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 chances of the high-growth scenario being achieved. that said even the baseline scenario requires huge financial commitments. i just want to raise one other issue that potentially further complicates that. if the region is going to be making such huge financial commitments, it's also important that all of the relevant local governments make the appropriate commitments about land uses, close to the caltrain stations. and that will necessarily mean that in many cases the density of development close to these caltrain stations. they need to be substantially increased, parking requirements will have to be reduced. but it really would be a

squandered opportunity if the region makes significant investments in a system, but then typical suburban land-use patterns continue to persist around many of these stations. thank you. >> chair: thank you for those comments. are there any other members of the public here for item number 6? seeing none, we will close public comment. thank you to caltrain staff for coming here today. i imagine you have to cun down to the santa clara county board of supervisors. so good luck getting down there, if you're on highway 101. if you take caltrain, i'm sure you'll get there in a second. with that we'll go to the executive director's report, ms. >> thank you so much. thank you, chair peskin and commissioners. that was such a thoughtful conversation and thank you for the thorough work again to our caltrain colleagues. today i'd like to give you a couple updates on the federal level. i was honored to travel to washington, d.c. a couple weeks ago to testify before the house highways and transit

subcommittee on the topic of pricing strategies. america's roads. this is the first hearing that the committee held to talk about the way to pay for infrastructure. not only did they discuss the gas tax, the traditional source, which is a declining source, but also explored per-mile tees, tolling and congestion pricing. so my testimony certainly emphasized the need for more long-term federal funding, in particularly raising the gas tax. but also to be exploring other innovative, diverse sources of revenue as well. on the federal fuel economy standards, as you've seen in the news, the e.p.a. and department of transportation announced new lower standards. there's a conflict, of course, with our california standards and our stricter requirements. and really pleased that the governor has, along with other 20 other states, filed a lawsuit -- attorney general has filed a lawsuit to overturn the new rule. we're tracking that work.

, not only because of the policy implications and meeting our climate goals, but also the project delivery implications for some of our projects that could be caught up in modifications to analysis and modeling related to the new standard. so in addition, i think we learned just late last night in a new development, the administration threatened the -- the white house threatened to withhold federal highway funds from california, pending updates of about 100 pollution control plans in california. it continues to be dynamic and we'll be tracking all of that together with our colleagues in the city and the region. planned bay area in our region kicked off officially. we've been doing advanced planning work with m.t.c., supporting that work through the horizon effort. however, plan barry has officially kicked off, as the portion of the process that will really contemplate the land use distribution, as well as the transportation investments to support future growth. the agency's around the region

will be seeking feedback together through a series of pop-up events, including here in san francisco, which we'll be publishing on the web site and getting the word out on social media. our role is to coordinate san francisco's input and to plan bay area, building off the local priorities that had been established in prior plans. and continuing through our connect assess effort. so we'll be probably bringing more updates to you through the winter and, anticipating approval of a fiscally constrained transportation investment package early next year. as chair mentioned, transit center in downtown extension work continues. resumption of the a.c. transit bus continued in august. and once again being enjoyed by the public. so we are also glad to report our preview final report is coming to you at the october 8th meeting. we look forward to presenting that. we have been working hard to support the peer panel, as well as having thoughtful

conversations with stakeholder agencies and their staff. we presented to the tgpa board and the c.a.c. a few times and met with vice chair gee to discuss some of the potential recommendations and findings. and we are also working with partners to discuss ways to potentially implement some of these recommendations in the near term, including through m.l.a., as well as potentially funding items here at the transportation authority, should the recommendations be accepted by the board in october. turning to some local issues. our pricing study has kicked off as well. we want to really appreciate the metropolitan transportation commission. thank you missioner ronen for serving on that, which approved $400,000 in regional funding to support our study. combined with our local t.a. funds, that's enabled to kick off with consultants and study partners. we've been working on community engagement plans and equity analyses at directed by the body. we look forward to bringing you

updates. treasure island outreach continues, particularly for the non-profit and for-profit business communities and their employees will be holding two collaborative workshops in october to talk about different ways to implement the treasure island policies, pertaining to service, transit, proposed toll and how we can balance the needs amongst the users of the system and the residents and the merchants. the m.t.a. board, of course, also recently approved central subways new schedule. and some budgeting increase to settle claims with the contractor, as chair mentioned, the new construction schedule is now slated to end in mid-2020. and with revenue testing would then allow for the opening of service to be in mid-2021. so just wanted to again share that update. we'll be tracking along with them what the different sources of funding are to cover the new $31 million, as well as potentially increased costs as they continue to explore what it's going to take to deliver

the total project. we have sort of committed all of our transportation authority funds here. so we understand that they are looking to their own surplus funds in their budget or financing from revenue bonds or reprioritizing capital projects on the m.t.a. capital plan. m.t.a. has done some great delivery work on the vehicle program in the fourth quarter of fiscal '19, ending just this past june. he they placed into a revenue service the very last motor coaches of the 424 total motor coaches, that they've procured with our support. all together supported $240 million of vehicle replacements from our prop k program. that includes the motor coaches, as well as new 40-foot trolley buses and paratransit vehicles. congratulations and thank you for getting those vehicles out on the street. m.t.a. will be providing an update on the replacement of the bright to light vehicles later in today's meeting. finally, i'd like to welcome and

introduce two new members of we have hugh, our new deputy director for planning here today, along with the assistant deputy director for capital projects. hugh joins us from planning and design firm alta, where he was principal vice president overseeing a group of 25 planners, designers and analysts to help deliver sustainable designs to clients across the bay area. and yana, working most recently on project delivery and sustainable and resilience planning and structures for europe. we're very pleased to have both of you on our team. >> chair: thank you. any members of the public who want to testify on the executive director's report? mr. finebalm, come on up. >> just a quick question for tilley. >> chair: bob, we can't actually do that. but you can make a public comment and secretary talk to you offline. >> i'll take a public comment to

the effect that i hope that the consultant's report, that's going to be presented on the 8th, will be fully available to the public, at least a week in advance. and i also would suggest that if you could have the supporting documents on the website as well, that would be very helpful. thank you. >> chair: thank you, mr. finebalm. seeing no other members of the public for this item, public comment is closed. [gavel] i want to apologize to folks who have been waiting patiently for the c.a.c. item we're going to blast through the consents agenda, which will just take a second and we'll go to item number 7. could you please read the consent agenda. >> clerk: item 5 approved at the september 10th board meeting. now being served the final approval. it's prepared to if, desired, a member objects and the consent items to be removed and considered separately. >> chair: any members of the public that want to speak? seeing none, public comment is

closed. is there a motion to move the consent agenda, made by commissioner ronen, seconded by commissioner safai. >> a roll call please. commissioner brown? >> i. >> commissioner fewer? >> aye. >> commissioner haney? >> aye. >> commissioner peskin? >> aye. >> commissioner ronen? >> aye. >> commissioner safai? >> aye. >> commissioner stefani. >> aye. >> commissioner yee. >> aye. >> we have final approval. >> clerk: next item, please. item number 7. >> appoint one member to the citizens' advisory economy. this is an action item. >> chair: ms. smith. again thank you to the members of the prick for -- of the public for your patience. the transportation authority has an 11-member citizens' advisory committee, with each member serving a two-year term. the board appoints individuals to fill any open seats nor the

staff or the c.a.c. itself make recommendations on appointments. to qualify for appointment to the c.a.c., speed limits must be san francisco residents and must appear before the board at least once to speak to the interests and qualifications. with that i can take any questions. >> chair: seeing no questions, i'm just going to make one little suggestion to staff about c.a.c. appointments. this is one by way of saving paper and time, which is i think when there's a vacancy for a particular seat, it would just be great if you just sent out those applicants who actually are eligible for that particular seat. so rather than having to go through applicants from 11 different districts, we can just

read the handful who are eligible for the seat that's hope, for what it is worth to staff. a friendly suggestion. with that are there any individuals who would like to be a c.a.c. member, who come -- please come forward. and you'll have two minutes to tell us your interests and qualifications. >> good morning, everyone. my name is -- i'm interested to be part of the transportation agency citizens' advisory committee. i'm a resident of district 1 in the long mountain neighborhood. for the last five years. i think i have a unique fit to be part of this community and help enhance the ties between the agency and the public in general. i grew up in louisiana. ten years ago i moved to san francisco. the scale of the transportation need and complexity in the city amazed a country boy like me.

and also share a confusion from lack of understanding and context of the public works, just like every other transplant to the city. as a first-generation immigrant, i know personally too well it takes a lot of energy and learning just to understand how government works and how the public service work in general. aside from a unique perspective, i also have a strong ability to help relay and inform the message to the public. i regularly hold local meet-up and discussions for immigrants -- with topics focusing on public service. i help them such as adopt -- we successfully have a couple of people that are part of the drain. i cofounded an online publication that educates and fact checks about politics and political systems in the united states for chinese immigrants. as i regularly have more than 20,000 readers, we have

interviewed and reported by the new yorkers, "washington post," "the new york times" and other national agencies. [bell dings] my wife and i cofounded metoochina.org, a leading platform for provision education, recovering assistance and other legal help that we help more than 5,000 people so far. i think my background as a transplant and first-generation immigrant can help the agency have a better understanding of the needs for the two fast-growing demographics. [bell dings] and my ability to inform, educate both in online -- can help relay the message for the agency and reduce confusion and increase transparency and understanding between the two parties. >> chair: thank you. >> thank you. >> chair: are there any other potential applicants, if you would please come forward and we'll open it up to members of the public on this item. >> good morning. my name is danielle so.

i'm a district 6 resident. i walked here today and saw an example many of the issues on our streets, that supervisor haney has talked about a lot recently. so i'm very concerned and passionate and eager to join the c.a.c. a little bit about me professionally. i was trained as an urban planner and currently work as an affordable housing developer in alameda. i previously sat on caltrain's bicycle advisory committee. so it was great to hear the update today that things are still moving along. i think it's really important within our district to call attention to the recent injuries and deaths on the streets and both to get enforcement measures and other, you know, kind of quick projects in the ground. as well as the longer-term things that the transportation authority undertakes. vision zero is just a vision unless we put the policy and the procedures and the money where it needs to go to make that happen. so i think to the c.a.c., i

would bring a vision of ensuring that what we're funding really walks and talks the same thing that vision zero says and ensures that, you know, ten years from now, a project that's receiving funding today or next month or next year is implementing those goals on the ground. so i appreciate your consideration. >> chair: thank you so much. are there any other potential applicants? seeing none, are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this item number 7? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] commissioner haney. >> supervisor haney: thank you, chair peskin. i'm excited to be able to nominate danielle today for the seat on the c.a.c., representing district 6. i also want to take a moment to thank our outgoing representative becky hoag, who is a treasure island resident. really a legendary leader in our

city, who had to unfortunately step down from seat. i want to really thank becky for her service and her leadership. as you heard today, danielle has expressed to me a very strong desire to not only advocate for traffic calming, t.n.c. regulation, red light cameras and equity in transportation planning, but very relevant for this body, she brings an eye towards putting our money where our mouth is, regarding transportation planning. she has a background in planning herself. and i think we'll make sure that we're using our money most effectively. i also think it's wonderful. she's also a tenderloin resident and understands firsthand someone who walks and bikes on a regular basis the disproportionate challenges that our neighborhood faces with unsafe streets, speeding and daily collisions. so i'm excited that she'll bring her perspective to the c.a.c.

and i want to thank danielle and i want to make a motion to nominate her to the c.a.c. >> chair: motion made by commissioner haney. is there a second for that motion? seconded by commissioner ronen. and on that item, we have the same house, same call. the motion is passed. [gavel] next item, please. >> clerk: item 8. update on the san francisco municipal transportation agency's siemens light-rail. >> you got to hear all about caltrain. thank you for your patience. >> good morning. i'm julie kish balm, the director of transit at sfmta. i appreciate the opportunity to brief you.

this is part of a monthly briefings that we're done to add accountability and transparency to the l.r.v.4 process. i am pleased to be here with some good news. we have made significant progress over the last month. we have now delivered 67 of our 68 phase 1 vehicles. and the phase 1 vehicles are all expansion vehicles, which it means more training out in the system, less crowding and better connections for our customers. the last train we're going to deliver next week, if any board members are interested in having an opportunity to come and address the employees that have been building this equipment, we are really proud that these vehicles are being produced as part of our megaregion and creating more jobs and opportunity within san francisco -- within california.

we also have seen city performance improvements. and i'll walk through some of those. we still have some technical issues we're working out, primarily being the hydraulic power unit, which currently makes up about a third of our in-service breakdowns. we've worked through some of the technical issues, but are still having some software challenges. as part of our 90-day plan, we did identify a set of what we thought were ambitious but achievable performance targets. photo most part we did meet all of our goals. the first one was related to availability. we want these vehicles out in the system. we want customers enjoying them and experiencing them. we're at a low point of only 22 vehicles out in the system. we're now averaging over 35. we also have -- are now able to

couple and have two-car trains. we've had no follow-up issues with doors or with couplers since those retrofits were put in place. as i said we're just about at our 68th vehicle being delivered. that will happen next week. and our breakdowns have reduced significantly. and then the last piece is that we have made some good progress on addressing the flat wheels. as we discussed, one of the challenges we've been facing with this vehicle is that it has aspects of it that are different than the brayed. when you hit the emergency mushroom button on the l.r.v.s 4, the wheels flatten. so we've been working with the manufacturer to put on additional track brakes. this will allow the vehicle to stop quickly, but will not put the same pressure on the

vehicles. this will significantly improve our vehicle availability. as we typically have three to four vehicles on hold, so that we can round out the wheels and we have about five vehicles right now that we can't even use at all, because their wheels are too narrow. a question that i've gotten is why couldn't we just address this problem with training. so train folks to use the track, the t-stick when they're in the lrv4s and the mushroom when they're in the braydas. the best way to equate it, the vehicles are different enough in their braking system, it's almost like you're drive an american car one day and your steering wheel is on the right and your brakes are with your right foot. and then the next day you go to england and we're also expecting you to be able to stop on a dime. but now the steering wheel is on the left side and your brakes

are operated differently. so we believe that this standardization between the two vehicles, while we continue to operate this mixed fleet, is going to have a significant customer benefit and it's also something that we've been getting strong requests from our operators. i have invited our union chair from the green division to speak on this issue, if you have questions. this does -- this chart targets our availability. as i said, we've seen a steady climb. and we will continue particularly as we addressed the flat wheels, which is currently having the biggest impact on vehicle availability. and we are back on our reliability targets. we were at a low of almost no more than 3500 miles between breakdown. and this is a vehicle that is intended to break down only about every six months, only

25,000 miles, once we make it through the reliability problem. so i'm really pleased that we more than doubled and heading closer to 8,000 miles between breakdowns. just as a point of reference, that's about 20 to 25% better than what we're seeing on the breed fleet currently. we're looking to get an order of magnitude different. that being said, i am not bringing any major decisions to this board today, because i would like additional time to be able to show that august isn't an anomaly. and that we're going to continue to have steady performance. so i'll continue to do these monthly updates. i anticipate coming back in the february, march timeframe, once we continue to see progress along that red line with the vehicles.

while doing that, i do plan to bring to the m.t.a. board two items that i think are important for the overall program. the first is to expand the track brake investment, to retrofit all of the phase 1 vehicles so we can see that near-term bump in availability. as well as to to get siemens started on the long lead time items that we need for the brayda replacements. i feel it's critical to start this work, so we don't lose the ability to compress the schedule. they'll be focusing on things like redesigning the car shell, in order to support the seat redesign. i believe we have strong support for seats that are lower, that face forward, that have the butt divots that we've heard a lot of strong requests for. but that's a complicated change. and they definitely need time to

do that engineering. also the way that they're expediting the schedule and compressing the braydas is by building the car shells off site. so this will also allow resources to represent the facility and begin preparing for the car shell construction. so in terms of next steps, solving the technical issues continues to be the highest priority. we're really down to at this point one or two major issues. , getting siemens working on addressing known problems in phase 1, as well as the long lead time in phase 2. continuing to do monthly reports, but i anticipate coming back for the larger allocation, that will really need for the breda replacements this spring. i think that's all i've got. please let me know if you have any questions.

>> chair: thank you. i do think we would like to hear from the representative from local 258, from the green division. but you anticipated the questions that i was going to ask. but, first, let me call on commissioner mar. >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair peskin. thanks so much for the update presentation, ms. kishbalm. i had a few questions. actually the first one around the reliability, or the reliability program slide. so, yeah, it's good to see, you know, the improvement that's happened over, you know, since the serious problem, reliability problem, you know, that cropped up in the spring. but just looking at the sort of target for increasing the reliability. it looks, as you mentioned, that's a significant goal to try to reach by june 2020.

and to go from -- it looks like we're about 8,000 miles per failure to 27 or 28,000, looking at the chart. i just wanted to ask if that's realistic. and yeah. i'm just asking now for my experience as a regular rider, i know that -- yeah. reliability is a problem for many years. and with the new siemens being brought online, you know, it really hasn't been any improvement so far. >> thank you for those questions. we're certainly all learning as we go. and we will make adjustments as we need to. the red line was a commitment that siemens made to us, based on what they think that they can deliver. i think it's based on the fact that we're still not seeing any issues with the core systems. it's primarily subsystems. the hydraulic power unit alone, which we're very close to

addressing is making up a third of our breakdowns. so as we begin to tick off the sources of breakdowns and delays, i am optimistic. this curve is based on what we see in a lot of new vehicles. the calgary vehicle that siemens prepared followed a similar trajectory. i think it's really too soon to say whether or not we're going to have to make some kind of adjustments as we go. but i am optimistic and i do plan to hold siemens accountable to this commitment. >> supervisor mar: thank you. that's good to hear that you're optimistic about making those aggressive targets. because that would be such a huge step forward for everyone that relies on the l.r.v.s to get around. then i just had a question around the project schedule slide.

and this sort of -- the phase 2l.r.v.s and the plan to have an accelerated schedule to bring those online. i think that sounds great to me. i just wanted to know how that aligns with our sort of workforce issues. and is that going to mean the need to expand the workforce of the l.r.v. operators and whether we're -- you know, we have a good plan for that. >> thank you for asking that question. you'll see in my next presentation, that operator staffing in the most acute issue that we face in the system. we've had with l.r.v. staffing, because we don't have a pipeline problem. we essentially train bus operators to become rail operators. this was an interesting contract. it's very unusual. we had such a pent-up demand.

phase 1 was the expansion and required additional operators and additional maintenanceer resources. phase 2 is replacement. with every new train that comes in, we'll help a breda train out the door. it's not a net increase in resources. but it will allow some overall enhancements to our system. >> supervisor mar: got it. thanks. thank you again for the update presentation. it's very helpful. >> chair: all right. why don't we hear from our representatives from local 258, the transit workers' union. >> thank you, commissioners, for having us here today. i'm the president of the t.w.u. local 258. as julie stated earlier, that is, indeed, good news when upper management and the union come together on a specific issue in terms of finding feasible solutions. that is indeed, a step forward, a step in the right