land use issues with respect to the rail yard, and the surrounding areas. and then we also looked at what would happen if we extended the alignment beyond the salesforce transit centre. and we looked at the issue of 280 and weather it made sense to consider modifying or removing it. i will start by saying that the last two items on this list have essentially been taken off the table. we looked at an extension of the alignment which could happen in the future and we think it has positive benefits. and we looked at whether if we are moving to this portion of 280 made any sense in terms of the overall transit system. whether the freeway would get in the way, if you will, of a rail alignment or vice versa. whether it would have to be modified. we have concluded there is no reason. there is no real connection, but we can accommodate the alignments that we need without touching the freeway. for now, that is not under consideration. again, just a little more detail, the alignments that i talked about, again, the green

is the existing alignment with grade separations they are highlighted in the lower part of the slide. the orange being pennsylvania and the blue being mission bay. with a station in it somewhere in the vicinity of the mission rock development. the second was to look at the railyard itself. it is 20 acres of land in the middle of the city. it is an important part here that many people don't realize. the railyard is actually privately owned. it is owned by a large industrial developer that is based in san francisco but it is, and actually -- actuality, the largest industrial property owner in the world. bait air rights are under the control of that company. if the trains were to go away, they would have the rights to develop that property with the change in zoning. we looked at possibilities. what if we separated the actual operations that they do on that site from the storage and maintenance and staging creeks two separate functions that happen on that sight?

we looked at locations and we believe that there are some locations a railyard could locate to. they are within the ten minute travel time to the terminus which is the requirement that the company has. we think there are two sites that could be possible to relocate the terminal. we looked at urban form and land use considerations and made some very broad assumptions about what would happen here if the railyard was to be removed, or lowered, or modified. we could of course restore the street graded and have much improved bicycle connections and deal with environmental issues and obviously, housing open space and other uses if that was the way we wanted to go. and then these last two items, again, as i mentioned, we did a very preliminary analysis about extension to the rail, which is shown here. whether it comes out of the salesforce terminal and going

across the bay, or looping back around. we looked at whether there was the potential for making this connection via the mission bay alignment. we frankly don't know enough about where the connection should go to the east, yet, to really understand that, and so we think all of these are possible in the future. we know that much, but we don't think, at this point, there is an urgency to making this decision. i will say that breaking through, if you will, the eastern end of the terminal to the east, does not only increase the capacity of the terminal and -- in the long run but it adds a whole new ridership to the terminal from oakland and the east bay. it is something to consider in the future. as i said, we had initially looked at weather this one and a half or 1.2 miles of 280 were in effect preventing us from a rail alignments that we would offer. we do not believe that it does. we don't believe there is a real

connection functionally -- functionally or traffic -wise between 280 and the transit system. so we did not take this any further and are not proposing any changes to 280 at this time. so, getting down to brass tacks on the cost. these are the high-level numbers of the three alternatives. what these numbers include, are full construction costs, they include for the pennsylvania and mission bay alignment, they include a relocated caltrain it yard, and they also include potential revenues that would accrue from land value recapture on the railyard. similarly to what we did in the transit centre plant. the one qualification on that latter point, is that because the land of the railyard is privately owned, we are not able to capture the land value. the land sales, as we did in the transit centre plan. it is the number -- the revenue generated from that site are not

as great as they would be if it was similar to the transit centre area. you will see there is some pretty big differences between the pennsylvania and mission avenue, mission bay alignment. and again, these are comparative costs, and i think an dollars. they could be inflated easily and could all rise proportionally. so, given those numbers, and given a number of considerations, that staffs of all of the agencies have put forward the pennsylvania avenue alignments as being our preferred alignment, and our recommendation to you and the mayor about the city's preferred alignment on this project. let me just give you a number of reasons. it actually solves one of the fundamental problems that we have seen that it is eliminating the possibility of closing streets. it avoids the trenching problem i mentioned, and most, i think

very significantly and a concern we heard when we first started this study, it does not delay the btx design and construction. the reason for that is one of the advantages of the pennsylvania avenue alignments is the dpx contribute -- proceed through engineering on its current schedule while we build to the rest of the tunnel to the south. so we are able to accommodate them on its current schedule without any delay while we further, through the environmental work and engineering work to build a tunnel through the south. it allows all the trains utilize the transit centre they are. clearly, land use benefits over last -- a mile of the city. and we think, we would like to further study the location of the 22nd street station in order to find -- utilize that land. it is the fastest-growing station in terms of ridership in the caltrain system and yet is not even accessible at this point. it is a very challenging

location for a station. there are clearly operational benefits, and it allows the possibility, which we did not include in the cost estimate, of even expanding underground at the fourth at townsend station which would be an underground station at that location. there are obvious negatives to this alignment. there is some increase in cost, about 900 million, we think, that requires additional environmental review of the segment that is south of the railyard. it requires relocating storage and maintenance facilities, as i said, and probably requires some relocation of utilities. so where are we headed here? we think this is a reasonable, doable timeline, obviously there are factors, that will come into play here, that might affect this timeline. but we are, of course unit may, updating you, on tuesday of next week, we will presenting the same pub -- presentation to the

public. over the next five or six weeks, we'll be doing presentations and we will hope to bring a recommendation for your approval either in july or right after your break in august. and finally, and this is, you had this in hard copy before, and this is a little hard to reach, what we are also doing now with our partner agencies is developing an overall strategy, a program of all the various transportation studies that are underway. and each of these, the colour coding on the raft -- left presents the lead agency. the top line is caltrain -- caltrain, high-speed rail, the city and county, at the last line is barge and other regional entities. there are a number of parallel planning efforts going on and the reason for preparing this diagram, is to really understand

how these efforts can be coordinated and to urge our partner agencies to work together on all these efforts as we move forward. which is interesting is how much of them overlapped. they are all going on now and will continue over the next couple of years. it is extremely important, we think, to have these efforts coordinated as we move forward. so thank you for your time and attention. if i may, i would like to ask ron who chaired our citizens working group that concluded it's meetings last night, to make a few comments to the commission as well. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. mr magill? >> thank you john. chairman, commissioners, i'm ron magill. it's been my pleasure and privilege to share the citizens working group for rail alignment and benefit study. the rep members represented a large segment of our city geographically, particularly those areas which will be most impacted by this project.

they are intimately involved in all areas of transit, local, and regional, and they fully understand the complexities in moving the project forward. the study it was conceded by the planning department three years ago. our working group started in august of 2016. we were charged with looking comprehensively at possible solutions to bring high-speed rail and electrified caltrain service into the salesforce transit centre, which will open later this year. our first meeting was august 2016. our last west yesterday evening. we did walking tours, station tours, discussed efforts and effects on mission bay, system capacity, to be a level, alignment options, railyard reconfiguration clark or relocation, other land-use and urban form used, as well as the

opportunities that would be made for housing and space. in other words, what would be best for san franciscans and businesses? as well as service to the greater bay area? any questions regarding i 280 where dispose of earlier on as it did not impact any of the alignments that were worthy of being studied. selection of the pennsylvania route was unanimous last night. coordinating the downtown rail extension, high-speed rail, electric creation of caltrain, to our mind, is the crux of a once in a hundred year decision. that decision has to start now, and i would be pleased to discuss this with any of you as we move forward. and we have to move forward. we have to start at this point. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. thank you for all of your, and

the other see ac members and their work on this. there is more public process coming and the ta is going to be intimately involved in that an oversight and a collaborative role. as wrong -- ron said this is a hundred year decision and it is important that all of san francisco be involved in it. there will be public meetings. when it will those meetings be, and what is the process, going forward, and what when do u think ultimately, this san francisco county transportation authority will be in a position to make a final decision? >> thank you for the question mr chairman. we have a public meeting on tuesday night at the green room across the street in the veteran building. tuesday at six, i believe. and then we intend to respond to a number of boards and commissions over the following few weeks.

planning commission is as early as june and other boards are coming up. we want to make sure, since this is our recommendation at this point, we want to make sure we are hearing from the public and other agencies and their feedback on that recommendation before the city takes a final position. however, what we hope to do, given that, and given that the initial feedback from our sister agencies has been quite positive, to date, we would like to get to you, as a board, and to the mayor, either in late july, or right after your september recess. so that the city is making an official decision, if you will, in that timeframe. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. thank you for your incredible amounts and quality of work. either questions from commissioners? commissioner few where? >> supervisor fewer: yes, thank you very much. i have a question for mr ram. there are two sights. you mention two sites for a new railyard.

where are those sights? >> because they are in private ownership right now i don't want to actually mention the exact locations of those sights. we believe there are physically two sites that are in properly zoned areas that could accomme them. >> supervisor fewer: and you said that's within ten minutes? >> the requirement -- yes. the requirement from caltrain is that the railyard, wherever it is in the long run, has to be within ten minutes of the terminal. >> supervisor fewer: one is outside of the city of san francisco and one is inside and both of those are privately owned? >> that is correct. >> supervisor fewer: to be have any plans of buying the property at all? >> at this point we do not. we made assumptions about potential costs and the cost estimates. >> supervisor fewer: so you think these two other sites that are privately owned, do you think the owners might be willing to buy them? , i mean, seldom. >> at this point there is no way of knowing. we would have to pursue that in the future. >> supervisor fewer: okay. you can't tell me where they are

likely that was my question. okay. thanks. >> supervisor peskin: commissioner safai? >> supervisor safai: i just want to say, you know, i've been in this room for over a year, and we've had multiple presentations on this. this is extremely extremely helpful today to have this information laid out in the way it is i do have it presented, you know, in parallel form, and have the options in a very clear and concise manner for us to be able to make really informed decisions. i really appreciate the hard work that your staff went into, and the presentation, to me, it makes a lot of the decision-making, going forward, that much easier. we really appreciate the hard work that you do. >> thank you. >> supervisor peskin: seeing no other questions or comments from commissioners, why don't we open this up to public comments. i have four speaker cards.

if you don't want to comment, we will close, okay. if you will line up to my left, you're right, the floor is yours. >> good morning, supervisors. we i'm glad we are starting the right conversation here. and i think if this moves forward you will be hearing more and more good news. storage seems to be a concern. the fact is, we will be abandoning one, and possibly two of the tunnels. if you look at how long these tunnels are, we have the capacity to store eight trains, you know. between two areas. but, now that we have finally landed on the alignment, as you recall, i presented to this board four or five years ago, i have seen a few supervisors. we can now rethink about where

we will be locating the towns -- townsend station. the logical place is to locate it on seventh. because there is nothing there. when we do that, -- so the station will straddle at mission creek. at that point, we will be serving mission bay and other parts. we are proposing to be the station by a loop which we -- will essentially connect chinatown. but, and closing, we know it will cost is $900 million to go from 22nd street to townsend. why don't you just carry on and

spend 900 million, instead of $4.7 billion connecting townsend to the centre? thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: thank you very much. mr olson, we. >> my name is ted olson. it was an honour, it is an honour to serve on the board for this project. i, obviously ask your approval of it, but i am here today to commend the director on the way he conducted and chose all of the participants for this, particularly his collegial work with the other partner departments which means that this is a uniform intelligence of all of your infrastructure departments. i also want to commend susan, and the entire team for leading our see wg through this process of understanding all of the technicalities that went into

this decision. finally i say, about the importance, and as john said, the differences between airports and roads versus railroad, by the time high-speed rail comes to san francisco, and the importance of this is it is a regional plan that we have proposed, by the time it arrives in san francisco, we will have 1 million residents. i urge your approval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> mr chairman, members of the commission, our interest is really in getting caltrain extended without any unnecessary delay. i'm glad to see this morning that a lot of the earlier proposals that were highly disruptive to the extension of caltrain, and yet, we are overpriced and this is progress.

we are getting closer to something that makes sense now. i did want to talk about one that has been mentioned and that is, the yard. i don't think they really serious they looked at two options for leaving it there. one is to shrink it, because now there are 14 tracks and going down to maybe, nine. put it in the building and billed to the podium above and develop the air rights above. the other is the depressive 30 feet and the whole sight is free. if somebody wants to build some massive parking garage underneath, i don't quite see the problem there. it's not that much more expensive than going down farther south, and much cheaper on the operational cost than buying new property somewhere else that we don't know anything about yet. so that was one point. we should not lose track of the possibility of keeping the yard where it is. it is operationally better for caltrain to do that. the second thing is, it was a

time where they're free weight will get removed and that meant all kinds of nice garden apartments in the southwest corner of mission bay, but the freeway is going to be there, which blights the area for decades. i think it was a good decision to destroy that, but under a freeway, it is not such a bad place for an under, a street underpass. as it is here, the tail is wagging the dog. that underpass is causing a lot of expense to be added to a project that need not be. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> i am representing safe uni. it is a supporter of the downtown expansion of caltrain. we want to see it didn't -- done as quickly as possible, and as inexpensively as possible. currently, the project is costed out at $3.9 billion.

san francisco is now adding a number of conditions to this project. that is grade separation. i have no proper eight -- problem with pennsylvania avenue alignment and no problem with great separation. four years ago, before the beginning of this study, any rail expert would have told you that greparade stion is a good idea. the question is cost. according to their figures, the costs is to $.1 billion in excess of the current project. i think san francisco has the belly up to the bar here, and committing to that extra $2.1 billion. until you do, and until you confront the financing question, you really are never going to be able to get this project done. i urge you to commit to the

city's funding capacity to the tune of $2.1 billion to accomplish the city's goals. and get this project done, now. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. are there any other members of the public here for item number 10, seeing none, public comment is closed. i think we are all deeply committed to getting the downtown extension into the trans bay terminal. as a matter of fact, when we hear item 11, and i apologize to mr williams, and the folks who are here, i think the number of us are actually anxious to go to the opening of that salesforce tower that towers above, or next to that trans bay terminal. so this is an information item. there is much more to come over the months and years ahead. it is our job to make sure that,

unlike in phase one, that the san francisco county transportation authority it remains intimatelremainsintimats project is delivered, hopefully as close to on time, and hopefully as close to the squishy budget as it now -- as is possible. with that, mr clerk, could you please read the next item? >> clerk: item 12, internal accounting report, item 11, update on san francisco transportation agencies with chair accessible taxi incentive program and recreational shuttle service program. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. miss williams, i terribly apologize for dragging you here. but i would like to subject to public comment, and asked my colleagues to continue this to the next meeting. went very much want to hear it and i again apologize to you for

having you sit here this morning. hopefully you enjoyed item number 10. and with that, is there any public comment on item number number 11? seeing none. >> to by mr chairman. >> supervisor peskin: you can speak under general public comment which is coming up. >> okay. that's fine. >> supervisor peskin: all right. no other public comment, public comment for number 11 is close. is there a motion to continue this to the next meeting made by commissioner fewer and seconded by commissioner safai. miss it fallen? by the way, we will continue

item 11 to the hearing of june 26th. >> on the deputy director for finance and administration. this is a report on the ta's financials as of the march 31st 2018. in the first nine months after this... revenues totalled 294.7 million. expenditures total to 145.8 million. both revenues and expenditures are in budget for the first nine months of the year. in terms of investment compliance, 62.9% of the ta's cash, excluding the bond proceeds helped with u.s. banks are invested with the city's treasury pool and are in compliance with the california government code and the ta's investment policy. in terms of expenditure compliance, we had you remember there was a bond in november of 2017. we are five months into that. as of march 31st, we have

spent 99.1 of those bond proceeds and have approximately 150.8 million to go and to be spent in the next 31 months. with that i'm more than happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor peskin: any questions? seeing none, is there any public comment on item number 12? seeing none, public comment is close. thank you for that information. is there any introduction of new items? seeing none, is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed, and we are adjourned. [♪]

>> so first, i want to say good afternoon and thank you for joining me as i submit our balance to your budget to the board of supervisors here in city hall. i want to start today by bei acknowledging all of the hard work that went into this. i want to thampg the members of the board of supervisors, i want to thank the departments that are here today and their staffs for all their hard work and the months of preparation that are here today. there are a few people that i want to call out. first, ben rosenfield. i also want to thank and acknowledge harvey rose.

it has been a pleasure with the board of supervisors to working with him. and lastly, and i want to say most importantly, i want to thank my entire budget team. they're all sitting over here, and to keller kirkpatrick, our acting budget director, can we give her a round of plauz? [applause] >> and i want to acknowledge my chief of staff, jason elliott, jason, thank you for everything. [applause] >> so before i dive into the specifics of the budget, i do want to acknowledge where we have been over the past seven months. i think we all remember where we were when we heard about mayor lee's passing and the shock that it felt. no one could have possibly anticipated that our mayor would have been taken from us in december, taken from the city that he loved. we all have endured a lot since

that fateful night. many of us have cried, many of us have mourned, but we have come together as a city. we have definitely had our disagreements and debates over the past seven months, but we have stayed together, defending the values of san francisco. and while our local economy continues to thrive, san francisco faces real challenges every single day. well, you all understand that a mother should not have to choose between paying her utility bill or paying rent, the potential of facing eviction or homelessness. we know that clean streets free of syringes and needles should be the norm, not the exception. that parking your car in san francisco should not induce a panic attack because you think it will be broken into. we all understand that residents in historically under

served communities did he serve the resources and -- deserve the resources in a booming economy. they deserve it from san francisco. and as the trump administration attacks so many of our communities, our immigrant community, our lgbt community, our women in san francisco, and the rights of all san franciscans, we must fight back. we are stewards of the greatest city in the world, and we will rise up to the challenges of today. thank you. [applause] >> now, homelessness has plagued our city for decades, but the situation has never been so dire as it is right now. we will not solve this epidemic with one single answer, and this budget takes a multifacet

multifaceted approach to making a real dent in the issue, to help stem the tight of homelessness and push back on the challenges that have confronted us for years on our streets. i also understand the roots of this tragedy are complex, they are not simple, and they are also not unique to san francisco, which is why over the past few months, i have partnered with ten of the mayor's of the other largest cities in california and advocated in sacramento, advocated with our governor, spent hours in sacramento together as mayors to ask for more than $1.5 billion in our state budget so that cities can address homelessness on our streets because we know the solutions that are working. and i want to say a special thanks to assembly man -- senator weiner, assembly men

chiu, and this budget, as large as it is and as large as the investments are within homelessness does not reflect a single dollar of that ask, and we have had great results in sacramento in committees over the past few weeks, and we are hopeful that additional funding will be coming shortly from sacramento. this budget invests in measures that prevent people from falling into the clutches of homelessness to begin with, while also supporting programs that ensure once they are housed, they will have the support and services that they need to avoid slipping back into homelessness on our streets. we will be compassion driven in our approach, but we will also take strategic common sense measures, measures such as our encampment resolution teams, because no one gets better by living on our streets at night. the first fiscal year of my budget will include $30 million in new initiatives for

homelessness. that package includes an investment to double our home ward bound budget, a measure that reunites struggling families with their loved ones, and last year alone over 900 people were served by project home ward bound, and less than 10% of people returned to the city of san francisco to access services. this is to prevent and divert people from a life on our streets here in san francisco. and when someone leaves the throes of homelessness, they will leave permanently with the resource necessary to make sure they get back on their own 2 feet. in the next fiscal year, this budget will create 200 new supportive housing units in san francisco. with these units, san francisco will have more than 7,900 permanent supportive housing units in the city of san

francisco, the most percapita of any city in our entire country. along with our new units, i will be investing $1.5 million additional funds to support additional housing at our permanent housing sites. this includes $15 million to continue our nav fact center pipeline, helping to secure the creation of four new facilities right here in our city, including the first one dedicated specifically to women and expectant mothers. these resource heavy centers are critical to breaking the cycle of homelessness, poverty and addiction on our streets. we will fund programs that support families, we will fund program that's support the youth that are homeless on our streets, and i will continue to support funding for operations that clear our streets of unsafe and unhealthy tent encampments.

again, no one's life is getting better by sleeping in tents on our streets. we must also address the core roots of the issue of homelessness. we must offer help to those on our streets struggling with addiction, mental illness and other behavioral health challenges. last month, i announced the creation of a new street medicine street which will deliver opioid treatments directly to people living on our streets. this dedicated unit under the direction of dr. barry zevin will offer medication to people living on our streets. it is a first in the nation program, and it will produce results here in san francisco. every day we are hearing more and more stories of people who have really inspired the rest of us by treating their addiction and making onto a better life. and for those -- for those that are on our streets that cannot

help themselves with buprenorphrine, we have an obligation to step in and offer assistance. we are investing in conserveatorship beds to those suffering from mental illnesses and living on our streets. earlier this year, i announced the opening of san francisco conserveatorship beds. and we will continue to invest in them and other programs that represent help for those struggling with addictions living on ourstres. we will continue to operate under the premise of laura's law, who help family members who cannot help themselves. too often we have approached

homelessness as an attractable issue and the residents experiencing these issues as lost causes. i refuse to accept that narrative. we will not solve this issue overnight, but we he made a dent over the past six months, and with this budget, we will make great strides in addressing homelessness on our streets. not only in the immediate future but with an eye toward making a dent, and make a permanent lasting legacy of san francisco. we also are fortunate to live in the most beautiful city in the world. stunning vistas, we have the golden gate bridge, we have the castro district, we have livly commercial corridors. but too often, our picture

perfect city is blighted with scenes of trash, litter, human waste, drug paraphernalia. we've seen it all. and that's why i'm adding 44 new street cleaners in this budget to be split up evenly between our city's 11 supervisor asorial districts. we've asked the department of public works to work with our supervisors to make sure they are placed exactly in the areas that they are needed in our city. we are also funding a dedicated street pickup team in the soma district. five days a week, manual labor pickup to pick up the trash to make that neighborhood better. in addition, i'll be funding new pit stops, which are safe, monitored public toilets, and a proven model to reduce human waste and litter on our streets. no one should be confronted with feces or the smell of urine walking the streets of

san francisco. we'll be adding five new pit stops in high volume corridors and expanding at other pit stops. they are win-win solutions for our communities. they offer struggling residents dignity and safety and keep our sidewalks and streets safe and clean. these additional investments will be paired with ongoing programs, including our dedicated street medicine team, specifically, a team that was created for needle pick ups based on resident complaints, and our fix it team that does such great work in our neighborhoods, and with this budget, we will be expanding from 25 to 35 zones throughout the city of san francisco. we all know that a clean and vibrant city is an economically successful and healthy city. and just as our city needs to be clean to thrive, it also needs to be safe. last year, we reported 31,000

car break-ins in san francisco. that's about one break-in every three hours on our street. s that's unacceptable. to the credit to our police department, they're doubled our foot patrols, creating a dedicated unit within the central police department, and increasing the burglary and serial crime units. year to date, car break-ins are down 20% in the city of san francisco, but we will not rest on our laurels here in approximate our city. this budget will reflect additional investments in our public safety departments. in particular, our police department to make sure we do not slip back. the center piece of this public safety goal is the addition of over 250 sworn police personnel over the next four years. i have often said that we have some of the best police officers in the country. we just need more of them.

let me be even more specific. i believe we have incredible men and women of our police department. they put the lives on the line for us every single day, and they deserve our respect, and i am proud of them. but san francisco is a growing, changing city, and we need a police force that grows and changes with it. in the next fiscal year, 130 new officers will be in the police academy, setting the foundation for 250 more officers on our streets. i want to make it clear that these new officers will not be just focused on our property crime epidemic, they'll also be working within our communities to make sure our residents feel safe in the city we all love. these new officers will have the tools and training we have implemented under our current d.o.j. reforms, such as time and distance strategies, deescalation tactics, and most

important, the policy and practice of sanctity of life. my budget contains additional investments that bolster our department of police accountability. we need our residents to trust our public safety officials, to believe that when they need help, they're going to get the services that they need. our department of emergency management teams are now answering approximately 89% of their 911 calls within ten seconds. 90%'s the nshl standard. we are investing $9 million to bolster that department to make sure we exceed the national standard and make sure the residents know when they pick up the phone and dial 911, they're going to have a life person on the other end of the line. it can mean the difference between life and death, and san francisco can do better. we are also investing in significant new equipment for

our firefighters to make sure that they are able to respond quickly and that they are able to do their jobs safely for our residents. we have also been a city that has opened our doors and right la lane -- welcomed the refugees of hate, bigotry an and oppression. we make sure that every person understands they are an integral part of our city. regardless of where you were raised, no matter where you come from, no matter what neighborhood you are from, you are a part of san francisco. [applause] >> and i am well aware of the persistent disparities that exist in our city, and without these budget dollars, without accountability to out comes will not be successful in

reducing widespread disparities. i'm also well aware that too many communities and populations are systematically stuck outside the prosperity of our city, particularly communities of color. this budgetonti cues to invest in these communities that are marginalized and most vulnerable. our community's most impacted by the delusional policies of the trump administration, and those communities that face persistent and widespread disparities. we're investing over $7 million over the next two years to provide representation for immigrants facing deportation among other legal and support programs. we will be providing our community-based organizations who are on the front line every single day with resources so they can support our own immigrant communities in san francisco. i'm here emphatically once again to say that we will not cower in fare to president

trump and the federal administration, and we will never embrace their ideologies of bigotry and hatred ever. and if our city is to truly succeed, we need to lift up every single community and put the right support between everybody that calls our city home. that is why this budget includes over $7 million for additional criminal justice reforms, including initiatives to expand pretrial monitoring and bail alternatives, ending onerous local fees, and supporting our street violence response team. we will continue to fund workforce programs so every san franciscan from every neighborhood can be a part of our growing economy. i want to thank our union partners who are collaborating with us to making sure the

residents can call san francisco home can also be a place where they can work. we're ensuring that the next generation of san franciscans, which is who we are fighting for, have good paying jobs and good benefits. and thanks to the passage of the soda tax, we will now dedicate $10 million annually to address health inequities, with a specific focus on communities, low-income communities and communities of concern that have disproportionately been affected by our health crisis. and we will provide support and resources for vulnerable communities when our city does not. as evidenced by the $4.2 million that we are investing for hiv and aids programs, backfilling local initiatives that were subject to federal funding cuts brought on by an administration that once again does not even respect our local communities and has no trace of empathy for

compassion. in san francisco, we do it different. i am proud to make sustained investments in these communities, and i'm also proud to do it in a fiscally responsible manner. we need to maintain our long-term investments, and this budget includes nearly $450 mil i don't kn -- million in reserves. i don't think anyone in here has forgotten the great recession, and it's not a question of if, but when the next town turn happens. in april, i issued an executive directive to expand our economically -- our economic resiliency plan so that our first in the nation policy will now have detailed and specific recession scenarios, allowing us to plan and then respond

accordingly when signs of the next economic downturn arise. there is a reason that mooney's have upgraded our bond rating to the highest in approximate our city's history, and to the highest level possible. it's the result of responsible fiscal planning, an approach we mirror when dealing with our long-term investments and our capital projects. and for the second consecutive year and the second year in our city's history, our capital plan will be fully funded. we are providing historic levels of investments in our parks, on our streets, and our seismic infrastructure. the capital budget will strengthen our seawall and repair, rebuild, and work on our critical infrastructure assets, such as the yslais creek bridge and our 911 call center. we are providing more than $100

million for street resurfacing projects, ensuring our roadways are smoother, safer, and easier to travel on because i don't believe anyone thinks the conditions of our streets today are acceptable. these are not just investments in our bridges, our streets, and our roads, and our waterfronts, these are investments in the very future of the city of san francisco. [applause] >> and because i care very deeply in the future of this city, the city where i was lucky enough to be born, lucky enough to be raised, and where i have lived my entire adult life, i am honored that this budget fulfills many of the legacies of our late mayor ed lee. i truly believe this budget would make him proud. i believe in the greatness of our city, in our residents, our

leaders, and i want to leave this office a place where the next mayor, whoever that may be, will have every opportunity to succeed. to that end, i do commitment to the next mayor my full support both personally and with my staff to make the transition before -- between our administrations as smooth as possible because i believe that no matter who holds the office of mayor, as san franciscans, we will all have a vested interest in the next mayor's success, and i pledge my complete and full support to make that happen. the poe el dylan thomas said the following about our amazing city. he wouldn't think such as place as san francisco can exist. the wonderful sun light here, the hills, the great bridges, the pacific at your shoes.

beautiful chinatown, every race in the world. the sardine fleets sailing out. the little cable cars whizzing down city hills, and the people are all friendly. that is a san francisco we all love and know. that is a san francisco we all aspire to be, and that is a san francisco we will be. thank you, everyone, for being here, and thank you for your time. [applause] >> important inform keep the drains clear it impacts the

flooding in the environment and the neighborhoods. >> hopefully, we'll have another rainy season that is important people keeping up tare trains 72 hours one thing to captain about things but take responsibility. >> we will in the best city in the world keep it clean. >> i invest a live-in san francisco for 38 years and proud owner of here. >> if we chip in i'm daniel a small business owner in the tenderloin and named in any drain after any boss. >> wear gloves. >> i'm diane this is kay we're in the golden gate hewitt's area and deposited 3

>> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to cleanpowersf.org, i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill, i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind

knowing you're doing your part in your household to help the environment.

>> supervisor cohen: good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i want to welcome you back to the budget and finance committee. it's monday morning, june 25. we're ready to go. we've got sfgovtv assisting us with today's broadcast. thank you, and i want to thank and recognize linda wong, who is our clerk today, recognizing that we ha've got sandy fewer o