>> supervisor peskin: good morning and welcome to the san francisco transportation authority for today tuesday, june 12, 2018. our clerk is mr. abililberto

quintanilla. please call the roll. [roll call] >> clerk: we have quorum. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. co we please have the c.a.c. report. good morninr. wadley. >> good morning, commissioners. >> supervisor peskin: good to be back. nice to see you. >>ness. chair larson and the backs are out today, so i'm filling in. items 7, 8, and 9 were passed without comment by the c.a.c. item 6 on your agenda, allocation of nearly $10 million in prop k funds, i had asked for equity strategy tree

planting. locations in the bayview specalld bgetting trees next year. chair larson also asked about the twin peaks tunnel track way improvement, and in particular, the outreach done as he being a regular rider had not heard about anything going on there until he saw it on the c.a.c. agenda. staff had assured him they had done significant outreach, and there would be ambassadors on hand during the closure. one thing you'll see in the nutes, we had a significantly long discussion and q&a are sf mta director of transportation edskidohn haley. we had been inviting them for severalmonths, maybe years, to speak before us. i think this was the first time they had ever come before our body. our questions were limit today

operations performance, and the two directors were asked a wide range of questions about the l.r.v.'s, continued perceptions, work rules, ride share impact does on public transit and bs sy and paratransit. given the amount of funds that pass through the sf mta and sfcta to the mta and other agencies, the c.f.c. has asked that directors of all agencies try to take some time out and come to the c.a.c. annually and share a report. that concludes my report. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. is there any comment for mr. walling. seeing none, public comment is closed. you may call item 3. >> clerk: approve theutes of the may 20, 2018 minutes. >> supervisor peskin: public

comment on minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes? approved by tang, seconded by yee. call the roll on the minutes. [roll call] >> clerk: we haveapproval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: item 4, appoint one member to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> supervisor peskin: mr. pickford. >> good morning. the citizens advise i don remembery committee is a board with each member filling a two year term. to qualify for appointment to the c.a.c. applicant does must be san francisco residents and must appear before the board at least once to speak to their interest and qualifications. attachment two in the packet

has a list of applicants you may choose from. the vacancy under consideration today is due to the withdrawal of bradley weedme due to missing four meetings, and with that, i can take any questions. >> supervisor peskin: are there any questions? seeing none, are there any applicants for this vacant position. miss zach, good morning. >> good morning. thank you so much for having me. my name is rachel zach. i applied to be on the c.a.c. i live at dave and powell. i'm very interested in transportation. i've been working on congestion management for a very long time, and i think it would just be a general honor to help be the eyes and ears for the t.i.a. working on community issues and transportation, so

thanks. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, miss zach. i think you are vastly under selling your credentials in so r youave a b.a. in urban studiesnd do mobility work at w.s.p., and as a matter of fact were involved in some data collection and research for the t.a. but before i suggest to my colleagues that we put you on the c.a.c., are there any other individuals here who are applicants for thec.a.c.? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. colleagues, if you look at page number 99 in your packet, you will see that rachel zach will be an incredible addition to

the c.a.c., and i am delighted that she is interested in serving. and if there is a motion to put her on the c.a.c., made by commissioner ronen, secondeyd b commissioner yee, colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: congratulations, and thank you for your service in advance. mr. quintanilla, next item, please. >> clerk: item 5. state and federal legislation item. this is an action item. >> supervisor peskin: mr. watts, you are in the middle of the session. thank you. >> thank you for having me here, commissioners. the first item i want to speak on is two bills before you for recommendation. the recommendation is support for sb 1014 by senator skinner. this bill is a measure that would direct the p.u.c. to conduct a clean miles standard or develop a clean miles

standard. >> supervisor peskin: zero emissions vehicles for people who don't know. >> my apologies. the bill had been under watch under previous action by the -- by the- - by the commission, by the authority, and we're now recommending support. there was an element that was in there that has been removed that dealt with an inner program. it's now just a pure clean miles standard that would be applied by the p.u.c. the second is sb 1328 by senator bell. this bill would extend the road user charge advisory commission, t.a.c. the pilot program that was conducted by the t.a.c. pretty much showed or demonstrated that there is a feasible approach to delivering road user charge and now the senator would like to extend the life of the advisory commission by four years to have more

exhaustive analytical data developed to see if really there is a current suitable alternative to the current state gas tax, and that bill was approved yesterday by the assembly transportation committee and is on its way to the appropriations committee. a note in passing on the statewide elections, one measure that had been watched by transportation agencies and advocates around the state was proposition 69, the lockbox for the new elements of sb 1. that passed at 81%, so that was very -- very accommodating effort to get that thing through the -- and approved. on a disappointing note, however, state senator newman who was one of the folks who helped pass sb 1 was recalled, and under the recall rules, there was also a concurrent election, and the former assembly member that had represented the area was

elected. assembly member ling ling chang, and she's serving office now. finally, on the state bu, the trsportation component of the state budget which i've focused on this year has been not very challenging this yea they're -- basically, the administration offered new funding provided by sb 1 in the form of appropriations, and there were not very many controversial items in the transportation area. i will say, however, the cap-and-trade program, the greenhouse gas reduction fund component of cap-and-trade, they were unable to reach an agreement on how to expend those funds, and sohey t put that over until later this summer. that i conclude my report. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. are there any questions for mr. watts? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is

closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: colleagues, does somebody want to move the resolution adoptin the aforementioned on sb 13 and sb 1328, there's a motion on that, secomiss bner tang? colleagues, can we take that same house, same call. item is adopted. next item, please. [agenda item read] >> supervisor peskin: all right. miss laporte. >> first request before you today is for $5.3 million in prop k transportation sales tax funds to complete the funding plan for the twin peaks tunnel track railroad improvement projects. this ia pro th will

enhance light rail safety and efficiency. it'll reduce maintenance for this 100-year-old tunnel. so the transportation authority previously allocated just over $4 million to the project in july of 2016, with a commitment toll an anal set of funds of 3.6 million. the cost has increased of the project, so the funding request is for more than the commitment to allocate as originally proposed. the cost increase is to cover additional scope. there have been crack repairs that have been slated for improvements originally there was only 250 feet of track repairs. now there's two miles of track repairs, replacing the track system between eureka and castro, so there are a host of additional elements as well as an intensive scope project that will require a 60 day shutdown of the tunnel that is scheduled from june 25 to august 24.

for folks watching at home, sfmta.com/twinwaekztunnel project, there is a lot of information about the bus schedules that will be offered. the project is slated for substantial completion by october 31 of this year. the next request is from the department of public works. this is for just under i 1 million. these are for improvements to increase safety at the work site and also it's increasing efficiency of street repair and cleaning up work that public works performs daily. next request, also something that we see every year, this is for public sidewalk and curb repair. in the past, the public works would request these primarily around street trees where the roots of the trees were causing the sidewalks around the trees

to buckle. with of as of 2017, there are funds available to street repair, so public works is using these funds. the locations arentified by public works through sections and public complaints, and there is a backlog of over 640 requests for sidewalk repair locations that are not related to street tree damage. and in your packet of materials, there's an enclosure that has all of the requests and the details of them, and in the sidewalk repair as well as in the tree planting, you can see the backlog of locations that public works has on record. the tree planting requests, so this funding source is no longer being requested to maintain street trees with the passage of prop e. it will pay for planting and establishing trees for the first few years of their life to keep them alive.

it's very important to water them extensively during those first few years. let's see here, public works hasrioritized locations that as were mentioned by the forme c.a.c. chair that are based on the census, street tree census, as well as the locations with large numbers of empty basins. and in the enclosure, you'll see some of those requests of locations that are still pending as well as the note that public works intends to do planting this year in the bayview, compeller, portola, and others. arguello neighborhood, this is a district one neighborhood transportation improvement program. the paving project is slated for completion at the end of the calendar year, at which time, mta will make sure that the green paint treatments are

installed in the class 2 bike lanes and bike boxes along arguello and cabello. the next, this is a state -- yes, a state senate bill 1, sb 1 funded project. it's a dollar for dollar match. it's called the local partnership program and the transportation authority board recommended this. it's a three box streetscape improvement program and the first phase was done in 2013 from hyde to jones. i will just say with the extensive discussion about the potential repeal for senate bill 1 funds, our understanding is any funds that the c.t.c.

has allocated to projects are allocated would be at risk.not we are still seeking confirmation on a daily basis. that is still the plan. the funds were awarded by the california transportation commisin ail or the project was awarded, and the c.p.c. will act to allocate those funds in june, so while these are 18-19 funds, and the repeal is on the ballot in november , the indication is these funds should be secured for the project upon allocation next month. next project is the neighborhood transportation improvement program coordination work that we do. this is for m.t.a. and public works to work with your offices and the implementing agencies to help the scope and deliver and monitor the projects that the board has prioritized for ntip funds. next request is another ntip project as well for the district street kearny street for the multimodal

implementation plan. this will complement the work that is done for the kearny street multiple implementation plan -- [inaudible] >> - so really, to see how this work can support the square's redesign, garage operations, and access and safety improvements, as well, so a final report isxpect at the end of the calendar year, and this is a request from the transportation authority to do this work. and with that, i can answer any questions, and there are a lot of project managers that are here, as well. >> supervisor peskin: commissioner yee? >> supervisor yee: yes, thank you, chair peskin. just a pretty quick question just so that the public will hear and -- hear the information on -- in regards to twin peaks tunnel enclosure, can you repeat all the dates an tim and everything so that people will understand,

especially those that don't necessarily take the -- the metro on a daily basis would know that there's going to be some disruption? >> sure. so i have written down that the 60 day shutdown is from june 25 to august 24. there are also up to 15 weekend closures between the period of march and september, and i'm not sure of the exact weekend dates. let me see if there's a -- >> supervisor yee: okay. and then, for those continuous closures, basically, there's no trains running at all or is there a particular time that's running? >> it's a full closure, but i'll let wen huang address. he's a commissioner at m.t.a. >> good morning, commissioner. we actually have 13 weekend

closures before the 60 day shutdown and then a couple of weekends after the 60 day shutdown. the shutdown is only for a couple hours each night, saturday night, midnight to 8:00, and sunday night, midnight to 8:00. that's the majority of the work windows for this contractor to perform their work. >> supervisor yee: so the 60 days they're completely shutdown. >> 60 days, completely hull down, 24-7. >> and the shuttles or the buses will be running at what time? >> the shuttle -- l line and m line would be motorized, so that would mean we'll be running bus breach west of the church station all the way to the end of the line. and then, k line, which would

be -- would be running the shadow between the balboa park and san francisco, so that is the arrangement that all transit has made. >> supervisor yee: so it goes to st. francis circle. if they wanted to go to downtown, what do they do? >> they will have to take a bus -- you know, they have to get off the train on the k line and then take on the bus. that will -- so the m bus will pick them up all the way to the downtown and then drop them off at either the castro station or church station, where they can take a shuttle -- the subway shuttle further into downtown. >> supervisor yee: so if you're, like, at stonestown, you would basically have to take two shuttle buses. >> you have to take the m bus -- you can get on the m bus and that will take you all the way to castro station, and then, you can get down to the subway and take a shuttle, so

that would be just one transfer. >> supervisor yee: okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. are there any other questions for mis lafort or any various city staff? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item number 6? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: is there aforemoned $9.546 million, made by commissioner tang, seconded by commissioner fewer. colleagues, can we have a different house? mr. quintanilla, roll call, please. [roll call] >> clerk: we have first approval. >> supervisor peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: item 7, adopt the

proposed fiscal year 2018-19 buet and work program. this is an action item. >> supervisor peskin: miss fong. >> good morning, commissioners. this is your second look at the proposed 18-19 budget. last month, i reported out a detailed listing of all the various revenues and expenditures. in addition, tilly chang presented the full work plan. we are looking at a request for revenues of 123.2 million and expenditures of 263.1 million for the various -- the five various funds and designated mandates the transportation authority to fd -- fully fund the expenditures, we will be utilizing the november 2017 sales tax revenue bond proceeds, in addition to the revolving credit loan that was recently approved back in april. with that, i would be more than happy to answer any questions

related to this year's budget. >> supervisor peskin: are there any questions for miss fong? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: is there a motion to adopt the proposed fiscal year 2018-19 budget, made by commissioner ta, seconded by commissioner sheehy. colleagues, can we do that, same house, sam call. the budget is adopted on first reading, please. next item, please. >> clerk: item 8, execute contracts and various professional services in an amount not to exceed 385,933. this is an action item. >> supervisor peskin: miss fong. >> this is my routine annual contract request that i came before this board each june. we have a request for four various contracts. the first one is with the city attorney's office. thad have been providing contract interagency agreement issuance of debt and litigation

services over to the past year. we'd like to request the contract for the same amount, $100,000. the information technology, as you can see they are filming and airing the program, we are looking to contract a total of $50,000 for these services. we have two competitively procured contracts on the list as well, one with knn public finances. you may recall knn is our financial advisors. they're been instrumental in helping us with our debt program, in addition to issuing this november 2017 bond and re recntly the renewal of our revolving credit agreement. we'd like to exercise the second and final option. typically, we would ask for a contract of $185,000, but since we've pretty much issued all the bond needs that we need for the next couple of years, we are looking to decrease our contract to 150,000.

they had a d.b.e. requirement of 5%. they have met it at 7%. and the last item i have is a contract for financial services. this was competitively procured. we would like to continue working with them for the fiscal year 18-19 audit, and fees to 85,933.t increase of they have a 10% d.b.e. requirement, they have met that 10% d.b.e. requirement. these total four contracts add up to 385,933. in terms of fiscal impact this has already been included in the budget as routine services that we expect to procure. in terms of c.a.c. approval, it was a unanimous motion of support. with that, i can open up for any questions. >> supervisor peskin: are there any questions for miss fong? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, is there a motion to allow for execution of the

contract renewals and options made by commissioner yee, seconded by commissioner stefani. same house, same call. the item is approved on first read. next item, please. >> clerk: item 9, authorize executive director to increase the contract with the metropolitan transportation commission to a total not to exceed $200,000 for transportation network company data collection. there is an action item. >> supervisor peskin: mr. copper. >> good morning, commissioners. may i have just a moment. san francisco county transportation authority in 2017 released the t.n.c.'s to date report which documented the number of location and timing of trips made in

transportation network company vehicles in san francisco. transportation network companies are uber and lyft for those of you unfamiliar with the term. the report found that the majority of t.n.c. trips i san francisco occur in the most congested locations of the city and during the most congests times of the day. the report, however did not ovl infoion relevant to answer all key questions. therefore, we have been partnering with m.t.c. to perform a comprehensive data collection to capture some of this information. the data collection will include things like the vehicle occupancies or how s, many people are in the cars, excluding the driver, whether or not they induce new travel or pull people off of transit or shift from other modes, and questions like that. the data collectionethodology

will be a travel diary which will capture entire weeks' worth of travel behavior every single trip, including origin, destination, departure, time of arrival. it will be app based, people will interact with it through their phone, and the sample will include about 4500 people regionally with 2,000 in san francisco. a pilot deployment of this data collection is scheduled for summer of this year, and the full survey is scheduled to be deployed this fall. this would make data available in early 2019. the -- we're currently requesting to increase the budget by $150,000 for a total amount not to exceed $200,000. the sources of the funding are the schmidt family foundation

through their 11th hour project, and memoranda of agreement that we have with the san francisco planning department and the sf mta. expenditures incurred in the fick of year 2017-18 -- fiscal year 2017-18 are expected to be in the budget amendment, and the budget for 18-19 includes sufficient funding for this action. with that, i'll take any questions. >> supervisor peskin: are there any questions for mr. copper? seeing none, is there -- is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: and is there a motion to authorize the executive director to increase funding to the m.t.c.? made by commissioner cohen, seconded by commissioner tang. colleagues, we have a different house. mr. quintanilla, could you

please call the roll. [roll call] >> clerk: we have first approval. >> supervisor peskin: okay. is there any introduction of new items? seeing none, is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is cled. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor peskin: and we are adjourned.

zbls hi. good morning and welcome to. >> i am joined today by supervisor aaron peskin who's the vice chair. i'd like to acknowledge our committee clerk, john carol and also the staff at sfgov tv for ensuring that our meetings are available to the public on-line. president breed is not going to be able to attend today's meeting, and so we will take a motion to excuse. president breed, we have a motion and a second. we can take that without

opposition. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor kim: mr. clerk, do we h an announcements? [agenda item read] >> supervisor kim: thank you so much, mr. clerk, can you please call agenda items 1 through 4 together. [agenda items read]

>> supervisor kim: thank you so much, mr. clerk, and i see mr. brian hsu who will be presenting on each of these items. >> good morning, brian chiu with the s omar'ice of housing and community development. i come here with our annual request to allow us to accept and expand our hud allocations in these four different funding streams. as you see attached in your packet, we are moving into the fourth year of our five-year funding cycle. we are grateful that we will be able to maintain all of our grantees at the same level to which they were previously entitled this year. as you may recall, even though the president chose to zero out the community development block programs, congress saw fit not only to renew that program but actually to increase it a little bit more, which means that for us, we have a little more money to provide for our

affordable housing and a little bit more money to rehab our community facilities. in the black grant program, we also received a little more money for our home funding. that's the dollars that allow us to build new construction for our affordable housing. our emergency solutions grants program was renewed at about the same amount, and our hopwa program, housing for persons with aids also compensated slightly, which accounts for the slight decrease that we will be receiving that hud imposed on that program. we don't really have any significant program attic change from last year because we're moving into the fourth year of our five-year funding cycle. we ask that you allow us to accept these funds and expend it in the way attached. i'm available for any questions that you might have on any

aspect of that program. >> supervisor kim: no questions at this time, so at this time i'm going to open it up for public comment on items one through four. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed [ gavel ] wendy paskin-jordan madam chair, i move that we send items 1 through 4 to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor kim: thank you. and we can do that without opposition. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor kim: mr. clerk. can you please call item number 5. [agenda item read] >> supervisor kim: and maria benjamin is already up at the podium, director of bmr and home ownership. i also want to acknowledge that ci yen, as well as deputy

city attorney sam ray are also here to ask any campbell. severin campbell is also here to make cments after. >> good morning, chair kim and supervisor peskin. item 5 would allow ocb to purchase a condominium that is scheduled for foreclosure sale. it is located at 860 mission street, and the building is called soma grand. the original owner purchase it had in 2008 through the bmr program. he had a first mortgage and since 2015, mocd, the planning

department and the city attorney's office has been in contact with the owner several times to try to bring him in compliance with the program. he owes the h.o.a. over $35,000 in unpaid h.o.a. dues. in 2017, the owner defaulted on his first mortgage, and the lender, which is seline finance has scheduled an auction for the property. mocd is requesting from the board to take the most expeditious course of action which is to bid on the unit at the auction for up to $300,000 which is below the allowable maximum sales price, according to the rules. if we are successful, we would

transfer the ownership to an income eligible household. if we are out bid at auction, the unit will still have affordable housin restrictions, but it is a costly and lengthy process to work with an investor who purcse it to bring it back into compliance. so we're asking you to forward the legislation to the board of supervisors with a recommendation so that we can take the quickest and most efficient route to bring the property back. and as you said, chair kim, my colleagues are here to answer any other questions. >> supervisor kim: so miss benjamin, i know this came up, i think two years ago, when i held a hearing on below market rate, and it was said th at least i had heard for the first time that we had lost at least

one or two home ownership units to market foreclosure to the banks. just to help me jog my memory. what is the protocol when we know one of these units is at risk of foreclosure. it just seems plainly wrong that a bank would get to own one of these units when it was part of a contractual agreement with the city that middle class owners could purchase homes in san francisco. i'm really glad in this case we have caught the unit before it goes to sale. of course it seems wrong that we bid on this. you know, what is the protocol currently, and what can we do to amend this to strengthen our ability to procure these units back? >> the current protocol is we monitor the units, all of our units, and when the first notice of defaults -- it's usually like three months before their lender has or

h.o.a. has the right to actually foreclose or go to sale. we contact the homeowner, and we reach out to them. a lot of times, they don't understand that they actually do have equity in theproperty, and so they -- they're kind of -- if they're in a financial problem, they are just, like, if they're giving up, we let them know what the value of their property is and then that leads to the sale of their home, rather than letting it just go. >> so -- sorry. in that instance, we would purchase the unit back from

them? >> i just want to understand the universe or the scope of this issue. i think it's pretty incredible weat have a pretty sizeable bmr home ownership program today and very few of the owners default. so that i think is pretty extraordinary, well i'd love to get a sense of -- how many b.m.r. units are there? what b.m.r. home ownerships are there, and how many fall under this category where we have to actually work through the bank? >> currently, we have 12 units in this category. they're at different phases of the foreclosure e. like ma i can't just mentd, the first phase is called notice of default. in that phase, we usually reach out to the owner and refer them

to mocd sf and for the agency to provide education for the homeowners. theousi counselor will do financial analysis for the household to see if they c initially u paynt of the property. of course there are all kinds of programs help out with the homeowners. mocd, internally we have the program called mortgage assistance loan program which is specifically designed to help homeowners who are in default of mortgage payment or at risk of foreclosure. so it depends on the household situation. there are different options avble fort household? i would say on a more quarterly basis, we were able to help between thr to five households to bring them back current or help them with different mortgage options. the reason why we have 1 unit

on t category because we are still actively working with them. they are still also working with their first mortgage lender to do ownership modification. >> how many units have we lot to foreclosure. >> for the inclusionary program because our restriction survives the foreclosure, so we actually -- just in the last two years, we only have one unit that was actually sold under foreclosure, but now we're working on it, and the new own understands the restrictions and willing to work with the city to sell the unit to the next qualified buyer. >> supervisor kim: okay. okay. >> supervisor peskin: my recollection was we had two -- >> supervisor kim: yeah. >> those two units were not inclusionary units. they were former redevelopment agency properties, where we don't have the -- the

restrictions do not survive foreclosure. >> supervisor peskin: right. and once those were foreclosed on, they became market rate units fore. >> t inclusionary rate unit, we're talking about, which survives the foreclosure. the inclusionary units, we lost that. that's part of -- the affordable restriction does not survive the foreclosure. >> supervisor peskin: and those are the ones we want to >> those are the ones -- since that time, we have not had any. >> supervisor kim: how many units are like this? this is the mission walk. so how many units are like the mission walk? >> our portfolio right now, we have 700 units under sfra, which either the restriction does not survive foreclosure. the units, we have about 1300

units. >> supervisor kim: 1300 unit total? >> 1300 total, but for the sfra, we have 1300 total. in addition to the two programs, we also have the conversion below market rate program, which is the oldest b.m.r. rate program, which was suspended in 1988, and for that program, we have about 900 units there. >> supervisor kim: but of what we cr tonsidee traditional below market rateits, there's about 2,000 below market ratme ownership. >> 1300. 300. >> supervisor kim: and of the 1300, there are 1200 in various stages of foreclosure shall we are working with. >> that's correct.

>> supervisor kim: and do we require notice to mohcd for all of these units? >> correct. for all the units, we have a copy of request of notice for default. so that will automatically notify the lender whenever there is a default, but for the counter conversion b.m.r. unit that i mentioned, those were on the very old program. that time, we did not have the process to have that documenting ready, but mohcd, we have a system, andhat system actually sends daily e-mail updates for all our portfolios, so whenever there is anything happen to our unit, we get notification. >> supervisor kim: okay. yeah. thank you very much. i do have to say that 12 out of 1300 units is pretty extraordinary, and at some point, i'd like to