City and County of San Francisco Tuesday, December 18, 2018

>> for tuesday, December 18. Miss Dowd, would you please read the roll.

>> clerk:   yes.

[Roll call]

>> clerk:   you do have a quorum.

>> just a note for the

audience, we don't have Ms. Boomer today.

>> clerk:   item three, announcement of prohibition of

sound producing devices during the meeting.

Please be aware that use of

cell phones, pagers, or other

sound producing electronic

device is prohibited.

Please know when these devices

set on vibrate do cause microphone interference, so please turn them off.

Number three, approval of the

December 4, 2018 regular meeting. >> thank you. Do I have any public comment on the minutes? No? Seeing none, public comment closed.

Do I have a motion to approve in. >> so moved.

>> do I have a second? >> second.

>> all in favor?

all opposed? Okay.

Minutes are approved. Okay. Communications. I have nothing. Anyone? All right. Good.

>> clerk:   I don't any either. Item six, introduction of new

or unfinished business by board of directors?

>> directors, do you have any new or unfun inished you'd like to bring up? No? Okay.

Item eight. >> director's report.

>> Madam President, staff, a

short up date.

A reminder we will offer free

rides home on knew year's eve,

so from 8:00 P.M. On new year's

eve to 5:00 A.M. On new year's

day, everybody can ride muni

for free. We do this because we want to make sure that people are not driving while impaired.

The facts from the california department of safety, one

person is killed by every 52 minutes by a drunk drive accident in this country. The office of traffic safety is funding the police department

to be conducting drive D.U.I. Saturation patrols during the holiday season. Just another reason for folks

to hop on a muni bus rather than get behind the wheel.

Vision zero and sfmta will not

supporting those efforts by amplifying social media posts

on facebook and twitter.

they can get behind the driver

of the wheel of a muni bus or

train and ride for free. With regard to geary a few months ago, you all approved

the phase one parking and

traffic changes for the geary B.R.T., which is eastern half

of the -- of the geary line going from will

stannion to market, so a big chunk of the core of

the 38, which is one of our highest ridership lines of the city. I just want to let you know that since you approved that, the near term transit and safety treatments are just

about complete, and that

includes new transit only lane that's have been installed

between stannion and blake and baker and goff

ugh, and a number of intersections have been daylighted where we've added painted safety zones. You'll recall that geary is not

just a very important transit corridor, it's also on the high

injury network, so those

improvements are improving our

vision zero goals.

In terms of construction projects, I'll give you an update on something we've talked about before, which is

the -- that we are constructing a new platform on third street,

in front of the arena that is

currently being built there. It will facilitate transit access and egress to the large

numbers of folks who are going

to be going to arena events,

which you'll recall it's not

just the 40 or so basketball

games a year, but numerous concerts and other events

throughout the year, if I recall.

It's more than 200 events a

year at the new arena.

So we are replacing the two

small platforms with one large platform, similar to what we have in front of the at&t ballpark. It's multiple phases work.

It's not just putting in a new platform, it's putting in

switches to give the trains

some flexibility to the wires

and under ground utility work.

We had a phase go longer than planned, and the next phase is more significant.

To make sure we have the plan completed and we can finish within the work window that

we're anticipating, we're

pushing back the start of construction. We were originally planning on January 4. We will now be starting sometime in mid-January, and we expect the construction to go through -- through the end of

March, which means during that

time, we will have bus

substitutions on or 23rd riders.

As I mentioned, a lot of

lessons learned the first time around, and we are working with everybody to make sure that we

can do this as smoothy as

possible with minimal

disruption, particularly to t-line riders as much as possible.

So we have been working with various stakeholders in the area, and once we've nailed

down a date, we'll make sure

that everybody gets the information.

It'll enable us to serve everybody in the whole corridor because of the new switches that we're putting in, but it will create a disruption. We're making sure we manage

that as well as possible.

Some good news resulting from

construction work is that in

early 2019, we will be set to

open up stockton street in union square, reopen it back up

to muni and other vehicles,

which we closed what seems like

many, many years ago as we started construction of the

central subway-union square-market street station. While the station work continues, we have now closed

up the openings, repaved the

street, and in time for winter walk. And once winter walk is done

after the holidays, we'll come

back and do some striping and other finish work examine and then reopen it to traffic.

Initially, we will have the

eight bayshore and the 91 outline run through, soon after, the 31 and the 45.

All of this make this a big jog

west around union square, so this will return them a

straight shot through stack ton tunnel and then down fourth

into market. So this'll be a big time safer for people who ride those lines. We do have an item -- I think it might be on the consent

calendar -- to just restore the transit only lane. So great news there.

And then, finally, one other piece of good news.

We learned earlier this week or maybe last week that national geographic has named san francisco as one of the top ten

cities in the world for getting

around by bicycle when judged

by infrastructure such as bike

lanes, bike accessibility, and appeal, san francisco was the

only U.S. City to make this

list of best cycling values. I don't think this is anything that we applied for or

something we sought out, but I

guess the folks that work at national geographic did some sort of survey across the world.

The report noted san francisco

for its iconic views, geography, culture, and noted

our hills.

We are joined in the top ten by ber

berlin, buenos aires, among others. The only other american city

was tucson, which received an honorable mention.

I'm sure some of our friends in

portland and seattle are scratching their heads, but we'll take. I want to commend our department for making biking a safeway to get around, and I

want to thank you for all of your bike improvements that you all have legislated, including some in the recent months, some of which we'll see going in the ground in the next couple of months.

So good news there, and that concludes my report.

>> thank you, Mr. Reiskin.

I do want to ask, with our

shutdown of the t 3rd, I know

this was a much smaller

shutdown of what we had originally anticipated the work. >> from my understanding the feedback from the planned portion of the shutdown was very good. Everybody knew it was coming.

We had lots of ambassadors.

We had two planned weekends of

work, but the second weekend,

we weren't able to restore

service until wednesday, so the two unplanned days of service shutdown monday and tuesday, folks weren't too pleased with that.

We did do a lot of work with

signage and am bass do

-- ambassadors

to mitigate the circumstances.

I think folks are understanding

of the need to do these

projects for -- whether it's

state of good repair or improvements, but we're taking the time to make sure whatever

we tell the folks about this

next closure is something we

can commit to with a greater degree of confidence.

>> I thought the last issue was related to rain. >> there were numerous issues. There was numerous issues for the cure time of the concrete, the clever reof the concrete,

the time to form the rebar,

which is the steel inside the concrete, the availability of person overnight to do the

work, and there was rain.

So we had a confluence of

issues, the perfect storm, that

caused us to extend the work.

We need to plan for rain this

time of year when we do the work.

>> so we think we have adequate mitigations for the rain, because obviously, this is the rainiest seasons that we'll be entering into.

>> yeah. They'll be working January -February-march, so there are a number of things that we're

doing, including some schedule

contingency, so when the rain comes, they won't force us to extend I don't know the duration for the public. >> and then, the operators are

usually doing the trains.

Are they being redirected to buses? >> right.

>> but the trains carry more people, so we have to staff morbuses. >> yeah. >> I know that sometimes we

don't have enough people to staff the trains.

>> the train system is in

pretty good shape in terms of staff availability to be able to meet the service without

impacting other service. We do anticipate as we did during the weekend shutdowns,

not running e line service because it complicates the

issues and it also frees up

staff to operate the rest of the service, but with a few

other changes, we believe we

can implement this without an

adverse effect to the rest of the system. >> thank you, director borden. Good point to bring up.

One more question on stockton street.

I'm sure the merchants in the

area are going to be stoked to have the project wrapped up.

I see we have Mr. Ho here from central subway. And know that we've done good work, working with the

merchants to make it as painless as possible.

as that street opens up, have

we added street amenities to it? How is the street different

than it used to be for everybody who's been both impacted by the shutdown and also enjoying the winter walk

aspect of the street? >> yeah.

I don't think that the basic

geomeetry of the street has changed very much.

All the kind of infrastructure

is being upgraded both below the ground and at the surface.

I believe we'll be putting in

new streets and overhead wires.

>> well, I'll look forward to getting out and enjoy what I

guess it's the last winter walk? >> so it's the last winter walk that'll be associated with the central subway project.

I know that the union square bid is interested in continuing

the event, which would be a seasonal shutdown.

I think there's a lot of work

between now and next September to see what the support it for that, but it's been very popular. >> yeah.

I know that people enjoy it to

go down there and use that space. Thank you. All right, directors, any other comments or questions on the director's report? >> all right.

Seeing none, we'll move on.

>> clerk:   there is one person

for public comment.

Mike spain. Chair, how much time? Two minutes? >> oh, yes, two minutes. thank you. >> thought I was going to get ten minutes today.

So I'm here today again to question why, when this taxi matter comes up next month,

it's going to be in the director's report --

>> clerk:   this is items in this director's report that he just spoke of.

>> the director's report should

not be where such an important issue should come up. It should not be made a decision without being able to extract from this item.

This is going to be devastating

to the taxi street. We've already seen the report

that's come before you.

We haven't seen it in its totality, but it's only going to get worse.

The director's hands are a little bit dirty on this one because he was here six years

ago when this permit program was passed, and the permit program is the reason we're here today.

And I have to say there's a

couple directors -- or board members who are here who have

already shown a willingness to

sabotage the industry to save

their own jobs. Public policy should not be

voted on without giving the director a chance to

restructure the whole industry, without you being able to vote

on it and the director being

able to restructure the new industry.

I urge you to pull this out of

the director's report and bring it up.

As it is now, you're not going to have that choice.

they used a parliamentary move

to take it from you in October, and I think you ought not to

get involved in their screw ups. Thank you.

>> thank you, Mr. Spain. Any other public comments on the director's report? Yes. This is for items in the director's report, not items

that are coming up later in the agenda.

>> my question was to the director saying that -- was

related to the director saying that the construction was delayed by approximately seven days. My question is who's going to

pay for that, okay?

Because that's an obvious cost overrun. I don't see anybody up on this dais asking who's going to pay for this item? Is the contractor responsible

for paying that or is it the

taxpayer, and I'd like to see that question answered, and I

didn't see it come up at the dais. >> thank you very much for your question, Mr. Lee. Any other public comment? No? Seeing none, public comment is

closed and we'll move on.

>> clerk:   item eight, citizens

advisory council report. >> sorry. Good afternoon, directors.

So I have prepared my report

here, and this is going to be kind of a year in review report

because we don't have any

motions from our last meeting

to bring you.

So 2018 has been a big year for

the sfmta, and it's also been a

year of a lot of frustration

for transit riders, given major

service impacts, persistent delays, and impacted on the streets, just to name a few issues that we're facing.

The sfmta citizens advisory council has also seen a few

changes this year with

departure of some of our long

serving members and the arrival

of some new ones. I'm encouraged to see our new

members are very committed and again

engaged in the topics and the

question they put forward. [Inaudible]

>> -- next bus, clipper, stop

signage, comprehensive topics

like outreach and communication and of course the ever changing

ways that people are getting

around the city.

All of the C.A.C.'s effort this year has been focused on

discussing how best to improve the transportation we have, but

it strikes me likely that we must improve the transportation

system that we need. Private automobiles pliek .

I would like 2019 to be the year that we see a lot more public transit, and I would

like san francisco to lead the way in that. As a general note, I'll leave with that.

Thank you all for hearing that. >> thank you very much, and thank you so much for your

ongoing service on the C.A.C. All right.

>> clerk:   item nine is public

comment for items that are not on the en, and

agenda, and we do have some members of the public that

have put in speaker cards. >> okay. Let's go ahead and have two

minutes put in, Miss Celaya.

You have a timer on the podium, when you hear a soft chime,

that means you have 30 seconds

left, and when you hear a

louder chime, your time is up,

and I will politely but firmly cut you off. >> okay.

>> my name is steven tieber and I am the transportation for

russian hill neighbors and also

a member of S.F. Next stop

which is an extension to the

subway to fisherman's wharf ask nd hopefully beyond.

I am here to express my sincere

thanks to this commission and

the staff for moving this project forward and holding a series of two public outreach

sessions which were held in

districts two and three and --

and in October and December.

The results, as far as I can

see was a very strong approval

in those communities of the

subway, subject to mitigation

of the effects, the short and long-term. We have the nation's fullest transit system, which is

nothing to be proud of. It takes about a half an hour to get downtown from russian hill and about 45 minutes from

the marina on muni, so this is

a project that is very worthwhile supporting. About four years ago, you put

out this very thorough concept study which was well researched and well received at the start

of the process, and we urge

that you continue the process

into next year as you begin to workup this project, and we will continue to support it in any way that we can. Thank you.

>> thank you, Mr. Taber.

Thank you for coming down and telling us.

>> I'm marcello fonseca.

I've been in touch with 60 minutes new york city to ask

them to investigate our uber

and lyft went from rogue to mainstream at the same time as

the city back stabbed the taxi industry.

Gavin newsom masterminded a

flawed taxi medallion sales program, and mayor lee went along with it at the same time

he praised uber and lyft.

You sold hundreds of medallions on the backs of hard working

cab drivers.

At the same time, no medallions

were required from the vast

oversupply of ubers and lyfts you have allowed on our

streets.

Your actions have been sleazy, unethical, and possibly illegal.

Now you're cozying up with one

group of medallion holders to

go after another group of me doll

-- medallion holders.

I really hope 60 minutes comes

to town and puts this city hall in the hot seat. The truth about this mess must

be exposed.

>> thank you, Mr. Fonseca.

Next speaker, please.

>> clerk:   martin, mark, and then robert.

>> good afternoon.

Martin kocynski. Medallion holder.

I sent you a letter titled yesterday, stop the madness.

It took me -- my english skill,

about five hours to compose three paragraphs.

The bottom line is Mr. Reiskin

and whoever else messed up, he

comes to me and now he wants me

to pay for his mess by removing

the value of my medallion and

getting rid of my retirement,

so this is basically unfair.

These are two major changes to

go in between some sort of bureaucratic bureaucratic traction. We need to look at this, examine the situation, come up with a reasonable solution

which is going to remedy the issue.

And personally, I think the

issue has to be remedied, the

other politicians because I

hold politicians responsible

for current situation.

Like many times before, I was here advocating, asking the

politicians if they do want the

medallion service in the city. This is a yes or no -or-no answer, and

if they do want the taxi service, then they have to figure out a way to remedy the

mess that Mr. Reiskin and some

other people caused. If they do not want the taxi

service, and I understand that

many of them are teachers and

students, then shut us down.

We have to make some sort of short --

>> thank you. Thank you. Thank you, thank you.

Next speaker, please. >> mark, fobt, and robert, and philip.

>> I was going to kind of reiterate what I said before, and I said in the past, but many speakers are going to reiterate this issue.

What I would like to talk about is I was watching T.V., and

there was a conservative commentator commenting about a book that he just broke.

He broke with a lot of conservatives that he wrote. He said I supported the gulf

war, along with all my friends, but when it all turned to kr crap, I started to criticize them, and they just couldn't stand that.

They hammered me for that. But if you can't admit that you

made mistakes and make restitution to those people that you've hurt, if you can't

admit that this was a failed --

a failed effort, but it can be

fixed, and you have to work at

fixing it, then you just continue government as -- as

it -- well, you make a -- you

compound a really bad mistake with a new one, and you hurt a lot of people that you don't necessarily have to hurt.

There's a way of settling there, and you have to sit down

with credit union and drivers

that got hurt, and you have to work out a settlement, and you

have to give back some of the $65 million that that program raised.

It May not take the whole 65,

but have you to give some of

that back and stop this shar charade

of destroying hundreds of cabs. They should not be made to pay the price because other people made some errors. You just have to somehow sometimes grapple with the --

with the problem that you

created -- the problems and have to solve it. >> thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> robert, philip, and then ahmad. >> good afternoon.

Before I start talking, I would like to apologize.

I am not addressing you, I am addressing the M.T.A.

The M.T.A. Has a conflict of interest.

You cannot make rulings on the

taxi cab industry at all because you are appointed by

the present mayor, and the people above you were appointed

by the previous mayor, and the people before you were appointed by the previous mayor

who is now the governor.

And all of you were supported

by the money that was paid by

the tech industry which is running uber and lyft, and also

other shuttles, as well.

And so you have no standing,

and the only suggestion that I

can have, because I believe the taxi industry should be within

the M.T.A., is there must be

independent directors that are

not appointed by the mayor

because the M.T.A. Has done so many things that are unbelievable. They've done so many things that are stupid. Okay.

They started selling medallions.

In 2012, they had a pilot program. Great. In 2012, uber started. In 2013 with thousands of ubers

on the road, they charge all

these poor foolish cab drivers

$250,000 each and now, you are

unwilling at least partially compensate them. >> thank you. >> thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> philip, followed by ahmad,

followed by abdallah. >> I'm going to shift gears and

talk about broad band alarms.

I want to bring to the board's attention. Please look at the term materials that I sent off.

I think it's the duty of the

board to replace the tonal

alarms are ineffective, and

broad band alarms. Tonal alarms, if you are

looking down, you can't tell

what direction they're coming from.

Broad band alarms are directional, so they only

impact the area that needs to

be listened to.

That's important, because if an alarm is always going off, it's

not an alarm, it's a nuisance.

These alarms actually decrease

pedestrian safety, whereas the directional ones, when you hear

it, you know you are in a

danger zone, you pay attention to it. Whereas people tune out the tonal alarms.

It gives a fault he has

lse sense of safety to people walking

through. They're harmful. The tonal alarms go out in all

sorts of directions -- I live 450 feet away from an intersection where buses are turning left in the city.

the broad band alarms dissipate quickly, so it's only loud in

the area and not all over. Osha used to tell people with

sites that have alarms, to use ear protection.

They alarms cost 1 -- these

alarms cost $100, and will safe money for the city. This is insane. We can stop this please. Please, please, please, please,

look into tonal alarms.

>> thank you, Mr. Brady.

I'll make sure we take the information you sent us and

forward it onto the appropriate

people at the sfmta. >> thank you.

I did it before and no one responded. >> thank you. We'll forward it. Thank you >> good morning. I was here at the previous sfmta meetings. We talked about uber and lyft,

and they say it's not our business, it's cpmc that are in charge of that, so I don't know

if this committee, these people here are appropriate place to

decide about that or not.

But these taxi medallion thing,

and then prop k and precious medallion, these all started

when the uber and lyft came to

the market, severely damaging

and really creating a lot of

division between the drivers

who knew each other a long time.

One part had medallion, other part didn't have medallion, and

they had to put it for $250,000.

So the main thing is create

something else that will limb eliminate uber and lyft or

creating something that will

control these guys. They are crowded -- they are crowding the city so significantly, so not only the taxi drivers are suffering by it, anybody.

Pedestrians, any driver in the

see are -- city are being

suffered by uber and lyft, and if you don't do anything about

it, we will suffer forever. Another thing I want to say,

when you go to macy's or costco, you buy something, it's

not good, you get your money back.

Why shouldn't the same thing work for medallion purchasers? We want our money back if there is no problem solved.

You should work on that when

the city has millions of

millions of dollars, pay those

medallion holders and create no difference between the

medallion holders, the -- >> thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir, and

you are correct, it is the cpmc that has jurisdiction over the T.M.C. >> good afternoon.

My name is abdullah.

I'm a driver of 22 years in the city of san francisco. I'm a father of five kids.

I bought my medallion from the city, and we have a problem.

The problem when the city

valued the money, not the people. There's a problem. I'm a father of five kids.

I got kicked out of my

apartment, I have damage on my credit card.

I have a really, really bad situation with my family.

if the city needs money, hey,

I'll go back home and give them money.

This is not the way you treat people.

I smuggle -- smuggle to united

states of america 1995.

I've been here 23 years and

almost eight days an american.

I came here to -- for opportunity.

I know when I talk, one day I didn't speak english.

I came, I learn english to this country. I never been schooled in

american school, but I learn one thing when I was a little boy. Why people rush to america? People rush to america because they are fair and honest, and I

was talking to my older son.

He's ten years old.

He said daddy, what are you doing with our medallion?

What are you doing with our retirement? Go and sell candies in the street.

It's better than what they're

doing to you.

I'm going to put $45,000 into

it, and now, I cannot even work.

22 years, I need to sit -- stay with my kids, my family, take

them to a coffee shop, like you.

We have a life to live. Live isn't all work. >> thank you.

Thank you Mr. Abdullah. Thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> next speaker. >> george, followed by herbert and austin.

>> my name is george.

I am a medallion buyer, and for the ladies and gentlemen that

didn't attend the last meeting,

we had history, we had huge agreement between chris, the

owner and manager of yellow

cab, with greg, the manager of

flywheel, which happened for the first time ever. Of course the agreement is to

industry the remaining of this

industry and bankrupt the rest

of the medallion buyers, which I'm one of them.

These guys are the same exact companies that bumped head,

refused to enforce dispatch and refused to enforce the laws. Maybe if we'd done that, we wouldn't have uber and lyft in

the cities, we would have been much better organized and much

better dispatched to people in

the city. The opposition of the idea to

slow down the prop k or the

free medallions at the airport

or make it faster for people who have medallions of course is always supported by taxi companies because they want to dominate this business, and

they just want to make their millions of dollars no matter how much the people that

struggle or how much the people

that bought medallions struggle. Color schemes are actually color scams.

We are not getting any business

in the city through the'

companies, we are just getting scammed, but we are being charged money for nothing. We are not getting any -- any

money from the companies.

On daily struggle, we are stuck

with medallions forever. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> herbert, followed by austin, and mark.

>> herbert winer. I have a riddle.

What's the difference between

santa claus and muni?

Santa claus gives presents.

Muni gives misery for the holidays. Last friday, I had to wait 25 minutes for a bus at california and presidio. The bus went to fourth avenue, and then, there was a switchback. And I don't blame the drivers

for this at all.

I was really furious, and everyone knew about it.

I'm sure people were quietly furious.

I have another question.

How many people on the M.T.A.

Board, M.T.A. Management, and

how many people support vision zero or the bicycle coalition

or muni acts?

Muni acts are those who blindly

support muni acts.

I can't identify the muni acts, only the muni acts know who they are.

So the next time they stair at

the meyer or when they look

at -- at the mirror when they

look at themselves in the morning, they have to ask

themselves, are they a muni-ac? >> next speaker, please.

>> austin, followed by mark. >> hi. I'm austin peterson.

I started driving san francisco taxi in '88. I was looking at other

opportunities in the '90's, but

people persuaded me that I

wanted to work towards a prop k medallion.

now that I have a prop k

medallion, my take-home pay is less now every day than it was

in the '90's without a medallion, so every day has

been a slog for the last three, four, five years, not even accounting for inflation.

I look at my numbers every day, and I'm taking home less money

now than I was in the '90's.

Flee wheel needs a heat map. That would tell me which neighborhood has the most

requests and the fewest taxis.

With the old dispatch, I used to know which neighborhood

needs taxi, but with the new

dispatch, I have no idea. And another subject, now that

we have uber and lyft, a lyft

driver gets hit by an uninsured driver while carrying passengers, that driver has to

come up with a $1500 deductible

to get his car fixed, so uber and lyft is not an opportunity for anyone.

It's theft of the driver's wages. I'm done. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> mark, followed by carl and mary.

>> thank you, chair brinkman, directors. Last week, I resigned from the taxi task force.

You should have gotten a copy

of my e-mail explaining my reasons, so I won't go into

them here.

I've also explained in the past

my opposition for caste reasons for taxis. Your stake in the medallion

sales program and the financial jeopardy you face mean you're not a disinterested regulator

that can be relied upon to make impartial decisions.

You can't change that fact, but you can remediate it.

Drivers are induced to purchase medallions after their path to

an earned medallion was cutoff.

Now they're virtually worthless. Provide fair compensation for people for the loss of March did he mal I don't knows. There are potential sources of revenue for this purpose. And incidentally, as I read the city charter, there is no requirement that the state

windfall you're about to

receive be used only for

capital purposes.

In my view, compensating

medallion holders would be allowed allowed. It's really a matter of will,

and in that case, think people

of san francisco would be in

favor of making these people

with medallions whole.

>> thank you. Next speaker.

>> I'm going to quote from

judge kahn's ruling in the

demurrer, the credit union sufficiently alleges breach of

contract and breach of implied coughnent of good faith and unfair deelg, so I think the

city's going to be on the hook

for 30 to $50 million in damage so far. At the same time, you are

selling medallions to people

for $250,000 and doing nothing

to keep uber and lyft or the

street, but you're ripping out

8,000 series medallions and

also issuing and selling more medallions yourselves to buy buses with.

so I think you can have various

ways to get the money back. You could also start enforcing

against violations of state and city law occurring on the streets. It's kind of a copout to say

you don't have jurisdiction

when in fact if a lyft or uber

driver runs a red light, the

sfpd can give them a ticket.

We have lyft and you beer

drivers who don't have insurance. The congestion in the city is

off the charts, and there's no money in the industry if you

don't thin out the ranks. In six years that uber and lyft

have been here, I don't think

one single person's been picked

up who are in a motorized wheel they are,

chair, but they're allowed to

violate policy. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> mary, followed by teresa, and ziad.

>> good afternoon. I'd like to address something

nobody's talked about in your

medallion reform package by

creating these two separate but inequal classes of taxis.

Somebody you're hurting, and that's 1800 drivers that don't have medallions. You never have talked about

them or considered them.

1800 drivers in order to help 540 drivers.

And those 1800 drivers, they don't have medallions.

They have families, they've got kids. You never hear from them. They're never here. Maybe they're out working or they're uninformed, they're not in the loop. I call them the silent majority, and they are going to

be the victims of your mistakes.

Nobody will talks about them. Their fate is not even considered in this, which you need to go back and vote on by the way.

I also want to address last

week's taxi task force meeting.

They were ugly, I hear. The director isn't running these meetings fairly.

She's favoring the prop k medallion holders and letting

them interrupt those who waited

their turn.

I was attacked and degraded when it came my time to speak,

and I would like to know how

many of these prop a medallion holders are women and how many

are going to hire women and as

a result will women stay in the

industry if they're locked out of S.F.O.? >> okay. Thank you. >> okay. Next time. >> okay. Thank you very much.

Next speaker.

>> teresa and ziad and then

jete is the last person. >> during the last taxi task force meeting, mark was insulted by the people who kept on interrupting. The books say in the task force that only the task force member

will speak, and the people who are outside will just wait

until the left, but they kept

interfering and did not let

them speak.

He got so angry, he just left

the meeting and then resigned. the director was not following the rules, which she told

everybody 20 times and she was not following the rules.

She should be out of a job. We don't come there for insult.

Now coming to this Miss Amanda, the board member, you don't know about the taxi industry.

You said you were going to vote

against it, and then, you voted

for it in just a few minutes.

Bring this agenda item, item

six back on the table. This is nothing but a proud proposal proposal going on.

If you put 350 medallion at the

airport, they will wait two to

three to four hours to get out. They're 540.

They cannot gain a penny at the airport, but this is going to

destroy 1800 drivers, which

Miss Mary Mcguire mentioned, it's going to destroy their jobs, destroy the industry.

This is such a garbage, such a garbage. Ed reese

ed reiskin knows nothing to do this. You are just trying to fit in the taxi industry.

Please bring this back on the agenda. Thank you. >> thank you.

Next speaker, please.

>> use the microphone, please. Thank you so much.

>> I am siad. I am a medallion purchaser, and I want to talk about the new suggested regulations at S.F.O.

For taxis. Nobody is speaking on his

behalf or her behalf, but I

think I speak for a lot of, if

not all medallion purchasers to

say that we support the new --

the new proposal.

It should be one step, it's not everything that we wanted, it's

the one step in the right direction.

Now, having said that -- to be

honest, it's like a band-aid on a serious injury. This is like a band-aid, but we'll take it. It's better than nothing. We'll take, it we support it,

and we want it -- we'll take

it, we support it, and we want it to pass. Now speaking of the taxi industry, I want to say the

taxi industry here in san francisco is more like a

bleeding man thrown in the streets. And everyone in the city is ignoring him.

So this sitting man, we either

cure him, let him go on with

his life or take him out of the streets.

You cannot just leave the

bleeding man on the streets.

Take him home, or let him

exist, but you can't leave him there.

Help the taxi or eliminate it,

and let uber and lyft continue doing their job, but don't let us continue to suffer. We need an end for this

suffering. Thank you very much. >> thank you very much.

Next speaker, please. Jete, and that's the last

person who submitted a speaker card. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, board

members and supervisors.

I'm a medallion holder.

I purchased a medallion, 450,000.

This time, the situation is so

bad, we can't make the money.

We supported M.T.A. Proposal,

however, we want the money back. Two things.

Give us airport to recover our

money, otherwise, give us money

so we not come and say anything. Thank you. >> thank you very much. Do I have anymore public comment?

If so, please come up and stand forward.

Sir, are you coming forward to state public comment? Okay. If not, public comment is closed. We'll move on.

>> item 10 is consent calendar. The following matters are recommended for approval as stated by the director or city

attorney were applicable. Calendar items are available for public review.

There have been some members of

the public who asked to sever

items 10.2d, e, and f.

>> are those the only ones that we've had requested severed? Everything else is still on? Okay.

If so, I will ask -- let's go

ahead and approve of the rest of the consent calendar, and

then, we'll hear 10.2d, e, and f.

Do I have a motion to approve

the consent calendar with the

exception of 10.2d, e, and f. Is there any comment?

>> just a comment on the public contract.

>> do we need to sever the item

if we're going to have comment

on it? [Inaudible]

>> okay. It's 10.4, 10.5, 6, and 7.

All right. Let's go ahead and hear the

consent calendar without 10.2d,

e, and f, and 10.4, 5, 6, and 7. All approved? All opposed? Okay. Who is the member of the public

on d, e, and f, do you want to hear these together or separate

public comment? >> there's several. Melanie, herbert, and kelly. >> maybe -- these are items related to the item we have

later on the agenda about the overnight parking.

>> oh, d, e, and f are. >> yeah. Which is item 13. Might it make sense to combine those with the --

>> do the policy first and then

hear those consent calendar items? Yes, that probably does make sense.

If the members of the public who ask for those to be severed have no objections, we will

hold off on d, e, and f until

we hear the item on the overnight parking. Any problem? Okay.

Thank you, director. That was a very good question.

Let's move onto items 10.4, 5, 6, and 7.

Director eakin, go ahead. [Inaudible] >> -- significantly extend the

due dates for projects, so just

as we're going to approve the capital improvement program

later today, I would just wonder if someone from the

staff wants to comment why

we're seeing these cost

overruns, project delays, and what can be done to mitigate against these types of situations in the future. >> okay. Thank you.

>> so I guess I can speak to that.

A couple of things.

First of all, we have been seeing very significant cost inflation in terms of bids that

we're getting on all kinds of construction work.

Traffic signals is one small example.

We're getting bids that are double maybe just two or three

years ago, so that's one of the factors that we're seeing and that we have tried to take into

account as we've provided the

estimates for the upcoming work

in the capital budget. In terms of the schedule, couple of these projects that

were related had some extraordinary schedule delays that were -- came from a number of reasons. What we haven't done in the

past is while we provide contingency for cost, we haven't provided it for

schedule, so that's something

that we -- we are also changing going forward.

With regard to four and five --

10.4 and 10.5, they were two large contracts that were

somewhat related. There were some overlaps and kind of where -- the work was all happening around the same place, around our balboa park

station yard, and we had

numerous unforeseen circumstances.

We had numerous scope additions that as the work was happening, we asked the contractor to do more. We did have some contractor

performance issues that we do not compensate the contractor for, and then, some of those

things impacted it so that the two kind of played off each other because where we had a delay on one, we created a delay on the other.

So we have been working to kind

of comprehensively evaluation

and overhaul the way that we do our project delivery overall from the very early planning where we're now -- in engineering, where we're now

doing more exploratory work so

we have fewer unforeseen conditions.

We're building better and more realistic schedules with schedule contingency, and we're trying to keep up with the cost escalation that we're seeing from the contracting community. This is something that we're seeing with all city agencies,

we're seeing it with private development. You've heard this a lot with regard to housing, that the cost to building housing is significantly higher now, that there's so much, both public

and private construction

demand, that the labor supply can't keep up. So I guess your -- to answer your overall question, we're trying as best as possible to

first of all make improvements

that we can, internally, but to incorporate this knowledge of capital and working projects

into our C.I.P. So that we can fully execute the projects in

our C.I.P. As we've laid out

and we'll be proposing to you later in the meeting.

>> I have a proposed question, then? >> yeah.

>> when we over run our time change, does that recalibrate

the price for the same thing?

When we originally bid out the

contract -- a stop sign, for $1 million, and when we have this

issue when where we have cost overruns and are about behind, do we

pay the $1 million or the $2 million. >> no.

The way the contracts are bid,

they're bidding unit prices.

So if it's $1 for a foot of

concrete, we're paying $1 for a foot of concrete, regardless of the conditions.

If we delay the contract, we

pay what's called extended overhead so they're kind of staying in business on this project longer than anticipated. They're paying for their staff, their trailer, their insurance

and bonding, so we do

compensate them for that on a per day basis to the extent

that the delays, we have determined, our are responsibility.

To the extent that the delays are their responsibility, we don't compensate them for that.

So we pay for the extended

overhead for our part of the delay, and any scope additions we ask for, we pay for.

I believe for the green yard, 10.4, there are things that we added after the bid to the contract based on feedback from

our transit operations folks as

the project was happening that

would make the ultimate redoing of the yard work better for

them, but that costs both time and money. And we thought at the time that the decision was a good decision to make in order to get the maximum benefit from the project since this is the

kind of thing we do once in a generation, building a rail yard.

>> I think the final question with that, with the extended

overhead, how do we -- >> it's a bid amount.

So in their bid, when they

submit it up front, it'll say

it's x amount per day of extended overhead.

What we're determining is the

culpablity is in the delays. >> thank you, director. Anymore questions on that?

And I believe director reiskin, two things. These things go through -- it's not a change management board. What do you -- the contract, the overseeing body that looks at these contract changes

before they come to us, correct? >> so the central subway, which

is one of the contracts has a change management board.

The other -- the rest of these projects don't, so it's just these internal processes within the agency. We do have a transportation capital committee that approves budget and schedule changes, so

it would go through that

process, but they're not, at a

technical level, looking at it

the way a change management

board does. We have a new system in place

that allows us to track every project in real-time with regard to schedule and budget.

I actually met with some of our capital folks today to review all the projects that are

showing not meeting their substantial completion date, and it's something we do every

month so we can try to look for opportunities to bring that schedule back or at least

understand if there's a legitimate reason for the delay. So we're trying to address

these, so we do have the means now to track them that we didn't have in the past, and then, we have kind of business processes in place within the agency to try to find what support we can give, say, to a

project manager to get a project back on track or if we

have an issue with an external entity, like, a utility, we'll try to reach out to make sure

we're keeping these projects on

schedule to the greatest extent possible. >> so these are surprises to

the contract group or the group

tracking them, they see these

modifications coming up on the

project who are

horizon? >> correct. >> director, thank you.

Any further questions?

>> are we expecting that these contract amendments will

continue to materialize for the future projects?

>> so like I said, we're trying

our best to incorporate more realistic schedules, to

anticipate as best we can the

level of unforeseen conditions

that we might see and cost escalation that we'll see, but

I will say that many of the

projects that are listed in the

C.I.P. Are at a very early stage of development, so for

the new projects, we've not

gone out and dug holes in the ground to see where the utilities are.

There will be refinements to

the budgets that you see in the

C.I.P. Today, but we've put

forth to our understanding the

best C.I.P. And our

understanding of what the

budget and schedule will be. There will always be changed in contract and that's what the

schedule and budget contingency is for.

We shouldn't be having projects

that are, like, 10.4, that are

adding $5 million to a $30-something million project. >> I did have questions related to her questions. >> sure.

>> I know that other agencies

within the city from done contracts that basically

provide a reward for finishing on time on budget.

Do we do that -- like, is that

something that we do?

>> there's been some -- there's

been various experience with -- around the city with doing that. I think the one where we tried,

we had no takers, so there is a

way to do it within the existing administrative code,

where you can essentially snent vise -- incentivize a contract. There's a limited number of contractors, and they're spread really thin, and as we're pushing them to do things quickly, they're unable.

So as we're awarding contracts, they're asking us not to issue the permit as quickly as possible because that starts the clock.

I did say in compensating them in overages that are our fall, if they're delays that are

their fault, that they can owe

money back to us. They're very reluctant to offer

into more aggressive schedules given how much work they have

and how spread out their work crews are.

We haven't had much success with that. In a different economy, it might work better.

These are almost all designed

to build, construction contracts.

There are other ways to do work or to deliver contracts or

contracting methods that might

give more flexibility in those incentives, but we've not found in this environment they've been very effective. >> all right. Since we have severed this item, do I have any public

comment on agenda items 10.4, 5, 6, and 7?

Mr. Winer?

>> herbert winer.

Without really knowing the

intricacies of contracts, you know, you talk about contractors having the work spread out, does that mean that

they're working on two, three,

four, or five projects at the same time?

I really think that you should get more of a commitment with

guaranteeing the work done in a certain period of time with

penalties if they do do it in that certain period of time.

That should be cut in stone. I really think that requires more observation and surveillance.

Also, what I'm wondering, do

no-bid contracts exist with M.T.A.?

Are they competitive or not?

I ask this as a question, not as an accusation.

So basically, without knowing

the intricacies, and just as a broad reaction to this, you know, what are we contracting for?

We're putting the city on the

hook for for money, and we can't spend it on the buses

that we desperately need, so these are just my impressions

as a citizen. Thank you.

>> do I have anymore public comment? If not, public comment is closed. Thank you very much.

Do I have a motion to approve? >> move to asecond. >>

>> -- do I have a second? >> second.

>> move and approve.

All in favor? Opposed? All. Motion passed.

Next item, please.

[Agenda item read]

>> season's greetings, director brinkman, members of the board and staff.

I'm director of marketing for sfmta. Well, it's the end of the year,

and it's time for john and myself to present the finding

of the 2018 muni ridership survey. This is our annual survey, and it's our primary instrument for

measuring and tracking muni customers' experience with our service over time. We've been conducting this

survey since 2001, and one of

the powers of this survey is its consistency in just monitoring what our customers care about over long intervals of time.

The survey helps inform us on

how muni is performing from a

customer peb spec rspective and if the programs that we're implementing over time from the needs of our customers. We've seen growth in the sfgs

of the survey due to what --

service of the survey due to

what this board has been

approving over time, significant investments in approximate the system.

This year, as you May know, we saw something different, and I want to tell you a little bit about this.

So because this is a tracking

survey, we do consistently --

we make every effort to field it at the same time every year,

and that time is typically the summer.

So this year, the muni rider survey was conducted from July

to August, and as you May recall, this was a real challenging time for the muni system?

We had the twin peaks tunnel project in effect? There was also a pretty significant operator shortage that was having impacts across the system, and there were a number of training initiatives that were under way to make sure that our staff could operate the vehicles and some of the other systems that are

in place, so there were quite a

few things going on during this period of time, and given the

timing of the survey, we're not surprise the surprised at all that we did see a drop, a change in customer satisfaction. I think we also learned

something in this survey, which

is how sensitive our customers actually are to changes in the system.

So we know that they value

frequency and reliability above

anything else, and any change to that will show up almost

immediately in the data in this survey.

So what we observed were what customers were telling us.

We observed this in the last half of the year, and it's something that you've already seen us start to address

through the 90-day muni improvement plan, so that plan was presented to you at the

last meeting, and that is the way that we have been working in a very focused and concerted way to address the concerns

that you're going to see in the survey data that we're

presenting to you this afternoon.

We do hope that as the muni

gets under way -- the second

part of it, I should say, keeps

the focus that the members of our agency and other teams are putting to move -- move our

performance forward, that the effects of that work will show

up in next year's survey.

It won't necessarily, we

believe, show up in this survey, but we hope it will come back in the coming years. I do want to mention something briefly, and those are the positive things that we saw in this year's survey.

So one, you'll see, when john

presents the data, is that our

customers are prepaying more instead of using cash, which helps to speed up the system. And additionally, I want to point out some branding aspects.

Awareness of the sfmta has increased quite dramatically over the last couple of years,

and we believe that's due in part to some of the branding

work that we've done to improve

the branding marks of the

agency. I'll stop there with some of

the preamble remarks, and I

want to ask john to come up and

present the actual survey data to you?

We hired a local research firm in san francisco.

They are a certified local

business enterprise, L.B.E. They've been working with the

sfmta and other transportation

organizations across the bay area for different research projects. They've done the alter boarding

survey, state of cycling, etc. So I'm going to turn it over to john to talk about that, and afterwards, we're both happy to

take any questions that you have.

>> thank you. Good to see you.

>> thank you. Thank you very much for inviting me to speak today.

I'm going to be going over key findings of the rider survey. First, I'll give you an introduction in terms of how the survey was done, and then,

we'll go through top-level findings is what you'll see in this presentation. There will be a full report

which will have additional

details, and then an opportunity for questions at the end. We are a local firm, we have been in the city for over 40 years.

We do a lot of transportation-related surveys of this time, so we have a lot

of experience in this space.

Here is the methodology of the

survey itself, so the survey was a telephone interview. It was conducted in July and August of this year, and that is consistent with what we've

done over the last few years, conducting at the same time period. We do do the interview with

muni riders, so anybody who has

ridden muni in last six months would qualify for the survey, so we get a cross section of people who ride it every day and those who ride it infrequently.

Sample size is 600 completed interviews, which is a substantial sample size.

You'll see a lot of city

surveys that are quoted on,

which you'll see it's a sample size about that size. Margin of error on that sample

size is plus or minus 3.9%. [Please stand by]

>>> we had 75% who used clipper

when you combine the products.

The cash was 18%. Candice mentioned it is a drop.

it is a significant drop from

last year 27% that is a big drop in the usage of cash on the system itself.

The other category would be

things like lifeline and the

mobile as well as paper

products. Why cash? Among folks who said they used

cash as the primary way to pay for muni. We asked why. The reason people gave the most

was they just simply prefer to pay as they ride. It is a preference. There are some other reasons which people gave, when you look

at this chart and see 60% as the reason thanks is the key.

There are other reasons as well.

We also asked the question about

walking a long question -- longer distance if it would reduce travel time.

We have asked this in the past as well.

When you look overall, percentage is high.

Over six in 10 said they would be willing to do that. One thing that is important when

you look at the rider groups, there are big differences.

One is when you look at disabled riders, it slips.

When you look at disabled you

have about a third who say yes, two-thirds would not be willing. This is a good question, important to know.

Which is when we look at

different groups of riders is

critically important.

This is the meat of the survey. Overall satisfaction which I

will have several slides on and specific questions about

specific attributes of muni. overall satisfaction. When you look at this question

and combine the ratings.

63% rated muni excellent or good

overall in 2018.

29% said fair. 8% said poor.

Making the comparison to

previous years, this overall rating has definitely dropped.

When you look at last year, it

was 70% when you combine the

excellent and good, you drop to 63%.

7% drop in the survey is a

significant drop, a big drop in a year.

Remaining on that overall

satisfaction you can look at the trending chart which shows each

year back to 2001 the excellent

and good rating on the overall

satisfaction rating. We have rich data. This has been asked many years.

You see the drop to 63%.

The previous two years at 70%.

I will mention it is a drop this year.

There is context in terms of looking where the ratings were through the years.

This is not the lowest rating.

When you go back a few years it

was in the 60s and 50s as well.

This gives context of the rating since the beginning since the

survey was done.

We also -- this is the same

overall satisfaction question. This is useful.

When you look at the rider

gaaps, for example people who

use muni less often are more satisfied.

They are happier. This is not a surprise.

Those who use it every day see the warts and see it more closely.

I think it is good to know this

from an agency perspective. Additionally when you look at

the service types. Rapid rail users are 70% say excellent or good.

They are a good bit higher than

other users. Higher than regular bus and

quite a bit higher than rapid rail users.

It is more dramatic this year

and tunnel closures and those

situations this year May have contribute ed to the greater disparity among these service type users. Look at income level.

It is a mixed bag.

You look at overall satisfaction.

Your riders with a lower income

level May be happier. Look at the poor rating.

It is a mix.

Not a straight line like service

type users and frequency of use users.

We also looked at it by area of the city.

We base this on where people live, home zip code and the

overall satisfaction rating combining excellent or good. You can see the southeast area

of the city has the highest

satisfaction based on zip code. West side is lower. Tunnel work was going on.

You can see that area in the

bottom left as lowest rating. Tunnel work was mentioned.

We did look at this and analyze

this in more detail to see the impact that it did have on the overall satisfaction.

What this shows is the same rating comparing to last year.

we talked as the overall being

63% satisfied in 2018 versus 70% last year, 7% drop.

If you look at the routes affected biotope el work the

people that -- tunnel work.

We saw a more dramatic drop.

If we look at those routes they dropped 9%.

Taking out that whole group and

saying let's look at routes not affected, you can see a drop of

5% in the overall rating among the other routes.

Could be a variety of reasons,

not just one segment which rated muni lower. There is a combination of things.

We also asked an open-ended question.

We took down what the

respondents said rather than checking a box on the rating.

What aspects of muni would you

mastlike to see improved. These were verbatim responses in

the different categories. More frequent 24%.

Better on time 20%, vehicle

station cleanliness. The rankings of the first three are similar to last year.

Higher in terms of 24%.

It was 19% more frequent service last year.

20% better on time performance is increase.

People are saying this more

often for the 2018 survey. Better security safety from

crime didn't show up on this top

seven list last time it is is

there but higher in the 2018 survey.

In addition to overall satisfaction we asked about

specific aspects of muni. We asked them to rate the

operator helpfulness, accurate

arrival, frequency of service. Comparison between previous years and 2018.

You will see a few that had

increases or slight increases,

including trips take a

reasonable amount of time, navigating road construction, communication with riders.

There is a slight increase on those.

You see big drops on some of the

rating aspects or aspects that

have a very high correlation

with satisfaction. Frequency of service and on time performance. Those are big drops.

On the next slide they corel late highly. When you see the drop there they

hit the overall satisfaction one hard. I will point out on the top of

the list accessibility for persons with disabilities rates quite highly. Operator driver helpfulness is

second on the list in terms of

percentage who rated it excellent or good followed by

trips take a reasonable amount

of time.

This next chart is a chart this

seeks to sort of look at those

same at tributes on the previous page and says which ones are most important in terms of driving overall satisfaction.

In terms of impacting overall satisfaction? When you look at the ones on the top.

As you move up on the chart those are the ones that you would consider more important or

have a greater impact on overall satisfaction.

Looking at the top of the chart, reliability and frequency of service have the biggest impact. This is not a surprise.

When I showed this to another

transit agency, those are the ones coming up.

You saw a drop to the right on the chart or dots to the right is a higher rating.

To the left it is lower rating.

When we looked at this for 2017 they have gone left. They are lower. Still just as important to riders.

That is why you see the drop in satisfaction.

Another one in the chart which

there was movement on in 2018 is

the trips take a reasonable amount of time.

That is up there in terms of

importance and in terms of correlation of satisfaction. It is not circled because it

does not have a negative impact on satisfaction. It is rating well.

It is worth looking looking at this.

If it is that important to riders, you need to continue to consider it when things are decided on. That is the key one for the riders.

At this point it is one of the

top flee in terms of importance

-- top three in terms of importance.

They asked the question also

about awareness of sfnta.

This is asked for the past five years.

In general how many are you with

the May

the sfmta? What we have seen in the last

couple years is there is considerable movement on that in

terms of awareness of who sfmta

is and now it jumps to 60%.

There is a greatter awareness in terms of what you are and what

you do.

We have been asking a question alternatives to muni for the past two years.

This does not go too far back but significant movement and

change compared to previous years.

Think about the last muni trip. Muni was not available how would you get where you needed to go?

What you are seeing there is 44%

are saying they would have used

a ride-hailing service, a very, very large number.

When you compare to last year,

that is a 10% jump.

That is a big jump in a year for any question like this.

Looking at other responses, use

other transit such a bart, walk or ride a bicycle, not a lot of movement.

Looking at the bottom of the

chart with a decrease, drive alone.

That is down 4%.

Next get a ride also decreased. Definite movement for

alternatives people are considering.

Among those who said ride hail

on the last chart I showed you,

we asked them why?

It is speed, door-to-door, not having to wait.

The top three there sort of paint the picture in terms of

what people are mentioning largely.

There are other reasons, the top

three are that point to point

speed to get me there quickly

are the ones that resonate the

most.

You finally, when I mentioned

this at the beginning a one

question survey among those who didn't use muni, this is the response.

All the others were for the muni

users, what would be barriers?

Main reason you don't use muni more? This is useful because it gives a lot of reasons people give.

I workout side the city.

Not a lot you can do about the. Responses are all over the place. It is nice when you see one thing to do.

We did that and we can bring them in.

There are a number of things.

Look at those to see where can

we use that to bring in new

riders, but it isn't a really

clear picture in terms of one or two things standing out among

the rest of them.

With that, that concludes the presentation.

I am open to questions. >> thank you very much.

It is enlightening to have the

years of data stacked up.

Directors, comments? Director borden.

>> you said you do that for other agencies.

How are we tracking based on other clients?

>> the surveys are all different. The question is not asked the same.

It is difficult to compare muni to caltran.

It is a completely different service.

There are survey results published some we have done and others have done. We are happy to pull that

together.

I would caution about trying to do apples to apples.

It is really a different service

or type of service.

If it would be useful we can

pull together the results from satisfaction surveys done with other agencies. Be careful.

>> my main question worry lated

to everyone is experiencing levels of traffic.

To what degree that is impacting satisfaction not just for us but other agencies would be interesting. >> I think that is interesting.

There might be something to that

worth looking at the trending

more so than comparing percentages. That could be done.

>> in areas where car usage is higher how the use of ride

shares or taxis compares to that

trend as well, whether it is a problem, how it is growing in the other areas would be interesting to know those two facts specifically. >> that one I think there is data on as well. We can look at that.

>> thank you.

I will note I think that barrier

to muni we can call that director borden.

You asked a year or two for that question. That is helpful.

Any questions, comments? >> one question.

How did you identify the population of muni riders?

>> we used the random digit sample and called. We told them what they were

doing if they were a user in the past six months we did the survey.

If they were a muni employee they didn't qualify. If they used it in the last six months.

>> director torres, comments, questions. >> I want to say this is really interesting and thank you.

It is so helpful to see this.

I will have to retrain myself.

For the last two years I have

been able to say our riders who

rate us good or excellent are 70%.

I will have to retrain myself to say 63%.

It will give us a goal. It makes sense we did this

during the tunnel shut down.

This was the biggest challenge. We got a measure of the impact on the ridership with that.

A couple things I would like to call out.

I am pleased to see the cash use

is down from what was it 26%

paying cash down to 18% paying cash? That shows we have done good

work getting the message out. Paying cost is going to cost more.

I am pleased to see movement on that.

The other thing to call out is

the rapid bus lines have the 70%

good or excellent service rating.

The things people have called

out why they like muni and what makes muni good or excellent to

them, I feel like those are only

things we can do on the rapid line.

A lot of things we have done to

make people like the muni route are not thinks we can do on the community lines or smaller

lines. It does involve stop removals or

why there is stop facing and red transit lanes.

That is a challenge to get the

riders on the small community

lines up to that same level of happiness with us.

I am sorry that wasn't phrased as a question, was it?

>> it is consistent.

From research we have seen the rapid line, people are on the top.

It is more dramatic this year compared to real.

>> thank you very much.

We will move to public comment now. Thank you for the presentation.

Do I have members of the public.

>> we have one approaching.

>> herbert weaner.

I would have liked to have been called for the survey. One thing I notices is one

question is if the travel time

would be reduced if there would

be if you could walk a longer

distance and reduce the travel

time, would you approval it?

Actually walking a longer distance doesn't reduce the travel time.

In the meantime buses pass by you as you walk to the bus stop.

There is a drop in satisfaction, and that is definitely

significant because small

percentages mean more people are dissatisfied. Also, people who are mentality

impaired are significant in this

because mentality impaired

people should be taking public transportation and not be driving.

That is a been

>> Ben:   fit to everyone, -- that

is a benefit to everyone.

There should be a survey how do

people feel about the elimination of bus stops,

alteration of bus stops and

discontinue youance of -- discontinue youance of bus

routes and the location of where people live. Do they live in a hilly area

that requires more walking to access the bus stop?

How does it affect them physically? These are things I would like to

see in the next survey. These are the comments I have to make.

I like what was presented, but

it could be more comprehensive.

>> any more public comment? Public comment is closed. We will move on. Thank you again.

We really appreciate coming back every year.

It is super-helpful. Thank you.

>> item 12.

Adopting the fy2019-2023 capital improvement program totaling $3 billion for approximately 267

projects within 11 programs

including transit reliabilities,

street safety, state of good

repair, facilities, taxi, system

safety and accessibility and

approving revisions to the

fy2019 and fy2020 capital budget. >> good afternoon.

I am leo levinson the new director of finance and new technology.

I am so new I can't take credit for the next agenda item. I am proud of the staff that worked on this important project.

This is our $3 billion capital

program over the next five

years, incorporating 266

projects, all of great

importance to the people of san francisco.

I would like to introduce monique webster, head of capital

planning and tim who is the head of the financial planning and analysis section to present this plan. >> thank you.

Nice to see you.

>> good afternoon, Madam Chair, directors, members of the public.

I am the manager of financial planning analysis.

I am here to print the 19 to 23 capital improvement program. What is the program?

A plan of projects the sfmta

plans to deliver in the next

five years for full fund you go

for projects and helps allow the

schedules.

There are three goals. First vision zero, transit first and the third is state of good repair.

Keeping the assets including the

feet facilities and rail in good

repair.

To be include in the cip it has to be part of the 20 year plan.

It goes throughout reach then it

goes from project managers to our team to align funding from various projects to be included

in the five year cip.

The cip including $3 billion in

revenue for 266 projects.

How does that compare to the

last cip two years ago?

This is a slight drop from

$3.4 billion to $3.0 billion

that had to do with projects

finishing including central subway you.

In terms of the makeup of the cip. The percentage point difference

has changes from prior cip.

That has to do with measure

three which is a revenue source.

There is a large portion of our

giobond for the $500 million transportation won. You will see a shift as compared

to prior cip cycles.

It does include revenue assumptions.

We anticipate 160 from three and

$7.5 million per year from the ride hail talks.

$36 million from potential and

new ballot measure all starting

in the cip to represent some of the revenue.

One I should mention is $38 million windfall. That revenue is not included in

the cip because we heard about it later than what we could

include as part of this. We do anticipate bringing that back to the board of supervisors

as part of the supplemental appropriations to get the money

available to use. Next slide shows details of the

revenue sources by different capital programs.

You can see the full detail on

the slide in terms how the

revenue is divided between the programs. Next slides highlight the major

projects in the cip.

Central subway is scheduled to finish.

It also includes did you large

replacement for the motor coach fleets as well as other ongoing

projects in the streets program.

I will address your questions if you have specific questions.

>> thank you. >> so as part of this calendar

we include update to the two

year capital budget.

Adjusting from 2019 down and add

justing the fy2020 budget slightly down also.

the significant projects that happened.

The big ones where we

anticipated getting a large cap and trade grant from the cap-and-trade program.

We got a lot less than expected.

That was a big reason why it went slightly down. We made revenue adjustments to

be more conservatives with the five year cip. I will take questions. Thank you for your time.

>> you move chair brinkman.

She is in the back. I will take over.

Board members, are there questions.

>> you adjusted down.

Are those in consideration of a

lot of prognosis the economy is

going to go in a downward spiral soon so we have overall tax and other revenues.

Is that the reason why or were

there other factors as well?

>> no, it is not based on

projections of an economic down turn. In determining of revenue

through the city, through the

general fund including prop b we

use projections from city controller's office.

They have explore ed somewhat recession scenarios might look like. They have not changed projections. The five year plan from the city

from which our numbers derive

are not based on recession scenario.

There was a slide that high late

you had the big grant that we

thought we were getting a lot more from the state than we did. We are trying to be conservative

about the less certain revenues.

Not because of economic

uncertainty because we don't

want to commit ourselves to projects with revenues that are less certain.

We have perspective revenues in there.

The change in the two year

budget from April to now is newer information about somewhat

revenues are likely available in

that two year period versus what we thought when we brought it to you in April.

>> there could be a revision at another time?

>> some of these are well established, others are projections.

>> we have a process for priority should that happen.

When revenues were less we

helped figure out where the priorities were.

>> the revised two year capital

budget is our proposal.

We have gone through that internally. This reflects how to live with

the smaller amount of revenues. Some repriortization.

Some are referred to rather years.

>> a further reduction would we

use this as a guide?

Would punishes age go smaller?

>> it depends.

Some are scalable, some are not.

It is reevaluating the program.

There are projects underway.

It is ones expect aren't

underway or what we would need

to defer to a future year.

>> in regards to you mentioned this does not include the wind fall money we are anticipating.

How would we allocate this based porn what we have here?

>> as tim said this doesn't include windfall.

This was put together before the windfall became appainter.

I will bring a recommendation to the board that will recommend

the use of those revenues to

accelerate the replacement of light rail vehicles.

We brought you an furringsal item on that.

The customer survey showed where

did you weak point was. Did you most important thing to

do is get out cars out and new cars in sooner. There will be a met cost to doing that. That is what I will be proposing.

We will have to go to the board

of supervisors to appropriate those funds.

They were unexpected.

Before going to the board of supervisors, we will come back

through this board.

>> director aiken.

>> it struck me we have a vision zero goal of eliminating fatalities in 2024.

This is the

the window to get us there.

If it is not here to achieve vision zero, I wonder.

How do we achieve that goal?

Are we getting all the way there

in terms of addressing the

streets and high injury network

through this plan?

I see tom jumping out.

>> tom

tom mic mcguire. We are addressing by the end of

this capital plan cycle we will

not have addressed every single street.

If you go back to 2014 when we

adopted the commitment.

We calculated over 80% of the streets will have received one

if not multiple engineering treatments.

There is enforcement, education, policy change.

I know at the board workshop in

January we will ahead a strategic conversation about

things board and staff can do to

make that final push to zero.

>> it is not necessarily

additional?

It ask there a funding gap?

Is this your dream plan or would there be more in here or not a

matter of funding? Policy interventions.

>> if we look back at the first

almost five years.

We have done per capita per any measure. I would say we have almost

certainly invested more in zero engineering than any city in the country.

I think the amount of work the board has done this fall ask a good indication.

All of the streets reflect how aggressive you have been there.

The other areas like enforcement

and education and policies to

the policy of safety, no low hanging fruit left.

Those are areas that demand more investment. We are talking to you about that in January. >> thank you. >> directors.

Do I have any other questions or comments?

>> a couple more questions? Does anyone else have more?

>> I saw the better market

street funding removed from the plan.

I want to hear if there is a plan to restore that. Two more quick questions?

how do we happy the future?

If we look at 2012.

Uber and lyft didn't exist. How does this anticipate the future.

A tbd measure four November 2020 on the ballot.

I wonder if you can speak to what that likely funding source is going to be.

>> the tbd funding measure.

Cip has a rule where projects

have to be included at 90% funding or more there.

Are a list of projects.

One you have the things we do is

highlight those by including a

tbd funding need or ballot measure to adjust those projects.

It highlights those projects we

don't have enough money to

potentially do, and it is a

potential proposal should we have enough money.

For better market street, one of

the things I mentioned is that

we try to take a more

conservative approach and be the conservative for the capacity funds. We don't want to say those will

go to the market street when we

can't really have certainty to

make sure those funds go to the better market street.

We made a slight adjustment.

The middle question.

>> is there a plan to future proving? >> it is difficult to do.

It is why we trial to align the five year with the 20 year capital plan.

Something has to be in the five year plan to be in the 20 year cip.

We have a look at the longer term to make sure those things

are included in the five year cip.

In terms of better market street

and extra funding not including

in there, I would say without knowing the specifics our staff

are looking at different funding

opportunities and different

scenarios to adjust the funding.

>> on better market, we had been

holding a place holder for a

very large discretionary federal

grant which we thought plight be un -- might be unlikely.

Good news the city received the

smaller grant for the first

phase, $15 million build grant which will help to get to full

funding of the first phase two our three blocks in mid market. We are continuing to work.

It is a multi agency effort

between public works, planning, transportation and economic development and us to build the funding for the full project. There is full commitment for the full better market street project. We are also putting in the

budget at this board's previous

request funding for near term

improvements.

Once the environmental document is certified there are things we

will do to put the parking and traffic changes and traffic and safety improvements in place we are funding that.

Taking out the large federal discretionary grant was us trying to be conservative.

We are committed to funding it.

To the fiscal year or 2020 revenue.

There was a task force

transportation 2045 task force last year. They recommended a measure to go forward.

They recommended a number of different potential funding

sources, not a single one on the list.

I think the top contenders were

additional half cents sales tax those were from last year. It now looks like the next

opportunity would be in 2020.

It will be more political and public process to determine the

right revenue source and timing

for that and what it might be. >> thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Seeing none.

Thank you for the presentation.

Public comment.

Mr. Winer. >> herbert winer. One thing I am concerned about

is transit going to be given top priority?

I have the sense this board considered bike lanes more important than public transportation.

I am really concerned about this

because I see a widening of

sidewalks, I see a taking away

of driver lanes which adds to

congestion, which adds to the difficulty of buses traveling throughout the city.

Before you could get from one

part of the industry to another the longest it would take would be an hour. Now it is an hour and-a-half.

I think one of the real answers

is more buses and more drivers.

I really think this board should

make transit the first priority. After all the model is transit first.

So far it is transit first, passengers last.

This is my concern I wish to convey to the board with regards to the capital project. Thank you.

>> again I recommend you read

the recent ta report on congestion in the city.

It does show that street network

changes barely contributed to

overall congestion in the city.

If you haven't reviewed that ta report, I recommend do you it.

Any more public comment? Public comment closed.

A motion to approve? >> second. All in favor? Any opposed. It is approved.

You thank you very much for the presentation. Much appreciated. All right.

We will move on.

13 approving policy guidelines for restricts overnight parking

of oversized vehicles on the san francisco streets. >> after 13 we will go back to

d, e, f on 10.2. Thank you.

>> good afternoon.

I am the senior analyst with the

sustainable streets division of

your you agency. We were here

on November 6th to talk about

adopting a policy for the and

when we would use the oversized

vehicle overnight parking restriction.

We had a very rich conversation. The board directed staff to come

back with refinementses to the

policy and I brought you a refined version.

As a procedural note, the staff

would like to make a minor edit

striking the footnote on page 6,

foot note sixty page 1 -- page 6

on the object in conversation.

I don't want to bore you with a powerpoint presentation from me.

The changes made to the document

have to do with elevating the participation of a part of

homeless outreach and healthy

streets operation center, the page 8 flowchart has a few

refinements on that note of coordinating with and following the lead of homeless outreach

team as we look at and work on

streets that have vehicles that

potentially are inhabited.

I talked and heard comment from

the board on the general criteria.

This May be the heart of the policy conversation.

What are the indications when

staff would say this measure you

should be brought forward and on

page 9 our page 14 for the staff

report, on that page for request

the continue to site visit stage staff will consider the characteristics.

We used the word blight. It is not in there.

We say as the fourth of the four points.

Streets subjecttography too and dumping.

When -- subject to the graphfitti.

We would consider the oversized

vehicle overnight restriction if

we thought that would be a

remedy or contribute to a remedy. Also, the first of the four bullets. Concentration of oversized vehicles.

If we find a street without a particular number. Two, five, rather a concentration of oversized

vehicles on a street that is under consideration, and above

all, I want to emphasize in the

flowchart that proceeds that

page back on page 8, our

decision tree how we evaluate

streets that might be suitable

for over size vehicle overnight restriction, we will begin work

with and end with homeless outreach team and the homeless support of housing group.

We had the director from the department of housing with us last visit.

I thought that was very

valuable.

Personally and on watch of the

agency I am grateful for the

partnership and cooperation, and any recommendation for the overnight restriction or even other parking management tools

that would reasonably have an

effect on peoplen u inhabiting

vehicles we will come to those

that are a plano parking

overnight where we could respect folks living in vehicles might be pushed out of that.

We will work with homeless

outreach and homeless support of

housing and hse folks to make every reasonable offer of

services and help for folks.

We are doing that already.

You will remember last meeting

this board approved did you posting on wolf street that was

so famous.

Friday, the 14th, the homeless

outreach team finished what they

thought was proper and adequate

outreach, helped a few of the households living in vehicles on

that street, connected them to

services, and then just then I

said sign shop, post the signs.

So right now to wolf street they

have the over size restriction posted.

I do want to be clear that work

of outreach and offer of services connecting folks to

help is not an offer of housing.

It is not an offer of an

alternative place to park, but rather trying to connect with

folks ill, who need help, and

they have connected with folks in desperate situation us and

gotten them help and services,

and helped move them out of a

bad place.

This agency is not promising to find a safe place for them to park.

That ask an ongoing conversation the city is having.

I think that is all I have to say about this document.

If the board has questions, I am eager to take them.

>> directors do you have

questions before public comment? Director torres.

>> we talked at length about the

issue and I sent articles to our

director about other cities in

california that found solutions.

East palo alto and santa barbara and I am trying to figure out

why is it taking so long for us

to find a parking lot or other

area to establish at least a temporary place for people to

park so they are out of the

neighborhoods causing so many

problems as many supervisors

articulated to me. >> excellent question.

I have become an expert on this

over the past five years. Santa rosa has retreated.

They had a robust program and

they are down to a small parking lot. The issue is funding.

There was funding for a year or

two and it was not adequate to keep going.

I hope Mr. Reskin will elaborate.

My understanding with the supervisors.

There is work going on towards

starting at least a pilot of the

safe parking program and other

sorts of relief and refuge for

folks living in vehicles.

It is not that we are asking for that help.

I am gratified we see some movement in the board of supervisors.

>> you should refer to the city

of hollywood where they are

establishing a parking lot for RVs.

I would be happy to refer you to his offices >> is there a reason we can't do it?

The board of supervisors has to diet? I never understood it. I thought we had jurisdictionable authority to do these things.

>> in terms of establishing a

safe parking program on private profit that May be something

that depending on the structure,

how the city acquire the land if

it is not city land and how the

city operates it, it would be something under the jurisdiction of the board.

There are a number of different supervisors working on this,

some have been working with the

mayor's office and department of homelessness in support of

housing on it.

To get back to the director torres it was question.

We have seen a lot of them

quickly and a lot of them failed. Part of the issue is making sure

we have things lined up to do it right.

Until recently I don't believe he had the opportunitying he

felt he would need to support a

successful safe parking program.

unlike other city, we are densely populated.

The opportunities for this space without neighborhood impact is harder space to come back.

A few years ago we tried to do bus operator training.

We were not able to find that

within the bounds of the city.

There is you more movement than

there has been before, there is

support to explore the concept. There are a lot of questions.

It is not entirely clear to somewhat extent that solves the

problem.

Homelessness is in support of housing.

Though are focusing on the

people who have great need.

They are sick or have issues

that makes living in vehicles problematic.

Then understanding a small sub

set of the issues out there.

If they are looking to prioritize dollars to the

people that need it most, some of what we see based on information we get from them is

that is foilings, some of the

folks in the vehicles are not the neediest who are the focus you have the resources.

That potentially makes parking not the highest priority and

what they are doing to address homelessness issues that have personal health and safety

impacts the people in the city. Safe parking is definitely on

the table as is more like parking storage.

If they can get somebody to services but for the fact the person doesn't want to lose their vehicle and possessions.

They are trying to find a place to store vehicles not to live in

but to not lose as they try to get back on their feet.

There are efforts moving, but I

know from working with the

department they are really

focusing on those most in need. In some neighborhoods that is a

small percentage of the folks

living in vicks. >> . -- vehicles.

>> we know that it is sometimes how people end up in the worst situation.

It is intermediate situation

until people that get worse off. We can prevent them getting

worse off it is a better thing

than going after them when they

are so far removed from thinks.

That is something that needs

thought about. For wolf street there was outreach done.

That is our first test case in

talking about this process.

>> I am sorry I don't have

someone to give you a more particular report, my

understanding is that in two of

the vehicles there were folks

who were connected who had

rather dire mental health situation.

That individual was connected to healthcare and services.

I do not know in terms of

housing outcomes, however, and I

am uneasy with that. To wolf, when we came to it, it had four large vehicles parked on it.

By the time this board moved

there were five or six vehicles.

It was a small population and small street.

My understanding is that a couple households did get services critical. The other folks had to move along.

That is the heart breaking fact.

Our understanding of the parking management section of the sustainable streets.

Pretty much every regulation we

bring to the street over ice

vehicles, parking regulations

are all going to displace parkers parked there folks with

a secret free parking place or

place to park to commute away or living there. It is the nature of regulating the curb to a place that doesn't

have regulation. Bit by bit.

Most of the cities are getting regulation.

The fact of pushing folks away is happening with every regulation we bring.

I am mindful some of those

displace minutes are pretty awful if you have the threat of losing your home.

It is place of unregulated

streets soaking up the pressure from regulated streets.

>> if we see the same people

moving from street to street, we have to figure out a solution.

The board didn't choose to do a city-wide ban. They don't want to do that.

I am not saying they should.

If what we are doing is keeping

the moving problem around.

We have to come to a solution.

It is not good use of our board to discuss that.

That will take two to five years. I do think that we have to kick

down or think of a bigger issue

around the larger policy

solution not just overnight VEHICLEs but overnight parks if that is going to be the case.

I think that is something we

really can't ignore. >> thank you.

Do I have any more clarifying questions before public comment?

Any more clarifying questions?

>> this follows up on the last question which is sort of this

piece by piece approach how are

we going to hear about the next request?

How are you as the staff going to handle the request?

As we move some people or do some regulations there is going

to be byproducts and different neighborhoods will feel the

effect and come to us.

I ask that.

Thinking back to the wolf

situation I want it to be treated like every other situation if they it is on this or other boards.

I appreciate the framework you set up, I appreciate the plan going forward, and my question

is how are you going to handle and prioritize the requests as

they come in the future? >> excellent question.

I will confess this is a

complaint driven list at this point. Your sustainable streets team have a long list of streets brought to us over the past

several years.

We have been trying to be very

strained in pushing any kind of

regulations forward towards the

concerns here and to some extent when the pressure from the

neighborhood gets very grade, we give it a closer look.

You have heard from neighbors

around the reservoir, Mr. Reskin and I and staff were with the neighbors earlier this week and

last week, there is a lot of frustration.

that, frankly, is bringing that

bunch of streets higher.

We need to be more systematic about how we engage this question.

To director borden is a whacking

game. I am not here to propose a rationale way.

We are motivated to bring you

more rationale ebb gagement. How are we going to treat the streets.

It is very much based on

community complaint on supervisors offices bringing complaints.

We are trying to balance how we bring those regulations forward to you. There are neighborhoods that

have not gotten as much attention.

We do not have a very strong

system but we are motivated to

make it make more sense.

>> we did hear from a large and

organized group from the supervisor their frustration

with the situation they are

seeing, and they made reference to the fact that other neighborhoods have been able to get the restrictions put in place, what about us?

It is a fair question you are raising.

We will be bringing -- we will take it through a public process

and the homeless outreach teams

are there working in the area.

We will bring you a proposal in

February for your consideration. It won't be easier than the others.

We will be true to this policy, but it is a very challenging issue.

There are people living in the

vehicles at the meeting expressing their perspective as well.

There are no easy ways out you have this.

The wind fall revenues, you

know, you saw the mayor's

propose scaland board proposal

will add more resources to the pipeline for housing and support

of housing and homeless shelters.

There are things done in

parallel that might be helpful for some of these folks.

We will continue to work with

the other agencies on safe parking and storage parking.

There is not an easy solution to

what is a result of a very

unfortunate and extreme dynamic

and the region that we are facing.

It is manifest by those in the streets in their cars.

>> I understand when there is an

item or restriction up four

consideration the outreach and

homelessness out reach and

related efforts are starting

with the information gathering process to understand what it is

we are about to do, is that correct?

>> that is the key concept in this pile of paper that we have

a partnership that is very

effective. The resources and capacity are

there working with homeless out

reach team and hsh and that

again as with wolf not a happy,

not harmonious situation to the

extent we will not post signs and commence enforcement until

homeless outreach and services have been brought forward.

We committed to that, executed on thaw.

That was a small pro pow type of

the policy that we are bringing you. >> any other questions before public comment? Go ahead.

>> briefly. I believe a week following our

last discussion of this item, mayor breed and supervisors made

an announcement about a new

program to address vehicle homelessness.

And if that has any bearing today?

>> I do not have specific os

that is I think Mr. Reskin

mentioned the mayor and the

supervisors have announced and

gestured in that direction.

Likewise supervisor ronen has made commitments.

I want to repeat whatever comes

forward if it is done properly.

The gate keeps is what I

caution I won't not want this

agency to evaluate the worth of somebody.

That is beyond what this agency should get into. >> thank you very much. I am moving to public comment.

We May have a few more questions as discussion starts.

Do we have public comment?

>> mike lee, ellie, melody have

turned in speaker cards.

>> two minutes please.

Use the lower microphone.

That will be turned on for you.

>> I am michael lee. Formerly homeless person.

I am one you have the few

experts in this room about some

of the things you are talking

about. Have you been homeless?

Why are you fooling with this issue?

What is your going about this is all stick.

We are going to regulate this,

pass this law, criminalize this,

do this and that. This gentleman says it is complaint driven.

That is nice. Complaint driven.

Anybody go to the vehicle dwellers and say the neighbors

have a concern about this behavior.

If you don't correct it, we are

going to have to regulate the street. Scent that reasonable and -- isn't that reasonable?

Isn't that humanitarian? No, not this city.

This city has a mayor that says

we are going to throw you in

jail, run you off, throw your things in the trash.

You act like people have an option. This commission member I asked

why is this taking so long?

Let's go back to the super bowl

15 days. Pier 80 was open.

Within four days they had justin

her man swept, the embarcadero swept the mission swept. They put them in pier 80.

It is political will:   I will leave you with this thought.

There is say federal ruling out of idaho.

You cannot evict homeless people unless you can provide a shelter space.

They were talking about homeless

encampments specifically.

If you pursue this policy we are researching right now if we can apply this to vehicles.

>> thank you very much, Mr. Lee.

>> you need to consider the humanitarian and whether they are legal.

Most definitely it violates the charter of human rights.

>> thank you. Next speaker please.

>> my name is ellie.

I am a volunteer on homelessness. I have brief personal experience. I have conducted several

outreaches in the bayview along armstrong and bancroft. Myself and those on behalf of the coalition.

Many of those vehicles are not transients to leach city

resources. One elder plea man struggled with addiction.

He is working to support himself

inside his rv for several years.

Another is hoping to raise his credit score.

His children attend the public school.

Others were living in shelters.

There were unsafe you living conditions like bedbugs.

The list is endless and heart breaking.

More over an embarrassment.

The steve san francisco we

choose to apply restrictions and enforcement and criminalize the

people for trying to survive in

the home base that

that is unaffordable.

We must carefully create

alternatives for vehicle and unharness folks.

We must remind ourselves they

are fighting every day to get by

in the city.

Signs force them to move from one street to the next.

It is part of the problem.

Until we face the issue of homelessness and carve out

spaces to over humanenessties we are not addressing the homeless

issue, not creating solutions or offering real solutions.

>> thank you for your work on

this and thank you for putting into words what people feel about the issue.

Next speaker, melody.

>> I am melody.

I have a couple comments on the policy.

It says vehicle encampment solution team. My experience with this is that

it is a fac ade, empty solution

to make it seem like people are helped.

As we know there is no housing

and no shelter offered to people

who do not fit the narrow

criteria. The navigation centers are 90 day stay.

Everybody I have seen in navigation has been out on the streets in three months back on my block.

The navigation centers are

approximately 550 people total of five navigation centers.

That is 550 people out for a 90 day shelter bed out you have the

total number of homeless people 7500 people.

That is all they are offering

us.

Also, on page 12 where it says number three vehicles in

jeopardy of being towed can be

notified pryer to being towed.

I ask that it be amanda

tomprethey be -- mandatory they are notified.

I am requesting at least two weeks notice and to post the

notice on the telephone poles

because when you put it on the

person's vehicle, they go I better leave. Then someone else pulls right in.

we are requesting that. Please. Thank you so much.

>> thank you, melody.

Any more public comment on this?

>> kiner -- winer and difficultler. >> commissioner tore resrespected in santa barbara adequate solutions are found.

The problem in san francisco there are less parking spaces.

This is partly do to mta ex

appropriating them willy-nilly.

That is one aspect of it.

Now, director reskin pointed out

that not all inhabitants of the

vehicles are necessarily at poverty level. That is true the there are college professors living in the

vans because of the housing problem.

One thing I have noticed is that

with the vans having to move all

over town because they are being

restricted, this is a cat and mouse game. It really has to stop.

One thing I wonder about.

Should these vehicles have parking permits? That is a question I would like

to propose to the board.

Maybe that would stop a lot of

fighting, towing and misery

theme piece endure in their VEHICLEs. I am a social worker by profession.

I can understand the dilemmas of

the people who are homeless living in the vehicles and also

the dilemma of the board because

this is broader than the board's concern.

This is a city-wide problem.

Frankly newsome used this to become mayor.

I don't like homeless being used

as a political tool. They are weak, vulnerable.

When you start persecuting the

homeless this is bullying.

>> thank you. Next speaker. >> kelly cutler. >> thank you.

I am kelly difficultler human rights organizer on the coalition of homelessness working on this for many year also. I sent you all a letter as well

as an article that just came out

in the street sheets which is well done. It did an analysis of the

meeting last week full of drama,

not many solutions focusing on enforcement.

In the letter I sent you, I

pointed on where Mr. Thornily mentioned approximately 1200 people living in vehicles.

As of today the city's single

adult shelter wait less that 21

people waiting for a temporary

-- 21 people waiting for a bed.

This is just adults.

We have seen a massive increase.

I got a call from a gentleman living in an rv in the area

where the meeting was with wife and two children.

It was towed on sunday. This is huge.

This is also the holiday season,

cold, rainy and taking away his

only shelter there. This is a lot more with the policy.

It is bad policy. What services are they talking about?

This is important they are coming batoll did you what resources if there is not housing what are they talking about? if you don't have housing.

This is advocating to force

people to sleep on the street.

In my last 16 seconds I would

like to invite you on friday the annual inter-faith vigil of the people that died on the streets

the past year.

230 people that is reality somewhat we are talking about. What they are doing is taking

away the little protection they

have from sleeping on the streets.

>> thank you for your work on this issue.

Public comment is closed. Directors.

>> I would love to see under

page 12-3 that area that

sentence where it saying towing note fiction where it says to

make that must be notified and maybe prescribe 20 days. Postings on the vehicles and the

polls if possible.

I also think that and I am not

sure if we can put it in here,

but for me when we talked about bringing these to us in the situation you were bringing to

us, I would love to see in the

report maybe in the policy or tell you this.

I would like to see the wolf street, 12 people, two got services, two people moved, we don't know what happened to them.

I think it is important because

the team went out and helped people doesn't provide the information we need, I feel, to feel comfortable this is working.

If it ends up the same people are on the next street. In the report whatever we can

get saying 12 people, two got

housing, two people moved. we don't know what happened to them. That is helpful. Those are the things I would

say. I don't know if we can put that in the report.

I will support the policy.

My personal what I am going to

tell the public I will not vote

for any new bans until there is a solution.

I am sec of the fact we are

setting -- sick of the fact we hear these every other week with no solution.

I am at my witnesses independent in being in that position.

This is the best we can do.

This is the jurisdiction we v.I will support the policy.

I won't vote for these bans

because the city has not done its job.

>> thank you, director borden.

>> can I chair fithe item on -- clarify the owing. That is a specific vehicle, not

a section of the street? >> that's right. >> in here we have talked about

the idea we don't want an entire

section of a street to suddenly be notified and employee enforced.

Are you confident what we have gotten to here won't get people

to that situation where melody pointed out if notices are put

and not on the streets and the

vehicles leave and more come in

those vehicles will see the

notices on the street saying the street will get these parking regulations shortly?

>> it is excellent and complex question.

Let me read back my thoughts on this.

First, in our document here we

elevated the fact that anyone

can take a license plate, go to

the mta website and find out the

peril that vehicle is. An old greyhound bus with someone living in it.

They have 25 citations they they are

in jeopardy being towed.

When that is your home that is catastrophic. Neighbors can do that. If you see that vehicle

afternoon it is dreadful you can

find out. One ticket not that that --

ticket that is what we are elevating. The outreach team is looking at

that to say there are folk that need help this vehicle seems to be in trouble.

It is not going to get a 1 hundred dollars ticket.

It is going to the tow yard and

the resident is not going to see it again. We notice for hearings. I also knock on doors. When we talk about bayview streets.

I went around and talked to

folks in addition to the posted

notice when we say we will bring you the proposal we will report on the experience so far.

When you give approval we will

be working further from that

with homeless outreach team.

There is more that happens and

it will heat up when the board

says post the notice it will get more intense. I can tell you here is what happened later.

When I know there is a restriction I will say parking

change is coming, this is going to affect you. We will do that with every

street where we displace people

living in vehicles.

Even posting signs May not be

enough to let folks know there

is trouble coming for you.

We can try to reach folks to let

them know we are talking about,

we decided to do this, it is

going to happen in a week, pay attention. It is going to push the problem. Some part of that group of

people is going to go we see

this the neighbors have said as

we regulated neighborhoods it pushed vehicle there is. Probably true.

When and if this board decides to regulate that street it will push them to another neighborhood.

Until we have every street

regulated this is the problem.

The noticing we can keep aspiring and acting to do better.

We are doing a pretty good job.

It is my commitment to notice

when there is a decision and

when vine signs are coming.

We are never going to have an answer for everybody.

>> you bring up an interesting question. You talked about reaching out to

people to let them know they are

on to brink of they could be to

towed with another citation.

It is earn overtable. Are we doing inferring -- inevitable.

Are we helping get rid of the towing? >> we have not done as much as we could.

Mostly I hear about after the

fact, when is catastrophic.

I hear from kelly and once that

vehicle is in the tow yard, it

is hard.

we have waiver of tow fees.

Once that vehicle is towed, it

is like human medicine.

Prevention is better than trying to cure it.

>> the point where you notify them the people that are problematic, is there anything

to do to say let's figure out

how to clear your slate? That is a different situation.

That is the people we know have

an issue.

A tech kit is -- ticket is not

the answer, they will be towed.

Is there an intervention we could do at that point to help

them clear the deck to start at zero? >> yes, but no, we haven't done

as much as we could. No, we don't have that active program in doing what you describe. That is powerful.

We are eager to work with folks

to have everybody paying attention to look out for folk

on the edge and helping connects

to a payment program or move

someplace where they are not in jeopardy.

If you have 20 tickets you can't keep parking there. We have had some success in

holding off on tows in a few cases where we say let's try to

fix this before the tows happen. Important to commit to doing more of that and that is part of

the overall solution is actively helping people move out of trouble. >> I would like at some point to

see some sort of policy around

how we do that in city when we

know people are in jeopardy of being towed.

>> thank you, director gordon. Yes, vice chair. >> are you aware of an area of the city where people are

parking oversized vehicles overnight where everyone around

is okay with it and there aren't

complains or concerns?

>> I have heard from

communities, for instance, on 80 boulevard. The fellow in that van is okay.

I don't want to punish him, he is a nice guy. Not a concentration.

It is usually an individual's.

I know there are good neighbors

living in the vehicles who have jobs.

I am not a neighborhood with

five or six vehicles with that he are okay.

It bothers somebody when you are

past five or six vehicles. >> if people are move anything

the city it is leading to another complaint.

It is an inefficient process.

I will support this proposal today.

As we think about proposals

going forward, if there are more standard rules that we could put

in to allow us to regulate this once and not on a complaint by

complaint basis, I would be open to that. That May be difficult.

Think about what is going to happen here. It

it is going to be complaint,

displacement, another complaint,

another displacement. Disruptive for people moving

around.

A lot of inishen sees and pain. That is a concern.

I am not sure how to solve it.

I will vote for this and

personally vote for this. As I have said before I do not

think it is appropriate to

saddle one neighborhood as a flashpoint the city is dealing with. I will say this.

I am confident you will do this. I want it on the record.

Please consider all

neighborhoods equally, all

complaints equally, judge on the objective merits, problems for

the neighborhood, associated

issues for the folks living in the vehicles. It is really important that we

treat these issues fairly and treat all neighborhoods fairly as we go forward.

I am worried this process will reward the more politically

organized and more concentrated communities in this process and

I don't think that is fair. >> understood and agreed. >> this proposal that is before

us today if passed, how will it

relate to whatever the board of

supervisors and our mayor is

moving towards?

Is it in conflict, parallel, how

will it be integrated? >> good question.

To my estimation there is no

conflict between this guidance

policy and anything the board of

supervisors and mayor brick bring forward.

This is more triage or

management of a large crisis

than a tactical strategic answer.

What we hope for from the supervisors and the mayor is

that better answer that is more system attic. A safe parking or permit system or something.

This guidance is really to have this conversation with the board

in a thoughtful way so staff can

know we can come to you with

saeducated proposal, but is it not the answer.

It is how we are going to manage

as we try to come up with an answer.

>> thank you, director torres.

Any more questions or comments?

>> do I have a motion to approve? >> yes.

>> do I have a second?

I don't have a second to approve. All right.

I have a motion and second.

Let's do a roll call vote on

this one, please, thank you.

Roll call:  . >> thank you. The ayes have it.

This is approved.

Thank you so much for your work on this. The board remains very, very concerned and committed to look

at the restrictions that are

brought to us very closely and

to the public commenters who came today. Thank you so much. We remain committed to watch

this and committed to helping

and having our agency help with

solutions that might exist. Thank you all very much.

Now we will move to the items

severed from the consent

calendar which are items 10.2d, e, f.

To the members of the public who have severed those items.

Can we call them?

We will call them together. Let's call those three items together.

We will hear from the members of

the public who severed these.

>> first speaker is mike lee.

He has left.

melody, followed by herbert winier and cutler.

>> thank you. >> thank you so much.

I am melody.

I am going to ask you where do these people go? Do not do this.

It is unfair to continue to shut

down street was no parking alternative.

You know there is nowhere for us to go. There is no shelter for us. Please do not do this.

Every time you shut down streets

where a vehicle is parked it

escalates the problem for those

with no city sanctioned exit

from homelessness hearding us to

few errand fewer streets.

The stress and sleep deprivation escalates with every street you shut down.

It does not matter that I am not

making a mess or doing drugs and

leaving dirty needles. This punishes me as if I am

doing those things. My mere existence is breaking

the law, and these signs tell me

I don't have the right to exist. Though it is my responsibility,

I am not the cause of my homelessness.

Please do not do this.

Again, since 2009 I am asking

the board of directors for a safe place to park.

Without your help and support I

cannot overcome my circumstances

and I am a scapegoat and society

demand I overcome my

circumstances while stripping me

ever every resource required to do so. Thank you for your time.

>> thank you, melody. Next speaker, please.

>> herbert weaner.

doesn't the resolution passed previously I doesn't this

conflict with equity regardingtic areas?

Now, you want to make this a

universal law this regulations apply throughout the city. This conflicts with all you have

the parking areas.

Now, have these areas in

question under d, e, and f, have

they posed a community nuance at all?

That is one question I have. Between 12 and 6.

Now what about the rest of the day? That doesn't interfere with parking the rest of the day.

12:00 and 6:00 is relatively quiet.

I think you should really vote against these proposals. I am in a rush.

I will say I am against d, e, f.

I think on humanitarian grounds

you should vote against it.

Otherwise, people are being chased helter-skelter all over

the city in RVs.

The real question is do you want individuals in the RVs

sleeping on your doorstep? I don't think so.

This is something to consider in the broad context.

To be fair, this commission is only part of the problem.

You know, there are other agencies that should be part of

it and you should consult with the commission on homelessness

on this before you take any action.

These are the thoughts I have.

I would vote no if I were a commissioner, and I request you to do the same. Thank you.

>> next speaker, please.

kelly cutler. >> coalition on homelessness.

I can say what I forgot the last

time.

With your comment about the

policy, it seems like the

complaint driven system.

Since we first came in 2012 with

the over size vehicle ban, we

have been going through this

routinely, and it is created a

worse problem.

The policy, the legislation that

the supervisors are working on,

we meet with them to create real solutions, none have happened yet.

Moving forward, it is like it

ask to create some alternatives.

With wolf, I am disappointed.

That you don't have the data.

He came here to say we are going

to send out the out reach team, we are going to do this. There is nothing for them to

report back. The real industries the outreach

workers, great workers without

the tools to offer people. Wolf is now resolved, I don't

know for who, it is resolved.

Now there is more streets coming

up to be resolved again.

I would at least postpone and

hold off until we can get some alternatives going.

It is currently worked on with

the supervisors right now.

At this point there is nothing.

There hasn't been since 2012. We keep coming back.

There are zero alternatives created -- created.

Any more public comment?

>> public comment is closed.

Directors, as I have said I am not supporting this.

It is obvious it is the only thing.

I recognize the jurisdictionally it is limited what we can do.

I feel like having taken the

stand it is make you go things move forward.

I think if as the decision-maker you have to use your position to best influence our people to do the work that needs done this.

Is a big challenge.

We have to -- I personally have

to not make it. You can't support moving forward. I don't people we have done anything in the way we need to have done it.

The overnight parking issues,

over size vehicle issues are far

from any reasonable resolution

in that area. Not necessarily indictment of

this agency, indictment of an entire city.

We are not going to solve. We can't keep waiting to deal with a problem because we are

trying to solve one aspect of it.

We have to do a lot of different

things in parts of your life, not one area.

That is somewhat we have to do.

>> it would be hip full to have

staff -- helpful for staff to

peak to the impetus of it.

>> I have to say I do notice

these are no parking overnight for everyone. What I brought up the last time

we had something in front of us.

It was no overnight parking for

oversized vehicles.

Neighbors said it was a parking overnight. Perhaps staff to speak to how these got on the consent calendar.

>> indeed.

Andy with the streets division.

These two, one of them is a

piece of a street they came from

businesses complaining about parking availability and congestion, garbage and debris

and general disorder.

Towards that point in our policy document that is hand waving.

There is a location prone to

dumping and parking congestion.

As directors have noted and

staff this agency is in a tough

spot charged with managing the

parking and curb in the streets. When we are called on by

businesses we must respond.

Statement we are compassionate

and humanitarian impulse is there and should be.

We are attorney by. I -- attorney by that.

I think this board has been practicing the notion that we

can't do this on our own, but

perhaps if we say no, we can motivate others. The supervisors and mayor see that. Back to the question.

This is constituents, these are

businesses saying my business is being punished.

The garbage, debris and there

are days when I can't get my

vehicles in and out of the yard. Geographic equity to the points the directors made. The nice neighborhoods have nice things.

I say that within sincere quotes.

Pacific heights don't have RVs

in front of the houses. Some of that is because the streets are really regulated out the window.

There is resident permit parking, time limits.

These corners of the bayview are

under regulated, barely street cleaning.

problems are pushed to these streets.

We are in a tough spot to

respond and give them regard and be merciful.

We are in that same tough spot.

>> vice chair.

>> the procedural point you heard director borden. I don't think these should be on the consent calendar. They should be automatically pulled. I can't believe we would Miss It. You have feedback from the board member saying she won't vote for this.

Procedurally we should voice that as we go forward not treat this as consent. It is not going to be.

Number two, I support this. You anticipated one of my points.

I am cognizant of what

neighborhood this is and the fact the neighborhood May say they don't have enough parking regulation to begin with.

This May well be a game of cashup.

For the geographic issues.

We are playing the game of catch up.

This is a good illustration of

the good faith of views here.

I respect director borden's position. It is logical, compassionate and

May have the grand effect that she is searching for. I hope it does.

From my view we can't hold

individual neighborhoods

especially ones who are not politically connected and don't

have resources to turn to that

others do, can't hold them

behind and hold them hostage while the city tries to solve a problem they have been trying to solve for a long time.

That is my personal view. I will vote for this.

I have tried

tried to be transparent.

I have given you my views.

Thank you for working this up, thank you for bringing it to us and representing that part of the city.

I hope this will pass and when

it did you guys will utilize the

same compassion and outreach you committed when I ammenting these. >> thank you. Anyone else?

Anything to add?

I am going to call these altogether.

Do I have a motion to approve? >> yes.

Second.

Roll call vote again.

Roll call:  .

>> those passed. Aubergine, to the staff and

everyone who worked on this.

As we heard we want to be as

compassionate and careful when I ammenting these. -- implementing these. That gave us hope that is what is going to happen.

As we hear from the people working with these people every day.

The solutions aren't there yet.

This is a kind of a tough situation for all of us.

Thank you for continuing to work

with it. Ms. Cutler thank you so much. We will move on.

>> item 14 approving the 2019

legislative program for sfmta.

>>. >> good afternoon. thank you. I appreciate your attention today.

I am kate breen with the legislative program.

This program was informed with

discussions with the sfmta staff and the various transportation interests over the last several months.

The draft program was reviewed

and approved as required by the state legislation committee in November and

and reviewed by the

sfmta advisory committee this month.

I would like to acknowledge my colleagues in pulling this together.

In 2019 a new political landscape after the elections.

New supervisors and governor and

legislature and new dynamics

with the house speaker role

returning to nancy pelosi.

We will look for policy and funding opportunities.

At the local level in the packet

the legislative efforts are dynamic and recognize -- dynamic.

The draft program anticipates categories of policy and

projects in 2019 such as vision zero, contract approvals and

many things we can't anticipate

that is part of our work. One kiev fort today is the --

one of the efforts is to improve communication was the city hall and board of supervisors.

This is a staff effort in the

last six months following the conversation last year on the changes.

The focus is overall process

improvements goal is to provide

comprehensive information about better customer service and

quick response to priorities by

the board of supervisors who

represent the interests of the public.

Accountable and the board of

supervisors work. Initiative was include response

team implemented in the streets division to advance the critical projects identified by the

members of the board,

improvements to public hearing, type of infrastructure and what

the public should expect in each district.

Updated enhanced protocols for

response to inquiries from the

board of supervisors, mayor's

office and requests tracked

through sales force.

A full rollout of the public

outreach requirements across the sfmta to ensure outreach to the

community on the projects

underway in any given neighborhood.

These plus planned future

initiatives set the foundation

to provide comprehensive work and quick response to the board. I felt it was important to highlight that work going on for

a number of months internally and different elements have been rolled out.

In the coming year with new supervisors we will see the

building of a partner ship

responsiveness and accountable.

I am moving to the state now.

On the state side I think that

with the mayor, board of supervisors and new governor we

have one theme at the top of the list. That is housing.

We will see efforts around

housing and opportunities to tie transportation elements to that transportation. with regard to transportation funding those working at the

state level and my colleagues

statewide are breathing a sigh of relief.

Of all of the work passing the

gas tax and proposition 6 folks

are like let's spend the money we will work for the grants and

count on the distribution of

formula money flowing for the next 10 years.

That I think will get folks

capacity to look to housing in

other areas where they want to bring the focus.

There is a conversation to the

transportation development act,

the quarter c ent sales tax to fund transit.

There are a lot of requests to seek exemptions from requirements under that and both chairs of the committees said enough. Can we look at what is not working.

If people are asking four

exceptions maybe something needs revised.

In the coming year we will participate in that effort, is

not the least of which is to ensure san francisco's interest

and the funds protected.

Look at it as an opportunity to educate.

Some members who have the important lifeline source for

public transit. The next item is city wide initiative not just mta.

It is important to include a

change to state law that seek to address requirement that was put into place a couple years ago

having to do with how bond make sures are describes on the local ballot.

The up shot if the provisions of

the law are maintained it

confuses voters of the ballot measure.

There are legal memos why this is a barrier for local

government funding, schools,

public infrastructure, health

care and hospitals, particularly around bond measures. We will work with the city

family to look for a remedy on that issue. >> I am talking not showing you

my topics. That was number three. Then cap and trade.

Again, growing fund source with potential opportunity to look for funding.

Earlier discussed light rail vehicle program will seek funds

out of the capital rail program

and maintaining the ongoing

commitment for high-speed rail. Next category where we will continue our work as we have

over the last number of years

and to tom's point earlier and

director eagan's program.

We have to have policy around enforcement and education and

the things we worked on have been tough fights. We will come back.

The first bullet talks about

creation of zero traffic fatalities traffic force.

In this year that statewide

table will provide a forum for

those of us proponents of speed management. We will have an opportunity to bring experts to the

conversation with a goal of coming up with recommendations

that we can advance around statewide policy.

You May have seen that recently

los angeles had to increase speed limits to enforce speed laws.

That ask the way the law is currently written.

You have to have speed limits to

the 85 percentile to measure how fast the cars are going. We are working with cities

around the state to bring awareness. It will be an education process

with the legislature and new members.

We are building a movement that takes time.

We will work with other

proposals that May come to the

floor around bikes and safety proposals.

Vision zero this last bullet is around mode shift.

What will it take for members of

the public and folks not riding

now but want to, disability community to feel safe is being

able to get from the bus stop to

the vehicle without step anything the street.

The concept is to seek an opportunity to you use the

existing transit only lane

enforcement cameras to enforce parking violation this is bus

stops anywhere, not just in or

adjacent to transit only lanes. Los angeles and ag transit have interest in this concept.

We are looking

looking for some traction.

It was the mayor newsome's idea

to improve the muni performance.

It took 8 years to get the

program after three pilots.

Two or three pilot authorizes.

We will see.

Next category rye is one you --

category is emerging mobility.

We will see what the coming year

brings around the scooters and shuttles and private transit vehicles.

Congestion pricing and it is a

small cell wireless sites.

There are a lot of things in

this with proposals. We don't know what form.

This practice towards preemption preemption.

Making sure that people want one and done.

They don't want to navigate individual sty policies.

At the state or federal level

they are rallying over local

government to keep control of the streets and make policies that work best for them.

We are mindful of what is coming up.

There are discussion us around

congestion pricing.

This is a deeper dive in terms

of what tom ask working on for

congestion parking framework and

we will be a resource in the legislature as that continues.

On parking somebody told me on

accessible parking policy the

tough ones take the longest.

First is disabled placard reform.

San francisco good a deep dive

on that issue four or five years ago. Los angeles and sacramento picked up the ball.

La is looking at legislation around the policy.

We will be continuing to engage

in that conversation such as there is an opportunity.

The take away in this arena is

no progress without the

engagement of the disability community and equity interest.

Both of these for lack of better

term the larger categories of

interest haven't been as engage.

To be successful it will be morrow best. -- robust.

Parking focusing on the impact

of low income individuals and seeking to ensure those

programs are implimented explea.

We are working on a curb

management report. We will see if there are

proposals coming from that.

Housing is a newcomb

is

is a newcomb opponent.

Parking minimums and maximums and permit streamlining we will

look for opportunities. Lastly I but not least,

sustainabilities and efforts

around greenhouse gas emission

reductions, busy

electrification of

bus us helping with carbs to

understand the unique position

with the trolley coach which is zero emission.

As we transition to zero

emission that we can phase out

the trolley coaches under this

regulation.

The federal component will be kicker.

We have a changed federal landscape. It is interesting.

There is a lot of bipartisan

talk around infrastructure.

Incoming chairs expressed

support for emt charge,

congestive pricing but mind full this won't work for everyone.

We are anticipating a robust

conversation working to clarify

the top infrastructure priorities to make sure we are ready to go.

The fast act will be expiring

600 days along those lines.

We will behind full of

conversations on reauthorizes authorization.

Autonomous vehicles we have capacity with members of tom's

team and our government affairs folks.

It is a super deep dive with

senator feinstein around the issue of preemption and legal

issues in the house and senate autonomous vehicle bills.

The guess right now the clock

ask ticking to come to agreement.

It seems today it would be hail

mary to be successful in passing agreeable autonomous vehicle legislation. You never know.

To let you know we are very much

involved in those conversations.

Lastly, the broader context of mobility.

It is something we will monitor closely. That is my report. I am happy to answer questions.

>> thank you so much.

Questions or comments. Director borden.

>> a few years ago when they

passed 375. Has it helped in terms of regional transportation dollars

that all of our housing is transit oriented? >> that is the promise?

Has that been fulfilled?

>> sustainability. They have you merged and there is an opportunity to realize that promise.

The effort underway over the past six months. This year for the first time I

have seen is probably as a

result of the consolidation. The legislative program is now

the number one issue is housing.

I would say it is a little early yet.

There are definitions within the

sustainability community strategy that do not benefit the region.

There are conversations so more

funds would flow based on disadvantaged communities.

I think you have to say there is

so much demand and need around

housing that they haven't quite delivered that yet. >> curb management.

Can you talk about the things that you are advocating for?

>> I would say not advocating

for.

I

I will see if tom wants to speak.

It is who has the right to permit the curb. It is broader than that.

>> thank you, Mr. Mcguire.

>> the curb management is all of

the tools regulating who gets to

use the privileges of the curb.

Parking paid and unpaid, pick up and loading, putting things like

bike chair stations, my division

is undergoing a curb management strategy to bring to the board

at some point in 2019 to try to

suggest ways to better align one

of the strongest powers this organization has which is to

control the use of the curb with the new modes of transportation in the city and to figure out

how from a 21st century approach

would be to support transit

first and equity goals. >> am I contradicts to understand some of the things would need approval from the state to change?

>> it ask possible.

You know, one of the things we

find as we dig into the california vehicle code which

some people on apply team have memorized, there is quite a bit

of power for a city that is

willing to be creative.

You will hear more about that in 2019.

>> any questions or comments?

>> the 50% increase in the congestion on the streets.

Can you address to how the legislative program seeks to address that?

>> TNTs are regulated by the tpc.

If there are proposals for fees

in the context of pricing I

don't know.

That would be my best specific example I could come up with

that I have heard about.

>> really the ta commission on

the report asked the ta to start

redo the pricing study it did back in 2010.

As you know, there is likely to

resurface in the legislature a bill to authorize pilot

congestion management efforts as there had been last time.

I think those efforts could come together.

That won congestion pricing for everybody. What we have specifically ask a

law this past year that would

allow us to put the measure on

the ballot next year that would

impose a per trip tax on TNTs. Not clear what support there

would be locally let alone at

the state level for additional

ledge laytive changes in how

TNCs are regulated in california.

We have been trying for six

years to know avail. >> obviously you heard

frustration not just san

francisco, los angeles as well.

Cities lacking authority over TNCs. Any thought to state legislation

to empower cities further to address the challenges? >> I haven't heard anybody coming forth specifically.

We are in regular communication with the seven largest department of transportation in california.

So far there hasn't been a proposal.

I won't say a will. I think a proposal to try to take that on.

There is an opportunity with the incoming administration and how

it works or doesn't work effectively.

That conversation started two

years ago what should fall with in the purview and what night be

under the state agency.

It could be those conversations begin again.

>> we have a lot of people changing at the state level. People have been in place for quite some time.

I think we will see a lot of new

faces and a lot of stunt with

people changing.

>> the staff report mentions the

better market street.

We spoke about funding removed

from market street.

The budget is quite significant.

It sounds like it is moving for the first few blocks.

Can you talk about the plans for overall improvement.

>> as we have been talking to

folks how to prioritize if we

were asked, if there were an opportunity for other projects, better market street rises to

the top much the list.

It is socialized and people

understand the value.

Getting the $15 million grant

was like a huge surprise.

For phase one, which is about $70 million, things are move anything the right direction. We would want to advance when it

is ready the full project north

of $600 million, I believe, and look for every opportunity to

fund it as a marquis type of project.

We have no unknown fund sources the center piece of our ask when

infrastructure calls for

projects come forward.

>> thank you. No other directors have questions.

I will say thank you so much for

the work do you on this. Now the job you do is a

marathon, not a sprint.

The years on the board seeing the work inmuch forward on the things. Some of the things we put

forward we don't see a huge success.

We see incremental change and

the issues get socialized in the

state and other cities pick up the baton.

The transit only lane

enforcement with bus cameras, everybody is starting to realize

as there are new fleets with

fantastic cameras we have a big opportunity.

There is a report that shows

higher transit use means safer streets.

That ties to the disability community saying that is one of

the biggest issues to get safely to the bus.

I feel like we moved that along. Disabled placard reform was a big list. We didn't get what we started

out asking for, we did move the needle.

The dmv had an audit that forced

them to tighten controls which helped us. i don't know that we have seen

the numbers on it recently.

I assume the audits is going to trickle to our streets and we

will see some improvement. >> I would hope so.

I don't know how far they are in executing their recommendations from that audit.

It was a small step but positive step.

>> I just want to say thank you.

It is a marathon.

You guys and your staff are all doing very good work. We appreciate it.

>> we are lucky to have the

delegation we have. We have unified support.

>> I think what you are doing is probably helping to inform other

cities and they are looking to

pick up the baton and to run with that. Thank you.

Do I have any members of the

public left? No public comment. Public comment is closed.

Do I have a motion to approve this legislative agenda. Any opposed.

It is approved. Skit tight we do have a closed session.

>> item 15 discussion and vote

pursuant to add enough code section 67.10d.

I should note that the city

attorney's office is asking that

the shank settlements be removed from the agenda.

>> do I have a motion and second.

We will go into closed session.

[Closed session bracket

session.

>> we are back.

Item 16, announcement of closed session. the that met in closed session.

The board voted to approve the

mudawar case.

The motion to disclose or not disclose. >> move not to disclose. >> will not disclose. We are adjourned.

Thank you very much.

Everybody have a wonderful christmas, wonderful new year.