[gavel] >> good morning and welcome to san francisco county transportation authority board meeting for today, september 24th, 2019. our clerk is mr. alberto quintanilla. could you please call the roll. >> clerk: item 1 roll call. brown i. commissioner fewer? >> present. >> commissioner haney? haney present. commissioner mandelman? mandelman absent. commissioner mar? mar present. commissioner? >> present. >> commissioner safai? safai absent. commissioner stefani? >> present. >> clerk: commissioner walton? walton present. commissioner yee. yee absent. we have quorum. >> chair: thank you. colleagues, if you will indulge

me, because of caltrain's general manager's schedule, i would like to take a few things out of order this morning and start with -- well, the chair's report, which would be inappropriate. next item. so with that, i will give the chair's report. this month we focus our attention on regional transportation and the future of caltrain, with a presentation on the long-awaited caltrain business plan and service. i want to thank mr. hartnet for being here with members of his staff to present this update. you've seen him before here at previous meetings. and i want to thank jim and his staff for working with our staff and the city on this important effort for transportation up and down the peninsula. and with the electrification program that we all fought so hard for to get the $647 million

under way and ridership levels at an an all-time high, this is the opportune time to plan for growth and development of the plan. we look forward to hearing staff's recommendations, which i understand to be appropriately ambitious, as rail is one of the keys to sustainability of the west bay corridor. delivering the baseline improvements alone, including the extension of caltrain to the transit terminal, which we previously discussed here, will be a big lift. when i say lift, i don't mean like lyft and our, but a monumental under taking. this means we need to understand and face the challenge of this endeavor. as the organizational assessment note reports, it's the most productive railroads in the country -- addresses the upcoming transformation and the status quo is no longer viable.

so i hope that the conversation about supporting the bigs plan will include a conversation about how to set caltrain up for success over decades to come, not only in terms of funding, but also organizationally. i know caltrain joint powers authority is deliberating many complex issues, from how to grow and retain staff, to securing permanent long-term funding, to support caltrain's development. and i really want to thank our commissioner and colleague supervisor walton for working collaboratively with our regional counterparts on these questions. and for raising the need for sound analysis and independent advice on organizational structures and government options. as the board resolution that we passed earlier this year suggests, we do believe in independent dedicated and well-resourced agency is needed to realize caltrain's potential going forward. san francisco is committed to working in partnership with our

joint powers board colleagues. and the region to discuss this and support a stronger caltrain over the coming weeks and months and years. that concludes the chair's report. is there any public comment on the chair's report? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, if you'll indulge me, i would like to take item 6 out of order. mr. clerk, could you please read item number 6. >> clerk: this is an information item. >> chair: mr. hartnet, mr. fungy, good morning. >> good morning. >> chair: hold on, jim. we'll turn that microphone on. alberto. >> good morning, mr. chair. thank you so much for having us here today. i'm pleased to have the opportunity. i have with me the key responsible parties and experts on each of the subject areas

that we would like to address this morning. john fungy, who is head of our electrification program. michelle bouchard is the chair of the -- chief officer for rail, which includes the p.t.c. program and sebastian petty, who is in charge of the business plan efforts. and each of them will be making brief presentations. we'll be happy to answer any questions. my role is to support them and to help them this their presentations, but they're the experts in the field. i apologize for this schedule. they certainly can stay as long as you desire. and i will as well. the santa clara county board of supervisors set the same item today as well for 12:00 noon and said by 12:15, our presentation

is done. so i have to at least be there to help present there. but thank you for this opportunity. and we appreciate all of your support. and this is a great transformative time for caltrain. so we're really pleased to be here and present to you. so first we'll start with john. >> chair: thank you, jim. hopefully caltrain will take you there timely. [laughter] >> good morning, chair peskin, supervisors. john fungy. the caltrain -- the calmont program includes the electrification project and the electric procurement that upgrades the safety, and reliability of caltrain service, along the peninsula corridor. the current electrification project will electrify the corridor from san francisco to san jose and replace caltrain's diesel service with high-performance electric

trains. reducing air pollution and providing better service to more riders. there we go. sorry about that. >> chair: no worries. >> at your service, john. >> thank you, michelle. so the existing caltrain system, 32 stations from gilroy to san francisco. as chair peskin indicated, the ridership has grown dramatically from 30,000 to over 60,000 riders on a daily basis. the electrified area is south of san jose, north to san francisco, approximately

51 miles. the basic project elements of the infrastructure project are two major upgrades or actual replacements of the substations, one at east grand and the other in san jose. and incorporation of 10 facilities that will convey the power along the 50 miles, along with the contact wire and transformers. from the electric trains, the procurement contract is 133 trains. it will be purchased as part of this project. all -- well, the majority of the work of the infrastructure work happens at night, between 7:45 in the evening until 5:30 in the morning. that includes the settings of the foundation, the poles, the wires. the only components that actually occur during the day is

work outside of the rail right right-of-way, like the upgrades to the pg&e substation. the electric vehicles are currently in fabrication in salt lake city. we have approximately two and a half train sets in various stages of operation, of assembly. those vehicles, the first vehicle will be ready for testing in may of '20. and we'll be sending that first vehicle for the required f.r.a. prototype testing to the ttc i facility in pueblo, colorado. to summarize the benefits of an electric train, convenience, comfort, capacity and sustainability. the overall program budget is $1.98 billion. the program is scheduled to go into revenue service in may of

2022. the infrastructure project is currently forecasted to be completed in december of 2021. and with that, that completes my presentation. and i'd like to turn it over to michelle bouchard, the chief operating officer for rail. thank you. >> chair: thank you, mr. fungy. and ms. bouchard, the floor is yours. >> so i'm going to give a brief update on our positive train control project. this is essentially the third leg of the calmont program. just to briefly explain what p.t.c. is. it's a complex signal system overlay. so it's a safety system that overlays the existing signal system, that provides for trains to brake and to be precluded from getting into unsafe situations, even if the engineers are not operating the train appropriately. it's important to understand,

though, that training is still fundamental for our engineers. it's not automatic train operation. and so we like to say the p.t.c. system will never kick in if an engineer is operating his or her train appropriately. it is a federal mandate. so we are required to have safety certificate success from the f.r.a. at a date certain. that date is december 31st, 2020. we just reached a major milestone in our program, as of september 7th. we actually entered into the first trains running p.t.c. enforced with passengers on board. and what happens is that what we call revenue service demonstration. it rolls out over the course of the time. over the course of the next three months, we're increasing the number of trains that are operated in revenue service. i'm happy to report that things are going very well with this testing. this testing period is used to

shake out any system bugs, to ensure that folks are trained both from an operating and maintenance perspective. the f.r.a., our regulator, on property often to be able to oversee this testing. and so we're really happy to have reached that milestone, which is critical to achieving the next milestones, which involve operating on the gilroy segment, which is actually union pacific-owned property. so we're working hard with the u.p. and very cooperatively. so that's going well. that's anticipated in december 2019. and meeting these deadlines and milestones are critical to then submitting our safety plan, which is the final plan to the f.r.a., that will then take about six months for them to concur with, to ask questions about, in hopes of full safety security in december 2020. so you see over here the budget. we're working well within our

budget. and anticipate the need for no additional funds through the life of this project. so where that that completes our calmod update. here you see the information as to where you can get more information online and to contact us at caltrain. >> chair: thank you, ms. bouchard. >> with that i'm going to hand it over to sebastian petty for the business plan update. >> good morning. thank you for having me. i'm a director of policy development at canada -- caltrain and provide a brief update on the business plan process as the chair mentioned, we're reaching a major milestone in the process. switch microphones here. so, first, i think it's important to start by saying what is the caltrain business plan. it's called a business plan and ultimately will result in something that looks like a traditional business plan, it really is a long-awaited --

long-range plan and the corridor that we operate on. it's a very comprehensive planning effort. as well as other regional operators and the private sector as part of this effort. as we're at this sort of pivotal point where we're making a recommendation around the long-range service vision for caltrain, it's worth taking a step back and reminding ourselves of why we're asking this question at all. the caltrain corridor, the rail corridor, on which caltrain operates, has been a passenger rail corridor for over 150 years. as the railroad has grown and changed, we've been part of the urban growth and change on the peninsula as a whole. and we see the growth is continuing. by 2040, using the last regional projects from the adopted plan bay area, we see there will be an additional 1.2 million people living and working within two miles of our stations. that's a 40% increase in the

human density around our stations. and so we as a railroad are in a position where we really want to ask ourselves what can we do to make sure we're providing the mobility services that those folks need and making ourselves an attractive option to all of the different people who live near the corridor. and more platform are we going to be ready to provide that level of service. what do we need to do to plan and prepare to be the level of railroad that can be successful in that environment. we're also doing this work in the context of a lot of state and regional and local planning around rail that's happening in the bay area. there are any number of major projects, plans and concepts that are being actively built or designed or thought about related to rail. many of them touch the caltrain corridor, probably most significantly here in san francisco. the sales force transit center is a major new facility that will one day be the northern

terminal of the caltrain corridor. and so as caltrain, because we, as you heard, are in some ways out in front, we're actually building an electrification system. we're running new electric trains soon. we're in a unique position where we have the -- both the opportunity and the responsibility to sort of show what a true modernized rail system could look like in the bay area and in the state of california. and so we feel very strongly that we need to have a leadership role in defining a future vision for our corridor and showing how the caltrain service can help knit many of the big projects and plans together. and so that's really the context that we went to our board in august and laid out a draft recommendation for what the long-range service vision for caltrain could be. it's really asking and responding to the question of how much service should caltrain provide and what should that service look like. if we want to serve the market that we think is growing on the

peninsula, if we want to help tie these big regional projects together and get sort of the best value and best use out of them. what is caltrain's role in making that happen. and what does that mean for this -- specifically for the service that we plan to provide. we've been doing that work and the analysis leading up to that recommendation over the last year. we've been doing that work closely with san francisco's staff, as well as staff from our other partner agencies, state agencies and communities up and down the corridor. and what we've done is laid out basically three potential growth scenarios or visions for what the future the service could be. one is what we called a baseline scenario. as you'll see, that's a very ambitious baseline. it really cues to the work in planning that's been done in the corridor for the last decade or so. and then we've looked at two options that pose the question what it looks like if we wanted to expand rail service further. what would the service looks like, what infrastructure would be required and what would it cost. we've done this work.

and i won't go through the slides in detail. we have done the work at a high level of detail. this has been an intensive, technical effort. although the policy language we're proposing to the board is a little bit higher-level. we've really tried to prove out the concepts and do the technical work. that's in part to make sure that we're providing a vision statement that's sound. and it's also the act of doing that work helps advance the projects up and down the corridor that we're working on. six caltrain trains per hour, electrified, blended with high-speed rail. that's the planning that's been going on for the last decade in the corridor. we've looked at what we've been calling the moderate or middle growth option that looks at growing caltrain service even more. so having basically eight caltrain trains per hour, per direction, four expressway trains, four local trains. and then we've looked at a high-growth scenario, that actually really kind of pushes the existing corridor to the max. it kind of finds the limit of what's the most rail service we

could provide. that's going to as many as 12 caltrain trains per hour per direction, as well as the four high-speed trains that are common to all of these scenarios. we laid out to our board in august was really a framework for weighing the choices between the different options and think being how we can signed of sin -- synthesize them. a framework for thinking about these issues from a number of different perspectives. so we've looked at sort sort of a service-to-service, we have done the detailed financial analysis. we've looked at sort of the economic benefits to caltrain riders, things like time savings or vehicle trips not taken. we have thought about the regional aspects. so how this kind of an investment in rail service matters for people who maybe don't ride the train. and we've also talked a little bit about flexibility and uncertainty. and kind of how we can establish a vision that's doable in the

future. so this is just a flavor of a much longer technical analysis sis. we looked at things to what extent they result in the stations in our system getting high frequency or very high frequency service. as you can imagine, as you add trains, the number of stations starting to really get that almost bart-like show up and go service really increases. we've done detailed ridership projections, using land-use forecasts and caltrain today carries around 65,000 people every weekday. in the future, we think we'll be carrying between 150,000 to over 200,000 riders. that's based on both the land-use changes in our corridor, as well as the improved service. we've also done a lot of work trying to come up with the total program of investment, that would be required to support the service and really to again knit together all of those projects that are complicated. and those numbers are large. so i want to preface what i'm going to describe a little bit by talking about how we built these up. we tried to take an expansive

view of projects needed to deliver rail service, which is to say we worked with our partners, our state partners and our local jurisdiction partners to look at all of the projects they're planning for that intersect with the caltrain corridor, and to include them. so that means looking at the projects we're doing today as caltrain, it means looking at these what we've been calling partner projects understand then it thinks thinking about what beyond the system needs. the costs are quite high. all of the dollars i'm going to show you are in constant, de-escalated 2,018-dollars. so about $2.3 billion of active paid-for caltrain work on the corridor today. most of that is the electrification program that you heard about today. there's some other smaller projects that make up the balance. when we look at the partners that are actively being planned or worked on by our partners, we get to over $16 billion. again it's de-escalated 2,018-dollars. in san francisco, there's the d.t.x. program.

i recognize that the number i'm showing here again is de-escalated. it might be a little bit different. it's important to report that the pennsylvania avenue extension is also included. it is listed in the grade separation category, but the total is for both projects are included here. there's another very large project being thought about at the other end of our system, at deerdon, a major reconstruction of that station. there are a range of high-speed rail investments that would be directly shared by the caltrain system. a lot of that $2.6 billion relates to the proposal to electrify further south of san jose, down to gilroy in a way to share that corridor. a huge amount of investment being prisoned for in-grade separation -- being planned for in-grade separations. they're rightly concerned about increased train traffic going over the tracks. again in various stages of very active planning and design around those projects. >> chair: that's all 42 grade separations, isn't that

$7 billion? >> no. those are just the ones currently actively planned by cities. and by active planning, earl the definition is the city council is aware. they've issued a contract. and that can be anywhere from doing sort of a project study report, all the way through environmental clearance or advanced design. finally, we've identified in the baseline about an additional 3.5, $3.6 billion of investments we think caltrain will need by 2040, just to be sort of a complete system. even operating at the baseline level. this would include things like the full electrification of our fleet, expansion of train length to be able to better accommodate the demand. achieving level boarding on our stations to make them more accessible and to make our dwell times reliable enough to blend with high-speed rail. new signaling systems. and so a variety of other projects and programs. what we've done then is laid those investments out in time. and we've used the timeframes

that our project partners have provided. whatever date they said they believe these projects will happen, that's what we've used. that leads you to the conclusion that there's an awful lot of capital investment being planned in the late 2020s, early 20s. we looked at the marginal, additional projects or investments needed to grow caltrain more. that's what you're seeing in blue. if we want to move above the baseline and add additional caltrain service, $3 billion in overtake tracks and additional fleet to achieve the moderate growth level. and another 5 or so billion dollars to achieve the high growth, that cost being much longer overtakes and additional separateed grade separations. again to take a step back for a moment. this is one of the major questions we're asking in this plan is, if we collectively as a region, from gilroy all the way to san francisco, are planning for this kind of level of investment in the rail corridor, what will it take to provide

more service to take best advantage of that? we have done detailed financial projections, that also look at how this will affect the ongoing operating financials of the system. and this is work that stanford university helped us with, through the resources they were able to bring to this project. we do project that total cost of operating the system will grow from anywhere between $260 million to over $400 million. we do also project it's not reflected on this slide, that caltrain will remain a very efficient rail system. so even though our total financial scope will grow, we hold fares constant, generally what we're seeing is our ability to recover some of our costs that way is going to remain constant and will continue to cover a lot of our operating costs through fares, even though the total scope of the -- excuse me, of sort of the financial size of the system will grow. we've done a lot of analysis and i'm just giving awe flavor for it here, looking at again economic benefits to caltrain users and using those as part of a cost-benefit analysis.

both the moderate and high-growth do have a positive cost-benefit using a fairly narrow definition of the benefits. and then we've also looked at a range of regional factors. i'll highlight some of them here. one that's relevant to a lot of folks, who don't take the train, but are worried about congestion or things like that, the equivalent amount of sort of freeway lane capacity that this scale of investment adds. today in the peak hour, caltrain cares -- carries the equivalent of four lanes of people. with this scale of future growth, we're looking at adding between four and 8.5 lanes of additional sort of regional capacity. so some very large investments, but also some huge regional mobility benefits. we have looked at regional rail integration. as we plan the long-term sort of future of the caltrain corridor, think being how that intersects not with some of those big projects that are maybe just over the horizon, things like a second bay crossing or a

dunbarton rail connection. generally what we're finding is, you know, defining a program of growth that can grow in scale to meet those projects, if we as a region ever really want to have all kinds of trains, not just high-speed rail, but all kinds of trains running all over the bay. we need something in the high-growth scenario. we need to upgrade the peninsula corridor to a level with that train traffic. the next few slides really just summarize in more detail all of the analysis we went through. looking at different service metrics. financial and economic outputs. regional metrics. i would be remiss if i didn't mention all of these options are substantial greenhouse gas reduction benefits. then talking a little bit about flexibility and uncertainty. as staff, when we make a recommendation to our board, we want it to be one that is a vision that's durable and it's specific enough that it provides guidance to staff and helps us advance projects and work with san francisco or san jose around some of these major terminal planning efforts.

at the same time we have to acknowledge we're talking about huge dollar values and decades out into the future and so we need to make sure that we're crafting the language in a way that if projects are delayed or their scope changes slightly, we still have a vision that's durable and we're making sound recommendations. that's particularly relevant when we look at the distinction between what we've called the high-growth scenario and the moderate-growth scenario. we're requiring a lot of infrastructure that's very impactful to communities. it's very intertwined with the interplay of high-speed rail and caltrain's schedules. there's some discomfort about recommending that we go full speed ahead on that particular option. and so i'll talk a little bit about how we've incorporated that into our recommendation. before i get to that, the other real big stream of work we've done is a major organizational assessment. this work was led through stanford by howard permit, who is the former president of metro north, a major commuter rail line in the u.s., going into new

york city. this report is available in detail online. but it focuses on a full spectrum of organizational issues, ranging from service delivery, how we do our contracting, to sort of our own organization and resources and how those may need to change in the future to governance issues. both looking at how the caltrain system is governed and relating to the subjects. on the staff recommendations, we've developed sort of a policy statement and it's summarized here. essentially the recommendation has two parts. the first part is that we as sort of caltrain, being the three-county regional entity, are recommending what we've been calling the moderate-growth solutions, so the middle one. we think that that provides a type of service that meets the needs of the corridor, that serves our markets well and that can be sort of discreetly conceptualized and delivered by caltrain, even as sort perform larger timelines around it or

projects may change. at the same time the second part of the recommendation is we think as sort of good steward of the corridor. we don't want to ever preclude on the possibility of growing further. really what we're saying is the next step to look at even higher level of growth is not to run out and build it. it's to continue doing the planning and work with the region and our state partners to make sure that the commitments are there and the certainty is there. so when we do go out and start to have to really spend large amounts of money or very difficult conversations with communities, we're doing so with a level of certainty behind it, that those projects are real and committed. even though we've picked -- we've talked about an option, we've called moderate, that is a misleading term. so i want to close by just talking about how different that service would be from the caltrain service today. we really are talking about migrating from something that's a traditional commuter rail service, where you have a few trains an hour, you have to remember your train number. to something that is for most

stations in the system going to be much more of a show-up--and go service. by directional, all-day, really an urban transit-type service, where we would have express trains running all day. express trains by directionally from gilroy all the way to downtown san francisco. faster, more frequent service, show up and go at most stations. something that would have the capacity to triple our ridership and remove more than five freeway lanes worth of traffic from the system. where we are in the process, we laid this draft vision out to our board in great detail in august. we've been out taking input. and the t.a. board is one of our last stops before we kind of go back and really try to distill everything we heard to make some changes to what we're recommending. we will return to our board in october for their potential adoption of a recommended service vision. we're in the process of conveep

ago special meeting to dive deep into the organization issues. that's something we heard from the board and we wanted that and confirmed that for a november timeframe now. our hope is to wrap up the complete business plan in early 2020. we've been doing a range of outreach. casey, our director of community affairs, has really been leading that effort. and really focusing on working with all of the different 21 local jurisdictions on our corridor, to make sure that they understand what we're doing and what it could mean for them. thank you. >> chair: thank you, sebastian. i don't know if you have additional preparations, and i know that mr. hartnet is four minutes past his departure time. but, jim, if you want to wrap up and then i know that commissioner walton has some questions or comments, as do i. and we'll open it up to other members of this body and then members of the public. >> just wanted to thank you

again. and i appreciate the working relationship with your staff. their report in support of this agenda item was comprehensive and it really very well done. i think they have a solid handle on the business plan and caltrain electrification, the p.t.c. project. i appreciate all of the work they do, as well as, mr. chair, and the board. i just want to say thank you. i think all of the presentations were quite a mouthful. there was a lot there. >> chair: thank you, jim. commissioner walton. >> supervisor walton: thank you, chair peskin. thank you director hartnet for coming down from san carlos today. i want to ask a couple of questions. you know, this is a very ambitious vision, complete with electrification, more trains, even during none commute hours. this vision is one to get

extremely excited about, as this growing railroad, both in ridership and in service, will be a premiere means of transportation from san francisco, at the transit terminal, through the south bay and into silicon valley, all the way to gilroy. this vision can only be realized with dedicated funding source and regional governance structure, worthy of a world-kensington palace. we're currently working to select the appropriate service levels of the business plan, as you heard in the preparation. the suggestion is the moderate stage. and the organizational structure that will help realize this vision. just as f.y.i. to my colleagues and to the public here in san francisco, i have also made a request to consider a resolution to undertake procurement for general counsel and legal advisory service for caltrain at the november meeting. this request is in good line

with good governance and best practices. also a testament to the understanding of the tremendous growth of the railroad. i do just have a couple of questions for john. as we know, moving forward with the business plan, electrification is a big piece of realizing that vision. and so i wanted to know the status of electrification in the budget. >> okay. so on the electrification piece, the two major components -- both projects are on schedule and on budget. starting with the electrification piece, the completion date is december of '21. and we have a team monitoring that on a daily basis. while we're all sleeping, the infrastructure is being

upgraded. on the e.m.u. front, we're working very closely with stadler usa, our electric train manufacturer. they have two and a half train sets. and when i say a train set, that's a seven-car set in various stages of assembly. we're monitoring the production very closely, as their fabrication of the car body occurs in europe. 60% components of u.s. parts. to give you a sense of scale, there's about 25,000 parts are useed to assemble a vehicle. we have an outstanding quality assurance program that monitors serial numbers each component so

we have a documented history of what gets incorporated into the car for its future maintenance and operation needs. >> supervisor walton: my follow-up question. ensure our current contractors are able to deliver? >> well, we're -- as supervisor walton, as any large construction contract, it's -- they're challenging. there's issues that arise every day. we have an outstanding team that works on resolving these issues. to highlight some difficulties with the electrification piece. we're encountering a number of underground utilities along the corridor. this corridor has been around since the time of abraham lincoln. and there's been a lot of things buried underground. we're in the midst of assisting in uncovering these utilities.

just helping them decide which ones are abandoned, which ones are actual live, working with them very closely to redesign components, as needed, as we set the foundations and the poles. and o.c.s. system is very intricate, in that one shift of one pole actually has cascading effects on the adjacent poles. so we're working very closely with them to mitigate issues that are encountered. working with the e.m.u., the manufacturer stadler usa, we understand the challenges of actually establishing a new assembly plant in the united states working with u.s. suppliers. and we're monitoring the supply chain closely. the quality of the various components incorporated into the vehicle, so that we assure

ourselves we'll have a very reliable train. and there's been some hiccups there in terms of labor, manpower, train staff, stadster usa has responded by shipping a lot of journeyman, trained labor forces from switzerland. and have brought them into the united states to act as train the trainer with a large u.s.-based workforce. i was there about a week and a half ago and noticed some of the improvements in the manufacturing facility in both train staff and quality enhancements. wall -- >> supervisor walton: i want to let everyone really know how excited really i am about this vision and this plan moving forward. it's a business plan.

it really does take into account everything that will be necessary for this rail system to be one of most vibrant transportation rail systems that we have. and really in the state of california. and so it's going to take all of us working together, understanding the intricacies and thank you for bringing the team in and presenting on the plan and on electrification. we're going to continue to work hard to do everything that we can to make sure that we can realize this vision responsibly as a team here in san francisco. >> chair: thank you, commissioner walton. and thank you for your service on the j.p.b. commissioner yee. >> supervisor yee: thank you, chair peskin. also excited about your vision. i'd like to recognize you moving, especially when you're talking about a system that's going to be almost like showing up and just catching the train.

although i wish we had this vision 20 years ago. so i have just some simple questions around the business plan. for my better understanding. on your summary page, when you -- benefit-cost ratio that you're talking about. for the moderate growth it's 1.33 and for the high growth it's 1.04. so is my interpretation to say that we're better off doing the moderate growth, because it has more benefit to the cost? >> through that specific, somewhat admittedly narrow analysis. that's why we did a comprehensive analysis. i think in doing this times of calculations, we looked at economic benefits in that specifically two caltrain riders. so really kind of benefits that are contained within the system. when we look at the high-growth

scenario, what we're talking about building to achieve, that really requires building a lot of long four-track extensions. and they're very expensive and they are costs that would -- some of the costs could be shared between multiple systems and multiple beneficiaries. when we're going to the high-growth and really building the long sections, they're really costs that accrue to the regional railroad, to caltrain. that parts of what makes the cost-benefit ratio a little bit lower. >> supervisor yee: and then -- because i saw another set of numbers. i forget what page it's on. the percentage of operation recovery or something. >> yes. >> supervisor yee: as soon as i -- the recovery for that was better for the high growth. so that's why i was a little confused. why wouldn't we do that. i mean, so we could cover

operations through the fares. >> yes. and that was a finding. the capital costs in this case are so tremendous, they townsend to dwarf some of the ongoing marginal difference. >> supervisor yee: thank you for the explanation. >> chair: commissioner fewer. >> supervisor fewer: i think this is very exciting and i think super ambitious quite frankry. but i'm wondering when you're speaking to our regional partners, and you -- i guess when you're doing this plan, you're also taking in account economic growth of -- along that corridor and also about housing plans and developments, is that correct? >> that's correct. so our -- the land-use forecast we used to do our ridership projections and market analysis are based on the adopted plan bay area. what we've done beyond that,

looked to see if individual jurisdictions have actually approved or undertaken any developments that significantly change or exceed those projections. m.t.c. is in the mid of beginning their next plan barrier process. so as they have new projections, we'll take a take a look at thod see how it changes as well. >> supervisor fewer: yes. i'm wondering then are we taking into account, if there would be a slowdown in the economy? if we hit a recession. you know, in the bay area corridor we are very dependent on tech. that tech industry. and if we see fluctuations there, that might last for a long time. do you have a contingency plan with your board about what might happen? and a modified timeline if we were to have actually a recession. >> sure. i think the way i would answer that plan is, you know, we very consciously called this a 2040 vision. by doing that, really what we're

trying to say is a long-range vision. so we're trying to look at everything that's on the board today and put together the pieces of what -- how does it all fit together in the long-term. when all of these big projects are built and done, how do we make a complete system. some of the way we've built that analysis and the work we're doing now, is looking at the path to get there. what are the different paths to get there. that's sort of the space where i would really answer that question, of, you know, we know where we are today. we know what we're building and buying for the early 2020s when we're electrified. we want to know when we're going in the long-term future, so we can go there efficiently. we have flexibility in terms of how fast we move on that path or how aggressively we move. >> supervisor fewer: and so then i imagine you're working with regional jurisdictions around their transportation plans, to actually have caltrain be accessible to all parts of their residents, is that

correct? >> yes. some ofin fact, that's a major f the analysis to complete before we finish the business plan. once we have a single specific plan to complete to, some of the major pieces of work we're scoping out and starting now looking at connectivity to other systems, how people are getting to the station. if we triple our ridership, we don't want to triple the number of parking garages we're building. those connections will be very important to us. similarly looking at the equity implications of the work we're doing and really how do we as we shift to all-day service that's more use to a broad range of folks and trip purposes, how do we make sure caltrain can grow the customer base to include all of the people who want to use the system. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. my last question is. the gentleman before mentioned that you're on budget with the electrification. and, i mean, and also it should be completed by december 2021. and yet in your report, you say that bellfor is now forecasting

a substantial completion on april 16th, 2022. why is the discrepancy and who is right? >> so thank you for that question. sobellfor is currently under contract with the agency to deliver the electrification infrastructure. and that contract has timelines, listed costs, performance bonds. and so while we work very closely with bellfor in monitoring the progress and helping them be successful, bellfor is informing us it's taking them a bit longer, as related to constant warning time, which is the grade crossing design component. so what they have said is that it's taking them longer and we -- in our response to bellfor, we're enforcing the terms of the

contract, and have assisted them in the approval of the designs. as an example, they would issue -- they would give us a schedule asking for more time, because of extended design reviews. and so the way the agency responds to that is that we deny that request. and we give them assistance in getting and allowing bellfor to be successful in those design reviews, as a specific example, working with union pacific. we have a shared corridor, where freight operates along the corridor. and u.p. has the design authority to approve or deny a certain type of grade crossing design. and so the agency is helped with that process. we've received u.p. approval. and in turn expect bellfor beety

to give us -- to be able to pull that schedule back. we'll continue to work with bellfor to be successful, but we are enforcing the terms of the contract. >> supervisor fewer:. okay. thank you very much. you mentioned about sadler and that they were importing people to train the trainers, is that correct, but in your report it actually says it's securing alternative suppliers to pick up the shortfall. so that is a different i think tactic on being able to meet the requirement for our vehicles. >> so there's actual two questions there. so the alternative suppliers actually deals with sizenbocker, which is a -- they supply the finish components to the vehicles. and so sizenbocker is a european firm that established a presence here in the united states. it's very good at what they do.

and every train manufacturer is using them. and they are -- while the quality is high, they're having trouble meeting all of their contracts. so we're looking at -- stadler is looking at alternative alternatives, in addition to sizenbocker. they're putting a lot of pressure on sizenbocker usa to deliver on this job. they haven't given up on that. but if for some reason the finishes are not arriving on time, they'll be looking at alternative suppliers. what i was referring to in my presentation was the labor force and the trained labor force was probably like any industry, it's tough to get labor to -- there's so much work out there. and they've imported folks from europe to help train folks, even without experience and helping them train and be productive on the train assembly line.

>> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. >> chair: thank you for those questions and answers, commissioner fewer and mr. fungy. and before i launch into and pull back the curtain on one sticky wicket, i do want to say that the best policy that any agency can have, with regard to the delivery of very complex capital projects is to be as honest and forthright with the public and decision makers. and i'm saying that in the wake of -- this is -- i know this is a sensitive topic. i'm saying that in the wake of -- this is after your time, john. but in front of this body on a number of occasions, your successor in the central subway project said to this body and to the public and to members of media that we were going to be in revenue service by the end of

this calendar year on the central subway. and, of course, it turns out that is going to be another year and a half. i suspect that mr. hoe might have known that. and had clues about that, because the f.t.a. oversight reports were already indicatingg that. and i'm not saying that anything is behind schedule or over budget, relative to this but when we start to think that, we should probably tell everybody that. that's -- for what it's worth. it's better than ripping the band-aid off at the end. but what i was actually going to touch on is that i would like to associate myself and this body and i think we have already done that in terms of a vote, with the words that our planning director and our executive director from this agency penned on august 30th, with regard to the caltrain business plan 2040 and the long-range service

vision and organizational assessment, which i concur with all of the members who just spoke is a wonderful document to have. i think taking stock and thinking comprehensively at this point for the next generation, makes great sense. the issue around organizational structure and dynamics, i want to say for the record, isn't it an issue about any county or elected decision maker wanting to garner more power or control. we underwent a very interesting expert third party's analysis of what we should be doing in terms of the downtown extension. and one of the fundamental things that i got from the time that we spent on that and this body actually spent an extraordinary amount of time on that, is when you're looking at multi-billion dollar projects,

the only way you're going to attract the kind of federal dollars that projects like these ultimately are going to have to have, if they're going to be achieved, is by truly regionalizing a project and a need. in in case in one of the densest, wealthiest, most congested corridors in the great state of california. and so i think that -- and this is not going to be an easy conversation. but i think that we all have to a mutual, profound stake in truly having an organization and governmental structure that is regional in nature. and the j.p.b., which is an interesting historic thing, which san mateo county rescued decades ago, has evolved in a way that i think could be better. and so i think if we really want

to succeed at this mid-century vision, we have to have the tough conversation about organizational dynamics at the beginning. and commissioner walton spoke to some modest proposals. i think this body and the mayor -- our mayor's office and we've got a lot of cooks in our kitchen. we've got the planning department, we've got a director of transportation, we have a transportation authority, which is not related to our director of transportation. we have a mayor. but i think we are all unified in the very modest step of the joint powers board having independent counsel, which i think you'll all be considering on november 21st. i'm actually not having this conversation with staff. this is kind of more of -- i'm saying this for the benefit of the three j.p.b. members in santa clara members and the three j.p.b. members in san ma tarot county and the three members on the same page in san francisco county. it's not an easy conversation to

have. and what i really want to underscore is it's not a conversation about any county wanting to have advantage. it's about making this agency an agency that will garner the billions of dollars that we need in order to implement this ambitious vision. with that i would like to open this up to members of the public. i have a number of speaker cards. you know who you are. bob, edward, -- actually just bob is the only speaker i have for item number 6. if you line up to my left, your right. mr. peterson, please come on up. >> good morning. bob finebalm, president of save muni. we are fully supportive of this ambitious plan that the caltrain staff is putting forward. however, let me just say a few

things for the record. as to the moderate growth versus the high-growth scenario, we would urge staff to take a little harder look at the high-growth scenario, for the following reasons. as was pointed out by one of the questions from members of this group, there are differents in cost effective analysis. and it often turns out that those differences are dependent upon the inputs to the model. therefore, if there's a good case for the high-growth scenario, that suggests that that might be pursued further. secondly, sebastian pointed out correctly that there are some very hard conversations that have to occur with the high-growth scenario. i'd suggest that those difficult

conversations are going to exist with the moderate-growth scenario as well. and, therefore, that's another perhaps persuasive argument for looking further at the high-growth scenario. [bell dings] finally, i'd like to suggest that the analysis was for coming to san francisco. i think the focus has to be more on coming to the transbay transit center, rather than just two san francisco. thank you. >> chair: thank you, mr. finebalm. mr. peterson. >> good morning. my name is christopher peterson. i agree with many of the previous comments in support of the business plan. i agree with the previous speaker that hopefully the plan can be done in a way that maximizes the cha