the new dam is currently planned for relicensing. i urge the commission t protest the congressman's proposed rider to federal appropriations bills regarding the ensire. it's essential an end run around the principle of transparency and inclusiveness that is sfpuc has exhibited in alameda creek. me feaward on this issue and join those of us who believe in dialogue and cooperation, not political maneuvering, to achieve lasting solutions to california water issues. thank you. thank you. our next speaker card i have

here is john mcmanis. pl come forward. good afternoon. i'm the president of the golden gate salmon association. we represent those sport and commercial salmon fishermen and related businesses. i'm here today to urge your opposition to this rider that would prohibit the national marine fishery service from doing work that it's authorized to do in re-licensing procedures. here's what i'm talking about. right now, the national fishery service is looking at the re-licensing of don pedro and they're considering whether or not they should requir some type of mitigation to reintroduce salmon above the dam. others have looked at it and said it's impractical, costs too much money. it costs a lot of money. i will admit that. but here's what i want to say.

there's power generation that's occurring in the dams upstream that you folks are involved in. and the power generation llequires -- bas the situation as such that waters are rising and falling quite a bit as peak flows are being released to spin energy. if salmon are put up there, the fear is that they'll lay eggs, the water will drop, the eggs will dry o ad you'll have a whole new problem on your hands. what i want to point out to this body that you may not be considering is that if you make an exception and carve out an exception to the authority re, nly a matter of time before every other water operator up and down the sierras and the cascades and all the way up to the canadian border start coming to congress and looking to carve out exceptions for their river.

i don't think the public utility commission with its greet green environmental conditions wants to be party to this type of activity. i can tell you also -- i mean, to move forward with this is basically like saying we're gonna take the fish out of fishermen's wh we've got salmon fishermen throughout this city, we helped

build this city and this would be a stab in the back toalmon men. i just want to make sure that's on your radar, thank you for your time. thank you. next speaker card i have is no no noah oppenheim. good afternoon. if we allow irrigation

districts that are working in very close collaboration with staff of your commission to dictate environmental policy for projects that this commission uses to deliver water to your rate payers, then e w aggregating the environmental stewardship values that this city holds dear. we will continue as the previous speakers have mentioned, to allow and facilitate the decline of commercial and recreational salmo fisheries throughout our state, which would be to disastrous effect. i urge you to oppose the rider. i urge you further to oppose any policy offered by any member of congress in any legislative vehicle that would prevent the national marine fishery service from implementing its authority under the federal power act.

these are -- the people of san francisco's opinions matter. i urge you to oppose this and

to work with the city urgently befor'sitoo thank you. thank you. next speaker card i have is peter dreckmeyer. good afternoon, president kwan andmmissioners. peter dreckmeyer with the tuolumne river trust. i think you both know that president trump has led ah war on the environment and on the state of california. the big question is where does the sfpuc stand on these issues? i believe they've bery e aware of what's going on. they might not participate in some of the meetings, strategically, but there comes a time when silence is betrayal. jords of martin luther k and justingnd by allowing things like this to happen is not okay. now, i think your staff is well aware of senator feinstein's position on these issues.

last fall, she sent a couple of letters with very strong language telling them to back off. we got suspicious and we filed a sunshine ordnance request and we found a whole paper trail of sfpuc staff and lobbyists in dc working on these letters. feinstein sent another letter to the department of commerce last friday. does staff know about that, of course they do. i think you need to sit down with staff and have a real heart to heart. we came and we discussed the rider three weeks ago. and we asked sfpuc to put an issue on the agenda. and we wanted them to oppose it. have a real dialogue about it and discussion.

you're representing the environment on this commio you need to really push hard. ask staff, what did they know and when did they know it. get to the bottom of it. we want to support you when you do the right thing. but we don't have faith in what staff has been doing in dc. taking full advantage of the trump administration to try to kill environmental improvements on the tuolumne. and really, decisions need to be made based on the best available science. we're willing to sit down, discuss that with you, try to come up with ideas that can save money. there's a lot of things we can do together. we feeghti now we're not at a fair table with your staff. and we need you to step in and change that table, make it more fair. thank thank you. those are all the speaker cards i have.

any other public comment? commissioners -- forgive me, i'm sorry. i do have a saker cardrom mr. barry nelson. excuse me, i'm gonna call mr. nelso pardon me, please. thank you, chairman kwan and members of the commission. barry nelson working with the golden gate salmon association and the other organizations here today on the issues in washington dc. to put this in a slightly larger legislative context in dc, the salmon fishing community is fighting at least seven different riders like this appearing in congress. as you've heard, this is very much a coordinated attack on the salmon fishing industry coming from the trump administration and very conservative members of congress. we're not asking for your help on all of those things. we're only asking for your help on that one attack on salmon that effects your river.

and there are three reasons why it really makes sense for the sfpuc toakup, given what's likely to play out in dc in the next several months. this rider is in the cjs, the commerce justi and science appropriations bill. we'v seen in the past is that these riders will often pop up again and again and again on multiple vehicles. and one of the reasons you should take a position now is because we don't know whether this will be acted upon in two weeks, whether it will be acted upon in a month. or whether we might not learn about it until a couple of days before it happens on the floor of the house of the senate. so if you wait until this rider is fther through the process, by the time it's clear what's happening, it may be too late for you to act. i think it's very clear that while it's being considered now at cjs, it makes sense for you to act so that you can weigh in. clearly, inl, your senators want to know what your position

is. second is the reality of how washington works. if the sfpuc doesn't object to being prohibited from protecting salmon on the tuolumne river, that's what this rider is meant to do. the message that sends very clearly is that the sfpuc doesn't oppose prohibiting protection of salmon on that river. if they're silent on this issue, i've worked in dc for 25 year

years.if it finds way in mewhere, we may be in a very tough position with the measure and some action. thank you, thank you. come on up. commissioners, you heard five gentlemen give very astute statements about something that you, commissioners, each one of you and your staff did not pay attention to.

what you do pay attention to is when you get a phone call from dianne feinstein. today, we will listen to dianne feinstein when she says that our water should go south. and y'all don't pay attention to the pristine water that you

get. you heard somebody from communications come here and talk about what's going on in washington dc. well you know, let me tell you. this commission has bended to the democrats when they were in power. and this commission should stop even mentioning what is going on in washington dc today because we are the fifth rgest economy in the world. but you commissioners haven't paid attention about water. do you know that every single drop of water that comes from the heavens belongs to all of us citizens.

unlike what happens on the east coast. now, the gentlemen who are fighting for the fishing produce and resources, they make a point. but missing in this equation is the voice of the indigenous people. what do they have to say? so that together you can report to washington dc in a holistic way. so commissioners, wake up. thank you. any other public comment on item 10? moving forward, madam secretary, the consent calendar summary, please. item 11 is the consent calendar. all matters listed here are considered to be retained by the san francisco public

utilities commission and will be acted upon by a single vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or the public shall ret. in which event, the matter will be removed from calendar and considered as a separateitem. okay. any requests to remove items from the consent calendar. i'll move approval. second. any public comment before we take the vote? okay. all in vor? aye. opposed? approved. next item, please. item 12 was removed from calendar and will be heard on june 26th. and item 13, grant agreement with the san francisco unified school district and authorized the general manager to execute this amendment, increasing the

current amount by 180,000 with no change in the agreement duration. any discussion, commissioners? i'll moveit second. bre we vote, any public comment on 13? all in favor? aye. opposed? okay, approved. aye, i'm sorry. item 14, please. approve the selection and award of china town community development center and authorize the general manager to negotiate and execute the grant agreement with the center for an amount not to exceed $180,000 and with the duration of two years. i'll move it. i wouldeik to recuse myself from this item because i'm an employee of the san francisco foundation that provided a grant to this project. thank you. i'll move it. i'll second.

# approve the plans and specifications for a total contract amount with the duration of 400 consecutive calendar days > mov it. second. any public comment on 15? all in favor? aye.

approved. any discussion, commissioners? any public comment? second. any public comme on 16? all in favor? opposed? approved. 17, please. resource adequacy contracts, approve three resource adequacy contracts for clean power sf executed by the general manager between the san ciscan puc and the pacific gas and electric company with a combined term of two years and five months in the total cost of $13.7 million. any discussion? so moved.

second. any public comment on 17? all in favor? aye. opposed. approved. item 19 is existing litigati litigation. existing litation -- 21, isabelle rodriguez versus the city and county of san francisco. item 22, existing litigation. 23, existing litigation pacific gas and electric. 24, existing litigation pacific gas and electric. item 26, existing litigation pacific gas and electric. 27, existing litigation pacific

gas and electric. 28, existing litigation city and county of san francisco versus pacific gas and electric. do i have a motion on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege. motion to assert the privilege. second. any public comment? any public comment on our closed session items? okay. >> so we're back. okay. do we have a motion not to discuss the items during closed session? >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> all in favor? [voting] >> okay. commissioners, any new business? any public comment on -- there is no new business. >> there is no new busi. >> i have a new business.

>> i do, too. >> i would like to, through the chair, agendaize this question that'snaised around opposing the validale meeting, the validale rider next meeting. >> and let's avoid any agendaized discussions. that's next meeting. es. i did caution you there's not much more information than what i've presented today. >> the -- i understand. i don't know if we need more information. i mean, i've heard enough information at least to have a robust conversation, and we can take it offline as we're talking about how to agendaize it, but i this to take some action as a commission would b

interesting, even if we have to debate it as such. co clerk: to clarify, ission viator, that is an action or discussion? >> to take action. >> twice today -- it caught me a little off guard today. twice staff was kind of indicted. first on community benefits and lack of transparency, and then, on the federal question, honesty and whatever. and normally, i'll be the first one to rise to their defense. as i've sitting here right now, given some of the things that i have pending that are important to us, i -- i'm reluctant to do that. there's times that i talk to harlan about it but i want to let my colleagues know where i feel i'm just going to be totally played. one of the things is this janus

decision. it's going to be huge. i've been doing my best to articulate -- and that's why i didn't -- i've b doing my best to articulate the very clear difference between some of the folks that work for us that have computers and college degrees and everything else and some of the folks that work for us that don't have access to those things. and when i'm talking to staff about the most progressive mechanism for on boarding people, they really seem to be coming from a place of no. i feel like there's a point in time of where they should be coming from a place of yes given how we promote them. and i'm worried because i'm kind of getti tired of being told wake up all the time, because i'm wide awake. you guys know m i'm wide awake. i think we need to start calling balls and strikes when it comes to that stuff. but during the budget, i sent don an e-mail this week.

twors ago was talking about the lack of us having a workforce development policy, which is very important to me and us in anticipation of a bit of a downturn. we still haven't made much progress at all there. during the budget, i asked for parcels of our land and what our land management plan because they just don't want to find out that we have to give it away to some organization that may or may not be involved in political activity. and then, finally, this on boarding piece. but even the other day, there is -- and we're not taking credit, there is a preapprenticeship program that we're doing that i'm told we weren't doing with certain classifications, that we are doing, and i asked for a presentation to all of us because i think it's going to kind of dovetail into best practices, and that can's getting kicked down the road.

i think i'm getting a little bit played by staff, but when it comes to delivery -- and i'll just keep going. we both have talked to members of the board of supervisors ut this, but i'll be lk to themo sincere to my colleagues about this. i'm trying to make sure that this commission and this director can be something proud of as the most progressive approach to the workforce, rather than needing laws that tell us we have to d more, which is what ab 119 is doing, it tells us we've got to do more than what we have been doing. i feel like we've got to work with staff that we don't want to be legislated because we're good policy makers. so i'll leave it at that, but i think we're ready for some of these things. i think the attacks on staff is something we should take seriously, and they're either with or without merit, so we

should know that up front. >> thank you. >> any other public comment on new business raised by the commissioner? i think you can. >> the commissioner has a question of staff. >> no, it's public comment. >> right. >> i mean, emilio got up and spoke. >> yeah. >> i mean, my -- >> i have a question for him, and i want to just remind you, we're only talking about new business, new agenda items. we can't get into a discussion of something substantive since it wasn't agendaized. >> well, there were allegations made today that i took really seriously that i'm not true if they are or not. we are basically called liars twice. i'd like to hear from michael,

yeah, because that's important. like -- >> we probably can't have a discussion. >> yeah, we can't get into a substantive discussion. >> when it gets leveed, and we just get it go, i'm just sitther saying oh, we're just going to let it go. >> i think sometimes that's the nature of public comment. >> yeah, but that was rapid fire, right? that was kind of rapid fire. >> well, this item, if you want, future agenda items, so -- >> never mind. >> okay. is there anything else? any other public comment? meeting is adjourned. thank you very much, everyone, for your time.

>> 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. could we please have thec.a.c. report. good morning, mr. 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, ion ocation of nearly $10 prop k funds, i had asked for equity strategy tree planting. locations in the bayview specifically would be getting 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 minutes, we had a snificantly long discussion and q&a are sf mta director of transportation ed reiskin and john haley. we had been inviting them for several months, 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 thetus system, 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 the minutes of the may 20, 2018 minutes. >> supervisor peskin: public comment on minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion toppro a the minutes? approved by tang, seconded by yee. call the roll on the minutes.

[roll call] >> clerk: we have approval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: item 4, appoint one member to the citizens advisory committee. this is an actionitem. >> supervisor peskin: mr. pickford. >> good morning. the citizens advise i don't 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 weedmeyer 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. 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 far you have a b.a. in urban

studies and 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 seeing none, is there any ? public comment on this item? seeing no public comment, public comment is clo colleagues, 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, seconded by 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 cean miles standard or develop a clean miles standard. >> supervisor peskin: zero emissions vehicles for people who don't know. >> my apologies. i won't do that again. 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.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 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, ver, 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 budget, the transportation component of the state budget which i've

focused on this year has been not very challenging this year. 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-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 so they put that over until later this summer. and with 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 adopting the aforementioned on sb 13 and

sb 1328, there's a motion on that, seconded by commissioner 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 is a project that 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 to allocate an additional 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 wasnlytrack 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 are identified by public workshrough sections and public complaints, and there is a backlog of over 640 requests foralkewepair locations that are not related to street tree damage. and in your packet of materials, there'sn 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 has prioritized locations that as were mentioned by the former

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 -- a ss,te senate bill 1, sb 1 funded project. it's a dollar for dollar match. it's calledhe 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 safe, and anything that is not allocated would be at risk. we are still seeking confirmation on a daily basis. that is still the plan. the funds were awarded by the california transportation commission in april or the project was awarded, and the

c.p.c. will acto 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 ecn 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 is expected at the end of the calendar year, and this is a request from the transportation authority to dos 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 and times and everything so that people will understand, especially those that don't necessarily take the -- the 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:ay.ok 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 huangss.re 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 afthey 60 da 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 downs they're completely >> 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 wou be -- would be running the d s 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 miss 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 a motion to allocate the aforementioned $9.546 million, made by commissioner tang, seconded by commissioner fewer. colleagues, can we have a different h? mr. quintanilla, roll call, please.oll call] >> clerk: we have first >> supervisor peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: item, adopt the proposed fiscal year 2018-19 budget and work program. this is an action it. >> supervisor peskin: miss fong. >> good morning, commissioners. this is your second look at the

proposed 18-19 budget. last mont reported out a detailed listing of all the various revenues and expenditures. in addition,lyhang presented the full work plan. we are looking at a request for revenues of 123.2 million and uresexf 263.lion1 mil for the various -- the five various funds and designated mandates the transportation authority has to fund -- fully fund the expenditures, we will be utilizing the november 2017 sales tax revenue bond proceedsn addion to the revolving credit loan that was recently approved back in april. withthat, i woulde 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 tang, seconded by commissioner sheehy. colleagues, can we do that, same house, same 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 exceed385,933. is 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 ones with the city attorney's office. they had have been providing contract interagency agreement issuance of debt and litigation services over to the past year. we'd l to request 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 more recently the renewal of our revolving credi agrment. second option.exerise the 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 nextouple 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 contra for financial

services. this was competitively procured. we would like to continue working with them for rescalr 18-19 audit, and test a increase of fees to 85,933. 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 uestens for miss rvisor peskin:e fong? seeing none, is there any blicpuomment 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,cal. the item isnirst 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 tran ortation 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 in 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 provide all information relevant to answer all key questions. therefore, we have been partnering with m.t.c. to perform a comprehensive data collection to capt some of this information. the data collection will include things like the demographics of t.n.c. users, the vehicle occupancies or how many peo are i the cars, excluding tdriver, whether or not they induce new travel or pull people off of transit or shift from other modes, and questions like that. the data collection methodology will be a travel diary which will capture entire weeks' wth of tra bavior 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 about50le 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 curly requesting to increase the budget by $150,000 for a total amount not to exceed $200,000. the sources of the funding are the schmidndat familon throh 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