screens where we have a short-term thing going on where the giants will be advertising something for a month and that's going to be flexible. for the sponsorship and the terms, i think we really need to think about the idea or encourage the idea of options and rights of first refusal. because if i were a big sponsor, i would

two concerns. i don't know how this is going to play out in the representation and what the community is going to think. i would like a little flexibility, that would be options. at the other hand, if we say if this becomes as big, then the value of the poerp -- sponsorship is going up. you have a short-term write-up for it's refusal to keep the sponsorship going. if someone wants to come up at a market price. that's what we have to deal with. >> right. that's the way it works. they would have the right to match a better off. >> and ed is not here to support me. i know he would. the transit ideas and the ads on the buses, it's

not just trying to stay within very middle norms. there are people on the edges that are pushing rights and that sort of thing and in the example that i give through operation transit because right now we are trying to talk about what are our bus ads going to look like. if planned parenthood would put an ad, would we have a problem with that. or if the nra wanted to, would we have a policy to prohibit it. those are things you need to think through which i don't think we need for a while, bit do. >> our advertising policy would do anything to prohibit on positions of neutrality that are not related to the transbay programs. >> some people are pushing

1st amendment rights when you have a policy and when they have a political message. does that mean your ad policy would have to accept it. it's dynamic right now. >> it is the item no. 1 on our list of shall not, consider political campaigns. it's great. i don't think any of us have a problem with the concept. it's the idea of all the factors involved. good luck. >> thank you. that concludes my report. >> okay. go ahead and move to your next item. item 6 is the citizens advisory committee update.

>> chairman and members of the board, executive director. i'm happy to give you the report of our citizens advisory committee. it will be in two parts. first on vision zero and secondly on the rfp for naming rights and stuff like that. i was not able to stay for the whole meeting and so vice chairman provided me for second points. i thank scott for bringing it here so i can see it. in terms of vision zero, we were very grateful to scott and staff for scheduling vision zero to speak to us on the agenda. because bruce and i sit over that committee and had requested

it. megan, we and mary hunter presented it to us and you may wish to present a similar presentation before you. vision zero as you know is city policies adopted by 13 agencies of the city. and ed reiskin is one of the, director of one of those agencies that manages the director of department of public health. i would like to mention to you that this is a 10-year plan of course to reduce traffic incidents to zero whether they be motorist. the

number of reporting traffic incidents. 17 pedestrians, 9 motorist, 3 bicyclist. the second point was high injury streets. 12 percent of all san francisco streets are upon for 70 percent of the total crashes. we is that is the transbay transit center happens to be in the network of that 12 percent of the streets. so we really want to be thinking of this now, how working with the city we prevent accidents from happening around this wonderful grand central station of the west which

will be hub of all traffic in san francisco and you can imagine for yourselves what the head lines and public city would be if during the first year or subsequent years we have an accident there. we want to prevent that. now is the time that we need to think of that and i propose to you that we with the transbay center become the exemplar of this vision zero of making sure that we have done all that we can to prevent that. so i had proposed that the vision zero theme meet with maria and her team and bruce and i would be there but especially with the commander who sits on the vision zero is signed to the vision zero campaign and task force so that we hear from

the police what they are doing around the transbay hub and know that we are going to have something very important there. of course i would ask chairman harper to ask if to distribute that report. i think that report would be very helpful for all of you. after meeting with the staff then, they will the vision zero team.

the comments as vice-chair agd mentioned them. if sponsorship dollars are not sufficient, we should not award any bids and resubmit the rfp closer to completion of phase one and it could be more valuable and attractive at that time. i think all of you were dealing with the time constraints already in this, i'm merely mentioning what was discussed at the cac. no. 2, component sponsorship is a great idea to sponsor the entire transit center and the bid such as a 10-year sponsorship, the cac was concerned with name changing on a regular basis as the sponsorship changes. according to him felt it loses dignity with the

significant public infrastructure the last one is one that is i have suggested from the beginning that we explore as one of those exhibits on the park working with the exploratoria. it has external exhibits and mayor lee has created the living innovations zone on market street showing these exhibits. i think what's important in these exhibits as spontaneously as people are circulating on the park they come and realize some of the significance of transportation. i would suggest the two themes they should focus

on is transportation and history and what not and/or how current transportation works and no. 2, san francisco's historic regional role as a regional hub here. i would also just suggest that at least one exhibit should be on the politics of how as the transit has created. that concludes my report. if you have any questions i will try to answer them. >> i do want to thank you for bringing vision zero. looking for

large vehicles and the truck and association in and one of the concerns is the large vehicles that are making delivers to san francisco and i know the project brings a large number of vehicles and i would ask that you tap into the communication and some of the ideas that are being discussed there and more importantly they are coming up with a video that anybody doing business with the city and hopefully you know the larger greater san francisco that all drivers should take that 1 hour video to understand what it is and the difficulties of getting around san francisco and making sure that safety is the highest priority and making sure that we

reduce those fatalities. thank you for bringing that up. >> thank you. >> supervisor? i assume that they are an in a project that they will participate. one of the incidents involved in one of our subcontractors with our fatality in south beach. i'm hoping the contractor will be participating in pedestrian and bike safety program. this has come up before and to director i would ask that they are working in part with this group and making sure that all drivers are trained and they view the video so if we can make that

happen. item 7. public comment. not received a card from anyone but looks like mr. patrick is moving forward. >> thank you, i'm jim patrick with san francisco. i want to make a comment on this proposal for the sponsorship. i believe there are several issues we need to look at. one we constructed this proposal we heard this morning that we are in events of one or the other. we have to sell a product. when we sell a posted note. we don't discriminate who we sell our product to and we have to watch so we are not placed in a can then resell

the advertising value. he resells it. or something like that. i don't know propose unless and we should extract

as much value. i think it's for 10 years to rebid it and rather than being stuck with a negotiated settlement. thank you. that concludes members of the public that wanted to --