the markets will go on to fall 40%. okay? on page 4, we look at different characteristics of different major bull markets. this list, the 10 largest bull markets which range from like negative 27% to the great depression, and you see that the characteristics vary widely. our high valuations predictive of a major bear market? only five times out of 10 were high valuations present at the start of a major bear market. so half and half, a coin flip. the one factor that has been common among major bull markets is recession. they've been present in eight out of 10 major bear markets.

but this is critically important, is oftentimes the recession began well after the bear market was already underway, okay? this happened in 1929. it happened in the bursting of the internet bubble. and in the g.f.c. the recession only began well after the bear market was already well underway. so the bottom line here is that it's hard to point to -- i think that it's impossible to point to any single factor for any group of factors and say that we have a high level of confidence that there's going to be a bull market in our timeframe that we're buying the contract for.

and what we looked at is from the period where regulations began which is 1940 and we looked at every fiscal year, from july 1940 to june 2018. and so there's 78 years during that period. and what we wanted to know is how many years in those 78 years would buying puts at the start of the calendar year and letting them expire at the end of the year, how many years would buying puts have been a profitable trade. okay? and we looked at it in three ways. buying zero percent out of the money puts and buying 10 and buying 20% out of the money puts. so buying zero percent out of the money puts, the puts would have expired worthless in 66 out

of 78 years. it would have been a profitable trade and the markets would have fallen more than 5.2% out of 12 out of those 78 years. but the cumulative effect of that, again, for a current $10.2 billion equity portfolio, assuming that there's a constant rate of $10.2 billion every year is that you see that it would have had aining negative impactn the portfolio of a large sum of money. and the same for 10% out of the money puts is that it would have been a profitable trade only five out of 78 years. this seems remarkable of buying 20% out of the money puts will end them for one year if there was only one year where that proved to be a profitable trade and that was for the fiscal year ending june 30, 2009. it would not have been a

profitable trade in 1987, when the market fell a lot and it would not have been a profitable trade during any three years of the bursting of the internet bubble and it was a profitable trade in only one year. go ahead. >> if i could add that profitable trade doesn't mean that you would have enjoyed the results of that. the unsmooth market value of the plan in that one fiscal year went from 103% to 72%. it was a very painful year. if you had bought 20% out of the money puts you wouldn't have gone to 72%, you would have fallen to 74%. instead of falling from 103% of the -- of the -- of the fund status. and the market value -- instead of 103% to 72%, that 20% money

put option would have protected you as much to fall from 103% to 74% so it's not much protection. >> what was the worst year that we had? >> that's only purchasing on a one-year basis? >> yes. yes. if you bought those puts and all of those previous years you wouldn't have been 103% to start with, you would have been lower because you wouldn't have had those returns. >> so say you let those puts then expire at june 2009 and you didn't buy them again, you know. and instead of having a funded status now of 93% we would have 95%, is that right? >> probably pretty close, yeah. >> why was the effect so small? the market rebounded by the end of that time period? >> because the market falls from june-to-june by more than 20% plus the cost which was 1.7 -- it had to fall by more than 22%.

>> the market did begin to recover rapidly on march ninth, okay? it had a really robust rally in the second half of march and april. i don't recall what the return was from march to june but it was considerable. i believe that the market by march ninth at the start of the fiscal year was down about 40 but i think that it finished at a loss of 26 or 27%. i think that it's like negative 27% or 28%. so you have to get your timing exactly right. because when the markets -- because bull markets, they tend to -- they tend to be not always, again, every bull market has its own characteristics and 73%, 74% was just a drip and every month was down. and whereas in the bursting of the internet bubble, the markets

actually rose sharply for several months preceding the 2000 election. now the market gapped down quite a bit but then from about june to october it rose a lot and then when there was uncertainty about the presidential election it began to decline a lot. but my point is that in -- in every major bull market that there are often powerful cyclical short-term bull markets. for example, when -- when the markets fell considerably in january of 2008, they rose sharply in february of 2008. and then they fell again and then they rose again. and the clarity of whether or not we were in a really deep bear market did not become clear until the collapse.

so i'll finish up here real quick. so then on page six you can see the impact. if we had bought -- out of the money puts at various levels, if you would see that we would have had a very small decline if we had bought several percent out of the money puts but our current return out of the last 11 years would have been almost 2% less and as dan indicated for a 1% -- excuse me, 20% out of the puts is our return would have been almost 1% last annualized over the last 11 years. and looking at some of the charts, i thought that this was very relevant. how often has our plan experienced a large loss? okay, what we care about is we care about our funded status. and our funded status is measured at the end of every fiscal year and that's our key

sensitivity date, what is our funded status at june 30th. and our funded status at august 30th or march 31st is much less relevant, okay? it's june 30th. so that's why i wanted to look at how often do we experience a large loss? we only had one year where we have lost materially more than 10%. when we did lose, you know, more than 20%, okay? and that was in the g.f.c. and now remember that in the g.f.c. is, you know, the volatility in the equity market was something like about 5 acts relative to its normal standard deviation. and the volatility in the high-yield bond market was such that if you used normal probability of distribution or returns it should happen once in the history of the world. it was a real anomaly. and i might point that over 10

years things were okay, okay. we did recover and the world didn't collapse, it felt that it was but the world didn't collapse. let's look at our fiscal year returns. so you will see here this now shows every year that we've only had one year where we materially lost more than 20% and we've only had two returns where we lost materially more than 15%. on the next slide this shows how punishing or generous markets can be over short periods of time, one year. and you'll see that we've had five periods since the great depression where we lost more than 20% in any rolling one-year period of time and we've had two periods where we lost about 40%. and so if the bottom line of this message in the short term is that the markets can be generous or they can be punishing and we all know that.

and how about over longer periods of time. even over five years, you looked at since regulation that losses more than five years are relatively rare. and you look out over 10 years and the losses essentially are non-existent in the equity market, okay? what this is beginning to tell us is that over -- the markets are punishing or generous in the short term and we see that punishing element goes away. and let's look at how much it goes away and how much that punishing effect goes away. so over 20 years since regulation is we have earned a minimum of about 6% rate of return and annualized rate of return over a 20-year return in the equity market and how about a 30-year period.

and the minimum 30-year return in the s&p 500 since its inception has been 8.5%. that's its lowest return. how about compound, what is that? that's an 11.5% return over 30 years. the bottom line between the three charts in the short term, the markets are generous or they're punishing. but in the long term they've been generous. >> thank you. commissioner driscoll? >> commissioner driscoll: i'm not sure exactly what was the key question that you were trying to answer when you wrote all of this up, but i can make the case as well why puts on strategically almost doesn't make any sense.

but that's why we diversify across many asset classes. i'm not sure exactly how you represented the great recession here in your tables. or even if you accurately reflect that but i'll just let that one go. in your conclusion it's about the strategic use of puts. but then you sort of talk about the tactical. at one point you talked about there were five markets where valuations were excessive, is that the time to put puts on? it will be more expensive at that point in time, let alone netting it out. but i'm not trying to do this strategically or don't do it at all? >> we think that doing this strategically is a poor idea. we think that doing it tactically is an extremely difficult thing because you need to know the timing and the magnitude, you need to know how much a -- when it's going to

happen, when it will end, and how much it will -- how much the magnitude will decline? for example, we have been encouraged by one person who has been present in many of our readings and urging us in really, really strong language to buy puts for 3.5 years. that the market -- that there's, quote, going to be a bear market some time in the next five years. well, how helpful is that? you still need to know the exact time. it's not happened in the last 3.5 years. and so far buying 20% out of the money puts would have cost us a little over $600 million if we had done that. if we had bought zero percent out of the money puts it would have been devastating to the plan. so the message here on commissioner driscoll to do it tactically is that i just outlined how much it would have cost to try and do that tactically and if you were wrong

about the timing and the magnitude it would have been very, very costly. >> insurance is never cheap. >> um-hmm. >> i think that most of our buildings that we have fire insurance, how many do we have earthquake insurance? >> there's huge differences between buying insurance for an individual and buying insurance for a plan, okay? you -- the concept of insurance is to -- to insure against a loss that would be financially devastating for an individual should the small -- small probability of a loss -- a large loss -- actually occur, okay? that doesn't apply here because first of all we have a very long time horizon and, second, we

don't have a single individual. our entire net worth can't be wiped out. >> we had the advantages of pooling, okay? keep going. >> okay, that's it. >> the question is if we see high valuations, extreme valuation periods. is that the time to tactically use puts, sort of rediversifying all of our assets? we can tell our managers to send us 20% of their money for cash, we can do that, right? or we don't say anything to them and we put puts against all of their positions? there's all ways of managing risk tactically? >> right, right. so if we did see that environment and as a board, or a commission, as a staff, as a consultant, could we recommend or decide to buy puts for one short period of time we could. but we could also decide to

change the asset allocation. to something more appealing. that's something that we do every few years already when we consider it. >> that's not tactical then? it does take a long period of time. and leaving with the discretion of staff to do things today -- >> it could be faster now that we've hired a manager. >> there's all sorts of tools that know how to do it and all of that's otheof these other in. diversification is the number one way to do it but tactically there are things that we could do because we only have to lose money for one day. if it occurs on june 30th we

have to recognize that loss. and if it happens one day, that's the day that we recognize and that drives the contributions and we don't try to smooth or amortize things but that's whatte we have to do her. the question is not buying puts based on what we think will happen on june 30th but what will happen over the immediate term. is it paying for the insurance or not. maybe that did not come through here. you answered a question that some board member gave to you. >> i want to say thank you for the presentation and we'll probably lose a quorum very shortly so i'll ask the president if there's any more action items, we'd be happy to stay for an action item. >> clerk: i think that there's one more action item and we're

happy to move on. >> i have a question on this. first off, thank you for putting this together. i asked you guys to take your analysis last time and plus flut further here and it gets us to the point that you can't just buy competitively year after year and that clearly answers that question. but i think that for me i still have a little bit of a question as to whether or not you can do it tactically. and i understand that it's very difficult to do. are there any other plans out there that have done this or are doing it? >> tactically? >> or even just strategically but i assume that is not successful if it was strategic. >> i'm familiar with plans that have used overlays to change their overall exposure to equities and other asset classes

tactically. i'm not familiar with -- >> have they been successful? >> the one that i'm thinking of has lowered their equity exposure in the face of the strong equity performance over the last several years so that has been unsuccessful. >> there's a prominent endowment that thought that we were in a bear market in the mid 2000s and it was way under weight and that worked out very poorly. they were like 99%. and they terminated their c.i.o. who was making that call and then they went to a more normal equity orientation in 2007.

so a key here really is -- is if you're going to do it tactically, you know, how willing are you to be wrong and again you have to get that timing right. you can be right that we'll have a bear market some time in the next five or 10 years but if you have a big bull market in the first four years how long can you endure that pain of that having been wrong? >> it affects your contributions and whets our appetite for that kind of, you know -- >> so another approach then is to diversify your assets such that you're reducing your probability of a large loss along that -- along that time path strategically. >> let's do this -- i think that there's maybe a little bit more of a conversation to be had here but for the purposes of time

today, why don't we go ahead and we'll wrap this up and follow up offline and we can see if there's other questions that are worth being asked and answered. >> can i just float out one more idea real quick? >> sure. >> so in a prior 10-year, a couple decades ago, you know, we were concerned about our payout ratio and it was an endowment of what we could pay out, you know, at the end -- it was based on the fiscal year-end returns. so we did think about it because this was the internet bubble. we all knew that valuations were extremely high, it dominated every investment committee meeting. but we often thought of buying puts for like the last two months, you know, in july and august, just to lock in a 25% gain at fiscal year-end.

we ended up not doing that but we thought about it a lot. if you had a really, really good return and you're two months away from locking in your funded status at the end of the year to go, it's worth it to us now to miss out on a couple months of a bubble market, to lock in what we know will be a strong funded status at june 30th. that could be one option. >> interesting. okay. thank you very much. why don't we open it up for public comment? any members of the public -- did i call -- that would like to address the commission regarding this item? >> and one looking for protection in a down market, how many high-risk investments do you need? you decided that the edge phones are going to give us a down market protection. i think that now have invested in edge phones and you should stick with them. and you can find that any good

edge phone salesman will tell you that you have to invest more than 25% of the assets in edge phones to protect the other 75%. in the last down market in 2008, one million dollar debt, the s&p 500 outperformed edge fund. and the point of interest, the edge fund that was picked, the edge funds are the average loss of 21%. and if you would have invested one million dollars of your own money in those, after 10 years you'd have a gain of -- a net gain of $250,000. and if you had invested that one million dollars in the s&p 500 you would have had a gain of $850,000. nearly four times. so in a down market you should gravitate towards low-risk investments and not high-risk

investments. >> thank you. any other members of the public that would like to address the commission? seeing none we'll close public comment. next item please. >> clerk: item number 9, recommendation to terminate the focused emerging markets equity strategy, or the focused strategy. >> president stansbury: very good, commissioners. as the team makes it up here, a manager that we've had for more than a decade and we're recommending termination and ask kirk and alice to make a couple brief comments and dan is available as well. what was the reason for being handed another copy? >> there was a typo, my typo. in there we node that mod rirch on is under review list,

incorrectly since the third quarter of 2006. the manager under review list is the quarter of 2016. that's reflected in your corrected copy. good afternoon, commissioners, and in support of the termination of our investment management agreement. and they currently manage $220 million in their focused emerging markets equity strate strategy. and meeting a brief momento that has the -- memo that has rationale, i will turn it back to any comments that you may have. >> thank you for putting so many numbers on the page to include

cardigan. we know that it's sometimes difficult for us to put a ma manager when we're terminating them. sometimes people like to see the names on papers and sometimes they do not. but this thing about whether any manager would like to work with our system, i think they should take heart in the fact that how long we stayed with them despite their performance. and if you look at cardigan, why the heck did you hire them? we more than give people the chance, more than the risk they will take and this does not include the group that back tested data in order to hire them? but if staff believes that they're good people, it's not always numbers, it's the qualitative issues and we will invest with them and call it taking a chance. if we believe in what they will do, we will do that. so if anyone thinks that it

gives them a fair chance to be hired they should see this as evidence that we will do that. whether they bid for our work, that's their decision. but, again, i don't like bad numbers more than anyone else does but we believe in people and we'll take a chance to them. and they just have to prove how good they are. and most of the time we get it right and sometimes we get it wrong. maybe this is one of those cases. we have a unique history with them like a few other money managers who we said that we knew them before we invested with them. so that's it. >> any questions? a motion. a second? >> second. >> president stansbury: motion, and a second. why don't we open it up for public comment? any members that would like to address the commission regarding this item? seeing none we will close public comment. can we take this item without objection?

yes? okay. item passes. thank you very much. commissioner casciato, there is the -- what is your timing looking like? >> i'd like to go before the garage closes. the gate closes. >> president stansbury: i think that we have really just a couple items, we have a chief investment report. >> at 10 to i'm walking out of the door. >> president stansbury: okay. >> clerk: discussion item, chief investment officer report. >> okay, here we go. front page, you will see that we returned 1.02% for the month and equities up a couple percent, in particular our global equity manager aerostreet does really well. and the private market strategies were all slightly in the green. i did want to turn to page 2 and highlight one thing.

and that is that we have added a column off on the far right side and that is the dollar amounts of our unfunded commitments. again, we're on page 2 on the far right side in the new column. and that is to show just a magnitude of our unfunded commitments because it's grown quite a bit. and we were at less than $2 billion, 3.5 years ago. we are still in a good position and we monitor this all of the time and there's a lot of metrics and someday we'll walk through it. and commissioner driscoll asked to do a cash flow for casting and so we will walk through that in a future meeting but we are in good position here. but we want increased visibility for the board to see the dollar amount of our unfunded commitments. if we turn to also -- also to the graph, i'm not sure that i see a page on it but commissioner driscoll, you asked

for the liabilities on the spurs monthly net assets that is included. and i do have a couple obligations i need to walk through in the c.i.o. report. you know, first of all in terms of economic conditions, everything is still quite solid. and earnings growth has been really, really good and it's north of 20% for the last couple quarters. and as long as earnings growth is going to be good, the markets, that should put a line on anything that happens in terms of valuations and those kinds of things. the markets don't do well when earnings decline. and the -- i did want to point out on page 3 just the status of our implementation of the strategic asset allocation and you can see that we have come quite a long ways. you will see our rate in june of

2014, both our policy and our actual. the bottom line is that except for private credit we are most of the way through on everything, okay? and the private credit is one that we still think is going to take about five to seven years but we are anticipating making a large recommendation next month. i just want to say quickly that liquidity in the bond market continues to dry up and i just want the board to an, whatte, a, it can take a long time to sell assets that we think are taking a long time to sell. some obligations in terms of reporting things to the closed session, board approved in closed session. beacon light which is a short manager we asked the board to approve $225 million and we have funded $100 million of that and future funding will come over the course of time.

and d.c.m., which is a venture capital strategy, we asked for $50 million and the board, and we received $35 million. and a strategy that the board approved earlier this year, we requested $100 million and we did get the full $100 million. and k4 private investments which is a software oriented mid-market buyout strategy, we asked for $50 million and we did get all $50 million. kitty hawk, we asked for -- this is real assets, real estate real assets strategy and we asked for £40 million euros and we got £35 million euros. and pepperton, we asked for $60 million in u.s. dollars and we did get $60 million. we have a couple additions, closings that took place, on

thursday night and friday respectively that i believe that the board has received print copy of. first regarding polaris, this is a growth equity strategy in the portfolio and we asked for $30 million and we got $21. and solis which is a distressed credit oriented strategy in our buyout -- excuse me, in our out state return strategy that we asked for $300 million and the board approved that. we did fund the first $100 million on august 1. and with that that's the close of the c.i.a. report. >> president stansbury: are w we (indiscernible) the funding? >> yes, they are calling capital as they see opportunity. >> president stansbury: and questions from the board? >> not really questions but, one, the cash flow that we

talked about is a big issue and it will be a subject for the investment committee to talk about because it's a large task that he and his team has to manage. and in the immediate term though is the fact that it's not simply that private debt which would take several years to get to that allocation target but now we're overwreat and that's a tactical decision. and we're underway real assets and we're at 4%. and so we look at a public equity as a private equivalent and i look at those three groups together.

>> it's a long bull market. tactically the decision is that you park the money at your decision which we are supporting. (please stand by).

>> clerk: item 11 -- >> let's call items 11 and 12 together. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i will make this quick in the interest of time. item 12 before you is a monthly activity report. i just wanted to point out on page 3 that we had included a line item to call out the target dates

-- i will keep this quick. we had our meeting on july 25 where we had interviewed the three semifinalists, which are indicated in commissioner bridges report. and we are authorized to conduct offsite due diligence. we were busy flying all over the country visiting these vendors. i wanted to report that they were very beneficial and helpful and able to learn things that were not seen on paper and that will help us in crafting our recommendation to the board. we plan on finalizing our recommendation to the committee on september 19. we're targeting an october board

recommendation, but that could change and that's my update. >> thank you. commissioner bridges? >> my report is not different than the report in that we had a very lengthy meeting july 25 and committee supports everything in her recommendation that we did review the semifinals of all three and the onsite due diligence, so looking forward to hearing the recommendations coming back from the visits to understand all the details of the offsite and due diligence. once we hear all of the recommendations from the travel and research, then we'll come back as a committee and make recommendations to the full board. >> thank you very much. let's open it up for public comment. any members of the public that would like to address the

commission on this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment. anything further from the board? great. on item number 13, i'm going to continue that, pending feedback from our newest commissioners. and then why don't we help on to item 14, please. >> clerk: item 14, travel expense reports for the quarter ended down30, 2018. >> we'll take it as submitted. any members of the public that would like to address the commission on this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment. anything from the board? >> a lot of due diligence going on out there.

>> any questions from the board? seeing none, we'll open it up to the public. any members of the public that would like to address the commission on the executive director's report? seeing none, we'll close public comment. is there a 16? >> yes. >> let's call item 16.

anything from the board? >> the september 19 meeting of the investment committee is on september 19, following the deferred compensation meeting that morning. thanks to commissioners, we have a commissioner coming to speak at the meeting. we want to start promptly at 1:00 to take advantage of the amount of time we have with him. he's a world-class investor, very strong views on the credit market. so my request to the board, please be on time so we can start on time. if you can't be here at 1:00, sit in the back of the room and don't come waltzing up here. hopefully we'll start at 1:00. >> we'll send out a reminder to everyone.

anything else from the board? seeing nothing, we'll open it up to public comment. any members of the public that would like to address the commission only about the good of the order? >> i am a great believer in punctuality. in the last 50 years, i don't think i've been late five times. all you members waltz in whenever you feel like and you give the impression that you are only concerns about your own time and nobody else. i think that you should be on time. people behind me probably have other commitments and meetings. so when you start late, it may make them late for their meetings. thank you. >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public that would like to address the commission regarding this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment.

>> there are no reports -- board member reports or comments. >> nothing in the packet, right, for item 17? >> that's right. >> meeting adjourned, everyone.

>> supervisor kim: good morning. thank you for your patience as we waited to get on line. welcome to the treasure island mobility management agency. alberto quintanilla is our clerk. i want to acknowledge sfgov tv for broadcasting the meeting. mr. clerk, can you please call the roll? [roll call] >> clerk: we have a quorum.

>> supervisor kim: thank you so much. i will begin with the chair's report today. and i just want to highlight recently as we test out different technologies on treasure island that the metropolitan transportation commission, which i also sit on, effort to update the clipper transit fare payment system. clipper has made great strides in integrating bay area operator transit fares to a single fare card but the system is decades old and in need of renewal and enhancement. clipper 2.0 is a critical opportunity to achieve excellent customer service experience, bring technology to transportation payment and improve administrative effiency for operators and agencies including timma. as we move forward with the next generation of clipper, we need to ensure that clipper 2.0 will be nimble and advance forward. new york city, who is going through a similar process, has chosen to do away with paper tickets altogether and introducing a mobile option for

phones as well. los angeles is piloting a platform that allows passengers to pay transit and toll with a single account. we want a system that is able to integrate with other transportation services. i want to urge us to help ensure clipper incorporates the innovative ideas and ensures seamless transitions between multiple modes of transportation. i look forward to working with my colleagues here at mtc to look at clipper 2.0 and making transit more convenience and affordable for current and future residents alike. i want to -- i apologize, mr. clerk. could you call items 2 and 3. >> clerk: item 2, chair's report, information item. item 3, executive director report, information item. >> supervisor kim: i would like to bring up our deputy director to present. >> good morning, eric cordoba,

area director capital project. happy to deliver the executive director's report. let's start with the good news, regional measure 3 has been approved. that's good news for timma, especially when it comes to a potential $300 million ready and available for ferry, transportation, capital projects across the region, including treasure island. we expect funding will be available in early 2019 and we look forward to working with mtc and the water emergency transportation authority on accessing this prague rachlt let's move on to the regional mobility as service opportunities. we've had discussions and participating with mtc and the bay area transit agencies related to the clipper fare payment system that you just mentioned. the clipper -- there's a clipper executive board that oversees the system's next generation upgrade known as c2. the clipper executive board

discusses the role of the clipper system in supporting mobility as a service or moss. you will hear a lot of that term here over the next couple of years. month is an alternative to vehicle ownership where people can access shared mobility, with trip planning, payment and navigation. timma staff will participate in follow-up discussions in that regard. we provided a letter of support just recently to the contra costa transportation authority for an application for federal transportation management, technologies, grant funds. the grant award would support the region alamos platform with initial deployment in contra costa. let's move on to water transportation, which is a major potential benefit here for the island. and that we as staff are starting it focus on. at its march 1, 2018, meeting,

we authorized staff to proceed with an exploratory study of smaller vessel explorations. they would look at the cleaner vessels delivered relatively quickly for initial service for locations such as treasure island. from our perspective, treasure island is probably one of the optimum locations to have a pilot in that regard. if you have had the opportunity to move back and forth between treasure island and the ferry building, it's only about a 10- to 12-minute run, so we think there's a lot of opportunity here. the study will be overseen by a committee of the board comprised of directors. we're working actively with a scope of work that includes treasure island as a case study for smaller vessel service and will participate on the

technical staff advisory committee. let's move on to federal highway administration. national congestion pricing conference. there's a spotlight on treasure island. fhwa invited staff to present at the pricing conference at the u.s. department of transportation in washington, d.c. there was on may 22 and 23. the conference covered a range of pricing strategies, for example, managed lanes, computer incentives and parking, pricing. principal planner rachel hyatt presented on overhaul of housing, pricing, travel demand management. the conference host has provided funding for timma policy analysis in the 2013-2016 time frame. moving on to local issues, we're right now actually planning a tour of the island for the commissioners. we had hoped to do it this week. the weather looked like it was going to cooperate, but we'll go

ahead and do it a different day. so we'll work with your schedules, to do that, commissioner ronen, as requested. next item, advanced transportation and technology deployment. once again, the grant as reported, sfmta and sfcta have been awarded $10.99 million. of that total, $5 million is being utilized by timma and will support the toll system design and implementation. $300,000 will support the piloting of an autonomous circulator shuttle on the island. at its june 29, timma meeting, we provided an update on grant award and are ready to move forward with utilization of of funds and are excited to that opportunity. related to that, staff will speak at the upcoming automated vehicle symposium scheduled for july 9-12. the annual symposium is

organized by the national transportation research board and so hes yugs for unmanned vehicle systems international. on the project delivery front, as it relates to construction here, there are numerous construction projects that are just starting right now on yerba buena island. let's talk first about what was recently completed. as you all know, the efforts that we led the i-80 westbound on and off ramps is complete. also completed vista point. we're working to make the vista point facility permanent. so working with mtc in that regard and also with the u.s. coast guard. we're really excited about that opportunity. future projects include mccalla road widening. and moving on to the next phase of work, the i-80 south gate

road project, which we hope to bring to construction in spring, 2019, which transportation authority will lead. and, finally, to complete the roadway network, the west side bridges, retrofit of seismically 7 deficient bridges on the western slope of the island. we want to brung that to construction in 2020 time frame with the goal of having all of the major roadway infrastructure completed by the summer of 2021, including the toling systems as well as enhanced transit, a.c. transit, and in particular initial ferry service. so that's the goal. a lot ahead of us over the next three years. and i'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. >> supervisor kim: all right. at this time, see nog questions for mr. cordoba, we'll open up

for public comment on items 2 and 3. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. mr. clerk, can you please call item 4. >> clerk: approve the minutes of the january 23, 2018, meeting. this is an action meeting. >> supervisor kim: do we have a motion? a motion from sheehy and seconded by fewer. at this time, open up for public comment on item 4. seeing no public comment on item 4, public comment is closed. can we take a roll call, please, on item 4? [roll call] >> clerk: we have approval. >> supervisor kim: thank you. would you please call items 5 and 6 together?

>> clerk: item 5, amend adopted fiscal year 2017/18 to decrease revenues annex pend tours by $2.1 million, action item. item 6, adopt the proposed fiscal year 2018/19 annual budget and work program. this is an action item. >> supervisor kim: thank you. i want to bring up cynthia fong, deputy finance administration to present on the adopted proposed budget amendments. that's what's in my agenda. if it's not you, i can call up somebody else. >> cynthia fong, deputy director finance administration. both items were in past timma meetings. if it's the desire it have a full presentation, staff is more than happy to, otherwise, i can take any questions that you have on this item. >> supervisor kim: seeing no questions, we have the annual budget and work program action time. and eric cordoba is available to answer any questions that

committee members might have on this item. >> if there are any questions, eric and i are here to answer them. >> supervisor kim: all right. seeing no questions. at this time, open up for public comment on items 5 and 6. see nog public comment, public item is closed. can we take 5 and 6, same house, same call? we do that without opposition. mr. clerk, can you please call item 7. >> clerk: authorize executive director to accept on the treasure island mobility management agency's behalf all interests real property action. >> supervisor kim: any questions? we'll open it up for public comment? seeing no public comment, close public comment. can we take this same house, same call? without opposition. can you please call 8 and 9. >> clerk: item 8, introduction

of new items. item 9, public comment. >> supervisor kim: any new items? seeing none, we'll open it up for public comment for 8 and general public comment. seeing no public comment, we'll close for 8 and 9. mr. clerk, are there any other items before this committee? >> clerk: item 10, adjournment. >> supervisor kim: meeting is adjourned. .

welcome to tonight's san francisco unified school district board meeting. -- please go to the corner to borrow a headset, and we will do the simultaneous interpretation for you. and this message will be repeated in cantonese and spanish later. [speaking foreign language] [speaking