e.

Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of December 14, 2007.

Carried

Subrogation Claim of California State Automobile Association
(Insured: Michael Kurylo)

Carried

Purchase

Date

Maturity

Date

Original

Cost

Percent

Yield

Accept the Investment Report for November 2007 prepared by PFM Asset Management, LLC.

Adopted

Presentation of Employee of the Month Award for January 2008 to Craig Dodson, Superintendent of Facilities and Equipment, Bridge Division

President Moylan presented the Employee of the Month Award for January 2008 to Craig Dodson, Superintendent of Facilities and Equipment, Bridge Division, and expressed his congratulations on behalf of the Board of Directors.

Approve an Increase in the 2008 Special Event Ferry Fare between the Larkspur Ferry Terminal and AT&T Park

Directors PAHRE/STROEH
Ordinance No. 2008-01 approves an increase in the 2008 Special Event Ferry fare between the Larkspur Ferry Terminal and AT&T Park from $7.00 to $7.50, in keeping with the goal to set special event fares at “breakeven” levels, effective March 1, 2008.

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Brown, Cochran, Dufty, Eddie, Grosboll, Kerns, McGlashan, McGoldrick, Middlebrook, Newhouse Segal, Pahre, Reilly, Sanders, Sandoval and Stroeh; Second Vice President Ammiano; First Vice President Boro; President Moylan
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Hernández

Authorize Execution of an Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with the Bay Area Toll Authority for the Operation of the FasTrak® Regional Customer Service Center for a Modification to the Cost Allocation Formula

Directors MIDDLEBROOK/BROWN
Resolution No. 2008-002 authorizes execution of an amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with the Bay Area Toll Authority for the operation of the FasTrak® Regional Customer Service Center to modify the cost allocation formula, basing the District’s cost share on its average payments from July 2005 to July 2007, to be adjusted by the percentage increase of Golden Gate Bridge FasTrak® accounts.

Adopted

AYES (18): Directors Brown, Cochran, Dufty, Eddie, Grosboll, Kerns, McGlashan, McGoldrick, Middlebrook, Newhouse Segal, Pahre, Reilly, Sanders, Sandoval and Stroeh; Second Vice President Ammiano; First Vice President Boro; President Moylan
NOES (0): None
ABSENT (1): Director Hernández

Authorize Execution of an Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Traffic Technologies, Inc., for Extended Support Services Relative to Contract No. 2006-B-19, Replacement of FasTrak® Lane and Plaza/Host Equipment

Directors PAHRE/KERNS
Resolution No. 2008-003 approves the following actions relative to Contract No. 2006-B-19, Replacement of FasTrak® Lane and Plaza/Host Equipment:

Authorize a budget increase in the FY 07/08 Bridge Division Capital Budget in the amount of $280,000 from District Reserves for a total project budget of $5,110,000.

Adopted

In a memorandum to the Board of Directors, General Manager Celia Kupersmith reiterated staff’s recommendation in the form of a draft resolution that had been presented at the December 14, 2007, Board of Directors meeting, at which time the Board had voted to continue the matter relative to collection of a toll on Doyle Drive by the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) to the January 11, 2008, Board of Directors meeting. The report stated that subsequent to the December 14th Board meeting, a meeting was held on January 3, 2008, with representatives of the various involved agencies, including the District, the SFCTA, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM). At the meeting, the MTC and the SFCTA provided an overview of the Doyle Drive replacement project, and general issues and concerns of each agency regarding the Doyle Drive funding plan were discussed. The report noted that no clear direction or consensus had resulted from the January 3rd meeting. The report also included a copy of the December 14th draft resolution, as well as a copy of a letter dated December 20, 2007, from the District’s General Manager to the SFCTA’s Executive Director, requesting answers to questions raised by Board members. A copy of the report, with attachments, is available in the Office of the District Secretary and on the District’s web site.

At the meeting, a four-page letter from the SFCTA’s Executive Director, Jose Luis Moscovich, dated January 10, 2008, was distributed to the Board of Directors, along with an attachment containing graphs that described the funding scenarios for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive.

Acting General Manager Denis Mulligan provided a brief overview of the District’s recent discussions and activities relative to the SFCTA’s efforts to obtain legislative authority to collect a toll on Doyle Drive, including the summit meeting of key stakeholders held on January 3, 2008, at which President Moylan and First Vice President Boro represented the District.

First Vice President Boro provided a report to the Board of Directors regarding the discussion held at the January 3rd meeting. He pointed out that Doyle Drive is a state highway, owned by the State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans). He stated that during the 1970s, the California State Legislature granted the City and County of San Francisco (City) certain responsibilities with respect to future improvements to Doyle Drive. He stated that the plans to rebuild Doyle Drive have been developing for more than 16 years, and that at one point in the process, an agreement was made with Caltrans, the City and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area regarding the funding mechanism for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive. He emphasized the point that Caltrans should be solely responsible for funding the reconstruction of Doyle Drive, since Caltrans is funding the rehabilitation of all other state-owned bridges identified as susceptible to earthquake by the Governor’s Board of Inquiry on the Loma Prieta Earthquake. He stated that the proposed Doyle Drive toll is unprecedented in the State of California, because a local jurisdiction and local tollpayers are being asked to contribute toward the funding of a state-owned bridge reconstruction project.

First Vice President Boro further described the discussion at the January 3rd meeting, noting that the meeting participants did not receive answers to the six questions that were in the General Manager’s December 20th letter. He also stated that no draft legislation was presented with respect to the SFCTA’s efforts to obtain legislative authority for tolling on Doyle Drive. He reported that he had consulted with the Attorney for the District regarding the Board’s desire that all users of Doyle Drive be subject to any proposed toll, not just those who access Doyle Drive from the Golden Gate Bridge. The Attorney advised that if one group of Doyle Drive users is required to pay a toll and another group of Doyle Drive users do not have to pay, it could be considered discriminatory, and could be subject to legal challenge. He further stated that with regards to the Urban Partnership Program grant, the District representatives urged the MTC to seek an extension to the March 31, 2008, deadline for the SFCTA to obtain tolling authority so that the various agencies can work more constructively towards mutual goals.

First Vice President Boro proposed that the Board consider adopting a substitute resolution, replacing the draft resolution presented at the December 14, 2007, Board meeting.

The following motion was made and seconded by Directors BORO/BROWN:

“RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District adopts the following policy positions regarding issues associated with the proposed reconstruction of Doyle Drive:

The Board of Directors supports the proposed project for reconstruction of Doyle Drive, but opposes the use of tolls as a financing mechanism for this critical safety project, since this is the responsibility of the State of California;

In the event legislation is obtained granting tolling authority as a means for financing Doyle Drive reconstruction, it is the policy position of the Board of Directors that all of the following safeguards must be incorporated in any such legislation:
.

Tolls must be imposed on all drivers using Doyle Drive and not only on those Doyle Drive travelers who also travel across the Golden Gate Bridge;

RESOLVED, that the District supports congestion pricing on a regional basis as a means of encouraging alternatives to single-occupant vehicle trips and as a means of encouraging the distribution of peak hour trips into non-peak hour travel times in order to reduce congestion.”

Director McGoldrick emphasized the urgency of rebuilding Doyle Drive, describing the tremendous impacts to the regional transportation system that would result from the structural failure of the aging Doyle Drive. He agreed that Caltrans should pay for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive, a state-owned highway, but noted that a collective, regional responsibility needs to be taken. He also noted that since the Golden Gate Bridge would be rendered unusable if Doyle Drive were to collapse, the District should take a leading role in the regional responsibility for Doyle Drive. He provided additional details as to why the total cost of the Doyle Drive reconstruction project has escalated. Director McGoldrick stated that the Chair of the MTC, Bill Dodd, requested that the Board continue this matter to a later date, in order to allow more time for all of the various stakeholders to reach consensus regarding the tolling component for financing the reconstruction of Doyle Drive. He offered a substitute motion to continue the matter to a future date.

The following motion was made and seconded by Directors McGOLDRICK/AMMIANO:

“Continue the matter of, Approve Consideration of Policy Position Regarding Legislation to Authorize the San Francisco County Transportation Authority to Collect a Toll from All Users of Doyle Drive, to a future date to be called by the President of the Board of Directors, to allow more time for all stakeholders to seek other alternatives for funding the reconstruction of Doyle Drive.”

Director Newhouse Segal proposed a motion to table the matter permanently, with no further discussion on the matter of the SFCTA’s efforts to impose a toll on Doyle Drive. The motion failed for lack of a second.

The following Directors commented concerning the resolution proposed by First Vice President Boro:

• Director McGlashan stated that he opposes the use of tolls as a financing mechanism for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive, noting that in his opinion, such a toll would be an unfair levy on North Bay residents. He further stated that the cost of rebuilding Doyle Drive, as a state highway safety project, should be borne by the people of the State of California, not just the people of Marin and Sonoma counties. He also noted that he supports the concept of congestion pricing as a way to encourage alternative transportation.

• Director Grosboll offered an amendment to delete the phrase, “the proposed project” from Item No. 1 of the first RESOLVED paragraph of the resolution being proposed by First Vice President Boro, so that the sentence reads: “The Board of Directors supports reconstruction of Doyle Drive, but opposes the use of tolls as a financing mechanism for this critical safety project since this is the responsibility of the State of California.” First Vice President Boro, the maker of the motion, and Director Brown, who seconded the motion, accepted the amendment.

• Director Sanders noted that she supports, in concept, the idea of congestion pricing. She further stated that the State of California should be held accountable for fixing failing infrastructure in the state, using state tax revenue.

• Director Middlebrook noted that it is important for the District to take a position regarding the proposed Doyle Drive toll.

• Director Brown stated that a Doyle Drive toll would be an unfair levy on North Bay residents.

• Director Stroeh stated that the idea of using Doyle Drive tolls as a funding mechanism should be removed from consideration.

The following Directors expressed support for continuing the matter to a later date:

• Director Kerns expressed support for continuing the matter, in order to allow more time to seek other alternatives for funding the reconstruction of Doyle Drive. He also expressed his opposition to a Doyle Drive toll, noting that in his opinion, such a toll would be unfair to North Bay residents who use the Golden Gate Bridge.

• Director Ammiano expressed support for continuing the matter. He inquired of the Attorney to confirm that an action taken by the current Board of Directors is binding until such time as a different Board in the future overturns the previous action. In response, Attorney Miller concurred, noting that a Board may have internal rules that govern when a particular matter may be renewed for further action, but the basic premise remains that a policy action would not be forever binding.

• Director Grosboll expressed support for continuing the matter, in deference to the request made by the MTC.

• Director Reilly expressed support for continuing the matter to allow time for the various stakeholders to seek consensus.

• Director McGoldrick provided additional reasons for continuing the matter, including giving more time for the District and the other involved agencies to work together in a regional partnership in the shared responsibility for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive.

• Director Sandoval expressed his reluctance to support a toll on Doyle Drive, since the public would likely perceive it as an extension of the Golden Gate Bridge toll. He also expressed his support for continuing the matter, to provide an opportunity to explore other revenue sources through changes to the District’s charter, as he had suggested at the November 9, 2007, Board Retreat.

Joe Alioto Veronese expressed his opposition to the proposed Doyle Drive toll, noting that in his opinion, such a toll would pose a hardship to North Bay families. He also stated that the increased traffic on surrounding residential streets in San Francisco from those trying to avoid paying the toll would have a significant environmental impact. He further stated that California’s leadership in Sacramento needs to take responsibility for funding the reconstruction of Doyle Drive.

Norman Rolfe reiterated comments he had made at the December 14, 2007, meeting of the Board of Directors, expressing general opposition to the Presidio Parkway option for the reconstruction of Doyle Drive. He also noted that in 2005, the SFCTA had originally proposed a congestion pricing strategy for the perimeter of downtown San Francisco, not Doyle Drive.

Andrew Fremier noted that he had attended the January 3rd meeting as a representative of the MTC, and expressed his support for continuing the matter to allow time to meet with all concerned stakeholders. Mr. Fremier discussed an upcoming meeting in Washington, D.C., with staff from the U.S. DOT to discuss the Urban Partnership Agreement. Mr. Fremier advised that all issues that have been discussed at today’s meeting will be on the table, including MTC support the March 31st deadline.

Amanda Hoenigman expressed her support for continuing the matter, and also expressed her support for the concept of congestion pricing, particularly by charging user fees to fund road improvements.

Karen Nygren expressed her opposition to a Doyle Drive toll, because a double toll would likely cause a reduction in the number of cars crossing the Golden Gate Bridge, which in turn would reduce the amount of toll revenue available to subsidize the District’s bus and ferry transit operations. She stated that the much-needed reconstruction of Doyle Drive must be paid by state and federal funds, not by an additional toll.

Jerry Grace expressed support for continuing the matter, to allow the MTC to seek additional funding sources from the State of California.

John Diamante expressed his opposition to the reconstruction of Doyle Drive as what he considers a freeway through the Presidio.

The following motion was made and seconded by Directors McGOLDRICK/AMMIANO:

It is recommended that the Board of Directors continue the matter of, Approve Consideration of Policy Position Regarding Legislation to Authorize the San Francisco County Transportation Authority to Collect a Toll from All Users of Doyle Drive, to a future date to be called by the President of the Board of Directors, to allow more time for all stakeholders to seek other alternatives for funding the reconstruction of Doyle Drive.

Carried

AYES (10): Directors Dufty, Grosboll, Kerns, McGoldrick, Newhouse Segal, Pahre, Reilly and Sandoval; Second Vice President Ammiano; President Moylan
NOES (8): Directors Brown, Cochran, Eddie, McGlashan, Middlebrook, Sanders and Stroeh; First Vice President Boro
ABSENT (1): Director Hernández

Attorney’s Report

Attorney David Miller, at the request of President Moylan, stated that the Board of Directors would convene in closed session to discuss a matter of pending litigation listed on the agenda as Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District (District) vs. T.Y. Lin International/Imbsen & Associates, Inc., a Joint Venture, et al.

After closed session, President Moylan called the meeting to order in open session with a quorum present. Attorney Miller reported that the Board of Directors met in closed session, as permitted by the Brown Act, to discuss the item of pending litigation, District vs. T.Y. Lin International/Imbsen & Associates, Inc., a Joint Venture, et al. Mr. Miller stated that the Board of Directors provided advice and authority to Counsel for disposition of the matter.