The proposed 2020 state legislative program, and transportation funding, emersion and parking, land use and housing and sustainability and i would note these are issues carrying over into the second year into january, year two of the current session and the dynamics are different in year two. I think were looking for opportunities to build on some of the conversations that started in year one. But also, perhaps, advance a little more aggressively some of the proposals have been eluded to around vision zero. With that, i will highlight a few of the things in the calendar item. First under transportation funding, there are specific things to call out and under statewide funding, the tircp, we do anticipate advancing a large request from this program for a combined core capacity investment, if you will, of muni forward and train control system improvements and they are due very soon. So i wanted to make you aware of that and we will be working with the delegatio delegation to makt case. Skipping down to conversations that have happened here at this board and with the board of supervisors and the ta and in the region, around a megameasure. The faster folks were hea here d gave a presentation. Our staff are working closely with all of the members of the city family to really identify the priority list of projects and programs that would be a part of any ultimate funding measure. In addition, in a parallel effort, there is conversation around a caltrain sales tax already authorized by the legislature and the folks on caltrain are working to make sure that if consensus and momentum doesnt move forward with a megameasure this year, which would have to happen quickly, the cal train measure canvass. Anyway, the second major topic area, and this is something mr. Mcguire mentioned about the task force. The program itself covers our broad commitment to vision zero. For the past six months, ive had the opportunity to represent San Francisco on the task force and ive been joined in the Advisory Group capacity by colleagues at the department of public health, walk sf and mtc have been pratting i participats and it has been important to have a statelevel conversation around the discussions that San Francisco and the large cities in california have been having over the last several years related to pedestrian and roadway fatalities. I think that with the discussions that have occurred, were anticipating seeing recommendations, findings and a report in january. And the focus of that report, pursuant to the original legislation that created the task force is on speed limit setting. So very specifically to director eakins comment, that you called out the restriction, if you will, between the ability for us to lower speed limits on certain streets is squarely one of those topics that is addressed in the task force conversations. And so, our hope is that once a report and the recommendations come out, that there will be an opportunity for San Francisco to put its full voice behind recommendations that will move us forward towards our vision zero commitment. So one of the notes and i sort of observed sometimes people have this ahha moment, that we cannot set speed limits below a certain point and the answer is no, you cannot. The deep, deep precedent and practise of settin setting speet the 85th percentile, its like setting your teenagers curfew on the tam time they get home. Its not the way well save lives. Our mantra, if you will, at the state level, is to embrace the urgency and look to the specific changes to allow cities to have the flexibility that we need to move this agenda forward. So the next bucket is emerging mobility and innovation. This dynamic lane, if you will, in the legislature, this past fall, director mcguire and director tore had an opportunity to testify at an opportunity in november around shared mobility. We sha saw an interest in explog what other possibilities exist, in the realm of shared mobility, what cities can do and those discussions are live and ongoing. Well look forward to reporting back to you in the near future on what some of the fruit that will bear. And something i know of interest here in the past two and also a part of the vision zero, congestion pricing and i would say recognising the veto of the lumbard pricing bull is controversial. We will have opportunities to see where the legislation might go. Ill skip through. Theres other categories of land use and housing and sustainability and finance and administration and theres a proposal that our staff, our finance staff brought tow brougt has to do with the fact that credit card fraud is pr proliferating not just in the right imaginregion but in calif. This is to provide transit operators with the ability to require zip codes at ticket vending machines in the same way if you used a credit card at a gas station, any unmanned gas station and in this case, ticket vending machine would require of a zip code as a secondary form of off ten authentication to ree incidents of fraud. This crime, if you will, causes us up to 300,000 a year in costbacks and were looking forward to working with our state partners on that. And on the federal side, i think what were looking at is, you know, reauthorization, the federal law governing and that expires in september and i think the folks that are really in the know recognize that until we identify a longterm Sustainable Fund source, it will be hard to have a renewed program without some sort of new commitment to a yet to be identified funding source. Weve seen multiple continuations in the past and the second priority area that i want to mention, because weve had our staff go back to washington, even as recently as two weeks ago to work closely with legislative staff and the National League of cities on Autonomous Vehicles policy and really trying to make sure that citys voices and our ability to not have federal law or the companys preempt our ability to what happens on our streets has been driving those conversations. So those were the highlights that i wanted to share with you today. This is actually an exciting year ahead in sacramento and a lot of opportunity for our priorities and im happy to answer any questions. Directors, any questions . Dr. Eakin . Ill get in first. Two quickkies. Im not sure what the answer is to the first one, but ill ask it anyway. You mentioned on the ballot measure front, this megameasure, the caltrain measure, theres a measure that i know youre aware of that mtc has put something on the ballot about housing and some expectation in the near term, not the longterm and whatever the ta is cooking up here in San Francisco, about a San Francisco revenue measure. That just looks like a train wreck. [ laughter ] if theyre all trying to be on the same ballot. Are you participating of who goes first, second or together. You think all of the folks participating are well aware of the dynamics and the tension, if you will, of who will be the first horse out of the gate. I would say that the decisions about that are going to have to be made very soon relative to timelines to get things on ballots. And so, yes, the answer is yes, we are participating in that and i dont know what the answer will be in terms of what the shakeout is ultimately, but there are a lot of and mine, the bottom line is, theres such a need, right . I think one thing i would observe to your point about the Regional Housing authority approved, they have a green light, right . That is authorized and ready to go. Thats true for three of the four, right. Thats right. The only one that isnt is the megameasure, which to make the ballot next year like march, like early. Would require the statute. Yes, youre right and in the next three months, its not an answer but that path forward that will have to be revealed. The other question is on the tncs and i know there have been discusses andiscussions and effy to cut local government in to a regulatory position. Have we explored whether or not thats possible through administrative action . I mean, could be state delegate its authority over that to a local jurisdiction . Saw, on a pilot basis and say one thats near San Francisco bay. Is there anything worth looking at there . Well, i would ask if our City Attorney has had a chance to look at that question, i believe early on, director hemminger, about why cant cities do anything . There was that fundamental, what is within our power . And, you know, susan is turning her mic on. Im deputy City Attorney. Through the chair, this the cpc has been engaged in various rulemaking procedures which is how the administrative regulations are informed at this point and San Francisco has been actively participating in those rule makings on various issues, such as access to data and other issues, so far, i would say not great success. But we are continuing to file comments. But thats access to data not regulation business . Thats correct. My question is, could they . Could the cpuc, by administrative action, by regulation, delegate some or all authority over the tncs to a local government or governments . I would just say thats not a question they have taken up. Well, it seems to me, you know, you could keep hitting your head on the wall in front of you and theres a way around it. Maybe this isnt the only way. But i would appreciate some thinking about whether or not that is worth talking about. And whether or not that requires statutory change. Right. What i was looking for, i guess, is a way around statutory change since that isnt for forthcomin. Maybe you could figure out a way to negotiate something differently. There you go. Ok, thank you. Other questions from director eakin . Just a couple, really quick. Do you read or continued the house use in housing, supporting tod to include the sort of sb50 conversation around increasing density around transit as contempcontemplated . For sure. And we have last year looked at that in the context of that bill in particular and i would say that in general, we work really following the lead of city planning and we lack forwar looo any opportunity we can to bring our voice to that conversation. Great. Best of luck to you on the task force. We look forward to big news in january. Awesome. And just two small things. One was, theres a better Market Street item in here referring to engineering items in 2018 and i wondewonder if this is dated anf there is any work around better Market Street that your team will engage in if this needs updating in the legislative program. And the other pieces around the congestion charge item. This is a very small detail, but theres language in here about how were going to look at a framework to ensure fewer vehicle miles traveled are reduced. Got it. I want to make sure that were not talking about that, but talking about the reduction site and i want to make it quick. Ok, thank you for that. Its a typo that maybe changes meaning, thank you. Ok, cool. Any other questions from directors . I could hav do have a question r machines and i dont remember, do the credit card machines take chip . No, thats the problem. And what is the prohibition for us doing that . Frankly, a financial cost of replacing the equipment. Its cheaper to lose the 300,000 than to make the investment . Or thats whats happened, practically. Were not alone in that. I mean, it was a big thing when it passed because consumers that dont know, back in, like, 2015, the law change ed this if you did not take a chip credit card in someones claim that it wasnt valid and the business took on the cost as opposed to the consumer. And restaurants had a big thing around it and i dont know why we cant look at, maybe, chip technology. I dont know if the new if you got rid of putting it in or did the waiting, the tapping taking advantage. Its something to look at for that didn and i know our new iteration of meters will have that capability, right. Right. Just had a question about that. And then with the train control, what are other sources weve identified for funding . For the train control system . Yes. So i would certainly defer to my finance colleagues on the capital side as to the funding plan for that. I do know that there are conversations about looking at, for example, the Capital InvestmentGrant Program at the federal level and packaging that as a part of a larger ask out of the traditional new starts program. But unless folks want to speak to the funding plan for the train control system. I know its part of the ask and we dont what will happen with that. Right. Any other questions from directors . If not, ill open this up to Public Comment, on miss breens report. No one has turned in a speaker card on this matter. Wonderful, seeing none, well move on to our next item. Item 13, directors approving all unilateral contract modification, 123 to 1300 lightrail program, surface track and systems to construct a Chinatown Plaza in the amount of 9,360,083. 48. No change to the term of the contract. Are we supposed to approve that legislative agenda . Yes. All in favour . So just to not confuse the public, we need to take a vote to officially approve the legislative agenda and we didnt do so because we went back to item 12 and now were back on to item 13. So ill ask my colleague to come up and give a presentation about the train town station and while he pulls the presentation up, ill set context. Weve been talking about this over the course of several meetings and the item before you today is about the very important Design Change that took place when the mta and the Chinatown Community agreed jointly to put a project on top of the chinatown station. When that decision was made, the Mayors Office was able to come up with almost 7 million worth of funding and we never emit the the contract. Even though that was over two years ago. Because its on the Critical Path to meet our substantial deadline, they have been doing that work at risk for over a month now some we feel obligated to ask you to approve this which we will walk you through. So its 9 million overall but theoretically we allocated about 6 plus million to this project but not contracted, right. Right. So the real cost increase is about 3 million and we werent contemplating 9 million. Were ask we modify by 9 million and to fund that9 million, we use a combination of the 6. 9 million provided by the ipic committee which is the source of funds. Thank you. Directors, good afternoon again. Im wyman lee and im a resident engineer for chinatown station. Today i am presenting contract modification 123 to construct chinatown station plaza for your approval. Central subway, phase two, we are constructing four stations. One surface station at fourth and branno inning, one at mosconi, another at union square and and my most prized at chinatown. Our timeline, substantial completion for the tailend of june of 2020. For the rose station, the original station has the residenrendering, and i consista surface level as well as roof. We want that to be incorporated into the construction contract. As can see from the rendering below, theres another story, another level thats going to be constructed above the surface. Well end up with the ground level, the plaza level, as well as the roof when everything is done. And the next slide, is shows the magnitude of the construction thats being performed at chinatown. There are six levels constructed underground, along stockton street and three levels that have the cavern of about 1,000 feet, where trains and pedestrians will be meeting each other. The plaza itself will be at the very top and well call this level two and it will be the second floor above the surface. Contract modification 123, one of the main reasons is that the money, the monetary threshold to be approv approved by the direcs beyond that and thats why were here in front of you, the board. Also, in good faith, our contractor has been constructing this plaza and theyve started construction of this since september of this year with some of the southern walls. And those wall constructions continue to this day. And the two elevators that will service this plaza have already been fabricated and scheduled for deliver iy in february of 2020. Some of the ongoing plaza work i wanted to share with everyone, you can see the two renderings above. The southern wall is worked on in the bottom left, as well as moving westward and some of the west walls being constructed. And also, whats going on underground, theres the staircases, structural steel and what youll see is a long, long staircase and its about 110 feet long and it will bring all of the passengers down to a ticketing hall where they can use a clipper card to enter the fair gates and board the trains. So all of this work is being constructed underground and we have escalators schedul schedulr delivery by next week. I have in front of you a slide just summarizing the original budget for this plaza work was just under 7 million and thats 680 million. The contract is 9,360,183. 48. So our recommendation today is pretty obvious, recommending to the board to approve contract modification 123 to have tutor continue their construction of the plaza at chinatown station. Thank you. With that, directors, are there any questions specifically about what mr. A lo wyman presented u . I thought the understanding was we give you the award and you reduce the request. I guess that didnt get through to you. [ laughter ] part of my responsibility as resident engineer is to spend our money wisely. So my question, just to be clear about what were doing today, this is a unilateral change order so the contractor doesnt agree with the number and so the number you just had on the screen of was it 12 or 9 or 6 . 9,360,000. What does the contractor think that number is . The contract . So there were two other numbers because remember, theres about a milliondollar difference between what we thought the cost should be and what you included in the staff report is sidebyside of what the city believes and the contractor believ believes and e contractor conclude concluded m. The tuits about 2. 6 millios the difference. So a 3 million delta. Yeah. What will be the process to resolve that and other disputes . So as weve discussed when we modified the scheduled completion date and resolved the delay claims earlier this year, its still our intention to bring to this board an updated estimate of completion and that will form our final trueup of the contract which has been once and for all, first of all, well know how much more well need to finish the job,