>> thank you, i'd love to have a cup of coffee some day. >> if we have questions we'll call you back up. any members of the public wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> supervisor yee: i'll make a positive recommendation to appoint conny ford to city college financial assistance fund oversight committee clerk of the board. >> supervisor safai: great. without objection, that item is moved forward. congratulations. congratulations.

>> i worked for the new york city mayor office in economic development. i teach economics now in the design mba program at california college of the arts. my children going to school. i learned about the eastern neighborhoods a couple of years ago given my children's school expansion. i spend a lot of time in this neighborhood.

it was my first exposure to san francisco. where i worked on project including the barclays center in downtown brick lynn, the revitalization of time square as well as lower manhattan after 9/11, i'm really interested in how the city of thinking of wholesale neighborhood in this space. over the couple of years, i've watched the population of the area has grown and changed and how new housing and retail has come in. as the space gets more active in the space of city life i'm interested to see how the city collectcollects input. we're building housing, as you probably know, but i also have my students out in the neighborhood much more than i used to. they interviewed hundreds of homeless residents in the fall. you know, from the perspective of students who spend a lot of time in this neighborhood, it's changing quite a bit.

i think we're currently the only middle school. as we look at the changing landscape of the neighborhood, we think about things over there in the context of crossing the streets, open space, parks, we are a school that's grounded in civic engagement. we think a lot about the ways in which our students go out in the community and serve the community. it's an interesting moment to me in san francisco and this is the most exciting neighborhood i kind of wish i lived here actually. i'm really excited to hear more about the 16th street plan. i would like the idea of the from' very much. i think the warriors are a very interesting opportunity. i'm interesting in traffic and street crossings and things like that. it's a really important neighborhood we get right as a city. so i'm delated to be here ask to present my qualifications to you guys today. >> what's the name of the school

your kids go to? >> live oak school. >> ok. >> great. >> any questions? supervisor sheehy has joined us. do you want to say anything? >> well. >> are you here for this item. >> she's my appointment? >> for both. >> you can say you came for that? i'm just kidding. >> i ran down. i met with sarah. her experience in new york and her background makes her extremely well qualified for this position. as a fellow parent, i think her commitment to kids in this city is important as we start to talk

about how we build out our neighborhoods. the perspective is powerful. >> great. thank you. thank you for joining us. >> any other members of the public wish to comment on this idea. public comment is closed. entertain a motion. supervisor stephanie. >> yes, i move -- now i'm going to get the move wrong. sarah bahat to c7 on the eastern neighborhoods citizen advisory board with recommendations. >> great. and that motion is seconded. congratulations and approved. >> thank you. call the next item. >> item number 6 is ordinance waving refunding investigations fees imposed for persons registered with the office of cannabis. >> great. unless there's any initial comments from committee members,

i'd like to hand it over to supervisor sheehy. i know he would like to say a few words first. >> sure. i want to recognize nicole elliott from the office of cannabis and what this legislation does is really try to rectify a consequence built into our regulations. we wanted to get everyone, this really relates more it's not about the retail operations. obviously for those of us, stefani you were lucky you were not here for cannabis legislation. >> we can make some amendments so she can participate. >> maybe some public comments, et cetera, et cetera. we wanted to bring the supply

chain into compliance with the city regulations, city rules and they largely were outside because there was no pathway for them to be functioning as a legal business. unlike the retail operations which were able to function legally as medical cannabis dispensaries. in doing that, they're all coming in seeking licenses and permits for the city, but especially where it goes to land use questions, they haven't been up to code so department of business was there and obviously because they weren't part of a process of getting legalized in the beginning, a lot of code violations are being discovered. now, given the way our rules were, cold violations including fines on top of fixing the

violations. this is something they cannot wave. we don't want these punitive fines to be a barrier or obstruction or deterrent to businesses coming into the legal market and complying with all of our rules and regulations. so what this legislation does is wave those fines and penalties so that we can continue our work, which i get, i salute director elliott in what must be unimaginably complicated and difficult work getting all these businesses into compliance. we would like to -- what this does is removes the fines and penalties for these businesses as we get them into the legal -- appropriate legal framework and in compliance with the rules and regulations in the city and

county. >> we thought it was important enough to pull it out of another committee and get it on here. >> thank you. >> you are welcome. >> we felt like that was a necessary move essentially given the fact that the whole conversation, as you've said, when we were drafting the legislation, was to pull people out of the woodwork for lack of a better word and we want to give them the incentive to come forward and be legalized businesses and that process we don't want to penalize them to come forward. so i see a great value in this and i think the trade off is a small amount in terms of what we get in return because director elliott were talk about bringing them out of the shadows allows us to then create revenue for the city and job opportunities and work with them to expand their businesses. so, director elliott, did you want to speak on that?

>> supervisors, thank you for having me here today and again, thank you for the efforts made to move this out of another committee into this committee so we can move it forward more quickly. as you mentioned, every day these dollars don't go reimbursed to these operators is a day that they have less money to meet compliance we're asking them to meet. registration process was meant to serve as an amnesty process for operators to start working with the city towards compliance and ensuring that we see these operators move towards compliance and providing a fair pathway for them to do that is the only way that we can be successful in creating i legal market place in san francisco and reducing the unregulated market place that previously existed through no quality of their own.

it is in the best interest to do this so i want to thank you guys for considering this today. i want to give a shout out to the many inspectors who have participated in this process and supervisor sheehy, these are fees being imposed by operators by the department of building inspection and by their inspectors for work done without a permit and so they do not have the authority to not issue these penalties so this ordinance would give them that authority. we're also being joined by inspectors from the department of public-health, the fire department and my office. up to 12 inspectors are visiting these sites on a daily basis. it's been an enormous undertaking and proven to be helpful in preventing life safety issues we're seeing at some of these operators' locations and in starting to move them towards compliance in a fairway. with that, i just want to state that this ordinance was heard by the building inspection

commission last week and unanimously supported by the commission so they are also in favor of waving these penalties. with that i'm happy to answer questions you may have. >> i think we'll call back up. i have a series of about 50 questions -- >> i'm prepared. [laughter] any members of the public wish to comment on this item. seeing none. public comments closed. any last words supervisor sheehy before we make a motion? >> i just wanted to thank you and the committee for considering this and for taking it on to expedite it. >> you are welcome. >> entertain a motion on this item. >> norman. supervisor yee. >> i'll make a motion. >> to cause and recommendation to the full board. >> i think that's all we need. >> does she want it as a

committee. expedited. >> no, no. this is good. positive recommendation. >> ok. thank you. do we need to -- that's a good question. do we need to send thought as a committee report to go? >> no. >> it will make the next report. >> ok, great. >> ok. >> so the motion is to send it with a positive recommendation. secondedwithout objection that item is ordered. congratulations. any other matters before us today? >> that concludes our business for today. >> we are adjourned, thank you.

>> supervisor peskin: good morning welcome to the transportation authority meeting for today february 27th. mr. clerk, if you could call the role. >> clerk: (calling roll)

we have quorum. >> supervisor peskin: we have a motion to excuse commissioner safai made by commissioner breed and seconded by commissioner stephanie. we'll take that without objectjectiobjec objection. i'm going to talk about two issues we have been discussing here at the ta with increasing frequency, transportation network companies and driverless vehicles which have significant overlap. at the january meeting, we had a presentation of our tnc regulatory landscape study that staff outlined the regulatory arrangements.

one of the findings of the report, the regulatory fees, tnc like uber and lyft pay to the commissions was a subject of an action proposing the rate on the state agenda a week later. uber and lyft wanted fees reduced even though there was no data to justify the decrease. the san francisco tna and i wrote opposition letters why we believe it is another give-away to companies unwilling to work with local governments. despite the ta, los angeles's department of transportation, all giving strong testimony at the february puc meeting, the state puc acted to lower them from 0.33 to 0.25%. while we managed to prevent them from reducing them lower to the original staff recommendation

0.2%, we remain disappointed and determined to pursue the right sizing of fees and enforcement given the congestion and public safety conflicts we see on the streets. if the cupc is unable to perform the regulatory sector, we urge them to give it to locals like san francisco who will. the message is clear, let us manage our public streets for the public good. in a related development, i was pleased to see the city attorney's announcement that lyft has agreed to allow transportation experts such as transportation authority staff to look at the data under the agreed to protective order rules. it's long overdue. i hope uber will join soon as well. for far too long our constituents have dealt with congested streets, cyclist

issues, double parking and muni stops. coupled with lack of adequate background checks and reporting by tnc's, discriminatory pick up practices, the regulatory system has clearly failed the public. i'm hopeful the data can at least scale back the number of vehicles on city streets. as for driverless cars, you all saw the california department of motor vehicles announced the final regulations they have developed for driverless vehicles. the dmv will give permits for testing and deployment in april. subject to permit conditions, including the requirement to coordinate with locals on law enforcement interaction plans. while this technology could lead to less cars overtime, the future impacts are uncertain. the permit process appears to be dominated by self-certification

procedures, as a result and based on the past, we are concerned that local coordination and input be taken seriously and not just be a check the box exercise. we must also ensure that the dmv and california highway patrol are equip with the necessary resources to play their effective role and hold them accountable. i'm glad we're setting up meetings with first responders to get ahead of the operational issues that will inevitably arise. questions must be answered quickly, like how do you pull over an autonomous vehicle. who will be given access to the black box in the event of crash. how do you report collisions and who is accountable. additional emerging technology will pop up, including the latest, private stationless motor rised scooters. i'm prepared to introduce

division one to create a permit requirement as we have for stationless bicycles. for any company aiming to place these in the public right of way. and to create conditions for that permit to minimize potential harm to the public. we have heard other cities where the scooters have dropped. in santa monica it has had hundreds of criminal stops. they have raised over $$15 million and expanded to los angeles and san diego. it is important for us to get ahead of this so they're not blocking our downtown sidewalks and so we can be sure they come with a plan to distribute them in communities of need. i look forward to further discussions about how to anticipate the emerging

technologies going forward. in january the bay area toll authority voted to place regional measure three, the traffic relief plan on the ballot for 99 days from today. this proposal to increase the tolls on the seven various state owned bridges except for the golden gate bridge by different fees. the revenues would be used to fund transportation projects and programs that aleave congestion in the bridge corridors as detailed in senate bill 595, consistent with requirements, the board of supervisors, our board of supervisors passed the resolution to put it on the ballot here in san francisco. all the other bay area counties are expected to take similar actions by the end of the week. including 4.45 billion for transportation capital across the region, including san francisco priorities, half a

billion for new bart cars, 325 million for downtown extension, muni vehicles and facilities and includes 60 million per year to help support regional bus and transit operations. finally colleagues, in an effort to truly get at the widening gap in our transportation task force, i will be introducing a tnc tax at the board of supervisors this afternoon to finally ensure that a sector that had profound impact on our public streets starts paying their fair share. other sectors contribute to the general operating budget of the city and need for revenue to manage local issues has never been greater. it is an exercise in equity and i'm looking forward to gain your support. that concludes the chair's remarks. >> clerk: public comment? >> supervisor peskin: seeing none, public comment is closed.

next item please. >> clerk: executive director report, information item. >> good morning commissioners. my report is before you and pleased to follow the chair's excellent remark, thank you for placing it on the ballot here in san francisco. we're excited to see if the voters agree that these are critical transportation projects to help prepare us for the future. staying at the state level for a moment, the dmv work that the chair mentioned, we will continue to work under the group with their own enforcement groups as well as pd and fire and california highway patrol and members of industry i believe who we need at the table to cooperate in developing the law enforcement interaction plans. turning to another funding topic. senate bill one, i wanted to report that january was a busy month for a number of the agencies around bay area,

seeking sb-1 funds, this is a set of programs that was passed -- by the funding package last year that includes congestion relief and local partnership program and other funds. we put forward mission bay ferry landing, jefferson street and better market street projects. the largest of the pots is the transit and inner city rail program. we saw $10.9 billion in need as expressed through applications for the pot. we're going to continue to advocate for the vehicles and extension funds for downtown to meet current and future needs. we want to thank at the state level, david shoe, he introduced a spot bill for us earlier in february in the 101, to seek

administration for the potential lanes should the body decide to pursue in the future. this is for the totalling authority, similar to what was included in sb-595 for it to be extended. no decision has been made but the bill helps us to be a part of that policy conversation, should those two other counties continue to make progress on the managed lanes in san mataeo and other aspects in this corridor. and i wanted to talk about the regional agencies kick off of the futures planning effort at m.p.c. you'll see later on the agenda, our own connect sf update that corresponds with the regional

effort. every four years our agencies try to look forward into the future and take land use and technology and other types of demographic type forecasts and create a long range plan to help us navigate all the known and unknown trends. this could include manmade disasters, economic booms and busts and even things such as political volatility around revenues and funds for transportation. i look forward to the presentation later today and your feedback on the work. this month they are beginning outreach on their efforts, futures project, an 18 month series of events looking at the trends and trying to prepare the region to navigate them as well as using that as a platform to identify projects and investment priorities. we'll continue to work with them and together with the four

agencies you'll hear about later. the outreach is robust, conducted in english, spanish and chinese. there will be pop-ups, state holder feedback will be possible through multiple means, including text surveys and a like. we'll keep you updated as it unfolds. turning to local, the lifeline call for projects is now out. i want to thank staff for getting this out. this is the source for low income residence and addresses gaps and barriers through equity, analysis and other needs assessments. for this cycle we'll prioritize projects that support communities of concern. since this is one of the few funding sources we can use for the purpose. transit operators are the only recipients and applications are due march 23rd. for more information go to

sfcta.org or contact april smith the project manager. we have other outreach, including design outreach workshops. this fast evolving era with technology and policy moving at rapid pace, it's important to stay connected and keep the dialogue up. i they we have made clear what our hopes and expectations are and that's a good way to engage with industry partners and other agencies grappling with the complexity of new technologies and hopefully the benefits they bring to our city. the muni equity strategy is underway. you have seen that through notifications through your offices and online and other outreach that mta has been doing. this is the final phase of the 2018 service equity strategy. this began in 2013 actually under a prior county-wide plan

and mta's own strategic plan, focusing on eight equity neighborhoods and making sure we close gaps and improve conditions for those most dependant on public transportation. mta has administered general surveys and received quite a few responses and will recommend to their board and plan to come to our board as well to brief you all and the public through our board. please stand by...

and set up any debt needed and update the debt strategy from the cash flow needed, for the larger projects. over the next two months, we'll reach out to your offices to schedule briefings with you and your staff about this fro ses and how you would like to weigh in on the use of these sales tax funds over the next five years, we look forward to that work as well. turning to project delivery, thank the deputy for capital project and his team, peer review of the technical questions related to the cal

train extension projects, question of two versus three tracks for that portion that leads up to the station itself as requested by chair peskin. so we have convened a host of a strong panel of experts, as well as stakeholders from multiple agencies, cal train itself, high speed rail, planning department and other land owners in the area to try and sort through multiple reports that had analyzed these questions and so good news is, we plan to bring a report back to you in march that reflects the consensus that we are hearing, i don't want to preempt that big news but we are making really great progress and consensus emerging, so we look forward to bringing that in march. thank the participants for their efforts input and contributions to the collaborative process.

finally, thank our finance and admin team, for the workshop. this is our disadvantaged business enterprise and our local business enterprise outreach workshop to ensure all of our contracting is as inclusive as possible. on february 22nd, hosted a workshop with approximately 60, 70 attendees and brought together the prime consultants as well as the subcontractors to learn how they may connect with one another and what's coming up at the transportation authority and the treasure island management agency work program. and appreciate san francisco public works, m.t.a., m.t.c., and cal trans as well. so great feedback and we look forward to doing these on a regular basis. thank you very much. >> chairman peskin: any questions, commissioner kim. >> supervisor kim: when you talked about the lifeline program and the application

opening, could you tell the commission some of the priorities for sfcta for the grant funding for the lifeline? >> thank you very much, commissioner kim. reflecting on what i'm aware of, not as aware of all the needs. i know the sfmta in particular has an interest in closing some equity gaps from the equity strategy that they are conducting right now. they want to close late night service gaps as well, some of the owl network around town. in the past they have used the funds to do work in those types of corridors that serve, for example, the overnight market and s.f.o. to city corridor. let me let anna maybe add to that. >> thank you. to your question, commissioner tang. this has been a very erratic -- >> commissioner tang is not here. >> i'm sorry, commissioners kim.

i was thinking i need to type an email to commissioner tang. >> this has been a relatively erratic funding source, this is the smallest pot of funds we have had available to program to projects, and one of the very few funding sources we can program to operating projects. so, we have prioritized funding projects that provide access to and in communities of concern and she highlighted some of the platforms that we expect projects to spring from. so -- that's -- >> mainly around filling gap services in certain neighborhoods that are prioritized as he can with it at this neighborhoods, is that what i'm hearing? >> we are not sure -- prior equity strategy identified some gaps, so i would assume they are in the top priority. we are not privy to all their analysis. >> i was asking for -- i know

the applications have not gone in yet, wondering what we are prioritizing as the lifeline funds. >> sponsors are the only ones eligible, so we do expect to receive most of them from sfmta. >> and not part of your report, but very interested in the regional discount pass that m.t.c. is studying and curious what they are pushing or advocating for with our regional partners. i think it's an incredible opportunity for us to provide our low income transit riders a pass that would work regionally through multiple operators and provide more smooth transition. we know that many low income riders depend on multiple operators to get to work, so i would like to hear the work and what we are advocating for on behalf of the city in that program. >> we'll be happy to bring that back to you, thank you for your

leadership at m.t.c. on that question. as we know here in san francisco, muni m.t.a. has a very good discount program, and coming in to create the means-based fare program. so that is being worked out. happy to report back next month. >> right, thank you. >> chairman peskin: any members of the public who would like to offer public comment on the executive director's report? seeing none, public comment is closed. could you please read the consent agenda. >> items 4-8, consent agenda, 5-8 approved at the board meeting and considered for final approval. remaining items are considered routine. staff is not planning to present on the items but prepared to present if desired. if a member objects, any of the consent items may be removed and considered separately. >> thank you. any public comment on item number four, the february 13,

2018, minutes, seeing none. public comment is closed. move to move the consent agenda, a roll call, please. [roll call vote taken] we have final approval. >> chairman peskin: next item please. >> clerk: nine, update on the quint street-jerrold road project, information item. >> mr. cordoba. or miss tang. >> hello, just by way of introduction of this item through the chair, just wanted to provide some background to the board. some of you may recall this project, some may not.

the quint jerrold connector road is a larger effort to bring a replacement cal train station to the bayview. following the closure of paul avenue, one of the lower ridership cal train stations closed in the early 2000s. the community came together and had a series of meetings for alternative station and landed near oakdale and third, the oakdale cal train station site. it was not clear that we could build a project there, that it would fit, that the ridership would work out, but in the sales tax plan, we were able to initiate feasibility studies that did confirm a conforming cal train station would here, and the need for access to be

preserved and maintained into the south bay with the job opportunities down the peninsula. so, we endeavored to develop this station area concept with the community, with cal train and local agencies, and the bridges in the vicinity of the site needed to be replaced, 100 years old, quint bridge and jerrold bridge needed to be replaced, and what design we would choose to maintain not only the safety of the bridge area but potential for the future station. i wanted to provide that backdrop at the time in 2012, we decided this body decided to use 20 million out of the available $25 million that cal train had for a berm, berm design was going to be affordable as well as wide enough to accommodate a future potential platform for the station, however, the tradeoff was it would close access on quint street. in recognition of the impact of

that, we identified a potential mitigation to create connector road, a detour road to connect motorists around this area through the jerrold underpass and preserved the circulation in the area. now, at the time we knew there were risks to that work because this quint connector road parcel was owned by the u.p.r.r. railway, and it's a difficult endeav endeavor to do, working with the railway, and we did work hard on the plans. now the point many years later the sale of that parcel has actually been made to a private entity and eric cordoba will pick the story up from there. >> good morning, commissioners. we have been leading and coordinating the efforts with the real estate division to try to obtain and purchase the land in question. let's talk about the road itself. two-lane connector, very simple,

lighting, landscaping and sidewalk that we are planning to ultimately construct. a little more history here. we did pursue and the city planning department prepared a mitigated negative declaration in august of 2015. there were engineering and right-of-way funds allocated in september of 2015 to the tune of over $2 million. conceptual design completed in fall of 2016 and as executive director chang indicated, negotiations with u.p. railway over three plus years of trying to negotiate to purchase the land, unbe known to us, and to the real estate division, they basically sold it to a private entity 1880 jerrold avenue, manager partner by the name of trans metro, who the city knows and has a good working relationship, that was done in the summer 2017. also in that regard, they

actually very quickly set up a concrete plant which is in violation d.b.i. issued a notice in that regard, so that's been stopped. and since then, though, a lot of activity in terms of discussion with the private report owner. and they have indicated in essence a willingness to allow us to start the environmental testing we need to as required per the environmental document, so we are pursuing that right now. we are going ahead and working with our consultants to go ahead and come up with the planning and get them out there to perform the appropriate archaeological testing, as well as hazardous materials testing. survey crews out there, spot checks on utilities, due diligence for the engineering work we need to go ahead and this will inform the appraisal. ordered an appraisal. so moving positively in that regard.

so, even though the bad news is u.p. railroad sold it but ultimately we have an entity we are working with a little more collaboratively in that regard. so, what lies ahead in terms of future abbing -- activities, come up with an appraisal, that will inform the overall cost in the summer of this year and hopefully negotiate a land purchase by the fall. we anticipate having to come back here in that regard to go ahead and give you an update once we have an appraise al. as part of that, that will also -- the costs have gone up, it's been a few years, i think the challenge here is pursue the funding and plan later this year and come back with implementation plan. so that completes my update on the project.

>> chairman peskin: thank you, and thank you for the briefing you and other staff gave me earlier. is there any questions or comments from commissioners? are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this informational item? please come forward. >> good morning, commissioners. chris wadling, district ten representative of the c.a.c. i have been involved in this project since it began and our community when miss chang came out to speak to us. and this is really the reason why i asked to join the c.a.c. while i'm encouraged by the comments, i will take it i'll believe it when i see it approach to this. we were told despite built as a transportation company, trans

metro is more a company that is described as having a lot of real estate holdings that also has a couple of shuttle busses. so, this is a company that the city knows and i hope we can figure out a way to get the land back from them without too much extra money. the land was cost a little over a million dollars, and the road roughly 5 million, that was in the budget, it's looking like it's going to be maybe 3 to 4 times that now, the numbers we were given at the last c.a.c. meeting. also asked mr. cordoba to work with the p.u.c. and the c.a.c. for upcoming land use and projects to impact all parts of the bayview. roads closed for the next ten years off and on and access to, and within and out of our

community is severely impacted by all these projects and we don't have a lot of major roots, so bay shore and 3rd street are the only ways to get out of the bayview and getting around some places is becoming quite difficult. so, i appreciate you taking the time to listen to this, and look forward to further on this. thank you. >> chairman peskin: and your chairperson has his eyes on this matter. is there any other member of the public who would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed and we will file that item. next item, please. >> clerk: update on the connect sf vision document, this is an information. >> chairman peskin: miss mickel. commissioner tang's favorite subject.

>> good morning, chair peskin and commissioners, linda mecel, i'm joined with doug johnson from the planning department also involved in the multi-agency effort. put this into presentation mode, excuse me. ok. so connect sf is a multi-agency partnership to build effective and equitable sustainable transportation system for san francisco's future. and the purpose is to align our agencies through a ground up process to identify our long-term transportation projects and policies. the program has three-phases, the first of which is a 50-year vision. that is creating goals and objectives that will guide phases 2 and 3 of the process. phase 2 is about the projects and policies, we need to achieve

the vision, and phase 3 is about the policy and action oriented documents to codify the projects and policies. update to the county-wide transportation plan and update to the element of the general plan. the project includes three streams of outreach. yellow is the public, the green is the futures task force and the blue is the connect sf multi-agency staff, and we are in the first big bubble there, the long range vision and we will work through the three streams through 2021 when we finish up our, the transportation element update and the county-wide transportation plan. so, we -- since 2016, we have conducted a lot of outreach on

this project. we have gone out and had 125 focus group participants, over 5300 survey respondents, and went to over 60 organizations to speak directly with them, and we definitely want to know if there is any other people that we should be talking to, so please let us know. the issues that are guiding this process, we are calling the drivers of change. these include both givens, as well as uncertainties and those are things that we are not sure what trajectory those issues will take. we are leveraging the work of our inner agency working groups that are looking at topics like emerging mobility, climate change resiliency and tilly mentioned earlier, future trends or drivers of change. this visioning process involved

exploring different plausible futures and the inherent tradeoffs between those different futures. and this slide shows the overwhelming support for the building bridges scenario. it was identified by both the public, the futures task force, as well as the focus groups. so our vision includes five goal areas. those are equity, economic vitality, environmental sustainability, safety and liveability, and a fifth goal added as a result result of engagement called accountability and engagement. and i will ask you to refer to the fact sheet online at connectsf.org for more information. but i will say the three main points, high growth focus on

equity, and strong civic engagement and government alignment. so what's next? we are already starting our phase 2 which involves looking at our transportation needs, figuring out what our needs will be to reach the vision, and then we will look at transit corridor study and streets and freeway study we will figure out the projects and policies needed to get to the vision. and then later we will go into phase 3, which includes again our policy and action-oriented documents, the san francisco county-wide transportation plan, otherwise known as sftp2050, and transportation element update. with that, i'm happy to take any questions. >> chairman peskin: any questions from commissioners?

seeing none, i have one speaker card from mr. ted olson. please come forward. >> my name is ted olson, third generation san franciscan, and sit on the task force of connectsf, and chairman of the transbay joint powers authority for the transit center. so, i'm very interested in this proposal. i would say a couple of things to all of you that number one, it's consistent with and coordinated with vision 0. so that i think is extremely important. number two, we need to continually, even though this is

planned for 50 years, we need to continue to look at it and that's in part of the plan, certainly at least every five years, we need to have an extension of cal high speed rail across the bay to stockton. also planning another tube for bart. senator feinstein has talked of another bridge across the bay. so, all of these things will have to play into the plan because the plan is considering this as a regional asset and a regional center. beyond that, of course, we have things like sea level rise and other things. so, it is a very forward-looking plan, and it includes additional focus as years go on. thank you. >> chairman peskin: thank you for your testimony mr. olson and your engagement. any other members of the public who would like to testify on this item? seeing none, public comment is

closed. thank you for that update. are there any introduction of new items, colleagues? seeing none, is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. and we are adjourned.

the meeting will come to order. welcome to the february 28, 2018 regular meeting of the public safety and neighborhood services committee. i'm supervisor jeff sheehy, chair of the committee, to my right is supervisor ronen and to my left is supervisor ronen and i would like to thank sf gov to have been for staffing the meeting. mr. clerk, any announcements? >> yes, thank you. please make sure to silence all cell on