this is a debate that has been taking place at mtc and abag. last week, at a meeting, we had a clearer look at how the debate will go. san francisco already is and will increasingly be a leader in the region baker's the pushing policies that encourage, reward local jurisdictions that make a real commitment to sustainable growth and affordable housing. it is also clear we will be a significant amount of strife getting to a plan that we can all live with reasonably but it will require extra effort on the part of those jurisdictions of lagging behind in these areas, and because we're going to continue to make a very forceful case for san francisco to get shared transportation dollars, that it is fair and commensurate with the city's longstanding commitment to sustainable transportation and responsible land use and housing policies. i want to point out in this context the importance of defeating assembly bill 57, which would reduce san francisco's modem influence on mtc, just at the time when a fundamentally important decisions about infrastructure

along those lines, we have undertaken a couple of major statewide issues with abag, allies in san francisco and other cities. we are asking for clear seismic retrofitting standards. why is that important? after loma pripet know, a lot of people in oakland got their homes retrofitted. we did a study and it showed 60% of those retrofits would not meet the standards of what we consider a decent retrofit. we have been nagging the legislature to develop basic standard. they had develop standards for single-family homes, probably have approved similar standards like it. they have not yet done it for soft story buildings and multi- family houses. i know there are international standards, so there needs to be a political will, so that when people spend their money, it is spent well. we have also been trying to