as we move forward, the feasibility study was adopted in 2007 to begin the eir eis. one thing i should note that is different about geary, the prop k line which specifies it must be rail-ready. we are doing more on the design work to make sure that if the decision is made to enhance rail, the physical dimensions are incorporated so we can minimize potential impact. one of the first items i should know in terms of new scope, we identified three alternative contract amendments. the contract identified only two build alternatives. similar to van ness, we are looking at three build alternatives in addition to the baseline. we have many different technical studies under way for the project. as part of the study, one thing we have identified are a couple of new areas of work that need to be focused on, moving forward. part of the design drawings, they pay focus to that, and a majority of the pending studies are contingent on the completion of the design drawings. as soon as they are complete, we expect them next year to move forward with additional studies. one of the key

right now, we are on the verge of circulating the public draft of the eir, eis, identifying a preferred alternative, and initiating 35% engineering on that provocative. the request before you is to amend our contract with parsons transportation group for their portion to getting to the finish line of completing and circulate the environment the document and supporting the 30% project development effort. it is a new scope item and all of those areas. the bigger picture for this phase is it is being conducted in three stages. the first stage is the work we have already done to complete the environmental technical analyses and to complete the 12% project development, which is already done. stage two is the subject of this current contract amendment. the larger picture is that it is the scope of work that also includes a significant mta and dpw support for 30% project development. the scope for this stage include completing the environmental analysis, with some additional technical works that were identified, based on the public and agency in but we have gone over the last year, and beginni

rapid transit eir and eis is nearly complete, the draft should be ready for release in 2011. brt is not far behind. i know that japan town is greatly waiting for this. we have a report on the low -- mobility appraising study, trailed blazing in the look at ingestion prices in california and the nation. we will have an opportunity to discuss this later in the meeting. not since the passage of proposition k has the transportation authority tried to advance another revenue generation measure that we just did in the recent ballot of proposition 8a. we received well over 55% of the vote to generate an extra $5 million per year to help us with our transit needs. last but not least we are wrapping up the year with another clean fiscal audit. this has been another productive year. i would like to thank the committee chair for his excellent work and commissioner mar for his hard work that has made this possible. i would like to thank all of you in your help in working through difficult issues. i would like to thank the authority staff for their ongoing work that has helped to make thi