Changes this includes updated financial and today you are being asked to adopt the srtp. Following that, we will satisfied our obligation and well turn our attention to the next cycle. We are actually pretty excited about this. As this was the first srtp produced by the transit division. I know its odd. The srtp was produced by the Planning Group of insustainability streets but as i said, this is relatively minor for the last one and were hoping however to introduce fairly major changes in the next one and information on some of the subjects you see here. One of which the Public TransportationAgency Safety plan update is coming to you soon and they are here to talk about that. Good afternoon. Members of the board. My name is mike and im one of the managers in the Safety Division and this is my colleague robin courtney. For the past three years, weve been weve been pass with the Public Transportation safety. This is a project thats been longstanding going back years and its the largest and major change in safety regulations over the past 25 years. It falls under federal regulation title 49 go to fed regulations part 673. It documents our Safety Management system. Or s. M. S. This replaces the document weve been using since 1996, which is our systems Safety Program plan and in this case, it adopted it was adopted only for rail but this new document applies to all our remotes, both our rail systems, our trolley bus systems and our diesel bus systems. Unlike the previous system Safety Program plan, it must be approved by you, the board of directors and it will be signed by the director of transportation. And when we have the package done, it will be effective next july 20th for a system safety plan and the former regulation having said that, let me turn this over to robin and give you an update. I wanted to walk through the timeline for completing both the Public TransportationAgency Safety plan. As of november 1st, we did complete the draft ptas which is this document here. We have submitted copies to our City Attorney and also the divisions from their reviews. Michael and i have been having a series of oneonone meetings with all of the subject Matter Experts to get their feedback and we expect all of the comments to be returned to us by december 10th. We will then accumulate those comments, incorporate them into an updated draft and have a completed second draft available december 31st. To have a draft of the puc and and we have and we have been communicating with them through the process about our ptasp. Well give them time to review and get back to us. We will expect to have a copy to the board of directors by apri april 2020. It will be signed off by our director of transportation, both of which are requirements and theyll be some time after that is certified by july of 2020. Theres no requirement to send this document to the fta although its their regulation mandate it and we will submit it for the rail but we do not currently have an Oversight Agency for the bus to be sending it to. Any questions . Directors, any questions . Thank you for your time. Were going to open to Public Comment. Any members of the public would would like to comment on this item . Mr. Wiener. Good afternoon, david pillpel, i happened to be down here for the Memorial Service and its very nice. Mr. Wiener is nice. Apologies. Thank you. I was saying that i was here for the buck delvin memorial. It was a very nice service. I heard two things of interest. One, the updated srtp which has not had a chance to review by read document like 40 years ago and its just been evolving since then. I think its important to look at the facilities portion, not just the potrero rebuild but the other Facility Needs of the agency. Particularly as it relates to the fleet needs in the future and ultimately it goes back to the service plan if ridership is flat, and in some cases decreasing, and other cases increasing, i really question whether the fleet needs to be expanded overtime and whether the facilities need to be increased or simply renovated or remodeled. Its a large question to think about. As relates to the safety piece that was just presented, i didnt see anything in the slide about Public Outreach whether the Citizens Advisory Council is being consulted and what other Public Outreach is being done relative to safety. Its important clearly to review internally with staff but the public has great concerns about safety on vehicles at stations, et cetera, and that needs to be addressed just as an example, over the weekend, the lights were out at westportal station for three days straight. It took that long to get the Electrical Work addressed. Those are the kind of daytoday safety concerns the passengers experience and should be incorporated into this . I did hear the staff say at end just now, although the state puc overseas with regaroversees, tht oversees them on bus. Its the chp that does safety inspections on bus and perhaps that could be incorporated. Its safety and increasing our funding relate today our facilities facility in the tunnels so we just approved an item that will address that issue substantially and then again, generally safety will be brought up both in the Transit Working Group and also in our workshop. Any additional comments . All in favor. Aye. The item moved and approved. Director, next item. Approving a contract approval delegation and requirements policy which delegates to the director of transportation the authority to approve and execute an expenditure and revenue contracts amendments and other agreements within certain limits. And since i am presenting, im going to go over to the podium. If its on speaker card. Directors, i will keep this brief. The mta board has approved about four different contract delegations approval policies in the last 20 or so years. What we are doing today is we are consolidating them no one document. The last time the board adopted revisions to contracting policy was nine years ago. Contracting costs have increased since then. And staff has recognized the agency enters into a lot of different kinds of contracts. Some are relatively low value that are not within the directors erup current delegatd approved authority. Today we want to do is ask for your approval for our consolidated delegation and requirement policy. The biggest change in this policy is that we are increasing the directs or of transportation approval contracts from 500,000 to a million dollars. Again, in the past years, contracts have increased and taking the time to bring relatively small amount documents contracts to the board results in delays in approval and it can stop construction contracts, construction from moving forward. So, we are trying to reassign the Approval Authority so the director can sign documents that will keep projects moving forward. Also, the document also allows the director of transportation to redelegate to certain establishmented individuals and within the organization and all of this is under the scrutiny of the board, as you would continue as you have for the past 20 years, gotten a Quarterly Report on contracts. Also, it is under the scrutiny of auditors and the controllers and a lot of checks and balances. Right now, his Delegation Authority of 500,000 is under what other city departments have and so were just looking to make an adjustment because we dont expect to bring a revision back to you for a number of years. So, we dont want this change to make them have to change their path at the last minute. So, were con if dent that by having an Effective Date of january 15th, 2020, this will allow those contracts to complete their process. With that, i think i will pause for questions. Directors. These all look reasonable to me. The person to whom well delegate these authorities will change in a couple of weeks. Yes. And has he been consulted . Yes, he has. And he supports the documents. The policy. Any other additional questions from director . My only question is, you mentioned the 500k increase to a million, its also a section on reDelegation Authority. Which grants to several Division Officers authority to approval contracts and amendments up to 10 million. So i just wonder if you can speak to that update . Up to 10 million. Theres a whole list of not exceeding 10 million of different authority granted to Different Division managers. Ok, do you know where that is . Ok, good. Ok. Rob stone, City Attorney worked on the drafting of this document and knows the contracting process of the mta inside and out. Great, thank you. You set a high bar. Rob stone, deputy City Attorney. The 10 milliondollar element is for the purpose of general goods, things like uniforms, fuel, tires, things that are generally consumable and some non professional service contracts, theyre not construction contracts, theyre not engineering contracts, theyre the general daytoday purchases of the city. The Current Practice of the agency, although its not been captured in a board policy, is to follow the city purchasers requirements and thats what is memorialized in this policy and made formal that the director and the directors delegates, which are the director of purchasing for the sfmta will have the same power as the city purchaser but are required to follow the city purchasers regulations and procedures will are generally advertising Competitive Bidding using the citys contract forms. Amended as is appropriate for a particular contract but basically following those general procedures. Is there any language in there around just in terms of accountability purposes with consistency with the existing adopting budgets or anything like that . Any language that con strains that authority . The citys contracting process would not allow a contract to be served by it if the funds were not already budgeted. I dont know how deeply you want to get into the weeds on that. The processes is that when a contract is certified, the city controller, first through the m. T. A. s own budget process but the citys mr. Wiener. One of my concerns about this proposal is the concentration of power in the executive authority where there should be checks and balances. Includes a boards of supervisors, it includes this board, it includes advocacy groups. And, i am unsure right now about this proposal. It seems harmless. It seems like conducting the routine daytoday affairs but it could be expanded. It could be widened. It could be a loophole that you could drive a truck through. So, i would be very cautious in evaluating this proposal. I think that weve seen, right now, i see a centralization of power because this board routinely a proves everything that is proposed. Ive never seen very rarely do i see a proposal denied by this board. Basically this board has to be a watchdog with teeth. Right now, its a fury pet that cuddles up to the executive director. I feel that we should have checks and balances and that is why i question the proposal. Thank you. Thank you. I do want to say that we have a policy in Governance Committee that addresses or discusses a lot of these topics. Traditionally thats why a lot of things arent voted down because the board is not supportive, staff doesnt present it to us for us to vote it down. It doesnt mean that there are things that staff proposes that we support everything that staff does it means that staff doesnt waste our time entertaining items that were not going to support. Madam chair, in anticipation of a question so much of that, we did take a look back at the last 18 months, actually the last three years to see how many contracts that this change in delegation would apply and for the last 18 months, it was zero and for the prior 18 months it was two contracts. So, it does not have big effect. Really the big issue here is the authority of the director of transportation to delegate a Contract Authority to his direct report so he doesnt the former direct are of transportation commented he adds no value but signing hundreds of poll license agreements for antennas so this is really to streamline the work that staff does. The fact that people cant spend unallocated money and the Controllers Office and so many other people are involved provides the necessary check and balances. So unless director have any further questions or comments i will entertain a motion. A motion to amend the to january 15th, 2020. Ill move the amendment. Second. All in favor. Aye. As we voted for the amendment and now the original motion. Ill move that. Ill second it. All in favor, aye. Madam chair, that concludes the business before you today. Wonderful. Happy holidays and well see everyone i guess the workshop the first meeting. January 7th. Well see you all january 7th. The meeting is adjourned. We call this meeting to order. And i apologize for my voice. Please call the roll. Good afternoon. This is the meeting of the San Francisco commission on the environment. The date is monday, november 25, 2019 and it a special meeting. The date is november 25, 2019, and the time is 5 05 p. M. A note to the public that the ringing of cell phones, pagers and similar sound producing Electronic Devices are prohibited at this meeting so please turn your devices off. Theres also going to be Public Comment on every item as well as an opportunity for general Public Comment for items that arent on the agenda. And general Public Comment is item number 4. We ask that you fill out a speaker card at the table there and hand them to me, and ill hand them to the president and the president will call folks in the order we receive them. You have the right to speak anonymously, so well call up folks after we have received the speaker cards if you would like to speak anonymously. Item 1, call to order and roll call. [roll call] commissioner ahn is excused. Theres a quorum. The next item is item 2, presid. This item is for discussion. Good evening, everybody, andn francisco commission on the env. We have two presentations today, performance evaluation of direc. The first presentation is a resd collaboration. To help our city get up to 100. Before we officially get starten manager Anthony Valdez for his e commission and to the commissioe environment. I just cannot say enough about d how he helps us get through theg together. He is leaving us for bakersfield. The office of the city manager, they pretty much do everything. Hes going to be a key member of the team as they retry write bakers fields master plan. Thank you for everything you have done, for your professionalisalism, your friendship. Our loss is bakerfields gain, and you are going to be doing Amazing Things there. I wanted to offer the opportunity to any of the commissioners to add anything to my comments about anthony. Its hard to imagine how we are going to get along without anthony. Really, youve done such a splendid job, not only with the commission but being the face of the commission and to a certain extent, the department, in the community. I absolutely second everything our president said about your professionalism to what she has said already, i would say your calmness, your confidence, your knowledge of the rules and the laws that we operate under has made doing the business of the commission so much easier, because youre there, you have our back in everything that we do. Youve done a splendid, truly wonderful job. And i kind of feel bad for the person who is going to replace you. [laughter] because they are going to have very big shoes and a very big job to feel. I wish you the greatest success in bakersfield. I dont think ill be coming to visit you there, but i hope you have a great start to what is really, i know, going to be a wonderful career in Public Service. And i just wish there were more people like you who are interested and committed to it and as you believe as you are. Good luck, anthony. Commissioner stephenson. Im so excited for you. Im proud that you are going off to do this great work, and im excited to see what happens in your career, because well be following you even from far away. I want to thank you for all of your efforts. You taught me a ton. I was already on the commission when you came on board, but i feel like the work you did here taught me so much about the smooth running of the commission and certainly the way that you helped me run the Operations Committee meetings was just completely invaluable. And during the moments when i would have to step in, you were called off to do big things some place else, i never freaked out even though i tend to get a little nervous around public speaking because i knew that you had my back, and i knew that you, with all of us, made sure we had every bit of information we could ever need to do this job and serve the city in this way. So i thank you so much for your efforts and im excited to watch you in your career. Commissioner sullivan. I want to second everything that came before me. But i would also just say that as weve worked together not only here but also in the urban forestry council, these volunteer boards often, its the staff that has a longer tenure than the members of the commissions and councils. And we roll on and roll off and dont often know what we are doing and we might violate the brown act or forget Public Comment, and its really the folks in your seat that are