i want to talk about some complementary actions that the mta board took recently earlier this month to amend division ii of the transportation code. the first thing that they did was to define shared mobility device service. that definition and part is mobility devices, device or ten or more people separately or together. the important component here is that we are looking at shared services not to regulate personally owned devices. this definition would incorporate the existing bike share and scooter share programs. the second major component was to establish concept authorizations so this is a way to prevent unregulated launches of services, create a clear path for companies that would like to test or deploying the city but on a limited basis. limited by the number of devices , the time that they are testing, or the geographic area that they would be operating. the most important parts of this is for us to collect information to understand if and how the city shall regulate a new mobility service. this program would be authorized by the director of transportation as i mentioned, our

the mta board has approved about four different contract delegations approval policies in the last 20 or so years. what we are doing today is we are consolidating them no one document. the last time the board adopted revisions to contracting policy was nine years ago. contracting costs have increased since then. and staff has recognized the agency enters into a lot of different kinds of contracts. some are relatively low value that are not within the directors erup' current delegatd approved authority. today we want to do is ask for your approval for our consolidated delegation and requirement policy. the biggest change in this policy is that we are increasing the directs or of transportation approval contracts from $500,000 to a million dollars. again, in the past years, contracts have increased and taking the time to bring relatively small amount documents contracts to the board results in delays in approval and it can stop construction contracts, construction from moving forward. so, we are trying to re-assign the approval authority so the director can sign documents that will keep

we have four times to go to the fac and three more of your presentations to you at the mta board available in february, in march and if needed, we've scheduled a second one in march and we'll see if we're able to do it with the first two and then we need adoption. finally adoption, on here two opportunities and hopefully we get it done and the first meeting in april, our charter requirement, as you know, is to have this submitted to the mayor and mitted by the mayo submittey the board of supervisors by may of 2020. so happy to answer any questio questions. >> directors, any question. >> just a couple and i'm mindful we'll go into this in more detail at the workshop. the 3 billion-dollar capital program over the next five years, what percent is funded? >> well, the first two years are actually budgeted for and have the funding identified. the next three years does include -- all of this -- revenue sources, a strong expectation of being available but this is updated every year as we get more information. so a project is not approved to be a part of this unless at least 90% funded from either

congratulations to the mayor, and the mta board for your recruitment of what i hope will be a strong leader for our city's transportation agency. i hope in addition to prioritizing meetings with all of you colleagues, that mr. tomlin will begin the task of getting to know the neighborhood and grassroots organizations that help fuel the city transit equity and street safety adequate -- advocacy. i know he has hit the ground running visiting maintenance facilities and hopefully meeting with writers and communities of concern directly will be his next step. jeff will also soon have the benefit of the muni reliability working group that commissioner mandelman and i have been serving on. i wish you well, and welcome you to our diverse communities. with that, i conclude my remarks. is there any public comment on the chairs remarks? seeing none. public comment is closed. the next item. >> executive directors report, this is an information item. >> thank you so much. i really do want to also thank you for your leadership, tremendous leadership, on the top d passage. this body was very keen f

board of appeals. so that does remain in the current legislation. >> for the puc and the mta, they have a whole separate thing they do that doesn't have the same noticing process and appeals process. >> public works is no longer overseeing their processes. in the prior legislation, we were issuing permits for all poles, and now they're currently taking and doing all the review related to their assets. >> okay. so i would for one be delighted in you want to continue to agree to hold off on the adoption of the objective standards. i think first and foremost i don't mean to be cranky on deputy city attorney's debut at the land use committee, but having our deputy city attorney who is the legal subject matter expert, mr. sanders, here, i'm not sure why he's not here, would be very helpful. i do not want to put ms. pearson in the position of having to delve into a body of legal material that is not her subject matter expertise. so i would like to continue to hold off. i would like to continue the hearing and also like to get legal advice about the potential outcomes of litigation three months hence. and at a

board of appeals. so that does remain in the current legislation. >> for the puc and the mta, they have a whole separatedoesn't have the same noticing process and appeals process. >> public works is no longer overseeing their processes. in the prior legislation, we were issuing permits for all p

board of appeals. so that does remain in the current legislation. >> for the puc and the mta, they have a whole separatedoesn't have the same

board of appeals. so that does remain in the current legislation. >> for the puc and the mta, they have a whole separatedoesn't have the same noticing process and appeals process. >> public works is no longer overseeing their processes. in the prior legislation, we were issuing permits for all poles, and now they're currently taking and doing all the review related to their assets. >> okay.