jeopardy which is also something that we been hoping would be explored on the face i saw an article lowering their rates by 10% and that was somewhat depressed it was somewhat depressing because we were just hearing about this jeopardy situation that we can to be and where were hoping that their neck rets change put this us up above us. this may be think that we really need to reevaluate every policy and procedure and every everything we put ourselves to be conservative. we really need to investigate the balance versus potential

failure and/or lack of positive program outcomes what us in this presentation that is artie happened. that is very heartening. we look for to talking with staff about more details. >> i just wanted to point out to make it clear that, the pci a is going up. and up our rates i just want to make sure that that'll make our rates is higher than that. >> thank your staff are doing a tremendous metalwork a very tough job but they been doing a lot of it would very changing situations.

a few things that i want to bring up. a ppa process i would say the pricing is the best but that is what was needed to be done in the beginning. i think it was well worth for them to do. we should be looking at that model and also the tax credits will go away from the federal level as a fallback which is not as good as the tax credit is now. we have some options that will save us in san francisco. the other thing is talking about the policies and procedures that you have for the first phase. i agree that we should be looking at all those things. you might want to look at the different costs.

it's not like long-term that you want to have but it can give you some money quickly to say were going to do it takes a couple years will go to the process. i think it's well worth the energy of what that is and how it looks like.

the quicker you expand the quicker you can get more leverage in your rate structure and having more money to do that buildout. this will take some time to actual build and develop the system.

>> any other public comments? thank you all very much and thank you for the presentation. item 13? am item 13 approved amendment number two. >> good afternoon. i'm the environmental justice and land-use manager. just a quick context for today's amendment that before you.

this is a continuation of a project that we started in partnership with supervisor around two years ago. we're trying to engage residents and ratepayers were there at that is in front of their homes to show that small actions like removing a little bit of concrete total on the ring to soak and can have benefits. this again is an amendment to extend the existing grant for an additional year and i will provide just a little bit of context around the accomplishments. working with the supervisor's office we have removed over 6000 ft. of impervious paved over concrete. replace it with vibrant stormwater front your gardens. that's around 75,000 gallons of storm water removed from our system.

the amendment that before you will help extend this program for another year and let us work with another 20 residents in district for. with that, i will take any questions. >> when you say were removing the concrete what you mean? >> that is a volunteer-based effort. they work with the property owner they cut the concrete and is a voluntary effort, everybody comes on help and bring in the soil and plant the sidewalk gardens and the maintenance of those front yards is on the property owner. >> the cutting the concrete breaking it down and all that is being done by friends of the urban force? >> they do some subcontractors but it's handling through friends of the urban force.

i am just a comment on reluctant keeping the fact that we been having these conversations about the nonprofits and the roles and more specifically when you're talking about actually doing construction work, the work that's covered bar agreement meant and performed by the men of women that already work for the commission but for men and women that work for summer contractors under certain standards because everyone so busy we just keep missing opportunity and opportunity. they were going to gauge into this there needs to be some

additional linkages. and what i'm talking about are the human beings. the ones that we have for example going through programs at the human services agencies. and in the friends of the urban foreigners want to have two, they should be looked at for an opportunity to have a job with a nonprofit. before we continue i'm going to say that i really can't support it at this point in time. until we continue to flush out the missing pieces. i feel with men and women every day or looking for an opportunity.

>> i understand that there are and we talked about getting back to you on all the nonprofit things that we are interact with. i think some of the challenge that were facing is that the labor is sort of hitting directly title. for example the scene property, if you lease it out who is actually managing the property? we are just listening? when we look at the situation we just want to break the square of a sidewalk and plant trees or something else. we don't really think about the labor component because were talking about how much? m this would be for 80,000 of which the concrete cutting services is a very small percentage.

i do agree that we need to have a more holistic look at all of the touch points. one of the things is put all the things that were doing as a touch. directly, indirectly with the labor market so that you have a full flavor of everything that were doing and how they interact and you're right, it could be an opportunity to leverage all the things were doing not only in this area but other areas. >> i greatly appreciate your comments. i want to be really, really crystal clear. it's not for me as for leverage and not for me about union and wage scales.

the labor standard piece does. people care and he gets a conversation going because of the investment they were married making as a city the committee workforce that is a linkage that i think we can all agree on. it were not linking some of these entities because we are profiting it out. on this one piece i think that we all invest in those young men and women that committee workforce piece. and there's just not enough there kind of not put together in the right way and we don't

have the leverage. if we have one great guy whose timing out with human service and agency they were just missing the opportunity. i hope to be clear. >> i think you're clear in every opportunity that we don't take advantage is a missed opportunity. we would love to sit down and chat with you about these type of opportunities. >> also this is the last time that this particular grant can be amended. and again it's trying to keep that were going. a lot of the volunteers and this is based on volunteer committee efforts.

i would urge the commission to consider approving this amendment while we give ourselves the time to have this conversation. this program has been so successful that i expect future opportunities as well and right now just hoping to keep the current work going. >> commissioner? >> i would like to thank you for the comments and i agree. i would like to support what proportion --proposed here there is momentum right now to the young men in orlando who help educate and help us put things on the ground. he came through a program. i don't abuse your study cancer

program and he found gainful career. it's a fantastic opportunity. i would like to suggest porch allow this and move forward while we look for components to engage in the labor concrete cutting. the actual the muscle of the work done by residence. i would like to throw my support behind this. >> it's appropriate for us to have this dialogue. i am not going to ask that you don't move it forward.

>> i appreciate your comments as well and i think that the workforce development conversation is very important, not only now but in this context and in every context. as a representative from the environmental seating committee i look at this differently as well. i see it as a pulling up as m h much. so understand your concerns i would still like to put a motion on the table to move this item forward. >> i will second. can i think we can probably do both. by moving, i think i'm committed before i send it to have a conversation to see how we can

take advantage of the opportunity. we need to take advantage of these opportunities. commissioner courtney maybe we can talk off-line and use that as leverage to take advantage of this opportunity. >> i'm confident that we will have a conversation. >> we have a lot of stuff to go. >> thank you. public comments?

>> good afternoon commissioner. the program. this program is one of the most popular program and we would like to see this continue. thank you everyone. >> thank you. any other public comments? we have a motion and a second all those in favor say i. opposed? it's a 3-one vote a1 vote and i.

we will be moving into executive session. would you please read the items that will be having a close session on? >> item 16 is dedication as plaintiff 17's conference will negotiator. this is price and terms of payment. will not hear item 18 through 2 22. and item 23 is a threat to public services cities. >> thank you do have any public comment on the items to be heard in close session? c9 may have a motion so that we can assert client moved to assert and second. all those in favor

>> -

>> san francisco is known worldwide for its atmospheric waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25

visitors every year the port of san francisco manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at

high tides and major repairs to a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl point time to plan for the future of san francisco's waterfront this year the port is updating it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and

resilient the biggest challenges facing the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the embarcadero roadway and seawalls that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy

impacts unfortunately, the port didn't have the financial resources to repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and

transportation issues and viral protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront. >> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come.

>> get involved with the planning process that will set the fraction for what is coming at the port. >> find for in upgrading dates on the ports website. >> (ship blowing horn in distances)

>> okay good morning, colleagues and welcome to the first timma meeting of 2017 very exciting my pleasure and privilege to lead this board that includes

treasure island i want to recognize and thank supervisor avalos and supervisor campos who served on timma committee with me over the past year we accomplished quite a bit in 2016 and for the first time last year adopted on initial set of tool policies and congestion management policies to shape a total program that support robust and very transit on the isle for the residents and workers while the town hall level will be worked out we accomplished perimeters likes population direction of travel and the shape of the discount and at the exemption policy i time to recognize the many residents of treasure island that worked with us and concept the recommendations this address town hall burdens and for the low income resident by directing the transportation affordability witness told you free in the early years of the program and

the county trait barriers for the low income travelers 2017 will condition to be busy as we design this transportation program and the island ferry surface expanded bus service and on island shuttle and car and bike you shuttle and entering into meta and funding from the state and regional grants in fact this is readily an initiative time and opportunity as we develop this new neighborhood for san francisco we imagine what a transportation heavy and transit first time neighborhood truly can look like speaking of grants i want to congratulate our staff with sfmta and uc berkley won a $6 million granted in the u.s. go department of transportation to support town hall and economic shuttles only the island i want to recognize, of

course, our director tilly chang, deputy director eric and michelle with that grant and matching fund will a town hall system and be able to work with sfmta related parking system with the mtc to bring the components together i look forward to working with all of you on the treasure island management program in the coming year thank you and mr. clerk, call the next item. >> we'll start with the role. >> off role commissioner breed absent a commissioner cohen is absent commissioner farrell present. >> commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang

commissioner yee. >> we we have quorum. >> thank you mr. clerk and i'm sorry for going out of order this is time for the colleagues to get to the women's press conference next item. >> call two and three, chairs 3 and those are informational items. >> ms. tilly chang want to thank chair kim for her leadership that was a busy year and as mentioned as the pa with the yerba buena island the westbound ramps was a huge accomplishment to continue on the grant award i was landline to join with colleagues mayor ed lee and director rahaim into the sfmta to meet with secretary fox two weeks ago to receive the grants that chairman shared from

the department of transportation for the deems of the town hall with the vehicle shutters that was mentioned in addition our staff works with the city and ripening staff from oakland and our own mayor's office in on the advocatvolkswagon program in tho we supported two applications four is $2 million i look forward to meeting with all of you to lay out to the opportunities and receive the input on this opportunity as well as all the opportunities around the treasure island mobility management this is truly an opportunity for us to be a laboratory for the sustainable development locally

we were disappointed is not able to secure the museum location we work hard with the planning department and that work will continue as we support the tida to further develop opportunities for this site on project delivery our engineering work continues with the grant we received we have funds to begin further design the town hall system and the shutters required for the interest would vehicles charging and hope to get climatic change funds as well as other potential electrical vehicles transit as well as for muni and this summary we'll be procuring that as we pass from the finance committees the ferry and operator agreements are operated with the tricker-treat this is our ferry agency in the

region and we're looking for the electronic compulsory systems we'll may or may not may i make a decision on the new island shutter and transit will tie to the charging system we develop on the island the mandatory transit program for those 0 who are the newest members and welcome to you all we'll be working with the tida as well as the developer on the island for the task programming for the cost of hours will be bundled into the hov fees for the residents and expect two residences below-market rate and the transportation will be programmed this is something we'll be working on to tie together the fund to be make it easy to implement the use of the

system as well to implement the exemption and discount policy the board adopts the task program we'll be working on together with mtc as and grant the transit systems that allows for the transit payment over the next few years with that, that concludes any remarks happy to take any questions. >> thank you director chang k chang do we need to open up for public comment we'll now accept public comment sierra mr. clerk, please move to item 4. >> approval of the minutes of the july 26, 2016, an action item. >> do we have a motion to approve the minutes of july 26th we have a motion from commissioner yee and seconded by commissioner peskin can we do a roll call.

>> on this item seeing none, public comment is closed. >> on the minutes commissioner farrell commissioner fewer i have clarification please chair am i able to vote on the minutes i was not there. >> you may vote but also obtaining stain. >> yes. thank you. >> commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang commissioner yee. >> the minutes are approved and that motion passes madam president can i rise without rising question to counsel through the chair i know

that i've been advised in other state bodies that on items that i didn't participate in i should abstain on the minutes is that different here? >> it is actually, you, if you've read the minutes from the members were here and read the minutes you can vote if you feel more be comfortable you can abstain. >> thank you commissioner peskin would you like to take a revote commissioners can abstain if they were not at the meeting 0 seeing no changes the approval of the minutes pass mr. clerk. >> item 5 election of chair and vice chair this is an action item. >> commissioners at this time we'll take nominations for the

much desired chair of this committee do we have any nominations commissioner peskin. >> i rise to nominate commissioner kim on a couple of theories in her incarceration as a member of the board of supervisors treasure island is within her district and in as far as treasure island is a lot more but linked with a series of transportation initiatives it is also a housing project which for those of you who don't know or remember was originally approved in concept by the board of supervisors in 2006 on the summation it will have thirty percent affordable housing substantially those numbers were revised downwards by actually significant

percentage and in her role as a member of the board of supervisors supervisor kim has been working diligently to increase the percentage of affordable housing on treasure island which again is linked to the transportation seconds by ferry and by what you see on the front of the engaged report that will appear from our director ms. chang with that, i'd like to place commissioner kim in nomination as chair. >> there is a motion to nominate by commissioner peskin and seconded by commissioner farrell thank you so much for your nomination. >> at this time seeing no further comment take a roll call vote. >> public comment. >> public comment. >> sorry yes take public comment one of

the chair. >> thank you commissioner peskin we'll take public comment on the selection item seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk. >> all right. the motion commissioner farrell commissioner fewer commissioner kim commissioner peskin commissioner ronen commissioner safai commissioner sheehy commissioner tang commissioner yee >> that item passes. >> colleagues thank you so much for your support on the chairship of this committee at this time we'll open up nomination for the vice chair of the next committee any nominations. >> please don't all jump up at once. >> commissioner peskin. >> this is obviously a very

sought after position laughter and in as far as nobody is offering themselves up in as far as commissioner low is my seatmate has generally agreed i hereby nominate commissioner yee to the vice chair. >> (laughter) thank you commissioner peskin thank you commissioner low. >> and there's a seconded by commissioner tang at this time open up for public comment on the election of the vice chair of the timma committee seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk can we take this same house, same call? >> congratulations commissioner yee. >> i want to make sure it is echoed by the west side of treasure island. >> we want to make sure we have quorum. >> all right. mr. clerk, call the next item.

>> item 6 introduction of new items are there any new items for introduction here today seeing none, we open up for public comment on this item. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk the next item. >> item 7 general public comment. >> thank you. good morning andrew yip so solely by the spreading of true principle on the society than ever of the topaz e people know of love and kindness of good deeds to be sought through the tragedy of procedural e unusual population and the wise men of improvements of virtues one can easily follow for the certification of e civilization of wisdom to accomplish the good works for

self-rescue and holy rescue of human heart in defending the holy principles one can expect to see the universe to let peace of with wellness only by the peaceful corporation can we insure the one quick way of wellness of the holy people and enjoying good time of prosperity the establishment of considerable works the establishment of virtues and the establishment of speak for on - the advancement for fishing for holy rescue to the society of the petitions would have a regarding benefit of personal family and personal results for principles thank you. >> thank you, mr. yip any

other public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. clerk may we call the last item. >> item 8 adjournment. >> the meeting is adjourned. >> we'll start the transportation authority board meeting in a few >> self-planning works to preserve and enhance the city what kind hispanic the environment in a variety of ways overhead plans to fwied other departments to open space and

land use an urban design and a variety of other matters related to the physical urban environment planning projects include implementing code change or designing plaza or parks projects can be broad as proipd on overhead neighborhood planning effort typically include public involvement depending on the subject a new lot or effect or be active in the final process lots of people are troubled by they're moving loss of they're of what we preserve to be they're moving mid block or rear yard open space. >> one way to be involved attend a meeting to go it gives us and the neighbors to learn and participate dribble in future improvements

meetings often take the form of open houses or focus groups or other stinks that allows you or your neighbors to provide feedback and ask questions the best way to insure you'll be alerted the community meetings sign up for the notification on the website by signing up using you'll receive the notifications of existing request the specific neighborhood or project type if you're language is a disability accomodation please call us 72 hours before the event over the events staff will receive the input and publish the results on the website the notifications bans feedback from the public for example, the feedback you provide may change how a street corridors looks at or the web

policy the get started in planning for our neighborhood or learner more mr. the upcoming visit the plans and programs package of our we are talking about with our feedback and participation that is important to us not everyone takes this so be proud of taking ann . >> (clapping.) >> in 2013 san francisco legislators newsom agreed to allow the reciprocate of our soft story buildings those building house one and 20 thousand resident a program of that collect requires extensive outreach and this continuation of that process who is here and bill graham the perfect venue so in 2014 we have

the first earthquake retrofit a huge success we're repeating this model what we've done it put together venues that are time professionals and contractor are financing institutions a other services that help people comply with the retrofit and as you can see the thousands of members of the public their assessing over one hundred vendors to comply with the ordinance or make improvements on their property i came to get specification information and puck h picking up information if you don't know what twaur doing i take it overwhelming. >> we're pleased a critical mass of people are keying into knowing their relents and understanding what had are the next steps to take and they're figuring out who to talk to not only the contractor by the mustards and the architect and

the structural engineers and getting the full picture of what options are necessary and being pro-acti pro-active. >> so i'm very pleased to see the soft story buildings 99.9 percent complies the highest of the program of this scale of the history a citywide effort high blood pressure in every stretch of san francisco to understand real risks associated with earthquake and those are universally agreed on. >> at some point you need to gather information i'll be talking to another engineer to come out and take a look at it and basically get a second opinion i'm for second and third opinions it is inspiring to see all the property owners that want to do the right thing and for proactively figuring out what

the solutions to get them that. >> what is amazing to me here we are over two years of first retrofit fair and at the time we are rh2 out to contractors to help us and reaching it out to design professionals that soft story buildings is in any and people understanding how to comply now it is different an industry that springs up as a result of the - their professed and gotten the costs down with lower financing options and these are defined and now the gene progression and have the buildings are buildings and the compliance we understand the 2020 one and 20 thousand san francisco's 15 messenger of our population will live in a retrofit building those people buildings or lives in buildings with 5 or more residential

building is soft story and wood frame and built before 1978 that house that one and 20 thousand san franciscans. >> san francisco is being the leader in getting in done and as you may know los angeles passed their retrofit law two months ago at the sort of taken san francisco's lead on the one and tenth anniversary as the residents san francisco this is a road map to the city and going to give us us plan are these to keep folks here on a disaster and steps to build a resident waterfront by 2020. >> this involves more than one and 80 individuals and over 60 nonprofits and other companies this is a huge plan and what are

the challenges we realize that people are concerned about climatic change, sea level rise and not only the affiliated hazards but things hike you're our amp infrastructure and consumed by social and other things we see this in society everyday and how we try to mitigate those are ultimately a direct result how resident we are after earthquake other issue out of the strategy of the concept after a major earthquake of keeping 95 percent of population here in san francisco that's the single best thing to help a equitable recovery to keep people here keep people back to work and kids in school and a residents of normal after a disaster. >> alliance energy in our partner undertook comprehensive

bid process we interviewed a half-dozen of folks who wanted to have a part of our soft story buildings are ordinance so alliance energy project programming is a clean assess energy a special financing that is done using the taxed authority of local multiples and one of the interesting features the loan is tied to the property not the vital if an individual didn't have good credit but it is another option for people not able to comply to find another avenue the assessment is actually places on the property and the builds for in that come literally a line item on the tax bill that's how you pay off the segment and tax. >> 20 or thirty years is all paid up front there are advantages your property tax

well it is important to give people on option and many private banks that provide loans over a are shorter term we wanted to create a longer pay back term. >> i think the next step for property owners after at the create themselves to take the plunge and quit the working downey done and have works of work done right of the right rest of the property owners can understand this process across the city. >> we need to do it. >> it is safety you know that's the bottom line safety. >> earthquake safety a everybody's responsibility that is providing the resources that people need to get done if you want to know more of the resources as a san franciscan please visit the .

>> working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrate and dynamic city on sfroert of the art and social change we've been

on the edge after all we're at the meeting of land and sea world-class style it is the burn of blew jeans where the rock holds court over the harbor the city's information technology xoflz work on the rulers project for free wifi and developing projects and insuring patient state of at san francisco general hospital our it professionals make guilty or innocent available and support the house/senate regional wear-out system your our employees joy excessive salaries but working for the city and county of san francisco give us employees the unities to contribute their ideas and energy and commitment to shape the city's future but for

considering a career with the city and county of san francisc >> good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors meeting for tuesday, january 31, 2017, madam clerk please call roll. >> madam president supervisor breed supervisor cohen supervisor farrell supervisor fewer supervisor kim not present supervisor peskin supervisor ronen supervisor safai not present supervisor sheehy

supervisor tang supervisor yee madam president we have quorum thank you, ladies and gentlemen, please join us in the pledge of allegiance and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you, everyone are there any communications. >> i have one communication to present madam president we're in receipt of a communication from the small business commission dated january 23rd forwarding not board for consideration rules and regulations and for the application of the legacy business program under the san francisco administrative code these rules and regulations are subject to disapproval by 30 days of this notice to the board

if you, your from transferred in disapproving those let me know by wednesday i'll submit a memo to the members madam clerk to the consent agenda. >> items 1 through 22 on content these items are - and turn your mike on. >> it was on. >> i would like to sever items 6 and 8 please. okay seeing no other names on the roster, on the items one through 22 excluding items 6 and 8 madam clerk please call roll. >> supervisor farrell supervisor fewer supervisor kim supervisor peskin supervisor ronen supervisor safai

supervisor sheehy supervisor tang supervisor yee supervisor breed supervisor cohen there are 11 i's. >> okay these items passes unanimously madam clerk please call 6 and 8 together. >> item 6 an ordinance to authorize a lawsuit for seven hundred and 50 thousand on 2015 in san francisco supreme court a medical malpractice and 89 to authors the lawsuit by the regent of the university of california for 4 hundred and 74 thousand for a refunded of building. >> thank you supervisor sheehy. >> the university of california is a party to those two settlements until i took office as a supervisor i was employed by the ucsf research

now retired those settlements didn't effect the department of use of force the city attorney has advised me i don't have a conflict of interest i can vote on those items because i now receive a pension and retirement benefits i must make that disclose before the vote. >> thank you supervisor sheehy seeing no other names on the roster, madam clerk oh, colleagues, same house, same call? without objection those items pass unanimously. >> madam clerk. >> item if an ordinance for an infrastructure and revision fencing district on treasure island and to adopt an infrastructure financing plan. >> please call item 24. >> item 24 an ordinance to levy special tax within the city and county of san francisco for the community district number 2016 also on treasure island. >> colleagues, can we take

that same house, same call? without objection the ordinances are finally passed unanimously next. >> item 25 to appropriate one $.5 million from the general fund for the matrixes the office of civil engagement the human rights for the represents for pathways for immigration for social services in 2016-2017. >> same house, same call? without objection the ordinance finally passes unanimously next. >> item 26 to authorize the settlement for attorney fees from the consolidated lawsuits but i know i know and communication against the city for one-hundred $4 million whether the administrative code point a complies that the california construction and appropriated seven hundred accomplice from the wastewater balance for this purpose. >> roll call vote. >> supervisor farrell

supervisor fewer supervisor kim supervisor peskin supervisor ronen supervisor safai supervisor sheehy supervisor tang supervisor yee supervisor breed no supervisor cohen there are 10 i's and one no with supervisor president breed in the descent the ordinance finally passes. >> item 27 from the budget committee for a lease disposition and a 75 year ground lease with the regents ucsf for a research building with an initial basis rent of one explanation thousand to accept a $10 million in contribution upon the ground lease and make second

and others understanding. >> supervisor fewer thank you supervisor president breed i appreciate the vision shown and will be voting in support of this legislation i harbor the costs of parking on this site and am continuing to work with ucsf to justify this cause thank you. >> thank you supervisor fewer supervisor cohen thank you oh, good afternoon, everyone good to see a full chamber open this important item we'll be discussing a lease option in particular petitioning to how that garage lease has an impact on parking i have a currently amount of questions for the department of health i want to recognize the many hours people have put into this project the leadership team from ucsf it incredible and between the department of health is equally as incredible and want to

recognition matt h mta for their communications helping us understand the option when if comps to parking not an easy feat what we're trying to do to balance the priorities in particular important to keep in mind the fragile position that president trump has put us in serving the fragile populations with the general hospital i'm the supervisor for the district in the southeast and represent the general hospital and have been for this is my 7 year in service and have been watch in project 2 had my hand on the projects for 3 years more importantly the amount of money not only time but money for this particular structure for this facility facility that we have made an investment if i'm not mistaken one $.3 billion was

that the investment that's incredible and able to mania research institution that has the willingness and heart to continue to serve people that don't have access to health care that can't get up and could go to doctor that's what really has moved me to look at this project with such a critical eye i have questions i'm, raising on behalf of the constituents i represent those from the kansas state safe neighborhood organization first i'd like to direct them to ucsf if you could come up to the podium and director garcia but love for you to describe to me good to see

you on tuesday first, the outreach process where we are do i think that is a missed not onlyer we've not done our due diligence in the number of housing we'll held in and around the effected area can you talk a little bit about. >> sure thank you. i'm barb barbara the chancellor for ucsf and this project has been part of my life for 5 years since 2013 ucsf has partnered with the department of health and engaged with nearby neighbors and members of the community to share our vision for the proposed research and academic building to seek their input specifically telephone community mooefrg and 3 hearing with the eir the environmental impact report, 3 hearings recommended to the term sheet and the ground lease before you and health commission and the board of supervisors a hearing at the

historic preservation commission and 3 hearings recommended to the lbd a including today all told 22 meetings since 2013 thank you. >> thank you how did ucsf come up with the $10 million for the parking loss. >> as you may know the project has proposed to be built on the b c lot directly south of the old hospital it currently how does one and thirty parking spaces the durability e department of health and if i'm not mistaken mark the controller's office as intend $38,000 for parking spaces and 78 times one and thirty is approximately $10 million the $10 million was based on market assessment to replace each one of the parking

spaces. >> thank you one of the things i'm concerned with the loss of parking it how will patients get to and from the hospital are we pulling up parking from them. >> the one and thirty spaces that are on the b.c. lots are for patients parking during the construction of the building ucsf will remember work with the city one and thirty spaces from the existing garage so that during the construction of building and we will park those people at mission bay and shuttle them to the hospital during the construction of the research building that there will be one and thirty extra spaces in the garage for patients. >> it is incredible we're not having a negative impact making it difficult for people to get to their care now as you recall

in the budget committee a robust discussions around the tdm plan and is program i think any colleagues supervisor tang raised go legitimate concerns talk about the tdm program one that you're putting forward and two, discuss request me the other alternatives you considered that are considered by sfmta. >> i would on this part speak for ucsf i'll invited director garcia to speak her counted that is leading the discussions but in terms of use of force has one thing of the most aggressive tdm programs at our campus we have among the lowest drive alone relationships in the city and currently have a rate of our staff at the general hospital

that is low we're working with the department of health to work together because we realize our 2000 doctors and their 35 hundred staff people and in addition to the patients so specifically we're working ucsf to determine a new location for the shutter staff at ucsf we right hand hurlts shuttles and working with the city and closely with the department of health on a joint tdm to insure that whatever the city is doing we're augmenting and vice versa i'll invite director garcia to speak specifically to the discussions around the tdm. >> thank you, thank you very much i will call up director garcia and for the people wondering transportation demand management that is our overall long term to deal with the

congestion of the number of cars and shuttles and buses a lot of transit on the streets we're trying to be thoughtful in our policy decisions director barbara garcia. >> director barbara garcia. >> barbara french laid out the tdm program i have a straightforward question how real is that policeman. >> it is real we have the dollars that be 1 pointed 3 correct and $10 million to assist us with the parking issues the staff offsite construction and lalth at other offsite parking and release some of the parking in the parking lot to insure that patients go have access and have community assess and bicycle parking and ride share and assess for

diddles individuals so we have a robust system and working closely with the mta on the tdm plan. >> yesterday you gave us an e-mail with detailed about the lease division about the ground lease in it you call out the long term mitigation planning i love for you to talk a little bit about the potential revenue bond for the $20 million gap sincerely with any conversation with supervisor ronen we share a genuine concern a huge gap not convinced a bond measure will fund it gap can you talk a little bit about what you're thinking. >> absolutely and share that with our cfo we are looking at did revenues that will be produced by the extra spots of parking and rate increases to do

that that's why we haven't completed this process in understanding an issue of the revenue bond for this but staff will continue to work with mta to fill that gap i think mike can talk about that and the amount of that if you like i can ask him to come and share. >> great let's ask him. >> good afternoon, supervisors greg wagner cfo for the district through the incident to supervisor cohen we've been working with the mta in looking at the possibility of financing an expansion to the garage and one of the concepts we introduced as we went into that discussion was the expect of a revenue bond you'll essential take the criminality bonds

through the construction of garage and potentially the incremental rates from construction and did analysis with the controller's office to look at how much revenue that produces and essentially be using revenue that will not exist but for the actions we'll be taking with the new garage so this year several challenges we've not founder a way to make that pencil out we're still in conversations with mta but the challenges you have to look at the cost of issuing the debt for a project of that size and sure that none of the funds will deplete the revenues that go to munching operations we will not want to or ask the mta to consider it so all the issues we've been working through we're working with mta but not kind of gotten to a financial model that works for

financial we're exploring options with the mta for example, revenues that close a portion of that gap what other fund might we draw in through one time dollars at the department or future capital budget proimthsdz so we're working closely with mta and the controller's office on that at the same time as we're considering other options including expanded tdm programs and 0i6b9 parking than on campus and other mitigation measures. >> thank you, madam chair no other questions. >> thank you supervisor tang you. >> thank you. i want to reiterate how for this research is i stated in and, of course, thank to everyone that is here taken time to show your support and the importance of use of

force and thank you for all your hard work and ucsf has taken care of of any family i'm appreciative but i brought up in budget committee this is parking issue not to say that i believe or colleagues building that parking is more important than the work you're doing absolutely not anytime we're looking to agreements with this development in the city there is a job to scrutinize and make sure that everything is take into consideration so when i was looking at the development or the amendment before us for the new research facility it caught any by surprise that despite 3 years in negotiation between the city and ucsf we've not solved for the issue of parking management and the fact that the parking management plan was not going to be rirtsd until the close of escrow or the close of

construction so that didn't rest well with me the fact we'll solve this later on down the road the other thing i know the dwp and ucsf and sfmta you've been working for over two years on developing the options my worry we're another this juncture and not seen the final place so i wanted to follow up on a couple of questions brands some of the things that supervisor cohen asked about for example, we heard from bearing are french during the construction dpw will remove one and thirty spaces from the garage and shuttle the employees i want to know if that will be permanent ongoing beyond construction i mean obviously the depends on what other parking mitigations we can find but i wanted to know whether

this arrangement of shifting the one thirty of spaces into the garage will continue. >> beyond construction. >> barbara garcia thank you for that question just to be clear the fact the building is on one and thirty parking spaces we're losing we're planning on taking permitted individuals in the parking staff and moving them not offsite. >> that's an, an ongoing basis. >> at this point we'll keep that as long as possible. >> for you know hospitals are very you know we can't ask everyone to ride on transit objective for a hospital facility this size how many that concludes my remarks generally speaking would something like that require as a san francisco general. >> we've look at that clearly over 8 hundred and we have now 8

hundred and need 4 to 5 additional hundred that's the long term plan we have established when we built the garage with anticipation of growth so we hope to use that as part of overall plan for expansion of parking assess. >> mention of exploring some off-street parking i see john updyke. >> we have michigan and looking at the chronicle parking lot and have asked real estate to look at other location we know that will be difficult and continue to do that that is important to do that to provide the access and priority to patients in the particularly i'm not sure that real estate has options at this point.

>> john updyke director of real estate we've not execute them but having conversations with the dpw and those who have lots that are available that can serve as remote lots inside the city. >> thank you i mean, i will say again had gave me pause not to stop the project or delay the project but the fact when this agreement was presented to us before the board of supervisors you know there was talk about the idea of issuing the sfmta revenue bonds that was a highly unrealistic solution especially, as we heard any of the fund that would be issued to the revenue bond none what deplete the operations this is decided over two years and not seen a solid plan before us

that gave me concern and looking at the existing tdm measures as well as proposed new ones and in terms of a new measure i see that the expanding the shuttle services is on the list by adding to caltrain or the transbay transit terminal will this serve the needs of people on the shuttle that is predominantly i'm guessing employees of ucsf. >> first of all, let me understand we're - i recognition and acknowledge what you said about not having the parking lot done before the entire process of structure of trying to get the research center had is so important to get throw in a timely manner do that and more importantly mitigating the one and thirty slots i take the responsibility

we didn't have the full plans for the overall parking process that's what you've been working hard on the last year not to complete in that project i recognize that our people have other items to discuss regarding this issue. >> thank you, supervisor so for context on the property new tdm measures we've identified and where those have come from that's a process we've been engaged in a quite a while going what can into the early stages the research building and part of larger approach to the compass in addition to addressing those one and thirty spaces we come to this list through an outside transportation consulting firm come into advise 0 on and on us

on transportation demand management they did studies and modeling with transportation at the grace looked like we took that and it's been an expensive process with the sustainable streets group they've reviewed those we came to agreement on the highest priority measures we also came to agreement on target metrics for the long run efforts to reduce the number of drive along commutes to the campus a lot of analysis to the list of measures we presented here i think we're tdm is one of the things that there's never enough you're at a point couldn't spend another dollar but this list represents a collective analysis of what the best use of our tdm dollars are and where we can get leverage for the resources in

terms of reducing the drive along trips to the compass. >> thank you. i know that a lot of colleagues have other questions or comments i will reiterate that is not that i care more burn parking on this particular issue i think that is important that anytime we are undergoing development we have to fully vet those issues and first and foremost we're here to help the patients need to make sure that is ample opportunity for them to get into the hospital first place so i'll ilipi i'll leave it at that. >> until i took office as a supervisor i was employed by the research institute i'm retired this didn't involve the department of ucsf the city

attorney has advised me i don't have a encountering i receive a pension and retirement benefits through ucsf i must make that disclosure before i vote and then as to san francisco general you know for any community a speed up resonance in 1981 when we first started dye amy friend san francisco general stood up other places they couldn't take care of us the reagan administration wouldn't say the word aids until the latest 80s people said that was embodies will we were left in the halls to die but the com passion and

the san francisco general team was an example to the whole country and represented the values of this envy city it wasn't just san francisco general the whole city embraced us and stood with us the very first research money for hiv and aids was obtained by then speaker brown at the state assembly through the state and when i was diagnosed i didn't have insurance i still remember a saturday night on a jury in any e i didn't in the er at the san francisco general before i was accepted so i think as we talk about this we think about this - i think this is important to remember what that hospital means to those of us who are faced with

despite illnesses who don't have resources because this hospital has always been here for those of us in san francisco when we need it most. >> thank you supervisor sheehy supervisor yee. >> thank you supervisor president breed and i wanted to reiterate what supervisor tang had already said which is that and - she was very target in her views from me has nothing to do with with the merit of the new building itself and the people that the researchers or doctors will be housed in the new building i think that during the budget committee hearing i expressed the gratitude that

myself and actually just about everyone in san francisco has for the staff so this is really about looking at things comprehensively and making sure that note one part of the community is left out of this decision making here and in this case the parking again is has nothing to do with with the research team and so forth but i think is wise for us to look at things not only for the maid but for the long term so a couple of questions in calculating the per parking the per parking - costs i guess to build a parking space it seems like i don't have in in front of the any i did in any

head in front of the budget committee i believe that was based on $26 million divided by 3 hundred parking spaces and one and thirty is 10 million was my you mention rough estimate i don't know if it is true but that's making the assumption that we would build three hundred something but a lot of times when we work developers and in my own organization and trying to do the calculations they charge me something that he said well, this is a stand-alone we can't afford to build the rest of the slots how much to build one and thirty slots period and then because we may not able to get enough money to build that far

out so then the calculation becomes something else what is the true cost if so a stand-alone project to build one and thirty parking spaces if you think of in those terms then feels like the $10 million is not enough that's where i'm coming from you collect for a stand-alone project and add on top of if you're able to get more money that reduces per parking space costs to the addition but i think we're making a mistake to think that we might be able to get all the money to build the three hundred can someone answer that. >> barbara garcia disorderly conduct of health one comment i'll have my colleague talk

about the stand-alone we're getting the rent of the parking from the staff along with - so it is income coming in as part of 8 hundred plus slots to note additional dollars on top of the one and thirty slots given by ucsf and we have calculations on one and thirty slots if we build that loan and whether in the parking lot itself we'll see if we can answer that. >> thank you for the questions supervises there are a couple of different pieces to that we have looked at tried to look at a couple of different scenarios how to build on the existing site one of the issues that to build one and thirty spaces the way this site is laid out there

is a structure and then an open area adjacent to the structure it calls for expanding into the surface that unbuilt lot next to the existing structure if you build one and thirty spaces on that site you don't get a portion at savings and cost you see have the cost of do construction all of the resources and the equipment to do that and you're not going as high but you're not saving on the costs of mobilizing. >> that was my point. >> okay. >> so am i correct? if it is a stand-alone more than $10 million. >> that's correct. >> why were we not negotiating in that direction. >> well the concept here was that once your building on that site it is cost effective to

build up to the existing garage and not as cost effect for the one and thirty spaces that allows us to fill that building and never and add the additional spacious that what mitigate others spacious and patient parking spaces. >> then basically who saves the money is uc bus we're basically going to have to build up above it is a cost to us but if the mitigation is one and thirty let's make no mistake about it that cheaper for you we'll build on top of that. >> if we were to not have sufficient dollars to build up to the full space on this site that will potentially be more

cost effect to take the dollars and would have on alternative use for the dollars such as an offsite parking location and additional tdm rather than doing a partial build of the existing site. >> my question was we're giving uc is a break. >> sorry supervisor i'm not sure i understand it is definitely the cost of their proportion share is less than it will be to build one and thirty on the site that's correct but the calculated value is based on the proportion of our original plan. >> okay. this is where it gets a little - gets a little bit if'y to want to buy the argument your giving me so the

other issue looks at looks like weighing we'll go around in circles i think i brought this up the issue where this is an assumption that once the new building is built for the existing staff that the number of staff members will be about the same in moving to add a few more but pretty much essentially the same number of staff members and had a followup in question to that what is going to happen - basically adding space for people to do stuff the old space which would be vacated then is available for somewhere else and will be renovated and add staff what are

the changes to add another one thousand people. >> supervisor yee you're correct the plan is the staff that are currently in the the non- seismically reefltd part into the new research building in the current please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, the capital plan for the proposal for renovation of the building 80, 90 to future consolidate the rest of the campus staff into a seismically safe building you're correct there are additional buildings on campus that are not fully occupied their undetermined over the past year or so been working within an architectural firmer

to evaluate the uses of those buildings but we don't yet know what the uses will be so we've been looked at everything from those a potential site so for the housing, could be used for administrative space but not currently determined plan for how those buildings will be used to the extent there are additional people come into the campus in those buildings that will be transportation management issue we'll need to address at the time, we have a plan for the use of those buildings. >> okay. just wanted to go on record to make sure we have that take into consideration in the future the - i think one last question and i'll let it go which say, i think that was i forgot who mentioned that will the one and thirty spaces that

will be lost not lost but given up by the ucsf staff to be move forward to the mission bay and this would be during the time when there is construction then a question that was asked not answered what happens after construction does that mean that one and thirty staff members that are parking on mission bay will move back into the parking lot you have a net loss of one and thirty. >> supervisor yee he would like to add a point of information i can - >> excuse me - ms. french we are conducting a conversation with the board unless a supervisor specifically asks you a question. >> your identified unfortunately hold off please.

supervisor president breed i'd like to ask bearing are french if she can answer the question. >> >> thank you on behalf of ucsf i'm here to consensus if this is of hope that ucsf about remove one and thorough o thirty spaces out of the garage as a way a future way to alleviate the long-term parking issue. >> thank you very much for that comment and that alleviates a lot of my anxiety about the parking by a lot. >> thank you supervisor yee. >> supervisor safai. >> sorry. >> so the longer is supervisor yee spoke he finally got to any question i appreciate the last question that was going to be my question. >> i take it back. >> no. we're even as of

deploy what happened earlier so one and thirty parking spaces that will be temporarily move forward offsite and hearing from ms. french about the commitment under uflgz my worry if it is temporary and move forward back what is ucsf going to do with that sited i have a feeling a proposal in front of us we'll want to use the space and more parking will be displaced and listen just want to reiterate everything my colleagues have said we want to prioritize the research and providing of public health that is an important thing the ucsf i wanted to commend the doctors and the people and don't take this as minimizing i know that doctors and nurses and janitor work long hours and overtime overworked

and their sleep depersisted and for them to get think a shuttle and have to worried about findings their car in the late you know late of time evening not as safe as an environment those are things we don't know or think about when we are talking about the construction of brick-and-mortar that commitment if ucsf is important but i would like to say in our transportation plan that you you can see mitigation money didn't necessarily have to be used for long-term parking but to mitigate it in another way my priority to have the parking onsite authorized unit important for residents but important for the workers and asking them to get on a hurt and wait an additional thirty plus minutes to their day each way to assess they're parking is many ways an

inconvenience i want barbara are to talk about that anyone here from sfmta 3 wants to talk about their negotiations with the ucsf i think that is an important part is anyone here from sfmta. >> first barbara. >> mr. garcia i thought i saw ed reiskin walk in with you. >> again someone else. >> barbara garcia parking is a big issue supervisor and that's when we built the original parking lot built it for expansion and so, now we are having to work at the issue of how to expand 24 parking lot using revenue from the parking and as our cfo look to add additional work that's the work with mta no immediate solutions

but the long term solution to expand to the mobility of the parkmerced that exist there if is built for that purpose and measure that with the priorities of department but because this i said this before because ucsf research center came and we think that is so important and was going to take up parking this is a good time to work on the parking lot we got far on the mitigation of parking for the loss of park by this research center but couldn't get the deal done for the rest of the parking but in agreement with mta and working with them closely and will get a solution we need additional time for that. >> just to follow up on that through the chair can we ask for a specific time for dpw and sfmta to come back and present their plan to us.

>> yes. >> can we ask them to come back with the next thirty days. >> yes. and we have a representative from the mta please identify yourself. >> supervisor president breed victor from the sustainable streets and to follow up on what dreamforce we're working closely and in fact, for the last year collaborated on the transportation demand management program that was referenced earlier with what mta feels are good measures to try to address some of the parking demands issue today i'm available to answer any questions about the timing or other issues. >> thank you, ms. garcia. >> barbara garcia director of health we don't believe that thirty days will solve that we would like to come with updates and like for we're here for the research center and this parking

lot has now come up as a big issue we're committed for the long term issue as we believe a short-term solve for the research center but need more than thirty days we want to delay it. >> that was not suggested we delay this for 90 o thirty days but dpw and sfmta to report book on their progress to come up with a solution for the long term problem. >> we'll be happy to come back every thirty days. >> as long as there is real progress. >> and ms. garcia i want to relate reiterate it is important you've been your department along with mta working on that for sometime this is frustration this didn't happen you were asking for this particular lease

there are other colleagues that want to make comments if you can give us something more definitive in terms of what makes sense for a timeline to keep us apprised of the development because we separately from the lease want to get to something that doesn't result in the additional cost from the city in general so for 24 particular issue i think that is potentially the bottom line what we're trying to get it at. >> thank you supervisor president breed we offered to quarterly and i'll be happy to and we've been working on this for a long time it is as important part of infrastructure we need to resolve for the campus as a whole. >> i'll reserve my condominiums that is important inform sfmta to have more

thought put into this not to say they haven't as far but come back with dpw one thirty days to present the progress on the long term solution he hear louder on the short term solution with the off-street parking for solely for folks that you are working there but to have a long term solution we want to see more progress so if you all can work on that and come back and report on your progress through the chair i'd like to put that in. >> thank you so they're in agreement it appears. >> yes. thanks. >> supervisor ronen. >> yes. i wanted to start off by office buildinging many of my colleagues talking about how for this new building is i've violated the red brick building with the spaces where the incredible faculties is currently doing cutting-edge research they're no dough you need a new space i can't

emphasis enough how important your work is and how cutting-edge both the partnerships with dwp and ucsf and everything he go to general am blown away by the way that you are dedicated to patient center care and the thoughtfulness and unique nature of your work i wanted to mention that before any comments i am, however, the supervisor of the mission district that has been impacted by all the construction of the new general hospital so i'll concerned with about the impact on neighbors i think have been generous in having they're parking their streets, and their neighborhood disrupted so for quite a while so i'm concern there were all the unanswered

questions around parking arrested congested area of the city and no open parking in the area so i still am confused asking questions or my staff for the last couple of days who use the one and thirty spaces to director garcia in lot b.c. >> according to our staff patients the majority. >> their patients lots so that was not what my staff was told earlier. >> because the garage that question i offers asked you how many in the garage so b.c. parking lot is next to the old intrment. >> but removing the staff to the parking lot that freeze up more spaces for patients.

>> i see that makes a lot of sense in that can say doctor french thank you for making that offer today of permanently using those one and thirty spaces for ucsf faculty and staff that would be great so see that in you didn't go i writing i agree with supervisor safai the development in mission bay is constant and have assurance those spots will be used for those purposes in the long term will certainly make me feel better so i am considering making a motion to continue this one week to see that that commitment in writing and i also just want to mention that there has been talk about a bond as a permanent solution for the parking needs other than general

not something if i'm in office will be supportive of we have needs in the city for bonds whether affordable housing, the state of our streets, our parks e and that will never be a priority in terms of the limited amount of bond we can issue as an aide as we get the reports going forward i'd like to see the option that doesn't include a bond in 2022. >> supervisor ronen has made a motion to continue this to the meeting. >> i'm happy to hear from other colleagues before i make the motion. >> if you want to withdraw your motion. >> i didn't make a motion i said i was going to make a motion. >> thank you, supervisor supervisor peskin. >> i believe that director garcia was going to make a

response in response to supervisor ronen. >> barbara garcia we hear you and understand that bonds are really important for those types of items we're that's why we're working hard with the mta and also understand that prop a didn't give us space for paternity prioritization so we've been working with mta they've been understanding of the priorities of the patients parking we understand. >> thank you supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam president i want to reiterate some of the words that many of the supervisors before me said our relationship as a city and county of san francisco over this institution san francisco san francisco general with the university of california, san francisco is a century old and we consider the university of california our sister agency all be it the part of the city what

is before us today i don't think anybody dangerous with we all want to see this facility happen within our purview to make sure that while we're not impacting everyday muni service in fact, in 2007 when a previous board put a charter amendment it said to the extent the city by carmen chu the mta build h built the new parking garages can't impact the muffin on a day to day basis as far as dwp has have not figured out how to finance as far as the parking revenue will not pay for the bond need notness to fill the gap of a minimum of $22 million and potentially $10 million more

than that i want to say for the record no way, however, you solve 24 problem will will adversely impact munoz budget i'm not disrespect i worry about that ed reiskin or the chief financial officer were here in disrespect to line staff we have our largest agencies before us today that still has wrinkles but i will building that mr. reiskin should be here with that no more comments. >> thank you, supervisor kim. >> i'm going to add to the courthouse of the respect and a.d. permission for the san francisco general and the partnership in particular our doctors and nurses and all the

staff you really do amazing, amazing work and i'm impressed with the hospital and with the at least on this parking lot again, i think our questions are really to department of health and sfmta in terms of the go mitigation plan and so i guess my question is what you know if thirty days is not a reasonable timeframe i i can't imagine you've been working on it for 5 years and still don't have the tdm program in place what is the reasonable timeframe for the board to be able to get an we are to our questions today. >> barbara garcia disorderly conduct of health if you gave us 90 days we can get an understanding and clarity on our plans and that's what i had asked proposed at the last committee hearings. >> you said that we should understand this is a long terms

process i'm sorry you don't know i don't think so what is so calculated about that. >> the financing of it. >> the financing portion but not the actual plan. >> except for financing how much dollars into this if we go in that direction. >> is there a plan to finance. >> that's something we'll have to determine and again, if we - figure out how we can move our dollars if this is the necessary match for us so that's where we need to have more conversations. >> to be totally clear i don't want the department to come back in thirty days and not have anything if 90 days is the reasonable timeframes in 90 days this board can expect to the transportation demand management plan but not necessarily the financing