and then utilized the authority's regular board process. what we heard from members of the public was pretty expected. it was great support for transit, pedestrian, bicycling projects. received 200 ideas from the public. these are on page 80 or attachment 3 of the packet. we also heard demand for a roadway capacity reduction project. and not one request for roadway extension project for members of the public. what we heard from the public agencies were almost 100 ideas. these were on page 97 of your packet or attachment 4. heard a lot of projects that were currently in the r.t.p. were proposed for inclusion in this one as well. also a number of new projects, which is not surprising giving the number of planning processes that have happened since the last r.t.p., things like the transit effectiveness project, various development plans. and then many projects that can be bundled into programmatic categories so there's no two projects can be in the r.t.p. first the individual or named project. these are projects that enhanced capacity and need

the authority is an 11-member citizen advisory committee. authority staff nor cac make recommendations as to appointments to that body. that is done to the plans and programs committee and ultimately the authority board. two requirements for cac members is that they beat san francisco residents and that they appear before this committee to talk to bet their interest and qualifications to serve on the committee. the two vacancies we have right now are both from term expectations. first from rosie west and another, jackie sacks. miss saxby is here to speak to her reappointment. i understand ms. west is also interested in being reappointed. she was planning to be here today, but i do not see her. commissioner campos: thank you. why don't we hear from this sex -miss sacks. good morning. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is jackie sacks. i have been involved with the transportation authority since the passage of prop. b in 1989. i was once of 56 individuals tht brought it. i was appointed to the cac in 1997. i am up for my eight reappointment. i have gone this far and i want to continue serving. i feel, with the background that i have, with what has been going on in the city, being disabled, i can d

have not provided that information, nor have we endeavored to do it because the charter is very clear. italy authorizes the board to extend or not extend the program. there is no allow -- it only authorizes the board to extend or not extend the program. >> -- supervisor mirkarimi: did the language give a disservice because of the way the language was structure because it actually tethered -- the charter gave you a limited orbit to be able to look at and analysis that frankly we did not even look at. >> the voter initiative creates no ability for any of us, the board, the retirement system or others, to make a modifications to improve on that without a modification. supervisor mirkarimi: i get it, but it went unstudied nonetheless. yes or no? >> we did not study modifications to the program because their outside of the scope of what the charter requires us to report on. supervisor chu: are you finished with the presentation? >> yes. unless there are other questions. supervisor chu: idea of a question. from my understanding, the report that has been laid out, primarily the savings is related to deferred recruitmen

we will form the transportation authority, which the board has authorized to run or subsidize the ferry service. they will get parking revenue from the island. meter revenue as well as parking revenue to subsidize the service, as well as the $30 million subsidy from the developer to subsidize weta and ac transit to provide transit service, so we are confident we will have robust transit service on the island. supervisor mirkarimi: be i hope that is the case, but in a case that is not, i'd like to move forward with a contingency potentially so that we all rise to the standard of what it means to be a transit first city, especially in a population that is isolated, for lack of a better characterization, in that we were trying to make sure that the principles of transit first our extended into a population that will be challenged in their own mobility and ability, so that it is not always defaulting back to private automobiles. i do not know if the project team sponsors would like to come up, but based on language that i have vetted with you all, under the section of existing development f

and over the years, we have had a really great community partnership with the treasure island development authority. the board has been amazing. they have had the vision of including low income and formerly homeless people from the ground up, from the start, so i want to thank the treasure island development authority for all of their leadership over the years. i also want to thank the director of operations. [applause] really, i know supervisor chu said that it takes a village to build a village, but it has really been that kind of story. that is why you had the 11-0 vote. it is not just city government doing something or developers doing something unilaterally, one group be more represented than another. it has been an iterative process where we have all work towards a common vision, one that will serve all san franciscans. i want to thank the developers, too, for the integrity they brought to the table, the citizens advisory board, and all the members of the tidhi commission, residents of treasure island that have been a part of this. so really from the ground up, everyone has been a part of this to create

went sour and pressure on the authorization board to be ok leslie go ahead go ahead yeah i mean i it's i understand given that that my collaborators on this program are legal scholars that you're sticking to a very strict legal definition but if you really think about if you really look at the level of deliberation that's gone into this level of discussion i absolutely agree with you this is a very problematic mission because of the tension between the goal of protecting civilians and regime change and then the reason that that's intention is because it's very difficult protect civilians without getting rid of gadhafi and that's that's the grays own that people are beginning to talk about but it's very difficult in terms of you do is to it's not something you just pressure and security council resolution areas. because its hands have been tied to the you know the mission for tens of millions in europe and to say that but to say that this is been an absolutely aggressive military intervention anything like the scale i mean the comparison to world war two is absolutely absurd we're not a

the mayor and adopted by the board, multi-year strategies were outlined that would continue to have a certain amount of capital, suspend nonprofit colas, and some other actions that are within the authority of the mayor and board to implement. but those actions adopted in the five-year financial plan are taken, that would shave about $100 million of the three and $50 million. the mayor has proposed two ballot measures for this november's ballot that would reduce that by about another $100 million. a charter amendment would serve to reduce costs. there would be some sales-tax increase to provide about $60 million in that year. depending on what happens with these items, you can see that the city has the opportunity to make significant progress toward meeting its structural imbalance. and potentially leaving us with a preliminary estimate and shortfall for next year of just under $150 million, which would be significant progress towards structural balance in the city's budget. >> what specifically from the five-year plan? >> it is $115 million in solutions adopted for the 2012- 2013 fiscal years. the single most significant one of those is the continued retracing of our capital spending. s

the board had approved of this project, last year. they were setting up the improvement for $45 million. this is a project with part of the funding for the entire program. and we have the authority by the board for $150 million, to help fund the project. >> just so we get a sense of this, we are delaying issuing the cops. being in construction, we have relatively historic interest rates. does this translate into the interest rates on the cops. it is a very cheap time compared to the traditiona ltime to issue debt. >> we have noticed this. it makes it a lot cheaper. we are getting .20 basis points on the variable rate, weekly. we do this analysis each time. the next slide is part of the 10-year growth plan. we do have the commitments of using certificates of participation to improve the were more -- war memorial, for all 130 million. the board has not seen the process of these documents, and the plant also proposing using this for $128.2 million. and again, when the board approved this proposal -- the next slide shows when you take into consideration, the proposals on the private -- prior page, it takes us over a threshold, and this requires 3.25% of the general fund revenues. th

the purview of this board. but is something we would have an interest in making sure it happened, but i do not know if we have the authority. >> any conditions the board is going to place on this side to permit needs to work, so the repair work being discussed is not part of the work on the spur matt. -- on the permit. >> also, i think when the building is completed, it is the best way to prevent future water going between the buildings. it is done every day in san francisco, and we need to sit down and talk with the appellant and have her agree, making sure her building is protected in the future. >> the issue has been raised having to do with work hours. you have some comments on that? >> it is basically governed by the building code. what time did you quit usually? unfortunately, with construction, one reason people start early is the coast -- is because it is done early to avoid traffic, and you can have a delivery trucks during peak hours, so they come earlier or later, and most construction group stop. people get at the site at 7:00, and they expect actual work at about 7:30. unfortunately, the shorter the hour you a

i just can tell you a very simply because of time constraints i have explained the authority in the board of governors and in fact in many meetings in different countries when i have had the opportunity to talk to parliamentarians all intellectuals for five legal reasons the security council resolution has do not have any legal basis it could not be implemented this is for sure and of course we have already said that these kind of we do not have any sort of activities towards military purposes and the reach went out all activities are fully under the i.s.f. therefore i categorically reject any allegation on this one and we are continuing our work with the i.a.e.a. and of course that was the story called we stay getting the united nation involved in the matters which is technically technical organization as soon as of course this is the engagement is a stop in new york it will create a new chapter of cooperative and votto men as we have done in the past of course we have taken even a step beyond our legal obligation as you know where voluntarily applying additional protocol for twenty year

currently, if the police chief or to authorize civilianization that has previously occurred and that the mayor and board have approved, the required number of officers to be funded in the budget is just under 1900. 1894 -- 1894, down from the p 1971 prop d. the budget before you funds 2100 officers, and adjusting for leeds and over * and other factors that go into the calculation, we're left with about 1874 funded officers -- suggesting for leaves and overtime. the challenge will likely to face during the coming year is that the budget assumes approximately 100 retirements of police officers and assumes no backfills. so it is likely to become imbalanced over the course of the year in terms of this one voter requirement. lastly, the charter requires the controller to place reserves on the budget on certain items until revenues are received. we have placed $87 million in reserves on the budget before you, pending the receipt of actual cash. the majority of these are related to capital-funded projects in the budget before you, where we have not yet issued the debt that is assumed. our long standing practic

i know in the past, the board has authorized a resolution for advocacy efforts, so i just asked various support of that as we move forward because they think that would be really important for next year. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning, members of the board of supervisors. i am from asian-pacific islander legal outrage. i want to first acknowledge the moh staff and the citizens committee for their hard work. we know this is a financially challenging time, and we all have a difficult task in balancing the budget and retaining important services. while we would like to express our appreciation for restoring our funds, which would enable us to continue our services city- wide, specifically to the most marginalized population, we also want you to know that we could not do this without our partners such as asian women shelter, cameron house, self-help for elderly and many more groups. the word collaboration has been thrown around the city, that we need to collaborate. the fact of the matter is that true collaboration takes a lot of work and some of us have bee

as much as i appreciate the voice of authority from the retirement board, and the retirement board has not taken the official position on this. if the retirement board hasn't taken an official position, it still comes back to us that allows us to interpret it. you look at the data, and what has motivated me is that it is incomplete. and when i called to talk to other jurisdictions like san diego or los angeles, they went through similar motions that we are going through right now. right at that same precedents, they decided to go ahead and reinstate it is based on the ways to count how the things should work better. that should also speak to us since we are not alone in this experience. the programs are not apples to apples here, we don't know what to compare it to. that is why we should extend it. i appreciate what people are saying. i don't inclusion be at this point without a thorough conversation. supervisor chu: i want to take a moment to appreciate the comments that supervisor campos made, and given the choice to spend on police whether it is to continue the program or at academy

the board of supervisors on how they can proceed. the board met again on the clinic to revisit the issue. >> it is my understanding there are at least four authoritiesuld potentially govern the process we are talking about. it is incumbent upon us that we have a process that is consistent with all of those things. >> on the member 16, you saw the board of supervisors direct me as the clerk to create a process that the board could utilize to nominate, select, and appoint a successor mayor. >> usually, when the board rules are silent, the role of order is the controlling parliamentary authority. so my recommendation is that the sports that have a process, received a draft, and then make modifications to it as you see fit. >> how do you start the voting, when does a supervisor have to leave a room if he or she is nominated? at what promises to you begin taking nominations? >> what is not formal this town that is manifested, the details of it. it is a challenge. the last time we did this on when mayor feinstein became mayor -- supervisor feinstein became mayor, under difficult to infanta's. in this case, we had more for morning. we have the ability to c

the authority's offices. it was an opportunity for elected officials representing san francisco on the boards of the regional agencies to meet with management and provide feedback from the vision scenario which is an important first step in the process for developing sustainable community strategy and eventually the new regional transportation plan. i was joined for this event by commissioners scott wiener and david comps on who also represent us on the m.t.c. we also have representatives from the mayor's office, housing and land use as well as management staff. we had a wagering of discussion about the direction of this planning effort for the bay area and had a chance to deliver a unified message. it was consist went discussions that took place at our own transportation authority board meetings. the amount of growth targeted would require major investments in transportation infrastructure and the region will have to make those commitments to san francisco. if the city is to commit to absorbing that growth and if the development of alternative development should be accompanied by discussion and how the fund

the entitlements. recognizing that this will be a 15 year, 20 year project. the board still retains authority. they would interpret whether or not what is being proposed is consistent with zoning. any change to the development would have to come back to the board for approval. it is the main document that the developer as. the city will receive land from the navy in fairly large chunks. there will be an additional chunk that makes up half the island. we, in turn, passed that on to the developer in two block increment. they have given us plans that have been approved to say that they are building things that are consistent with approval. that is to say yes, the infrastructure they are proposing is consistent with our infrastructure program with financial guarantees that the developer will build up. dda also includes housing plans, infrastructure plans, and jobs programs that we talked about. the agreement is our agreement with the treasure island home was developed initiative. we have formulated this plan over the past decade and we owe them a lot of credit. lies with our 1996 agreement with the

no, on item two, as i understand it, what the department is requesting -- the board of supervisors previously authorized the puc to issue commercial paper for water system improvement projects. as i understand this legislation, it would give them additional authority on an as- needed basis to issue, additional commercial paper -- to issue additional commercial paper for non-water system improvement projects, but this would not directly impact the rates. this is, as i understand it, considered temporary or bridge financing. ultimately, is the bonds -- it is the bonds in item one that would have the impact on the water rates of both commercial and residential users. supervisor chu: if i could ask the puc to clarify. >> certainly. the larger projects we are talking about, the wsip project, we said the rates would go up dramatically to have a reliable water system. we suggested rates would go from about $40 a month for the regular water bill to about $41 for the wsip program -- from about $14 a month. that is that part of it. $49 million is somewhat in addition to that with the commercial paper. the commerc

what is the legal standing given that the construction authorization board refused to allow the department of energy to withdraw the application? >> they denied the appeal. the application is still before the commission. >> so it is active. it should be acted upon. the commission should make a decision. >> correct. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the lady from colorado for five minutes. >> thank you very much. at the beginning of your report, you provided background for the structure of the nrc and for the authority. this is important based on the last question in. -- questioning. much of the power was evenly distributed, correct? >> under the reorganization. >> under the original structure of the commission, much of the was evenly distributed. then it was changed and it was changed because of three mile island. is that right? after three mile island, the presidential commission and an nrc commission review identified issues with that structure i described with the equal power. so they completely overhauled the commission. can you talk to me for a minute about some of the expanded du

have got a budget that is on time, that is >> [inaudible] >> called this meeting of the transbay joint powers authority board of directors to order. would you call the roll, please? >> i like to know -- note directors ford, sartpi will not be with us today. >> thank you. i would like to add that it is nice to be back. all i can say is any meeting at which you have to pass a budget and the chair and vice chair are so comfortable that they needn't be there, that is a pretty good organization. i feel pretty confident here. ok, so communications. what we have? >> let's go ahead and finish out the role -- roll. [roll call] you do have a quorum. >> indications? anything? anybody? no communications. new and old business -- anything there? executive director board -- i'm sure there is something. >> good morning directors, members of the public. most of our presentations now, director harbor, for your benefit, focus on the construction of date because we are in the midst of construction work, so you will be hearing more about that from steve rule of turner construction, but i wanted to report on a few more items, and

why can't we instead raise the bar a little bit and say that not only would it have a variance, but would not be allowed? >> that is within the board's authority. vice president garcia: i was not really confused about whether it was within our authority. i was asking you if you thought it would be ill-advised for us to do. >> i do believe so. i think what we have here is a distinct case from the hearing last time. in that case, there had been a development already at the property. they maximize the development potential. we did not think it would be fair to allow further expansion. in this case, they are doing things in the right order. they can go through that process. they are not seeking to expand buildings now and subdivided in a week or a month. i think it is an exceptionally high standard to go through the variance process where one would not otherwise be required. it is the only time i have invoked such conditions. vice president garcia: thank you. >> is there public comment on this item? seeing none, we will move into rebuttal. mr. ballinger, you have three minutes. >> if you want to indulge me for an extra minute, i can explain why th