it would not cause an increase from further vlf money. the 3rd is vlf street repaving which is reduce the city's capital cost will you tell unlike to to reduce transportation mode chair from private vehicle use and it's unlikely or uncertain whether a significant investment of road repavement would have impact on munis on time performance and safety of the public. we also looked at bicycle improvements. assuming they would look at the bicycle improvements there would be a shift way from private vehicle use and possibly way from transit. by providing cyclist with a safer and more connected bicycle network. for instance, a $30 million investment of bicycle improvement could result in 50 miles of painted lanes or 300 miles of bicycle lanes. this could reduce carbon emissions. significant investment in bicycle improvement can significantly increase the cost fof -- vehicle use. and it would have an impact on munis performance thus reducing over crowding, slow boardings and things related to over crowding. the last area we looked at is pedestri

should add there has been some research that indicates higher income households are able to pay less vlf by claim of deduction from their taxable income which lower income households are less likely to

it's just on the statewide vlf is it possible for the legislature to actually put that on the about on the ballot themselves. >> that's a good question. >> we can certainly research i know at this point they are planning on doing a ballot initiative and gathering over 8 hundred thousand signatures. but we can check to see if the legislature can do it as well. >> okay thank you. we have no control of what the legislature does but if we knew it was moving forward. >> we'll definitely follow up on that. >> regarding the vlf right? i think that the legislature can put it on the ballot i think the challenge is i know that they will probably continue to do poling statewide and it creates timing issues as well so it's definitely has created complications for us unfortunately in addition to the fact that it only poses 10 percent for transit of the entire pot which i find to be very problematic. >> right. most of it is resurfacing and the like. >> is that with the 10 percent for transit or is that? >> that's interesting. most of it would be for road maintenance. >> the way it's structured state

have an update on the two organizations that have submitted a proposal to file for a new state wide vlf, like proposal, if passed, this will be for the voters next year, at the state level and if passed a 50-plus threshold on the vlf could generate estimated 2.9 billion state wide with the revenue dedicated to mostly highway maintenance we believe and we are trying to track what other expenses might be available, for example the pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the proponents who are the transportation california coalition and the alliance for jobs would need to decide by january of next year, whether or not to go forward in the fall, and so we are working with the mayor's office to consider whether san francisco may want to opt out of that given that we are interested in putting our own measures on the ballot at the same time. and under our initial estimates, the state proposal, would generate, substantially less in the order of 57 million per year for san francisco than the 73 million that we would estimate for a local, vlf. and also, at the state level, the california transport

the pilot program and particularly if vlf has ian impact on other communities would help support them. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker? >> good morning, peter cohen from the housing communications. people wonder why housing is talking about transportation. we have over 25,000 affordable housing units in san francisco that have been built and management by non-property houseers and we know full well that the mg -- majority of those residents are extremely dependent on transportation and the community organizations that serve those folks have very independent work force. they can't remember the people that work in affordable housing also need to get where they need to go. we understand the point of view from but a technical perspective. the ta has done a great job to at least come up with a conceptual level to adequately in and they laid out a very nice game plan for you. a couple things i would point out is the communities of concern is a device full to focus equity. i would point out, remember transit dependent communities are not always low income communities and we need to thi

.#6 5 and increased the vlf to its full 2 percent cap in reservation for the task force and a couple years later proposing a sales tax dedicated to city improvement. this is the projected plan for the next 15 years. what's happening next year? >> that's going to depend on the board of supervisors to develop the time to do so. >> your recommendation for new revenue is so far in the future. my question is at least, last year, 5 years ago when we were going through planning did you identify revenue sources that are being utilized today. i'm looking for something more in the short-term. >> as part of the transportation task force work we did look at the existing funds that are available towards transportation and to improve the infrastructure. there are federal grants. some state grants. there is money that comes from the metropolitan transportation commission and there is a general fund subsidy to about $4 hundred million and there is a capital plan within the city that prior advertises some -- prior advertises some of the fund money. >> i heard from you and others and adam about potent