much bigger cushion than the policy minimum. >> okay. i would favor that. i would favor the 15%. just, you know, i've given this speech again about fund balance. i won't give it again, but one of the things that you said is in these certain times -- in these times, we have uncertain funding from particular sources, particularly the federal and state governments, all the more reason for us to go conservative with our balance. so that would be my preference for that. finally, on the taxi cabs, i'll suspect you'll hear this from others. it is a compelling point. i think we do need to look at ways in which we can alleviate the pain for our taxi drivers, and ways in which will also serve a policy goal. if there is a shortage of drivers right now, some sort of break on the a-card may be the way to go. if, you know, it's a situation where the k-medallions are

being turned back in or we got a disproportionate percentage, i'm not willing to say what the issue is, but it sounds like these are relativy smalleely s but i would appreciate solutions from staff on more things we could do to show the sort of understanding to that community of what we're going through. >> thank you, vice hachair heinicke? >> yes, director borden? >> yes, i would like to agree with all the points that director heinicke made. if students are going to school, they would be eligible under our program. i believe once you start a benefit, you can never take it away, so it would be one thing if we're talking about a long-term expenditure, but we're talking about a one time

expenditure. i just feel like we're in a position where we can't extend that. i also do believe that there is some value, especially if money is less of an object in your family, of having to pay for something. i used to serve on the board of the bayview ymca, and we always made families pay something for summer camps. some families paid $5 and gave their time, but they don't value something they get for free versus something they have to work for or pay for, so i understand that. if you can't afford to pay for it, that's a different analysis. i agree with the indexing, i agree with not spending too much of our fund balance because we just don't know what's going to happen with the economy and also at the federal level. i don't foresee that there'll be more dollars in the future, and we have certain ballot measures in so many other things, so i think the more

cautious approach is the best approach. and then, the other question i had was about the tsf, the transit sustainablity fee, and if we think the delay, was it when people paid because people can pay at different times in the planning cycle? why do we think there was such a discrepancy in terms of the fact that we thought there was some more $6 million expecting than what we were receiving? do we know what that was attributed to? >> you may recall when this was going through the board of supervisors, there was a lot of negotiation on grandfathering provisions on the tsf, and it passed with what i thought were somewhat generous grandfathering provisions, so there was some thought that perhaps because of all of the grandfathering that t-- i know

new applications into planning are down a little bit, so that might explain it, but it seems like in the end, the tsf is going to come in largely in line with expectations. >> and when do people pay in the life cycle of the projects? >> they pay when they pull their first -- >> okay. and then, the question was some people were trying to expand it to include medical facilities or something, and i couldn't remember if that ended up in the final version. >> so i -- i believe it was that there was a lot of negotiation. some was around health care facilities. nonprofits were exempt, and small businesses, small residential, affordable housing were the exemptions. i don't believe that the city ended up exempting the health care institutions. i don't remember exactly where that landed out.

i haven't -- there's recently been discussion to prove the increase on the amount of commercial, which would then change these calculations, but other than that, not heard any other -- other concerns with the current structure or proposals to change it. >> do you mean the increase on the special taxes or do you mean just the tsf? >> the ts fee, i think there's a proposal to increase it by $5 a square foot, the funds for commercial projects. whether that will move forward is a question that would presumably change our projections. >> maybe you can't speak to this because there's legislation potentially being introduced today related to tnc's. do you know if the intent was to earmark the funds to go to this program? >> so i didn't hear supervisor peskin's spoke to this, i

believe, last week at the ta commission, and i didn't hear his remarks. my understanding is that when he spoke about it, that he was speaking to it as a general tax, so not a special tax that would be dedicated to transportation. my understanding is that the introduction is going to be happening today. might be have already happened or happening as we speak, so we should be more soon. >> great. well maybe it would be dedicated to this. >> i would support that. >> thank you, director borden. director ramos? >> thank you. thank you so much, director reiskin for this hard work, and miss bode, i deeply appreciate all of the heavy lifting that you all are doing to make this all shake out, and it's -- it's something i'm very grateful for. i'll be eager to keep talking about it and figuring out what

direction we should go in. i'm going to agree with everything that i heard so far from my colleagues, reiterate colleague vice chair heinickes comments about the indexing. that's very real, and it's always a struggle if you don't do that. $15 would become under valued very quickly, i'm rather confident. i also want to appreciate mr. straus's recommendations around what you have in the report, around using the prop b funds for operations. i think that that's -- i suspect that there may be hesitation with that because it's a fluctuating number. it could at least go down. >> it fluctuates with population. >> yeah. that's something we should not hang our hat on with respect to

operations, but i think it's something we should look into, and i think if we can pull it off, it would be great. with respect to the free muni for youth, i, too, would love to be -- for those of us with means, we should pay because the system is still clearly not where it needs to be in terms of funding, and i would love for us to be able to get to a point where we subsidize transit as much as we subsidize cars. there was a comment made by a speaker earlier that bicyclists should pay their fair share. i think we should be thanking bicyclists every time we see one because they are actually saving us money by not creating wear and tear on the roads.

they're not costing us money for the additional sort of infrastructure that's required of cars, and even transit, for that matter, but i digress. i think that i would move love get to a place where we have free muni, but i heard the taxi driver's, and i think everybody's going to feel the pain when paradrivers and the ramp taxis become fewer and fewer. i would love to be able to do what we can for them in this budget. i don't expect we'd be able to do a whole lot more. i expect we're in a place where we failed at the ballot a couple of years back, and i think we're starting to feel it. maybe if -- if the free muni for youth would be a ballot proposal in the future, it

would be great to have voters vote on that. i would love a pension. there was an assumption made by mr. corngold that we get pensions, and i would encourage anybody never to make assumptions about what you see for anyone anywhere. i'm very concerned about my age, and when i heard anothere talk aboanothere -- another gentleman talking about seniors, i will be there in 20 years. i appreciate us being comprehensive in our thinking. once last little point i'll harp on is the term gypsy cab is derogatory. there's a whole people called gypsys, and they're persecuted in europe. they're regulated, as far as i'm concerned, and we should be doing more to regulate them. i don't know that we should be calling them cabs, but i would

encourage my colleagues to veer away from those kinds of terms. they are offensive to some. thank you very much. >> thank you director ramos. directors, anymore feedback, comments. >> question. >> oh, yes, director torres. >> i'm unfamiliar with this process. do we go -- do we go line by line and vote to remove invites that we don't like or vote to keep items that we do like? what is the process? >> what we try to do is use this kind of run up to the process to get the sense to the board so i can put together something that's going to be hopefully largely in sync with what you're seeking. hopefully next week, we will have a large ballot proposal,

whi. >> so on that point, what's your feeling about removing anything for the cab drivers. >> i would like to give you a comprehensive recommendation when we come back in two weeks, but it will show line by line here's what i'm proposing we subtract and add on the revenue side. in two weeks it would be great to get feedback on any of those that you like, don't like, so that when i come back on april 3rd, hopefully, it's a budget that reflects what you all want, but we do have a second meeting in april, in case you do want to make any changes to that meeting, which has happened in the past, and we can even schedule a third meeting. >> speaking of director ramos's concerns about reaching maturity, as we all will eventually. >> if we're lucky -- if i'm lucky. >> and i don't like people call gypsys out, because it was some other people that killed the

gypsys and the jews. lastly, i think the point you made was excellent in emergency ro room -- in terms of what kind of subsidies do we provide? do we make allowance for transportationly gifted? do we move toward no fee at all. >> for low and moderate income people with disabilities, they can ride muni for free. >> and chronologically gifted. >> and chronologically gifted. >> they're going to make that an item, madam chair. >> all right. if there are no otherment coulds, i'll add my voice to

what vice chair heinicke said, and i also agree that for those families who are luckily enough to be able to easily afford their children's muni passes, then let's go ahead and have them do that as their support to our system and their support to our friends who perhaps can't afford them, and no more gypsy term and we're chronologically lucky. >> we're gifted, too. >> all right. if there are no other comments, and director reiskin, if you have no other items for us. >> i do want to recognize our director of finance and technology, and the staff throughout the agency who worked to put all this together. it's a very large and complex budget, and she's not -- not only not gifted at operating powerpoint slides back and forward, but she's very gifted at all this work. i want to acknowledge her and all the folks that have worked

on this budget to date. >> excellent. excellent. it is. [ inaudible ] >> if people don't have computers at home, they can always go use the computers at the library, because i believe on wednesday, some of the libraries are open late. it comes back to us. when will we and the public get to see the actual numbers, the big file, the big budget book that people always love to pore over. >> so as director reiskin mentioned, we'll be before you with better numbers next time.

it won't be completely balanced, but close to balancing. you'll see the book right before the april 3rd meeting, sometimes the first of march to the third week of march. >> excellent. and if there are no other questions, we will move on. madam chair, item 13 is to take >> all right. madam chair, directors, the sfmta board of directors met in closed session to discuss in two cases. the board voted unanimously to approve the anderson and huang

cases. the next item would be to make a motion to disclose or not disclose. >> vote to disclose. all in favor? aye? all opposed? okay. we vote not to disclose. >> and madam chair, that concludes the items today. >> okay. thank you very much for spending your afternoon with us.

>> on december 28, 1912. san francisco mayor, sonny jim rolph stared into the crowds of those who have gathered. a moment in history. the birth of a publicly own

transit system. san francisco municipal railway. muni as it would become to be known. happy birthday, muni, here is to the next 100 years. the birth of muni had been a long-time coming. over the years the city was disjointed privately owned companies. horses and steam and electric-powered vehicles. creating a hodgepodge of transit options. none of them particularly satisfying to city residents. the city transit system like the city itself would have changes during the san francisco earthquake. the transition that will pursue from this aftermath would change