now calling the june 3rd, 2025 regular meeting of the municipal transportation agency board of directors and parking authority commission to order secretary silva please call the roll on the roll director chen present chen present director hemminger hemminger present director henderson henderson present director lindsey pheasant kinzie president chair tarlov present tarlov present. we are expecting directors felder and keena to join us shortly. for the record i know that director hensley is attending this meeting remotely. director lindsay's reminded

that she must appear on camera throughout the meeting in order to speak or vote on any items places you want. >> item number three the ringing and use of cell phones and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting the chair may order the removal from the meeting room. any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone or other device places you on item number four approval of approval of minutes for the may 20th regular meeting directors are there any changes to the minutes? all right. we'll now open public comment for item for the minutes for two minutes each. >> members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there will be a warning sound at 30s and a time when the time is up and any speakers can come up to the podium at this time seeing none we have no accommodations thank you. we'll now close public comment. colleagues is there a motion in a second i move second secretary silva please call the roll on the motion to approve

the minutes director chen. >> hi chen i director hemminger hemminger i director henderson henderson i director lindsey i think i heard harlow i tarlov i think you the minutes are approved secretary silver please call the next item places you on item number five communications i have none. >> secretary silva please call the next item places you want. >> item number six the directors report. >> good afternoon board members. julie kirschbaum it is my pleasure to introduce say livable streets director kimberly liang who's going to recognize our crossing guard program. >> all right. good afternoon chair turlock and directors. my name is kimberly liang and i'm global streets director. i am so incredibly excited to be here today to be recognizing our school crossing guard program. >> the crossing guard program plays a key role in supporting vision zero by ensuring the safety of students and families

at busy school intersections throughout the city. >> our guards provide daily coverage across multiple school sites during arrival and dismissal times even in challenging weather or traffic conditions there are extra eyes on the street to help us identify traffic or safety concerns near schools. >> something that i would like to highlight is that our crossing guard program builds trust and strong relationships with our community. crossing guards are often seen as familiar and friendly faces to children and parents and even earlier this year many students and parents came on a tuesday afternoon to to this group to tell you how much their crossing guard means to them. so for the 2020 fourth through 2025 school year our program had over 170 crossing guards supporting over 100 public and private schools throughout san francisco and we're only able to support a program of this size because of our dedicated staff, many of whom are here today. >> so the crossing guard program has seven office staff who manage all the operations of the program and provide year round coordination including recruitment, onboarding,

training and performance support. >> we have a diverse and multilingual office staff who provide training and clear communications to support a diverse workforce of crossing guards. you know our trainings are provided in english, spanish and cantonese to ensure that all of our guards feel supported and informed. >> so our office staff have streamlined our training programs and they provided increased level of training expectations. so during the last year in january 2025 our staff worked hard to get everything ready. >> they coordinated schedules. they kept track of attendance. they prepared training materials and handed out uniforms to over 170 crossing guards. our staff also handle daily emails from the public and the crossing guards to ensure we're providing consistent coverage and staffing for all schools. >> so this program plays such a critical role in advancing safety in san francisco and their work impacts the daily lives of people in this city. so i'm just so grateful for everything that they do. >> so at this time i'm going to hand out a few certificates and then invite our crossing guard program manager to come up here to share a few remarks

. >> great. so first off i would like to recognize isaiah barbero. right. i guess i'm going to take you to adriana scott, but let's hold our applause to the end. >> thank and varicella tommy loy and basheer alta haim thank

. >> all right. thank you kimberly. >> members of the board director kurzman, i just want to thank you for your continued support and we're excited and honored to be here today. the you know, as kimberly mentioned, the crossing out program plays a vital role, you know, in community safety. they help insurance students are crossing you know, the students and families safely and building trust and relationship within the communities. i'm also proud to stand alongside my team over here who are basically the backbone of the operation of this program, their tireless work. you know, it's just, you know, amazing in their like their every day to ensure that the crossing guards can focus on what's most important for them ,which is crossing the kids and making sure that they're safe and without them the program wouldn't run as efficient as possible. so i do want to thank them for that and although we're not here with us today, i do want to say a special thanks to our crossing guards who rain or shine are always out there

every morning, every afternoon and every day. you know, just full dedication and care crossing students and making sure that they're getting to school safely and you know, back to their homes as well. so thank you again for this opportunity and you know, it's an honor to be here and appreciate it. i thank you for sharing time. the next thing i wanted to talk about is muni safety out. we held our second muni safe day out on may 21st. i really want to thank chair tala for coming. you may not be able to spot her in these photos because she was decked head to toe in orange but we had over 60 staff from across the agency along with bilingual community partners from chinese for affirmative action and the community youth

center join us. we went out in groups i think we had eight groups throughout the system. they put up signage emphasizing how important it was to speak up when people experience harassment on our system. every group had chinese speaker and a spanish speaker. i mean in many cases a filipino speaker as well. so we were able to really communicate with our customers so that we really care about safety on our system and we are taking proactive steps on a continuous basis to improve safety. this program started with the muni safety equity initiative by serving 1600 customers. so these extended conversations build on that deeper surveying work so that when we do make investments they're the right

investments. some of those include deploying our staff to areas of concern. it also includes improving lighting at some of our bus stops particularly in our muni equity neighborhoods and studying the data from every incident so that we can identify ways to prevent challenges. we also as you know have 11 cameras on every system and every vehicle and we have designed our seating to really encourage community reinforcement. so we have a lot of standards on our system that help to keep their fellow passengers safe. so i really want to thank everybody who participated in making me safe on the 21st. but on every day and then the last thing that i wanted to talk about was a different type

of safety which is our infrastructure or mostly because i just wanted to show you these banana photos of our cable car machinery team is in the process of rebuilding and replacing this sheaths that pull the cable car system. each shield must be pulled out of the ground one at a time. all of the internal components are replaced or refurbished. this is not something you can buy off the shelf so we really need to to restore and protect it. they are not small and they are not light. they are eight by ten feet and diameter and they can weigh up to 8,000 pounds. >> we just finished some of the most complex work in the cable car basement.

we have also been working throughout the spring to replace them throughout the street. this is very old infrastructure. it is not going perfectly. we have a shaved cap apollo and market that is stuck and we are working on a strategy to get that removed so that we can continue this important work. but it is work that no other agency, no outside vendor could complete. this is really the in-house talent born out of generations of cable car machinery that enables us to do this work and i'm really excited about it and excited about the reliability it's going to provide for our system. i also am really appreciative to our cable car stakeholders like the union square alliance fisherman's wharf cbd, s.f.

travel. they've been meeting with us to design this work in a way that doesn't impact tourism. so for example the work is only being done monday through thursday it's only being done kind of one day at a time so that if somebody comes in town for a few days they can still ride their favorite cable car line and they're doing the work in a way that one cable is always open at any given time so that feedback was really helpful. it helped us shape this work and we are excited that it's going so smoothly. thank you. >> that ends my report. thank you very much. >> director kirschbaum before i open public comment on the director's report i would like to remind members of the public that they may provide comment on the director's report and director kirschbaum spoke on the following topics.

just as a reminder there was a special recognition of the crossing guards muni safety out and our cable car shave work if you feel the director missed addressing a topic you may comment on that during item nine general public comment if you're here to speak on an item later in today's agenda please wait to make your comment until those items are called with that public comment on the director's report is now open for two minutes each. members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there will be a warning sound at 30s in a chime when the time is up any speakers can come up to the podium at this time seeing none in the room. >> we do have one accommodation request speaker you've been unmuted. this is for the directors report i was to pass at this time. thank you.

thank you. no other speakers will now close public comment colleagues do you have any questions or comments on director kirschbaum report all right. >> i would just like to say that it was a real pleasure to participate in muni safety out it's very important work and the so much depends on our customers feelings of safety and support during their ride. there are so many messages both overt and more subtle that that let people know that they're in a place where if something were to happen there will be help available. there will be an opportunity to make a report that we have a lot of security systems

in place that may not be very obvious to the public but you know, by and large i found people very receptive to the message and and also it was just a really great opportunity to work more closely with some of our some of our very skilled and caring staff. >> so i had a i had a really fun day. so thank you so much for including me. all right. secretary silva, please call the next item places you and item number seven the citizens advisory council report. we have no report today places you on item number eight new or unfinished business by board members directors is there any new or unfinished business today? all right, secretary silva, please call the next item places you on item number nine general public comment. members of the public may address the board of directors on matters that are within the board's jurisdiction and are

not on today's calendar when open public comment will be will now close public comment open we will now open public comment to the members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there'll be a warning at 30s and a time when the time is up. any speakers can come up at this time not seeing any but we do have one accommodation request. >> speaker you've been unmuted. >> this is for general public comment. yeah this is herbert weiner now this weekend i got a notice that paratransit fees will be increased by for a one way ticket how the notice was from and i received that the weekend now it's a real inconvenience

for the living and assistance living scrounge up time to pay for that fee and also i really really it's a call we got a fair and praise and worry and now we're getting another one six months later now was that any notice? and i really think it should it's really unfair to have third granted with an extra fee for all i know for the muni bus fares have gone up by ten so i'd really like you to look into the and i suspect an explanation of what what's going why is there a check in crew yeah you really have a

responsibility because this is of your watch. >> thank you. >> thank you. no other speakers. we will now close public comment on. all right, secretary silva, please call the next item directors that places you on item ten consent calendar. these items are considered to be super simple or routine and will be acted upon by a single vote unless a member of the board or public requests that an item be taken off consent and heard separately for all speakers providing public comment please identify which item number you are speaking to you item 10.1 approving various routine parking and traffic modifications listed under items 10.1 a and b in the agenda item 10.2 approving a roadway shared spaces street closure application by a local business for maiden lane between kearny street and grant avenue. tuesday, june 3rd, 2025 through wednesday, june three, 2020

6:04 p.m. to 10 p.m. each monday through friday 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. each saturday and sunday. and making environmental review findings. item 10.3 supporting the renewal of the dogpatch and northwest potrero hill green benefit district gbd. and authorizing the director of transportation to submit a ballot in favor of the renewal formation of the tbd. that concludes your consent calendar. >> thank you. we will now open public comment on the consent calendar for two minutes each. members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there'll be a chime, a warning at 30s and a time when the time is up. any speakers can come up to the podium at this time. see none and i have no accommodation requests. >> thank you. >> we will now close public comment. may i have a motion in a second to approve the consent calendar? >> so moved. >> second secretary silva please call the roll. >> on the motion to approve the consent calendar. director chen chennai director

felder felder i director hemminger hemminger director henderson henderson director lindsey i india director karina i. i chair tarlov i tarlov i thank you the consent calendar is approved. >> secretary silva please call the next item places you on your regular calendar item number 11 amending transportation code section 402 to raise the mobile parking payment convenience fee from $0.10 to $0.35 with provisions for increases up to $0.39 to match the per transaction fee service fee paid by the s.f. mta to mobile parking payment contractors. >> good afternoon madam chair. directors rob malone with the parking operations group unit

of the streets division here to discuss the mobile parking payment convenience fee. i have a brief presentation for you today. >> it takes a village to set some context for mobile payment in terms of overall payments and meters in the city. we have been using a mobile payment app as an option to customers since 2012. use of mobile payment apps has increased over the years and has most recently been around 36% of folks paying are using the mobile payment option

to discuss convenience fee policies and overall issue. we for the first time as an agency in this board approved first began charging users a convenience fee just may 20th of this year where the fee went to went to $0.10. we have also recently been working on new contracts that are due to take effect very soon within which the vendors are going to be receiving from the agency a 35 cent transaction fee. so just want to clarify the transaction fee is what the agency is required to pay the vendors under the contract. our goal in the convenience fee that we have brought forth to you today is to enact a convenience fee in an equivalent amount of $0.35 to

the transaction fee thereby when the customer pays $0.35 they will basically be covering one for one the cost to the agency. so there's not a net cost to the agency for that transaction fee that the agency is paying to the vendors. we or we as an agency began this service with no fee to the customer that was at a time when the cost to the agency was very low. so for for many years the fee to the agency was only $0.04 per transaction as the back end costs of running these type of apps continued to increase software development costs, maintenance costs etc.. we did negotiate under an existing soon to be finished contract an increase in the payment to our vendor from

$0.04 to $0.10 and then we requested it was in follow up to parking option optimization presentation a few months ago where the board supported and then subsequently approved passing on that ten cent convenience fee to the customer which was put into effect just on may 20th of this year and we recommended this partially this is in keeping with the overall trend in this area among cities to be passing on to be charging folks a convenience fee at right in the slide you can see convenience fees that are charged by various cities. just want to highlight others in the general bay area and northern california area for example our our colleagues our friends over in oakland are charging 30 cent transaction fee. another closest city in sacramento is charging a 35 cent transaction fee.

>> and just to give a little further context to the amount that's recommended for the convenience fee, as i mentioned just a moment ago, users were first started paying this fee on may 20th. at that may 20th meeting an item came to you you all that was requesting approval of two contracts but also within the same item approval of this convenience fee that we're back to discuss with you again today . we had a discussion about that. several members of the board inquired about the possibility of charging could we charge customers more than $0.35. what can you tell us? talk to us more about the basis for that and what we could potentially have the ability to

charge. it is possible that under the cost recovery rules and and other relevant statutes that we could potentially charge a little charge more. we had discussed that with city attorney so there's a little bit more work and research that needs to be done to be sure that any proposal beyond $0.35 is fully well fully founded. and madam city attorney, i don't know if you want to weigh on how you charge but she would be able to probably tell you more about that. so our recommendation given is because we are a little bit concerned we want to cover the cost of the transaction fee that's in these contracts that are getting ready to take effect which is why the $0.35

is what was recommended. >> that said we a jump from the $0.10 that is currently being paid today to $0.35 is quite a significant jump even though it's a small amount of money it's like $0.10 an additional $0.25. it doesn't seem like that much but obviously on a percentage basis it's very large. >> so we're unsure about exactly what effect that's going to have on usage of these apps, how many what percentage of customers are going to care about that fee being imposed? it might be just a few or could be more than we expect. so our our desire is to start with a fee that's going to cover our costs to be able to study that in the in our slide here is that we we talk about two years we're not wed to that amount of time to we will be

doing from day one once an a fee higher than $0.10 goes and in fact we will be gathering data as every day will be analyzing the impact on utilization and and and getting a sense of what that elasticity of demand is for customers on this. and we are able to share that with with this board at and time of your choosing. and lastly just wanted to reiterate that we certainly do want to cover those costs. however are we do support an overall policy goal of we want folks to use their mobile payment apps. >> it helps support our the overall trend where we have been going with the payment policy for meters on the street as evidenced by our recently completed meter upgrade where

we went to you know multi space meters in half the city the mobile apps provide an appreciated level of convenience to folks who don't want to walk maybe to the corner. so it the availability of the mobile apps is very important and we again want to cover our costs but don't want to be don't want to dissuade customers from using the mobile apps with that concludes my presentation but i'm of course happy to answer any of your questions. thank you. mr. malone colleagues, are there any clarifying questions before we go to public comment ? all right. i will now open public comment for item 11 two minutes each. members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there'll be a warning at 30s and a time when the time is up any members of the public can come up to the podium at this time seeing none in the room and i have no accommodations. >> well we'll now close public

comment directors any additional questions or comments? >> director kahana there. thank you so much for your presentation. rob i did have a question as to whether or not you and the team modeled what a 2% or two cent increase would look like and if you could just tell us if you did do that what what sort of revenue did you did the model show that would absolutely so based on latest usage is about 6 million transactions with the mobile apps per year so every $0.01 is about $60,000 okay and that does just to clarify that does presume no elasticity ,no elasticity. we expect some amount of less city elasticity so probably a little bit less net how much less than that we don't know

exactly but about 6 million transient transactions a year as where we are today. >> so a two cent increase would of the 35 to 37 would be somewhere yeah, somewhat somewhere between 100 and 20,000 would be like a healthy estimate and you know like we did ask you to to consider if there's any way we could pull this lever to generate any sort of revenue. it seems like it would be modest if like if we were to increase it by $0.02 is in your in your staff report it did show that there is going to be a savings about over the course of sorry i just want to make sure i'm pulling up the right thing over the course of a few years of $11 million. >> i just wanted to understand how you got to that number. it seems like it's five years

or so but there would $11 million in savings. you just want to understand like the the math behind that. >> sure. so over that's over the there's a six year maximum term under the two contracts that were conditionally approved by this board two weeks ago. so we did for the purposes of you know modeling the life of those contracts model transactions. so there has been an upward trend in transaction fees. so we don't expect you know, the 6 million transaction or so as in the latest year. you know our hope is that they and our and our modeling here was based on an assumption of usage continuing to grow moderately and that's why it it's not linear i guess kind of and as it stands right now, the action before us today allows for some flexibility in terms of what staff can do because there is a range that we're

approving and not a fixed number. >> is that correct? yeah, i believe it from from 35 to $0.39. and and just to clarify the way the contracts are written, again it's not what you're being asked to approve but if it were to mirror what's in the contract it's $0.35 for the first for the first three years or for first two years $0.37 and the third and fourth years and then 39 in the fifth and six years is what we will be paying to the vendors again doesn't necessarily have to be as tied to the convenience fee but if the goal was to mirror that then that's what we that's what that's what the modeling is based on. is that as a convenience for increasing in sync with the transaction fee increases that are in the contracts but it that sorry that yeah it's marrying what's in the yeah i'm tracking thank you okay well i

appreciate you and the team and alexi for modeling what a different scenario would look like it doesn't sound like it would yield as much as we thought it might, but you know, i'll defer to two other folks in the queue right now and i'll see what my other colleagues say. but it's it seems like the the proposal you said you're putting forth before us seems like the most prudent action. but i'll wait to live from our other colleagues to opine. thank you. thank you. thank you. vice chair cohuna director hemminger thank you, madam chair. i want to dive into a couple of numbers to in one of your slides it indicates that we could go higher in terms of cost recovery than we are going

in the present proposal if we were to get to full cost recovery and this would be for all the other costs that are not covered yet, how much would that raise? sure. so and just to clarify, that's my understanding that in terms of my understanding is that we have the ability to go beyond any cost recovery that needs to be clarified still exactly what the legal underpinning of that but the primarily the other costs involved are what are called the merchant fees associated with a credit card transaction and that we all pay and those are roughly for for this population transact about $0.25 a transaction. so if you were really trying to recover the transaction fee that we're paying to the vendor $0.35 in this case and then it's an average of about $0.25

that we're paying to the card issuers that would be roughly the total cost. so about $0.60. >> well but if you went up by a quarter that's going to raise a lot more than $0.60 right? >> well, i was just adding $0.35 and then and then 1225. so i'm looking for revenue generation. so what would the revenue generation be if you raised it by a quarter you mean in addition to the 35 then we're not talking about the merchant fees we're talking about i mean i my understand ing is that we would be limited to no more than that around 60 that you're covering what your costs are. okay and again anyone with a calculator just help us out here. >> rob i think dr. hemingway's question was what would for example additional quarter cent

raise we did rob and i discussed prior to this meeting that if we went from $0.35 to $0.55 it raises about an additional 1 to 1.2 million. >> okay. so that's that's more in the ballpark now when you briefed me this morning on this item, one of the concerns you had about that is that you can charge those you could recover those costs of those fees from the mobile users but not from the credit card users, is that right? that's correct. so just to repeat what i said a few minutes ago, we are concerned about elasticity of use of the mobile apps and one of the things that could happen say for argument's sake take a hypothesis you go for a larger fee and it does deter some significant amount of users if those users go in decide this

isn't worth it to me i'm just going to walk to the meter and use my credit card. we're still paying that same merchant fee and if they use the meter we are not allowed to. we were forbidden by some combination of card issuer rules and and and and treasure treasury rules laws that you cannot charge folks a different price if they're using a credit card versus if they're paying cash at a payment method that accepts cash. the reason we can charge a convenience fee at all for use of the mobile app is because it's providing an enhanced service. it's providing some functionality that's not available to the user if they go to the meter one other vector just to put it on the table that helps me better understand the issue here your list of cities it appears you

sort of picked the middle point in in in the sense of our $0.35 if you went just down the list a few cities to washington d.c., our nation's capital some somebody to emulate for the most part that's that's a dime right that's a dime more so let me say one thing i don't know offhand in each day of any of these cities is the details of their i don't know anything about their contractual relationships with their vendors. right. just to repeat something i think was mentioned last meeting when we we the staff developed an rfp that would lead to new contracts. we decided not to have potential vendors bid their transaction fee. we didn't we didn't want price

to be the primary driver. >> what we did is survey the market, see what and decide what we felt was a reasonable price and we stipulated the price to the potential vendor community so again i can't say for sure but i am aware not about these specific cities but i am aware of cities who have multiple vendors and their their transaction fees. their communities are different for different apps because they left it open right and they said oh well this and people get to choose and like hey if i want a customer might a savvy customer could say oh i just need only the minimum service. i'm going to look at it and i'm going to use the app that's cheaper. >> we didn't want price to be a factor which is why we stipulated that. >> last question i think you indicated in your testimony just now that you're asking for

you're recommending a fee of $0.35 for two years and i think you said you weren't wedded to that to your numbers that right ? >> correct. i thought i heard from your team this morning that they think they can have an adequate data collection activity done by about six months. >> yes. yes. >> so that's correct. would you have any concern if we change that two years to six months? no, we would not. no colleagues, i would recommend at least that because look, i think the concern about elasticity of demand is legitimate and as long as we have enough months under our belts we could sort of answer that question. and i think there are enough open issues here that might justify a higher fee that we we ought to take a little time and understand that better

and what the tradeoffs might be. but six months seems to me to be reasonable. thank you, madam chair. thank you, director lindsey vague you well into your two questions just to clarify something off of there having raised questions. >> so to what degree is the curve in your proposed moonshot current your proposed 35 that we need to be a cost recovery of value so do we cost recover? we have $0.35 or could you like me to that? >> no not not completely. it would it recovers the vast majority of the projected cost of the vendor contracts which the transaction fee there are a few ancillary you know services

in the contract that are that are spelled out in the staff report under under maybe it's around i'm sorry i don't have the percentage of time i had maybe five 5% of the total value. >> there are some some marketing services the option there in is optional we we may request some of these services from them we may not so but it's the it's recouping the vast majority of the of the transaction cost paid the vendor paid to the vendor just to okay and then i guess this is to your evaluation it's roughly to go and i don't mean to speak for but instruct with do to go that when divide when care tala what it is try this app she's you know her experience is that you know she'd be pay more for the

convenience and so when you look at this as an evaluation tool how are we going to turn in if there are more people like that out there who who would pay more or the convenience of being able to pay by phone? that's an interesting question. so i mean the more straightforward part of the evaluation is how many people are using it and does the usage go down? i think that's very interesting question though. well, how do you know how many people would be i'm totally willing to pay more i think i think we'd have to think about how to how to look into that. but we can we can certainly do that. >> yeah, i look, i do wonder that our i do wonder if there are those people out there

particularly younger people who are always in like mobile wallets and all the all these mobile payment apps. i do agree with that if we do a study in six but perhaps you bring that back to us in addition to this item and we can see and we can make this revenue generating because i, i like the way we're looking at this with an eye towards possible revenue revenue generation but for today i think this makes sense. thank you madam chair. thank you director anz director felder thanks. >> i largely sort of echo director is comments i mean as

i expressed it in our last meeting i do think there's a revenue opportunity here and i think we need to be careful that while you know i appreciate the caution here and concern over elasticity we do need to generate more revenue and i think while you know we can look at this as an area of modest opportunity, the reality is that if we do take full advantage of the opportunity to cover you know, to fully you know, work through the cost recovery, you know, we could be dealing with $1.2 million plus or minus here and i that's the order of magnitude that i think we should be evaluating. so i, i tend to align with the notion that yes, let's take the six months to figure it out but that at that point let's not be talking about whether or not we're looking at a at a 2% increase. i think we should be talking about, you know, a 20 or 25 cent increase and so i think we should be prepared at that point to evaluate that opportunity. >> thank you, director cushman

yeah. >> thank you. i appreciate the discussion and the board's patience in allowing us some additional time to go back and look at this. i think my recommendation is that we look at it a little more broadly. i think what rob is concerned about is a shift between payment methods, especially from a efficient payment method to an inefficient payment method. so we will also make sure we come back armed with information about what are our opportunities to charge a similar transaction fee for credit card users and if there are any legal restrictions for that and also if it might just be simpler to increase the base fee which is another way to generate income for for for parking just attach the board's

goal of you know $0.25 but to the hourly fee for example instead of to a transaction fee. so we'll look at this a couple different ways and bring you all some choices with the goal of generating between 1 and 1 to 1.5 million additional revenue off this program. >> thank you director chen thank you chair. >> i think i echo i think a lot of my fellow colleagues here were asking for options. i'm not sure if this if this fee is the given given i think the structuring and i think also some of the legal challenge, the legal constraints that we have i'm not sure this fee is the way to do it and and and then also legal and also legally in terms of the resolution that we want to approve, i'm not sure how we would say oh well we're only going to approve a 35 cent transaction fee for six months

. so i it's i, i want to make sure that perhaps that we passed the the resolution as is but then we have to come back in six months for more options and then also echoing director kirschbaum i think those that set of options may or may not necessarily be limited to this specific fee. i think we can talk more in generally about street parking and street metering and then also i think what the team may have some ideas around general curb use management in general so this is like to the to the staff i think there is a lot of interest from the directors and thinking and thinking about how we can how we can provide value to the public and also provide revenue to the agency. >> i'm given how the contract is set up and how these things i'm not sure this fee is exactly the way that we would necessarily maximize to the to the limit. >> there might be other

options. so i would say pass the resolution now as is maybe you come back in six months. we want to look at we want to look at a broader menu of options that the team may be thinking about. city attorney cleveland knows do you have any concerns about an amendment as proposed by director hemminger? i thank you chair tarlov i was not clear. director hemminger did you want the increase in the fee to only last six months or do you want staff to come back in six months with options along the lines that director kirschbaum both said the fee would sunset? >> yeah two zero deadlines have a way of constantly adding the mind and i don't think having a deadline here is a bad idea if it's better to be eight months instead of six that's that's fine with me too. but i think putting a stake

in the ground is a useful first step. okay we can make that amendment today to sunset the fee. i think director chen was suggesting just come back in 6 or 8 months to staff but either one would be fine. i wouldn't call it perspective. i would just like to point out that six months is so december meeting which i think we've had difficulties in the past with holidays and fees and and things that are you know considered that that have some feeling around them. i would personally i'm not opposed to giving a deadline but i think it would be better to have it say in february which would be i think nine months. >> yes.

i would also just note that whenever you readapt it, it needs 30 days to go into effect . so that should be built into the timeline as well. >> director felder, did you have thanks. i mean i, i personally would be okay if rather than having it sunset we just have to have a presentation where we can assess whether or not it would be appropriate to adjust the fee at that time. i think that takes a little pressure off many of the dynamics that are being discussed. i also agree that we should be looking at this more broadly but i think that we should be looking at this in terms of maximizing the opportunity in each of these individual opportunities that are you know, that exist around parking. and so i'm not sure that i

would want to put a limitation whether it's, you know, 1.2 to 1.5 million. i think we need to be more aggressive in terms of how we approach this and i so i'm fine with all of what's been put forward. i just don't want there to be a limitation on you know, on what we're looking for here because if there's greater opportunity that we can all feel good about, i think we should be evaluating that in the totality of the exploration. >> well i'll second that motion and to clarify the motion is to approve the stuff that julie said and and we'll make it voluntary. very get i actually mr. malone i have a couple of quick questions. the so just to be super super clear for anybody who might be listening today, this convenience fee is voluntary

in the sense that anyone who doesn't want to pay it can walk to the meter and pay with cash or a credit card. is that correct? and another just piece that i think is very important is and this is actually my question i we pay a transaction fee and in turn we are charging the customer a convenience fee and i don't think i, i understand the the reason for the change in that is in the name is it a a legal requirement or standard industry terminology? >> okay so the can the when the fee becomes inconvenient in my mind i think i made my my feelings my fandom of the of

the program pretty clear at the last meeting but paying it again one of the great pieces of convenience is that you can you know without having to go back to the meter you know increase your time, your lunch is running long and and that transaction also is subject to a convenience fee so that's yes that's you know very it's a very convenient element of the program but but the fee starts feeling a little bit more onerous at that point but i can see myself being willing to pay it certainly so that that's that's all of my my questions colleagues are we susan digital okay are we ready to i heard a

motion and a second could you repeat the motion i would move that we approve the proposal in terms of the the rate increase with the caveat that we receive a presentation in six months on the elasticity of of demand that exists as a result the price increase such that we can assess whether a further increase is appropriate at that time and that that presentation should include other ideas within the parking program to increase revenue. >> so that's that's not a piece of the legislation. this is a piece of the present

direction that we're providing . >> and and i just to clarify as we're talking about the direction it sounded to me that there might be some legal considerations that we have to just make sure that we understand in addition to the the effect on demand of the increased price of the of the fee. so a do you still second that will do okay very good. >> just a friendly clarification is it six months or eight months because i, i think we we talked about avoiding the holidays for i think you said no sunset is that with no filter yeah it's nuts and selling going i would say we can have it in whatever

well we'll do our best to get a presentation late fall right all right. secretary silva, please call the room. >> okay. on that motion director chen by jan i director felder i felt all right. director hemminger i. i mean your eye doctor henderson henderson director hindi i hindi director cleaner i i charter love i tarlov i thank you that motion passes secretary silva please call the next item places you on item number 12 presentation and discussion regarding a state budget and regional revenue measure update it it is my pleasure to introduce judson true to the s.f. mta board judson is a second year new chief of staff and director of external affairs. >> he comes to us with a kind

of incredible wealth of experience. judson and i first worked together when i was working on the transit effectiveness project 17 years ago because he was our agency spokesperson at the time. he also served as david chu's chief of staff both when he was in the board of supervisors and with the assembly and most recently he worked for the breed administration helping to expedite some of our most important housing projects. so judson is is a he's a really thoughtful communicator but also i think a sophisticated leader and i'm very excited to have him on board among his many easy jobs. he is our agency's point person for all of the regional revenue measures as well as any anything we pursue pursue locally.

so you will be hearing from him periodically today with a focus on both the state budget and the regional revenue measure. thank you. >> thank thank you for that introduction director kirschbaum i think i should just not do this presentation and just write on that but it's great to be here. director tarlov sorry chair tarlov and directors as director kirschbaum said i am judson trew, chief of staff and director of external affairs for the s.f. mta. it's amazing to be back at this organization and and just as a san francisco resident for more than 25 years and a former and now current employee, it's just amazing to be a part of what this organization delivers for the people of the city, county and visitors every day. so thank you very much. i'm joined today by monique webster who is our manager of regional, state and federal government affairs and she's a crucial part of our team on both of these efforts. i'm going to brief you on today

. i am here to talk about two related measures the state budget and our regional revenue measure which is senate bill 63 or sb 63. at your last meeting cfo moerdler did provide a very brief thumbnail. the governor's may revise that just come out but we thought it was important to give you more information about where we are on the state budget as well as we thought it was a timely moment to update you on the regional revenue measure. >> so that's what i'm here to do on the state budget. >> many of you have followed the governor's may revise which came out may 14th that is the governor's sort of second stab at releasing a budget as part of the annual process. the first one is in january this january of 2025, which seems like quite a long time ago the state budget was had a very small surplus of just over 350 million. but as we know a lot has

happened since then in the country. that's a fact and in the state we had the horrific wildfires in southern california that have had a big impact on the budget and of course a fair amount of national uncertainty that has affected our economy here in california. >> so after all of those changes between january and may, the governor projected a $12 billion deficit for the state and proposed to close it with a variety of spending reductions delayed spending fund shifts and withdrawals from the state's rainy day fund for transit. there was no mention of the $2 billion request that was proposed by east bay state senator jesse riggin and assembly member marc gonzalez of l.a. that request has been supported by a broad array of stakeholders including of course our mayor, our board of supervisors and that which is also the board of course of the county transportation authority and of course this body and all all of us. and so that there was silence

on that $2 billion request and more even more concerning there were reductions to transit funding that we are, you know, now very much involved in in particular the may revised zeroed out previously plan commitments to transit capital and operating relief money made under sb 125. >> we'll get into those details at the same time as these budget changes are changes were proposed in the may revise the governor proposed an extension of the state's cap and trade program now renamed cap and invest. these two things are related but not the same and they're not on the same timeline as i'll talk about a little bit today. >> initially launched a little more than ten years ago the state's cap and trade program aims to reduce emissions by setting a limit on pollution and then creating a market to buy and sell the right to pollute effectively and or the ability to pollute. and so this is one of california's signature climate initiatives and it also has generated revenue for important

projects throughout both policies and projects throughout the state that reduce greenhouse gases and of course transit. you know, we believe and i think the state has shown a commitment to as well believe that that public transit as a transit is an important part of that that effort the program was is right now under law slated to expire in 2030. so the governor is proposing in addition to the renaming at 15 year extension to 2045 right now cap and trade kind of as a program exists now it has kind of two ways that it spends money. one is what's called continuous appropriation. so there's a certain percentage of the revenue that's generated that goes to particular buckets and then the rest the governor and the legislature would spend on an annual basis as part of the state budget. and so all of the existing continuous appropriations including important transit funding were essentially just absent and the governor's planted has planted a flag on two major priorities of his which are high speed rail and cal fire the billion

dollars that's in the governor's proposal for high speed rail is about what that program has received of the 4 to 4.5 billion a year that the program has generated. the 1.5 billion that he's proposed for cal fire is a shift of a general fund program to cap and trade. so that's important. >> what we're really affects us is the risk that we now have for the continuous appropriations and some of the discretionary appropriations for the low carbon transit operations program. and this will be we'll get a little more acronym heavy now with lc top and it puts at risk the term the program which we'll get into a little bit more as well both existing grant awards under cycles five and seven and future cycles. so that's that's really where we are deeply concerned is about the ongoing direction of of funding from cap and trade to transit. of course those capital projects and so now on the

future funding that's at risk, we really want to emphasize is the risk to our capital projects and so this is $245 million that will be going to muni forward projects including on you know some of our most heavily utilized corridors and our essential train control upgrade projects. so that's you know quite a significant concern not for this coming fiscal year but in the out fiscal years where we have money programed that we're expecting and in some cases it's been you know explicitly released and we need to, you know, really advocate for that and i won't emphasize that whether it's capital, those are capital projects. they of course have an impact on service through the efficiencies and improve reliability of muni forward projects and the just essential train control upgrade project. >> there is a there is operating funds at risk ongoing operating funds from the top program of around 17 million annually. that shifts a little bit but

those funds are what we use to support our muni discount fare programs and so those are at risk essentially starting in the fiscal year we think especially in the fiscal year that starts july first, 2026. so not this coming year but the year after the one where we have the significant fiscal cliff and that's that's a that's a real concern. i do want to also mention state operating relief funds. so these are funds that are that had come from the state in the last several years as part of the state operating relief money and these funds are at risk in the sense that there's a smaller pie overall and so we want to make sure that our funds are not affected. we do have 209 that we're expecting $200 million that we're expecting for the fiscal year that starts july 1st that we consider somewhat at risk but nothing like the risk we face to our capital funding. and in fact this money has been programed by mtc and they they

have the cash in the bank so that eases our concern but technically it still is at risk and in fact the mta board you all will see as soon as your next meeting the sort of routine effort that we bring forward to authorize the mta to seek essentially a claim from mtc that for all the money that we would expect from them in the coming fiscal year of which this is about two thirds so this is this is really important that we our capital fund is what we capital funding is what we consider most at risk the next steps on the budget discussion we are now in the time where the governor's presented the may revise and the negotiations are are in the legislature and with the governor. so that's you know the senate pro-tem the assembly speaker and then the budget chairs in each committee as well as some of the subcommittee chairs are working with their caucuses to come up with their negotiating positions and they'll work with the governor.

there is a hard deadline of june 15th for approval of the main budget bill in sacramento and that's where we expect some of the issues for this immediate coming fiscal year to be addressed. we are working with of course the mayor's office, other elected leaders and advocates to voice our concern because we believe that it's very important for the state to continue these commitments to transit funding because of how important we are to both the economy and the climate and air quality goals and our position specifically are for to support maintaining the state's existing commitments to turn the lc top and sb 125 through 2030 and support growing and maintaining the transit capital operations beyond that. so one thing that's worth emphasizing is that budget junior and trailer policy bills are do not have that same june 15th deadline. so this is where the cap and invest reauthorization will live and that those discussions will continue throughout the summer. so main budget expected to be

done in a few weeks has to be done in a few weeks. but the cap and invest negotiation will continue likely through session. so those are that the big picture on the state budget and cap and invest i know it's fairly complicated. i'm happy to to take questions either now or at the end of end of the presentation i can keep going. >> all right. pivoting to sb 63, this is again senate bill 63, the connect bay area act. this is authored by our own state senator scott wiener and senator jesse had again i should have mentioned previously as well that's that senator wiener is the chair of the budget committee in the state senate so we have a well positioned champion for transit there who are we are working with regularly on the budget issues. >> many of you are familiar with this with this measure. it's you know, very important to the future of transit not only here in san francisco with muni but in the entire bay area . it is, you know, designed to avoid major service cuts on all of the the regional systems

bart caltrain, ac transit and us what it does technically it creates a new district governed by mtc with alameda contra costa and san francisco are automatically within it and with options for san mateo and santa clara county to join it establishes a half cent sales tax for up to 410 between 10 and 15 years but it does allow san francisco to go between up to $0.01 it also has a provision that allows us to san francisco and san mateo to go up to $0.01 with a separate measure in one eighth of a cent increments that could be put on by the board of supervisors. i do want to mention that this this measure is coauthored by our assembly member katherine stefani and we appreciate that. i do also want to remind everyone that the regional measure is a key piece of our strategy to close our deficit for the for the f y 27 but it is not all of it but it is incredibly significant a few

additional provisions of of sb 63 i'll mention it it allows for up to 10% per year for transit transformation to grow ridership around the region and 1% to mtc for administration. it provides for the development of a detailed expenditure plan that development is delegated to county transportation agencies. so we're working very closely with the cta on that that that effort is currently underway. a couple of provisions that are you know we that are important are that it requires recipient recipient agencies to have third party review and only use fund for opera funds for operations unless granted an exception. and then finally and this is something that we supported sfm to it allows it allows mtc to withhold funding from agencies deemed non-compliant with regional network management policies and goals. that's a a set of policies and goals that came out of a blue ribbon task force during the pandemic and that's aiming at improving coordination across bay area transit

operators with things like fair integration, schedule coordination and wayfinding and as i said we support those efforts. i think it's important to mention the fair share scenario discussions that i that i just just touched on. those are the conversations that are underway across the region between the operators of county transportation authorities, the bill authors of course other elected officials and this is essentially developing the expenditure plan. the one thing i did want to mention and this is in line with the work of the muni funding working group we have worked in san francisco with the mayor's office with the cta and the board of supervisors that sits with the as a as a to to seek up to $170 million as munis sort of allocation from the regional measure in a one sense scenario where san francisco is at is that one said there is an august 11th deadline to produce an expenditure plan. so efforts are very much underway. >> august 11th will come back up as i go through the timeline this friday is the deadline for

sb 63 to pass the senate. i am very excited to report that it actually passed last night. senator wiener was able to take it to the floor and it received 28 votes in the state senate. it needed 21 so we are excited by that support and it now moves on to the assembly and from my experience in sacramento when things get to the second house they really accelerate. so the policy committee deadline in the assembly is just about six weeks away in mid-july and july 18th. then the legislature does take a summer recess but a lot of work continues to go on on bills during that recess depending you know, on on how much is required. >> and we do have an august 11th deadline to decide which counties are in set those final sales tax rates and have the detailed expenditure plan that i mentioned before the assembly appropriations appropriations deadline is august 29th. it can be amended on the floor up until september 5th and must pass by must pass by september 12th which is the end of

session and then the governor has 30 days to act on the bill. >> those are the broad outlines of course there's a lot of a lot of layers here on both the state budget and sb 63 and i'm again excited to be here at the sfm today and to make this first presentation to you all and look forward to hearing your questions and of course we will continue to keep you updated as these efforts continue. >> thank you mr. judson. colleagues, are there any clarifying questions before we go to public comment? okay, let's open public comment on mr. jetson's report for two minutes each. >> very good members of the public wish wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. there will be a warning sound at 30s and a chime when the time is up any speakers can come up to the podium at this time seeing none in the room we do have one accommodation request mr. speaker, one

question i have about the of funding and mta if i was an internal expenditure form of mr. manager making over a thousand a year to have the salary of then with no increase and there is for the duration of the crisis also projects that are not funded i mean based on how none of this this applies also to the bicycle coalition we should not see funding mta and mr. actually pay for licenses part just as

motorists pay and so this goes to the department i think this would be sort of how you for mta public is made up of and sacrifice putting increases and for public rotation and sacrifice to be reciprocal so these are my suggestions to rectify the present if i can. >> thank you no other speakers thank you. we will now close public comment mr. true i apologize. >> that's absolutely finance my grandfather's name so i always like hearing it. >> oh that's very good. all right colleagues comments, questions.

>> director felder, i guess one thing that would be helpful and don't expect it now necessarily but is if based on and i recognize that the the state budget at this point is in flux and it's it's hard really to get a sense of where it's going to end up. but at some point it would be helpful based on some of the reductions that are possible and the impact that they would have on our funding sources. >> oh, what in any given fiscal year what the total implication would be above and beyond what we have currently been anticipating. does that make sense? yes we can. we can provided especially once this june 15th deadline passes and we have a better sense of how that plays out and how the cap and invest conversation is going. we can outline that because we do know like how many dollars we're expecting on the on the capital side, you know, between

f y 27, 28, 27 and 30 when right now it looks like they'll go away now we do we are very actively involved in the negotiations with the california transit association, other operators and we know everyone understands the importance of transit so we're hoping we end up in a better place. but we can we can definitely provide that. thank you. >> vice chair kahana thank you for your presentation. judson i just wanted to give you an opportunity to expand a little bit more on the $17 million loss for muni discount fare programs in particular similar to director felder. i think having a better understanding of what that really looks like for members of the public would be really great to to just create more awareness around. but if you have some preliminary information on that like these are the programs that would be affected and this is how it would be affected

would be great to share that information if you have it. >> yes, i i think it's important to emphasize that that would be that is the most direct operating cut that would start and not this coming fiscal year but the one after it and that would be an ongoing issue that where we would either need to you know, that it basically adds to our deficit and we would we have to ,you know, just do everything we can to try to make sure that that cut doesn't happen because it does it would affect most if not all of our discount programs. we can find out exactly what the total cost is for those programs and how much this represents of it. but i think it's a fairly significant portion. but we can double check that and get back to you. director hirsch from princeton is one of the programs you're talking about like free muni for youth or is it or is it just you know it's yeah oh are this would impact almost every discounted fare program we have included in our free youth

program as well as our free program for low and moderate income seniors and people disabilities that that being said, you know the board would always have the option to fund those programs a different way . it would just create a $17 million hole somewhere else. so there's nothing specific about these programs riding on this funding source but we are grateful to have this funding source as a way of offsetting the subsidies if not for this funding source. so julie, does it become it sounds like it becomes increasingly challenging to to retain these programs given the financial situation we're in right now becomes a becomes a direct tradeoff with service cuts and on the advocacy front

on that piece alone, judson, do you feel you have the support that you that the agency needs to advocate for that position in particular? >> i think the short answer director is yes. but we continue to work with there's a there's a fairly broad coalition that's engaging on transit funding in sacramento but we can always do more to to sort of activate it and to make sure everyone has the information so we can we can come back to you with it specifically what we're doing on that front. but but i think we do expect a significant amount of ongoing advocacy for transit funding including these dollars for lc top as the cap invest program discussion continues through the summer and so we will and we will look forward to we can work with the board to engage all of you and we can really step up those efforts

in the in the weeks and months ahead. >> thank you. and i anything you can do to to emphasize that piece, i would encourage the team to do that in any way that of course we as board members can support the agency on that front. consider us partners in that. >> thank you director hemminger thank you madam chair. judson i hope you come to all of our meetings because we may be giving be getting out of this one at 3:00 which is unprecedented. >> so you are a lucky charm. two questions where did cal fire come from? have they always been a recipient in the cap and trade program? >> cal fire is funded through the general fund but i think that it's a proposal the governor has to shift the source of funding for the for at least a portion of the program. i don't know how much the program costs overall to to to

cap and trade to carbon invest. yes, it's well and look, our hearts go out to all those folks so they've got a pretty good hand to play i would guess in the legislature. secondly, look, we both have participated in regional measures before they typically center around bridge tolls and it's the worst form of herding cats i've i've ever run into. and i wonder if you've got a prognosis for the two so-called opt in counties whether they're going to opt in, whether the deal is sweet enough for them or it needs to get even better. what's your thinking on that? what's your intelligence? >> it's a chair hemminger i think that as you mentioned regional measures always involve quite a bit of conversation up until the point that they you know, move through the legislature we redraw measure three is what i

think you were referring to in particular i think we are looking forward to being as as a participant in all the conversation to see if we can do everything we can to have the those counties join. we of course defer to senator wiener and our our delegation in those conversations and so i think that you know, there's there are you know, elected officials and residents and active advocates throughout the the region that appreciate the importance of transit and so that makes me optimistic. but i don't think i'm setting any kind of line on the county's participation right now, any kind of betting line. >> well, maybe i'll ask julie instead. i don't like your answer but i'm incredibly grateful to tillie who has tillie chang from the transportation authority who has not only been you know, represent in san

francisco but also really trying to explain to our regional partners particularly our our southern regional partners what an important role muni plays in the region. her mtc's analysis estimates that about 16% of muni ridership is not san francisco based and so we are you know, cautiously optimist stick that both because of their own transit needs and a recognition of the broader regional needs that santa clara and san mateo are really active right now in in all of these discussions and i think at this point participation is is is is our our best indicator of outcome. >> thank you. thank you madam chair.

>> thank you, director lindsey they you get in and thank you madam chair. i just to quickly on the order that's on the order of things to add to your list when you come back and have more information i think it'll be interesting i asked for this today if you could but i. i totally understand. you know, things are in flux in one but if you in addition to the things that my colleagues ask if you could at some point provide a list of affected projects for our city once those conversations have gone to a place where you can provide us that information, i think that would be helpful. i think it's as casual as we can be for the public. i think that would be that would be help our advocacy position and help get people understand on our side.

>> so that's it. >> thank you, director lindsay we can we can definitely do that mr. true thank you so much for your presentation. i have a few questions. well first of all it was very interesting to learn more about the the cabin invest program and you you talked about how there were if i heard it correctly essentially to kind of big buckets continuous appropriations and kind of annual expenditures or discretionary expenditures. >> do you have a sense of the you know, the division of that is it 5050? is it predominantly one over the right now i believe that the continuous appropriations are 40 percent very money. >> i can double check but i believe 45, 55 or 40. so it's something like that we can double check and get back

to you exactly about that. but it's something in that range. >> and is that is that changing? is that to the is that the governor's discretion? >> so that's the existing program. does the existing program the only continuous appropriations in the governor's proposal right now or the billion dollars for high speed rail and 1.5 for the cal fire, the amount of money available changes based on the auctions and every year but a rough estimate is 4 to 4.5 billion a year or a year a year i think. yeah. okay. and so that gives you kind of a if it's 2.5 billion if the if the governor's basically proposing 2.5 billion of continuous from that it leaves less for other other other appropriations and is this change contingent on the the renaming cap and trade versus cap and invest or is that just annually there's a there's a change in that the program is

established with the percentage that is continuously appropriated with that called out and then in the annual process the the governor and the legislature can spend the rest. they can also program that out a number of years as well. so it's not like it's a it's kind of just like a blank slate every year there's there are certain things that usually get some of that money but and the renaming is part of the governor's proposal so if presumably if the governor and the legislature reach agreement on reauthorizing the program, it would have a new name. but it's widely called cap and trade around the world. it's sort of a you know, a innovative recognized program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions broadly speaking, no. but i personally think cap and invest is is a little bit more apt, right. >> i think that the governor would agree. so um with sb 63 it says that

the tax would be for 10 to 15 years. >> why the why the range i understand the range for the for half to a full cent but is that i think that's subject to the final legislation. so my understanding is right now it has that range and that it will be determined when the when the it'll either it'll allow that range so it's basically saying it couldn't be less than ten or less than 15 but i think that the you know what how the how the measure actually proceeds will determine the number of years. it won't be uncertain for us at some point right. so and then my my greatest concern i think based on what i've learned so far is is operating expenses that are tied specifically to our state

of good repair law and how how much of a concern, you know, capital projects are very important and i know that state of good repair is is baked into a lot of them but how concerned should we be about our ability to maintain that over over time if if in a worst case scenario situation i think we should be very concerned right now we are already directing a very large portion of our formula funds to train control with the expectation that every time a discretionary grant opportunity comes up we were going to apply and try to offset that this would move us in the opposite

direction so it would we are already minima izing our state of good repair funds on anything but train control and this would basically further tie them up which would impact our ability to replace outdated traction power system track that that is worn and cracked vehicles it would have a very significant impact on the reliability of our rail system. >> are there contracts that we've entered into say for the train control project that could be impacted currently the the train control is the is the primary contract at impacted okay. and then the the timeline is it

possible to to kind of lay on top of that our considerations for our next budget so because we can't really provide very good direction on budget until we know until we have numbers that are attached to any particular measure that may that may be coming forward. >> how does how does this impact our budget timeline? >> so i appreciate that question because at the board workshop i was really hoping to to sell you all on a budget process that started about six months early and worked through the major policy decisions as early as this summer. we are finding though that because of the kind of key building block which is how

much new revenue we can expect is not really going to be solidified until early fall. it's been challenging to do that. we are regrouping and working in the background on anything that we can be bringing as either scenarios or as policy conversations that we know we're going to need kind of regardless of the of the revenue levers. but i don't think we're going to have all of the factors that we need for you to start really making budget decisions until this fall. so the the bill that's tied to the regional measure if it does pass the legislature mid-september is it likely will will have a good indication from the governor's office whether or not he'll be

inclined to sign that legislation because that would take us to mid october. >> i would say typically there are very active conversations between the legislative sponsors and the governor's office and there's usually you know, some sense of where that stands by the time a bill, you know, gets to, you know, to the governor's desk and in fact, you know, most authors and i would think in this case in general i'm don't want to speak about this bill particular because i don't have any direct knowledge. but in general the the authors and in this case the coalition that's working on sb 63 would work with the governor's office in advance of the legislative deadline to, you know, craft a measure that could achieve gubernatorial support if that makes sense. so it's not something where you just kind of like wait until you throw it over the fence to the governor's desk to engage the governor's office. >> it happens well and earlier and i presume the the the

measure that that the actual funding measures i mean those are those that work is ongoing with our partners at mtc and correct you know so they're they're moving forward but we cannot move forward in terms of our our work until sb 63 until we we've got a good sense of sb 63 if it's going to to to pass ultimately. >> okay that's very helpful and what what julie while we wait are there are there pieces of learning and understanding that we can accomplish here in these intervening months that will assist us in in making these really important policy decisions once we have more clarity? yes, there there there there

definitely are and this presentation is sort of an example of how i plan to put something budget related and kind of an on each of our agenda so that we're not wasting any time but we do think we can start going through some of the policy directions. i think the parking discussion ,you know for example is you know, one thing to discuss in advance what the board's appetite is for either revenue generation or cost savings in a number of different scenarios. we are also as you know from what we presented at the board workshop any funding scenario

we're assuming about $5 million of additional efficiencies through things like the meeting forward program and $10 million in ongoing savings that would come out of things like how we set up our contracts or potentially out of staff positions. so those are things that we can also be working on in the background now that we have the current year's budget or the upcoming year's budget stabilized. >> okay. well thank you. thank you both. thank you very much. >> i oh director chen i apologize. >> didn't see i'm sorry i did this really quickly in terms of like total exposure to the fiscal year, the budget starting fiscal year starting in july of 26. right. fiscal year 2627.

so it's it's the 17 million in llc top and then are there and then most of the and then there's the 2 billion the the bridge funding of which there is the bridge funding and then there was the other sources you need mostly capital funding but some of those sources being flex operations is currently all all of those dollars that are at risk besides the 17 million and the the bridge funding the 2 billion portion of a statewide allocation that would come to us are all capital it's muni forward and and train control and we can get you a breakdown by year so it's the 245 is over i think 2 to 3 years starting in fy 27 so we can get that exact amount for you. but yeah just just trying to make sure there was there wasn't some other exposure that we had in the operating budget. so you know it's and then i know this is sort of incidental but will we be seeing a similar report possibly on the local

funding measure? i, i would defer to director chris but i think that's on the list of, you know, items that we will want to bring to you. you know, in advance of getting into the budget conversation. yes. okay. thank you. >> thank you. all right. so this is not this is we don't need any vote for this. >> so thank you colleagues, staff and members of the public. we are now adjourned and our next meeting will be on june 17th

>> >> a century ago, building a dam in the high country of the sierra to bring a supply of fresh water to the san francisco bay area was a monumental undertaking. mayor sunny jim rafh turned to michael to mastermind the project. michael

was a force of nature. air fwant in some ways but also a man's man. he supper advised the construction and it was the greatest engineering seats in the united states. >> the remow location of dam and reservoir made getting to the site a challenge. >> they had to get access to the slopes of the sierra nevada so they her to build a railroad to get construction equipment and materials into the site. they had to generate power so they built another reservoir to generate power and they did a remarkable amount of work with much less sophisticated equipment than what we have today. >> concrete for the dam was processed at a plant just upstream from the construction site, using sand and rock from the valley. nearly 400,000 yards of cubic concrete were poured

around the clock. >> oshansee was a detailed oriented guy. he was having his man dig down the bedrock and they would dig and dig and pull, you know, out debris and they come and say, okay, we've gotten down. we're down far enough. we need to personally look at it and say, no, dig deeper. >> in may 1923, the dam was completed and named first chief engineer and behind it, an 8-mile chef of the hetch hetchy valley was flooded and holding back 115 billion gallons in the new reservoir. it would take another 11 years to finish the system and bring that water across california to the san francisco bay area. >> this was the moment. it was made pososososososososososososos

[music] >> discover the heart of san francisco in district 5.

tapestry of neighborhood rich in history and unique character. from the iconpic hate ashbury and fillmore and japantown to hayes valley. the north of pand handle, western addition and tenderloin, this district showcase city diversity at its finest. >> i'm consisten evans a resident and small business owner in the historic haight ashbury. i own [indiscernible] haight ashbury is a unique place. it was the most colorful part of the city when i was a kid. i ended up moving here and owner a book stoor here, which was the dream. we have people of all walks and visor its and tourists around the world that come to the haight ashbury. coming sometimes to see the histzry of the neighborhood. the rock stars, janice jaupson

and grateful dead house. people are free spirited. here we have many second hand clothing stors. here are eco conference so people enjoying the street and a place to stop and people watch. while you are doing that, stop have lunch. we have [indiscernible] fun restaurant. cha, cha, cha, neighborhoods class. ic. they have a place next door. i could go on about all the really great places to try in the haight. i'm part of the haight ashbury merchant association and work promoting the corridor as a destination. people don't just come to haight street to one destination they visit 3 or 4 places when they visit. if we have vacancies we have fewer reasons people are coming to the street. we had 21 vacancies going into the pandemic.

that increased to 32 during the pandemic so one thing we had been advocating was a stour front vacancy tax. voters passed prop d and that revus deuced from 32 to 14. you should come to the haight ashbury, enjoy the beautiful weather, get a meal on haight street. kwrrks district 5 feature slow and safe street that cckt our neighborhood. haight shandsads a shining example bustling with bikers and pedestrians and recognized the city most successful slow street. the golderen grate greenway and car free hayes, turned to safe welcomeic spaces for walking and biking. >> after having lived all over the city, i wanted somewhere where i never needed to use a car.

and i also wanted somewhere where i am a little separation from my job downtown. i drew a 25 minute radius around downtown and hayes valley seemed to fit the bill. i found this neighborhood like kind of the most community i experienced. people tend to linger reminds me of a european city. i see a lot of people just hanging out outside and patss people and you get to know people in the naurbd. it is a pretty special environment. one of my favorite landmark is where we are standing patricia green. it was the former site of the freeway. she was part of a group of people that lead the movement to get the freeway taken down and this was the embarcadero is one of the best examples of what happens when you remove a free way and give space back to people. there are tons of places to shop and eat. pretty much something for everybody here. my friends kid had their first

birthday party last week and i walked to [indiscernible] and got a present for them. if it is warm like today you can hope to home town creamly and get ice cream. another favorite is mercury cafe down actaveia and another faiviate is hayes valley baker, where they have incredible bake goods and breakfast and sandwich and employ and train at risk and disabled people, so there is a real social angle to what they do. every friday saturday since covid the 400 block of hayes street between octaveia and gough was pedestrianized. we open to people. it doubles the size of our town square. for anybody in d5 or anywhere around the city, it is really a great gathering space to just lijer. you don't need a plan, just come and

hang out. >> the fillmore at the heart of district 5, one of san francisco historic black neighborhoods. after endureing redevelopment scr displacement the community is experiencing new businesses fresh life and vibrancy to the area in recent years >> i'm erica scott and we are here at honey art studio. i grew up here in the neighborhood i feel fortunate to have my business here. we are a multipurpose place. we teach art classes and we also have live entertainment, and community meetings. private event space. the history of the fillmore, dates back generations before me. that is a big part of our studio here. there is a book the harlem of the west, and that book depicts what the

harlem of the west was which is the fillmore and people really from all over the world would come here. it was a huge-just everything, this was the place to be to experience black culture and just to live. i definitely want to give honor to that. culture to my generation, new businesses. we have something really special and unique, which is in the black. sits on the corner of geary and fillmore. it is a home to i believe 30 entrepreneurs. it is like a marketplace. super cool. a lot of the things are either custom or just really unique. jazzy hair slaun. saloon and believe they are applying for a legacy business ownership because they have been in business over 25 years. there are lots of cottage and home bases.

>> brother mar key mohammed in the fillmore since 1999, been established here since 1999. my products, oils and cosmetic items, clothing. how is it going? >> going good. >> good to see you. i still have my old customers that come in. this is a sense of community. we have little remanence of the old vibe here. >> the fillmore is the famous jazz district and we still have elements that. you want to come and experience it. friendly people and a place where you take a piece of san francisco, a piece of the fillmore right back with you. >> since the redistricting in 2022, the tenderloin is part of district 5. introducing a vibrant community to the district. the tenderloin is rich in history with unique land marks like retvens alley renamed from shannon street. what was a blighted alley ask a

gathering place where veterans express through art and connects with one another. the neighborhood also boast a tenderloin museum offering programs that highlight the area cultural historical significance. >> the museum has a permanent collection about the history of the neighborhood and we also have a community art gallery featuring tenderloin artists and working on projects irn the neighborhood. >> we have become known having inspired arts programs and that's something that makes us very unique. we are producing a play about the cafeteria riots. we started to work as many neighbors and organizations as possible to create really diverse programming for diverse neighborhood. tenderloin is a close nit community, in just like all most decade i have been working here, you are able to make so

many connections with people. [indiscernible] an incredible neighborhood working class bar in the tenderloin neighbor, the first queer bar in the neighborhood. shows experimental performing arts and have been great partners and do a lot for the neighborhood. we have little saigon and saigon sandwiches. i think one of the classic staples of tenderloin. yemen kitchen is a restaurant that opened in the neighborhood that i highly recommend. the phoenix, the hotels, such a tenderloin legacy business. that brings in like people into the neighborhood that might not normally stay here. there is so much more in the tenderloin that you read in the news. a story from the people who live here themselves.

>> probably the most unique feature in japantown is the peace bugoata built as part of the japan trade center. the other-japan center itself, the oldest indoor shopping mall in san francisco. built in the late 1960's. despite all the changes japantown has been through, it is really still a authentic japantown. it is still a japanese american community. so, you could still find a lot of japanese american food here. japanese ice cream stores that are really popular. we have what is called maucha drinks here. the other thing that has become really popular in japantown is all of the new shops opened up. every japanese restaurant had [indiscernible] anything you could order, but

now it is all specialized so they come from different parts of japan and they feature their home town style of ramen. it is a really safe place to hang out. you come down here and you get a sense of the japanese american history and culture just by being down here. it is just one of the great places to visit in san francisco. >> district 5 is a vibrant diverse area with so much to offer both residents and visitors. it is a place where people can experience the amazing community spirit and explore the many unique small businesses that make this district truly special.

[music] >> i'm sabrina, i own vintage in north beach san francisco. i started 7 years ago online selling vintage clothing and 9 months ago i opened my brick and mortar in san francisco. i have always been passionate

about vintage clothing. always just been so passionate about what i do and i felt it was the right time after 7 years online. i think it is what north beach needed. especially because vintage clothing is so good for the environment as well. very anti--i think it is great and a opportunity to be here. we have everything from the 20 to 90. i personally like to create more towards the 60 and 70 as you can tell. there is something for everyone. i just always want everyone to feel very welcome in here. i want to treat everyone like a guest in my apartment. i want everyone to have a good time in here and just enjoy all this very clothing.

. >> welcome to the 15th annual nightlife and entertainment commission summit game. thank you all for coming. this event is brought to you by the entertainment commission for which i am the executive director. >> my name is maggie whalen. for all of those that. >> however, for all of those who i haven't met in the past please come up and say hi during one of the breaks or at our happy hour today. and for all those that i know it's so lovely seeing your faces. this is my 10th year with the