Alternatives. So as that conversation continues, i think this authority, Transbay Joint Powers Authority it continue working at a state level to see if we can participate in some of those discussions. Good point. Any final questions . Thank you very much for the update. Appreciate it. Next item or public comment. Weve got public comment. Clerk weve got roland lebrun. So thanks again. Let me start with the central valley. In europe, it would never be a highspeed lines, because theyre highspeed, they never, ever bisect. Next, i will be talking just not just about the r. C. P. , but about funds. Im going to talk about legislation. Prop 1 is codified in streets and highways section 2104. The first violation of this plan, is section 2704. 04, which specifies that another [inaudible] and operate a system that complies with prop 1a, including operating highspeed trains without an operating subsidy. Specific section cpuc section 185032, subsection b. In closing, the next step, my suggestion is forget about san jose and focus on the segment between san jose and gilroy. Thank you very much. Next item. Clerk yep. Item 16 is the San Francisco county Transportation Authority peer review update. We also in this intervening period heard from the apta peer review, and i appreciate that. This one was focused on a little bit more broad of a scope than the other one, but largely finds very similar things about the need to expand and deepen capacity in certain areas and to really regionalize this project in terms of the publics understanding of its importance and its value. Youll hear a bit more from john fisher, and ill turn it back over. Ill just note again that theres a second piece with this work that will deal with more the government organizational recommendations . The first dealt with project messages and sort of benefits and positioning as well as its project delivery aspects, so part two will come at a future date. Thank you. Thank you. And before i get started, id just like to add my thanks and congratulations to director reiskin for all your contributions to the city. Good luck in oakland. I hope i know your commute changes, but i hope to still run into you at forest hill station along the way. I would also like to thank mr. Zabaneh and your team in helping us get up to speed in all the meetings and the phone calls. Its not been insignificant, so thanks to you. As director chang said, the t. A. In april convened a Multidisciplinary Team to look at the different options for government oversight, funding and finance and project delivery to ensure that this is setup for success. The t. A. Assembled a panel of ten experts with diverse backgrounds, really with national and International Local and megaproject delivery experience, specifically with finance and legal and procurement backgrounds to bring to bear on the d. T. X. Program. This included as well as lawyers and engineers, we had academia represented, as well. The screen will show you the number of stakeholders involved. A lot of mayors office, the city family, the regional operators. As i said, really, the the many of some on this panel participated in a number of peer reviews and workshops not just in planning but also in governance and project funding and planning, so a big thanks to everyone who has spent time with us to provide input on this important question. So weve had a number of meetings, and we had a kickoff in april with presentations by tjpa, by caltrain, by the highspeed Rail Authority to make sure the panel had a consistent starting place as well as where current things stood, as well as the operation plans. There were over 22 confidential interviews with the stakeholders, Agency Representatives to glean input, as i said, on the current state of affair as well as whats working, whats not working. We we also embarked on a pretty extensive effort for five case studies of of rail and megaprojects to glean Lessons Learned, and those included california high speed rail, london cross rail, gateway in new york and new jersey, the San Francisco bay bridge, as well as the tosha, the High Speed Rail Service and station in madrid. And these helped us form commonalities in projects facing just like the d. T. S. And in formulating some of the recommendations. We also had workshops on governance, budget and finance, and oversight. And we had a workshop in june starting to vet ideas with representatives and stakeholders. It was great feedback skprks, really helped us shaped where were going. That was the workshop phase of the of the reporting process. And then, we cdid go to the sfcta board as we noted at the beginning of this update. As director chang noted, we have moved forward and wanted to provide an update today on those recommendations. This panel really saw itself as focusing on technical and policy issues. We really consider ourselves technical and independent. There are a lot of issues, and we really wanted to make sure we stayed independent and brought that objective perspective. We also wanted to make sure that we reached a consensus which isnt easy for ten people. We want to make sure that our recommendations have been thoroughly discussed and vetted and that we agreed on them. I just want to take a minute to read our initial finding because i think its important and its its its a key starting place for us. The d. T. X. Rail Program Offers critical mobility value to the bay areagilroysacramento by area and country. And it should continue to be pursued with important advancements on accountability and services should be realized at Salesforce Transit Center as soon as possible. This took a little bit of time to craft, and i just wanted to read it to this board to underscore the effort and commitment by the panel, that we are committed to this pan project. That was the basis for which we kicked off this panel. So with that, a few of the consensus recommendations that i just wanted to highlight for you today. And director chang mentioned this in her opening remarks. You know, this is a project, right or wrong, that has been seen as a San Francisco project, and i think as as has been rielted, it is more than that. It is a it is a regional realized, it is more than that. It is a regional project, and it is a partnership amongst agencies for these big projects. We, too, see that a highly collaborative Interagency Team would be best suited for delivering this. And really, this is a project of regional and national significance, and that is n not that may be of course. This is not a throwaway line. This is a federal and region statute, that with advocacy, is an opportunity to leverage federal funds in terms of meeting that bar. Theres some work to do, but i think that project is a great candidate. The next recommendation is really redefining this Value Proposition, and i think this a lot has happened since this project has been adopted into the r. T. P. In terms of the region. There is a hunger for more rail service, and there are a number of small to medium to large megaprojects that have initiated development in their own right that this project has been opportunity to harness and plan for, and those are just if you look at the intermodal station at dierdorn, and obviously in the b. A. R. T. , ccjpa, and caltrain planning and discussion for a second rail crossing, and the opportunity to have connections between at Salesforce Transit Center make a whole lot of sense. But that doesnt just happen on its own, so thats one of the recommendations of redefining that Value Proposition and the benefit statement for this project. And then finally, i think theres really an opportunity to rename and rebrand this project, and it is. Its a program of projects, and so when you look at 4th and king or a new rail yard or a 22nd or 26th street station rail yard or extension, theres an ability to talk about these programs together. The regional connector project in los angeles is a good example of being able to kind of harness this. Its this idea, and i think its also easier to frankly market to supporters in the public and also elected officials. So thats one of the other recommendations. As i mentioned, megaprojects are all unique, but one comm commonality is they take a long time to fund and produce. We need strong support from federal, state, and local elected officials. Not just the current ones, but the next generation. So that really takes a lot of coordination and working with federal officials in washington to make sure they see this as a preferred project. Were competing against projects not just in new york, but projects in los angeles. The other recommendation is we need to engage the public directly and make sure that the Value Proposition and that the shared goals of this program are known around Environmental Remediation and protection and environmental development. We heard a lot of this from the shake holders to have the operators agree on the scope of this project, both timing and what will their contributions be and ultimately how it will serve their customers, so thats a really important aspect of this. At this time, im going to turn it over to my colleague, ignacio, to walkthrough the rest of our recommendations. So relating to the rail program funding, which is one of the major components of what the expert panel was tasked to look into, one of the main kind of findings or recommendations of the programs already strong claims on existing sources, any project of this nature, y. As john will know, we have very ambitious emerging rail projects, both caltrain on the peninsula, as well as transbay crossing project, high speed rail, so its a very ambitious regional and megaregional project that this is the linchpin. So in terms of the revenues, the funding plan that we looked at, theres an existing plan that has a number of Funding Resources that are planned to be used. So establishing a longterm Financial Plan is one of the main recommendations of the panel. One of the key aspects of that is the federal participation in the funding plan, and one of the things that we were able to ascertain is that really, theres a strong need to maintain the project in the greater stream at the federal level, and that its high on the National Priority list so that the congressional delegation fully understands and supports that task of keeping the project high on that priority list. And it is one of many projects nationwide that is competing for those limited federal resources, so its a critically important thing, and we believe there is work to do to successfully compete for those sources, federal Funding Sources through the type of positioning that john was explaining. Theres, of course, a number of efforts going on here in the bay area and in the megaregion. For example, the other efforts being led by various parties. Now in terms of governance and oversight, i know this is the most titillating part that Everyone Wants to hear about, i know that most of the work is still ongoing in this regard, and were looking forward to having a final set of recommendations and a presentation to the sfcta board in september where well be able to talk more specifically about this. But ill just recap what i said previously in our previous presentation. First of all, the panel did review and study what are the best practices and Lessons Learned not only from around california but nationally and internationally so we would build into our thinking what those best practices are. And from that, we identified a set of common key criteria for success. I wont go through all of them, but some of the keynotable ones is definition of roles key notable ones is definition of roles, and project transparency. Sometimes we take it for granted, but its important it always be front and center, which is a focus on the customer, on the end user, and that should be a guiding principle in thinking of delivering outcomes for customers. But theres also more granular issues such as, for example, the need for independent assurance, independent advice that really challenges the thinking ahead of major decisions. And this is a really important aspect, and i think its consistent with the review panel made a similar finding and recommendation that we should be thinking about. But theres also other things such as project delivery and operational expertise, the importance of having those in a very strong way. Any of these aspects that i just mentioned, and theres many others, can easily make or break the success of a project. And in fact, theres a study that was done by the Mackenzie Company that led this study, sort of managed the panel, herding the cats there, and that study indicated that two thirds or roughly two thirds of megaproject cost overruns and delays are directly attributable to governance and organizational issues, so that really kind of emphasizes the importance of making those decisions and having the right strategy with respect to that. I would say that, just to echo previous comments that have been made, there is no single recipe for success. Yes, there are common characteristics across the case study that john mentioned and many others, but ultimately for a megaproject such as this, and especially if we think of it in terms of are real program, you have to look at it in terms of financial and other realities of the program. So just to recap in terms of organization, our definition is of the architecture of the team and organizational structure is an approach that sustains the support at the regional and the National Level is ultimately the goal that were that were looking to achieve. Moving on, one of the things that the panel was asked to look at is, say, okay, thats all very good and fine with these big picture strategy issues. What do we do in the next two years . What is it how do we go about implementing this strategy . So this work plan that you see here on the screen is is a something that the panel developed as a panel in response to that. And really, ultimately, regardless of who executes on that strategy on the work plan and whatever work plan ends up being adopted, the most important thing is that it should be it should prioritize expediting and energyizing the delivery of the project. So and we believe as a panel the best way to do that is with a strategy as reflective in the previous remarks and that would be implemented something along those lines. Now in developing this work plan, we recognized that there were two Critical Path issues for the project. One relates to funding. This is a multibilliondollar project, and the funding identifies we could say very high Funding Sources, a lot of it, but not all of it, and the delta is significant. And then, the second thing is a resolution of a number of key issues with the two rail operators, highspeed rail and caltrain. So with that in mind, with the goal of achieving rail service to the transit terminal at the earliest possible date and specifically thinking of a goal of achieving that by 2029, which has been the published date for start of service, we worked back from that and then identified a and this is what you see in this graphic, the next what would be the next major milestone to make project toward that the ultimate goal. And so working back from that, we identified that the key milestone is the start of procurement or the start of the process of contracting the construction contracts. And so we we looked at the the plans as they had been laid out, and we saw that mid2021, i believe, is the date when or roughly the timing or the start of that activity. The twoyear work line is working back from that milestone, which is the red diamond in the lower right hand corner of the diagram. And then, we worked we developed a series of tasks that are aligned with the recommendations of the strategy. We made a series of four key decision points, which are the blue points in the diagram in a certain sequence. So without painting it with too much of a broad brush, ill go into what that is. So the first series of tasks would be related to whether to adopt these recommendations of the extra panel, whether its all of them or some of them, and then, theres a number of decisions that would have to be taken also in relation to governance as well as the actual tasks themselves. With a number of agreements and m. O. U. S and so on that would have to be worked out in order to implement certain tasks. So that would have to be an early task in that process that would be related to that. That would then allow that project to proceed with the start of the next task, which is the repositioning and redefinition of the project. That involves a series of tasks really related to the funding plan, looking at the potential for phasing, looking at what are the realities for start of service, looking at california highspeed rail in the d. T. X. And Transit Center . And those would culminate in a selection of phasing and funding strategy aligned with the work of that task. That contains in it a number of tasks related to engineering, completing there may be aspects of the Engineering Design that has been done to date that needs to be further developed, cost estimating, risk analysis. There are a number of things that are embedded into that set of tasks. The second one and happening in parallel with it would be related to governance and oversight. The the thinking being that the decisions being taken in the first task is really pacific numb task number two, in the yellow bars, what that governance and ta organization would look like. That would be the task itself would be to determine those things. And then finally, also in parallel because these things, they have a certain sequence, but they have to be developed currently in an integrated way, is the very important task of the selection of a project delivery option. And i will talk about that more in the next slide. But that sequence of tasks would allow you to eventually make that decision on a project delivery method that would then support the milestone of start of procurement. Okay. So moving on to project d