>> commissioner kopp: i thought it was to give the public an opportunity to comment and review that amendment. de novo is not a trivial principal, and i would think people might have opinions about it. >> commissionerly. >> commissioner lee: thank you, madam chair. my support for taking action on attachment 1 today there are a couple reasons. one, i do agree with the director that the more time to allow the public to get used to the new regulatory changes and more importantly for the staff to prepare. we are hitting the holiday season in december, and much of what is included in attachment 1

was already discussed at the last meeting. it was based on the last discussion that we had that the staff had prepared for attachment 1. i do think that the public had the opportunity to comment, am i right, at the last meeting? the proposed regulatory changes were reflected by the commission's comments as well as public comment. >> that's correct, but i think the point from commissioner kopp and that i was making as well, the public notwithstanding we are adviced that the change in standard every view is within the scope of the notice that it

is a change, that we have discussed here and given public comment. it would give people an opportunity to read the language and review it. in the interest of transparency and comedy, i guess i am arguing that we just make that change and bring the regulations back in december. you can put it on as separate item so it is clear it can move forward independently from the legislative recommendations. it is separate and apart from recommending that we change the law which is a much more complicated process requiring board vomit. to get along and give the public an opportunity i would say -- i am not sure where we are on the motions. i am inclined to put it over to december.

>> commissioner kopp: first thing to do is adopt the amendment. >> the current pending motion t approve attachment 1 as amended with the new standards for law and for fact. that was seconded. now what we -- do we need to have a separate amendment to approve the second motion to approve the amendment? >> you can take a separate motion to approve the amendments then resolve whether you are going to pass the amended regulations today or put them over to next month or you could act on what i understand is now with commissioner lee's motion or commissioner renney's motion to pass it today in two steps or one. >> two steps.

first motion to amend attachment 1 to provide for standard every view for dinovo for fact and clearly rereasonious issues of law. is there a second? >> i need the motion. i am not seconding it. >> commissioner kopp: i second it. >> all in favor. that passes unanimously. the second motion. commissioner ambrose original motion was to approve today do you want to go forward or a to hold it over? >> that was commissioner renee's motion. >> commissioner kopp: the motion i make we approve attachment 1

as amended. >> i will second. >> all in favor. those opposed. so the motion carries 3-2. >> agenda item 6 discussion of monthly staff policy reports. >> thank you, chair. item 6 sets forth the policy divisions report on activity over the last month. i won't go through it. it is best to make myself available for questions. you will see the public financing review project at item 5 appears here, and otherwise there are items not before you today. i would be glad to answer

questions about those. >> i have one question on page 3, item b-1 whistleblower ordinance. the rules committee meeting on november 7th was cancelled. is there a date for the next meeting? >> i believe there is to be one more meeting before the legislative session ends. i don't know the exact date. i am regularly checking in with the chair of the rules committee and trying to get an update on whether or not this item will appear at the meeting and the date. i have not gotten confirmation on that. >> it is possible it could be heard on the latest session but it is possible it will be held over, pushed to next year. >> that's correct. >> thank you. commissioner lee.

>> commissioner lee: i just have a question. given the whistleblower ordinance as well as the ethics reform ordinance, both authors are to relieve the board at the end of this year. do you have any idea whether someone else has picked up sponsorship of these bims or where is it going? >> i can't hear you. >> commissioner lee: the whistleblower as well as the proposal since both of the sponsors will be leaving the board at the end of this year. do you have any idea if someone else is going to pick up the steam, so to speak, or what is going to happen to them? >> whistleblower i don't know. that is a good question. i am not sure what would happen if president cohen were to leave the board. >> she is leaving.

>> if the item were outstanding. maybe the deputy attorney can speak on that. >> there is a process when the sponsor or all sponsors of a piece of legislation leave the board and the legislation is pending the clerk will reach out to all supervisors to see -- to see if they will take it up. if one says yes, it will stay alive. if no sponsor moving it, the clerk will file the item and it won't move forward. >> if that were to happen we would reach out to the supervisors to see if we could find someone to pick the item up rather than letting it float on the wind. >> commissioner kopp: refresh my memory. i am looking at the summary of bills watch.

did the commission take a commission on each of those bills our none of them? >> none. this is from the fppc. >> commissioner kopp: i know the origin. >> support is not this commission. that is fppc. >> commissioner kopp: i remember a year ago discussing this subject of following bills which affect our subject matter and taking positions on them. has that been abandoned or never instituted? >> i think this list is made available to you in part to keep you appraised should you wish to take a position on it, this is to lets you know what bills you might want to take a position on. >> commissioner kopp: starting in january or february when bills are introduced, we will be

informed in the meeting packet? >> i will continue to provide this list. >> commissioner kopp: thank you. >> for the commission, for the record, the commission cannot take a position on state legislation on behalf of the city. only the board of supervisors or the state legislation which is another city body. >> we can recommend it? >> yes. >> commissioner kopp: i think we should if inclined and interested to do so. >> any other comments or questions for mr. ford? public comment on this item? there being no public item agenda item 7 staff enforcement report including update including highlights and

activities since the last monthly meeting. >> commissioners, you have seen the report that is concise. i will observe there are new graphics for you and the public to be hopefully better appraised of the complaints before the enforcement division. both in terms of those in preliminary review, which is the process we have described as triage and those complaints under open investigation. i would like to acknowledge staff of the electronic disclosure and data analysis team for making those graphics available to you. i am happy to receive question the commissioners might have. >> any questions? just warranted to commend you

and -- wanted to commend you and the team for making progress against the big backlog of cases and also they keep coming. keep it up. well-done. public comment on agenda item 7. there being number. we move too item 8. discussion of the executive director's report. >> thank you. this report has had brief updates for you. we want a quick snapshots of the forecast from election 2018 in terms of the scope of work, volume of public financing and candidates in the june and november elections. as a segway to identify two key activities that we will turn to

separate and apart from what you normally see regarding election related work. there is a requirement in the ordinance that we provide a report every post-election to the board and mayor's office about the public financing program so that is something we will work to do in the normal course of things, summarizing information and data from june and november since we had both elections this year. that report we will base on the final calendar year figures those are semi-annual reports at the end of january. we will present that to you for informational purposes and through that process as we issue other items of interest there we will highlight those in the report as well as basic statistics for the record year after year about the public financing program. in terms of the required audit,

you may recall we did secure the report of the controllers office for the 2016 campaign of public financed candidates. the controller has agreed to provide support for the mandatory public financing audits for the 2018 candidates there. are five committees to be audited. we will work to do the auditors of nonpublic finance candidates as well as remaining audits from the 2016 election. because you have enthusiasm year's busy -- because of this year's busy election process we are completing the 10 audits that are not completed. we have committee audits we selected. we will do that now post-election. we will be working to leverage

fund us that are available through the language of the campaign finance ordinance we can tap some of the election campaign fund for administration of work related to the fund. we believe accountability for public financing audits is a piece of that. that is something we will leverages to defray the resources to help with the november 2018 campaigns we audit, 10 of those. we are returning to audits to hope to make progress on that and continues assistance of controller's office. that is where we are. we continue to be in the exam phase for five positions that have been in recruitment. we are moving from written exam

to oral exam in the next month. i detailed information how that process works. we are attempting to be as aggressive as we can given constraints for when exams can be scheduled with core exams. we are making progress. we will look forward to giving you more information next month where we are. i am happy to take questions you might have. >> with regard to hiring do you anticipate you will be able too make offerers early new year. >> i hope so. >> so ideally we will be staffed up in the first quarter? >> i hope that is the case. any other questions from commissioners on this report? public comment? no public comment.

okay. agenda item 9. discussion possible action regarding probable cause determination for complaint received for violations. if there is a desire to go into closed session to discuss this. we will take public comment on agenda item 9. there being none and no motion to go into closed session we will head to again take item 10. discussion and possible action regarding probably cause for complaint alleges violations of lobbyist ordinance article 2, chapter 1 of the san francisco campaign and government conduct code. >> to clarify we placed it on the agenda as a place holder. no commissioner requested to

calder the report for consideration. it is a dead item. there will be no action, discussion our public comment. >> i was wondering what that was. agenda item 11 discussion and possible action on items for future meetings. public comment on agenda item 11. >> commissioner kopp: my question is what is the decision on the december meeting? >> it will be held on the regular scheduled date dust 21 -- december 21st at 2:00. >> when? >> december 21st, friday at 2: 2:00. public comment on agenda item 11. agenda item 12. additional opportunity for

public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda pursuant to ethics commission by laws article section 2. okay. motion to adjourn. >> commissioner kopp: so moved. >> second. we are done. we are adjourned. have a wonderful give everyone. have a wonderful thank giving everyone. we are

shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services within our neighborhoods, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> my name is ray behr. i am the owner of chief plus. it's a destination specialty foods store, and it's also a corner grocery store, as well. we call it cheese plus because there's a lot of additions in addition to cheese here. from fresh flowers, to wine, past a, chocolate, our dining area and espresso bar. you can have a casual meeting if you want to. it's a real community gathering place. what makes little polk unique, i

think, first of all, it's a great pedestrian street. there's people out and about all day, meeting this neighbor and coming out and supporting the businesses. the businesses here are almost all exclusively independent owned small businesses. it harkens back to supporting local. polk street doesn't look like anywhere u.s.a. it has its own businesses and personality. we have clothing stores to gallerys, to personal service stores, where you can get your hsus repaired, luggage repaired. there's a music studio across the street. it's raily a diverse and unique offering on this really great street. i think san franciscans should shop local as much as they can because they can discover things that they may not be familiar with. again, the marketplace is changing, and, you know, you look at a screen, and you click a mouse, and you order

something, and it shows up, but to have a tangible experience, to be able to come in to taste things, to see things, to smell things, all those things, it's very important that you do s >> 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 a coram.

it is 9:33 am. item one, rollcall. [roll call] >> thank you. item two, opportunity for the public to comment on any matters within the committee shall touch a jurisdiction that are not on the agenda -- the committee's jurisdiction that are not on the agenda,. >> item three, approval with possible modification of the

minutes of the august 13th, 2018, meeting. >> seeing none, item four. presentation from public works about -- i'm sorry. okay. i'll double. i'll double. -- i'll double check, all double check. >> aye. >> item four, presentation from public works about the 2011 in a row road repaving and street safety bond program and possible action by the committee in response to such presentation.

hold on. i'm sorry. it is not on yet. hold on. sorry. >> hello? good morning, chairman and members of committee. on the public manager with public works. i believe you have been listening to john thomas provide updates for many years on this

bond, and moving forward, i will be providing the updates. i'm here to present updates for the 2011 road repaving and street safety bond. this front page, the first slide here, on the left is something you have already seen. it is the overview of the original approved budget in 2011 , broken down by the different groups. we have the street repaving and reconstruction, $149 million and a bike pedestrian safety. traffic signal and street improvements, 20 million, sidewalk accessibility and sidewalks, 14 million and sidewalk accessibility improvements. to the right, we have updated photos of some streetscape projects currently in construction and one that has recently reached substantial completion. the first on the top left is that california will just california at laurel village streetscape. and the top right is the -- the

bottom right is the chinatown living alley. i will talk about highlights and accomplishments. public works has 48 completed street resurfacing contracts and four currently in construction. this update was as of september. since then, we have one of our projects that has reached substantial completion. on the presentation package shows we have taped 1,380 blocks out of the 1,423 blocks for the goal. to present day, a more updated number, we have paved 1,406 blocks. we are approaching our goal pretty quickly. and the chinatown living alley project has reached substantial completion in july of 2018. some of the upcoming milestones we have our -- we have a few streetscape projects that are

nearing completion this month. there is also the poke complete street project in the california laurel streetscape are anticipated to reach substantial this month. we have a remaining streetscape project that we anticipate advertising at the end of the month. as a reminder of the streets, it was a total of $250 million over three sales which includes interest. the third and final sale was $43.4 million -- i'm sorry, april 2016. as you all know, one of the challenges we have been facing in recent times is the financial reporting due to our sfpd implementation. we do have updates today. they are not 100% confident or 100% accurate, but we are moving

towards that. we have data to look at now and we are currently looking at a lot of the cleanup. the street repaving and reconstruction, as i mentioned, now it would be three projects under construction. the webster project project has reached substantial. and we anticipate completing the rest of the paving by summer of 2019. for our streetscape project, we can highlight the spot for the chinatown alley project that reached substantial and we have a few of these upcoming milestones. the streetscape projects will be anticipated to be completed in november. the curb ramp program and the sidewalk program, this light has not changed.

my understanding that for quite some time now, it has reached substantial and 100% completion for some time. we kind of keep this here as a show. for our roadway structure program, we do have 100% of the appropriate funds expended or encumbered and we have completed 39 out of our 40 projects. we have one remaining project, the richmond project that we use the bond funds for design and we are looking for construction funds which we have recently identified. we will be moving forward with the construction of this project and we anticipate completion in summer of 2020. traffic signals, we have these broken up into three different categories. from the last update, we were about 97 or 90% complete. since then, we completed all the

work so everything is 100%. that is something we can highlight and celebrate. this last slide is a snapshot of our most recent updated financial information. it has a broken down by the different programs such as the curb ramps, resurfacing structures, streetscape, traffic signals and we have the original budget appropriations and we have different columns for the expenditures and balances. for the most part, we have expended over 90% of the total budget for our bond. we have a couple of programs that are remaining. one being the street resurfacing program and the other one is the streetscape bike and pedestrian program. though sit at 96% and 87%. and we anticipate expending all

of the resurfacing funds by 2019 and the streetscape funds by 2020. are there any questions we. >> thank you. do you have any questions or comments? >> a couple comments and questions. i would like to congratulate you on your staff on the management and the implementation of these bond funds. i think as we are at the end of this bond expenditure, almost at the end of this bond expenditure , i think that the data and the projects completed reflective what was represented to the voters. it falls squarely inside the language of the bombs. and i mentioned in the past and in other ways, i know we have a full calendar, but i think it's important to point out or i would be remiss if i didn't

point out that you exceeded the goals in almost every category. you have either hit them, or exceeded the goal, even when the goals were revised because of additional -- like for street repaving, s.f. hope dollars that were not anticipated in an increase in the projected goal. that was satisfied also. when the goals walked up the, you are able to hit and reach those goals. in events that the goal wasn't to exceeded calculus certainly have each projected goal in each of these categories. and the remaining projects that are yet to be completed are all on-time and on budget, as i understand it based on our last conversations and based on the report. i wanted to recognize you and the staff at d.p.w. for

executing these contracts professionally, and accomplishing everything that the voters were promised when they voted for the bond. so thank you. >> any other comments? >> i have a question. i'm not going to take up your time, edmund, or the committee's , but i was hoping to get a point of contact for further detail about the transit signal priority program. tsp. would it be you or should it be somebody else? >> i can get the context to you. >> i will provide the context. >> i would appreciate that. >> sure. >> i'm not trying to get anything out of the voice of the committee, but we have a full agenda and i'm not speaking too well anyways pick whatever i learned, i'll be happy to report back in the next meeting. thank you.

>> any other comment from the committee? any public comment on the presentation? seeing then, let's move on. thank you. >> item five, presentation from the sfmta about the 2014 transportation and road improvement general obligation bond and possible action by the committee in response to such presentation. >> good morning. sorry about that. it looks like i have to stretch over here to be able to reach --

is this working? okay. can you hear me? good morning. i'm monique webster with sfmta and i'm here today to give you an update on the transportation road improvement general obligation bond. as a reminder, this bond was approved by the voters in 2014 and provides $500 million -- is there a problem? can you hear me? >> can everyone here? -- can everyone hear her? >> how is that? better? okay. [laughter] >> let's see. this will be better. my assistant will help me with

this today. this is collaboration between m.t.a. and public works. which we do a lot of. thank you, julia. i will start all over again. i'm monique webster and i am with the sfmta. i am the senior manager of capital finance. we also have a number of program managers throughout the divisions that manage the programs that are under this bond and -- let's see. we have a thin bench today because of the holiday, but i can try to answer any questions that you have on the projects themselves. as background, the bond was approved by the voters in 2014 and provides $500 million towards investing in transit reliability and safer streets. so far, a little bit under half of the bond funds have been issued and the first issuance was in 2015 followed by a much lighter bond issuance earlier this year for $173 million. there is also a supplemental

appropriation that was done last year which redirected a little bit of the portion of the funding from the first issuance to other projects that were -- we had to move money away from spot just projects that were spending slower than anticipated and were moved to use faster moving that had been anticipating funds from the second issuance. these next two slides show all of the projects, and their schedules to date, and the amount of general obligation bond funds that they have. to date, the bond is wanting over 40 projects across eight different investment categories. the largest funded category in terms of newer projects and dollar amounts -- and these projects are aimed at improving the reliability increasing travel times. there are $72 million in bond funds that have been allocated in this category to date. the second area of highest bond

funding at this point is the facilities projects. they are four projects that are founded of note on those projects. the bus maintenance facility had a ribbon cutting earlier this year and is substantially complete. there is also the metro east light rail vehicle facility where the bond funds help us with the project to build five additional tracks in the facility that allow us to store the expanded light rail vehicle fleets that we are current -- currently purchasing. that has also been completed. in addition to the sfmta projects, the bond also finds projects led by public works that are -- the better market street project and bite caltrain for the positive train control system and the electrification project. and also to bart to pay for a portion of the market street canopy. those are the canopies over the station entrances. a couple of them have opened

recently at civic centre and at powell station. on the pedestrian and street side, the bond funds are advancing a number of projects that focus on the dangerous intersections and corridors in the city. many of these projects are coordinated with the moving forward projects so they provides pedestrian and street safety enhancements, along with the moving forward project to ensure that we are being efficient in the delivery of these programs. most of these projects are concentrated on our high injury network as well. thank you, julia. expenditures, as of the end of september, and again these are preliminary numbers. as you have been hearing from some of the others, we have been having issues with s.f.p. not all the charges were in at this point in time but these are the latest numbers that we have. expenditures totalled $78 million as at the end of september which is about a third

of the under $240 million in available funds. another $23 million was uncovered to. we have a couple of categories where there are no expenditures yet or very little in expenditures. those are projects and programs being funded out of the second issuance. some of them are funded under multiple categories of the expenditures are taking place under some of the other categories before they move into these categories. okay. in terms of risks and challenges , these are ones we have discussed in the past with this committee. we thought it would be worthwhile bringing them forward again today. they are the amount of building an infrastructure construction going on citywide which is driving up cost and it can sometimes add to the contracting process and the timing of the contracting process and fewer

bidders are out there. we are seeing that in particular on some of the signals projects. large multi- agencies projects. we have a number of these projects which are coordinated with sewer, water and also with paving and coordination on those projects is going well but it does open up the window for additional delays to these projects because they are so complex. another one of the lessons we learned that we talked about a lot last year was that for some of our moving forward projects. we had underestimated the amount of time it would take to public outreach and engagement on these projects. i'm happy to report that we've done a really significant revamp of that whole process in our agency and we are really proud of it. we are now starting our outreach much earlier. we require all projects to go through a full public engagement plan, and we have a tremendous amount of training that is also happening within our agency for

staff and have a very clear expectation on public engagement with that, we have a whole bunch of slides at the back that i won't go through but in the interest of time, they do provide highlights and all of our projects. it's a lot of really nice pictures. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, mrs. webster. >> it you can take off. >> we will get a liaison report. >> we met with the m.t.a. staff on the 20th of september in anticipation of our meeting that got cancelled in october, and then again on the 7th of november with monique and her

staff. we learned what you have heard today in addition to that, we learned -- what would you call it, monique, your project management software that have been so problematic is now working adequately. we were glad to hear that because i know that that's a source of possible exposure to delete claims from the contractors who that system is designed to help get paid. that was good news. overall, we got a good report mean that the second bond which was so much larger than the first has been issued and so much money has already been spent and that progress is commensurate with the amount of money that they are spending, which is always a good sign. i have had some follow up with some m.t.a. staffers vis-à-vis

the need for a supplemental appropriations and it was, i think, tim and i will have a hard time pronouncing his last name. he had sent me some detailed information on the efforts that you guys had been making to try and make that system easier to implement. they have found, m.t.a. staff has found it is difficult in writing a bond to anticipate how much money will be spent on what and when. when they actually get to implementing the programs that they find that there may be expeditious -- it may be expeditious to shift money between different subcategories, and at this point, onto the current system, it takes the approval of the board of supervisors to make such a shift and i do not see any upside to

the process being that administratively intensive. it should take so much staff time, as much staff time as it would have to take to prepare a presentation to the board of supervisors and can only make that presentation when the appropriate committee of the board of supervisors is going to meet. on behalf of us, i hope on behalf of us, i would like to continue to work with the city, whatever agency the city government -- and it is also part of the controller post process office to streamline the process. and subsequent meetings, i will report back to the committee and to the public at large, who can now watch this on television. which has to be a thrill for everyone of us. that is as much as i would want to say. since the second meeting we had on the 7th of november, brenda attended and whatever she has to

add to what i said is the time to do it because my voice is just about gone. >> no, it was a very positive meeting. we were updated pretty much on what you will be presenting here in the public meeting and i'm glad that mr larkin shared with us his efforts to try and do something to speed up this process, this lengthy process that he talked about. i will open up to comments by other committee members in regards to this presentation. i just have one question or comment. i know and i may have covered this when we met, is that it looks like, with the second issuance -- it took about three and a half years for us to get to the second issue us and dove issuance and we are not quite halfway as far as dollars

expended. we are close to their and i know that the progression of these projects are not linear. based on your best estimate as you do your planning, can you give us an estimate of how long it might take to see the end of the bond spends quad is another three and a half years, or 3-4? again, this is just a guesstimate on your part. >> thank you. our projections are still holding to the original target of expending off bond funds to the entire amount of bond funds by the end of 2022. >> thank you. let me open up to public comment on this presentation. you had a comment? >> i want to take stevenson from the controllers to respond to mr larkin about the supplemental.

the requirements are in the budget and fiscal provisions of the admin code. they are standard and to my knowledge of this is a little bit dated. julia dawson or others may be able to correct me but a change of less than 15% is straightforward in most cases, and the controls can be set at different levels so when you design your original appropriation for the bond, you can hopefully obviate most of the reprocessing by the board of supervisors by purposely sizing the project and program allocations. just to say that, so you are aware and there are significant changes. i think the board approval of the supplemental is an important part of the overall transparency on the bond. that is the thinking behind it but we can certainly look at the original bond allocations to try and make it easiest to manage.

>> i understand the need for oversight because that's why there is a go door to go back to begin with. there was some misuse of bond funds for previous bonds, where things were supposed to have been used for but they flat out did get used for. but i think that there has to be some middle ground between the way we are now and the way we were then. i would never want staff to change the appropriation without at least informing the board of supervisors, but i can't imagine that in every case the board of supervisors wants or needs to review and approve it. they have to defer to staff at some point. if you can't trust the staff to do things that are fundamental to their mission, then we have a problem much deeper than the one that we are trying to correct right now. anyway, i would look to see if

there is a way of finding some reporting -- providing reporting to the board in lieu of asking for their approval. in other words, something where they could look at it and if they had any questions, they could object. but if they think it is all right, they could pass the approval without going through all the staff intensive work that is currently required. i will follow-up with you. >> if i might, with all due respect to commissioner larkin, and we frequently agree on many things, i have a different review on this as it relates to -- you trust staff and you trust them on the front part of the bond to make the appropriate allocation so that when it's represented to the voters, it is -- it doesn't have to be dead on the money. there is a window there.

there is a percentage in which they can move and they have discretion on. so without question, you have to trust your staff and you do it on the front and. if there are things that are unforeseen and they do come up, i think the board of supervisors subcommittees have regular scheduled meetings every 1212 weeks, very commonly. so you just go in front of them and they go up or down on it. that is my view. having said that, it also would require an admin change, which they can only do. it would be passing an ordinance which would amend the administrative code. i'm not 100% certain on the board of supervisors having exclusive ability to amend the admin code. may be another body can do it,

but i don't recall. >> i don't mean to overcomplicate this, but just to say that if it was felt that there was too much burden being taken to do supplemental appropriations and move money around, one of the ways to control that is when you do the original allocations is to appropriately sized the projects or the programs are the level at which the control is exercised so you can avoid that as much as possible. we are happy to take a look at the m.t.a. bond and make sure that those things are done appropriately so the lease burden is presented. i'm just saying both issues are going on. >> let me follow up and clarify a little bit. monique, correct me if i misrepresent what the situation is but what you are looking to do in moving funds around is not necessarily to make a permanent change in the allocation, but just if one set of projects is moving more quickly than another set from a different subcategory , you just want to