City and County of San Francisco Tuesday, February 05, 2019
>> clerk: for approval of the minutes of January 15 and January 19 meetings. >> okay. Board members, we have the
minutes before us for two meetings. Is there any public comment before us?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. Board members, I'm happy to take a motion to approve both at the same time.
>> motion to approve both. >> second.
>> motion to approve all say aye? Opposed? Okay.
>> clerk: items of the chair
or directors, I have none today. Introduction of new or unfinished business by board members.
>> board members, any new or unfinished business?
So much so that they're stymied.
>> clerk: item seven, director's report.
>> we got to you in record time, director reiskin. >> I want to wish everyone a
happy black history month, and it being February 5, it being lun or new year, I want to wish
everyone happy lunar new year. I want to start off by asking
our director of safety, melvin
henry, to come forward to
recognize some extraordinary
work, unusual work by him and his staff.
>> good afternoon, directors,
melvin henry, director of system safety. The three gentlemen coming up
here now, back on October 24,
we had an event that happened
in the office where we had a colleague that was going
through a cardiac arrest.
So the three gentlemen here grabbed or external
defibrillator and administered
it to Mr. Antoine ross.
They administered one shock and
immediately started the chest
compressions and rescue breathing. That continued until they were relieved by emergency responders who continued the
C.P.R. Efforts, and then, he
was transported to S.F. General
hospital and to this day, he is doing well.
He was released, he is recovering, and I just want
to -- on above of the ross family -- on behalf of the ross family, who some of the members
are here, and sfmta, I want to
thank them for their efforts. >> quite remarkable. Gentlemen, anything you want to say? Saving a life is enough.
You don't have to give a speech, but since you did save
a life, if you want to say something, you May.
>> and I forgot to give the names.
To my left we have elvino
garcia, josh fedore, and john ferontez. >> well, the only thing I want
to say is it is very scary.
It caught everybody off guard.
One thing that made it go
smoothly was the coordinated effort between the three of us.
It was nothing we had rehearsed
together but through our
previous experiences working
together, we led a coordinated
effort, which we got the
A.E.D., chest compressions,
911, security, they reserved
the elevator so paramedics
could have unrestricted access to us. The three of us working
together is what made it go as smoothly as it did.
>> well, thank you so much. I'll say this.
You're here today because we're
held britting a heroic
activism, but because you go
above and beyond for your support. Please accept these thanks and awards on behalf of the entire city of san francisco.
Thank you so much. [Applause]
>> so continuing on, next, with some vision zero updates. First with respect to our rapid response team, we did have our
first traffic fatality of the
year, when 84-year-old lucy morales was crossing at haight
and shrader. We did something different this time, having our own rapid response team who are the
engineers that go out right --
as soon as we're made aware of
a fatal or possibly fatal incident to see if there's anything we can do to make the area safer. They went out with public health crisis response team and also conducted outreach with
the goal to acknowledge the
fatality and ensure the city is aware and responsive and make sure the city has under way
vision zero to eliminate fatalities citywide on our streets. The teams were on-site within 24 hours, talking with businesses about how to make
their parking and traffic operations safer.
The messaging was similar to
what we do in the world day of remembrance in the fall, and we
had a poster with our neighbor died died here in a traffic collision. We can do better.
One is too many.
As a result of this outreach,
there are 300-plus in-person
interactions, some in spanish in connection to the department
of public health, their crisis response team that had
referrals to their 24-7 crisis hotline.
So we're trying to obviously prevent these fatalities in the first place, not only see what
we can do to help them from happening again, but also to
remind folks of the importance of everybody's responsibility. I think generally with the go a good response and some appreciation from folks knowing
that the city is aware of and working on this issue and
working hard to get to zero.
So along with that, just a summary of education and outreach.
In 2018, we had a dozen
outreach and education
campaigns to raise awareness of significance zero, including with the state department of motor vehicles to play antispeeding videos throughout
their offices in california. Six separate ad campaigns, including the district attorney, senior pedestrian
safety campaign that many of you probably saw on buses and bus shelters.
Vision zero campaigns combined
for more than 250 million media impressions.
We're trying to use digital and
social media channels to reach people.
We had 52 people reach out to community events throughout the city, and every one of those
had chinese, spanish, and/or
filipino ambassadors present. We talk about the engineering
and redesigning the street, s, which is critically important,
so I wanted to give you an overview of what was accomplished in 2018. Moving onto the B.A.R.T. Service changes that will result from their starting service late, starting next monday as part of a
reconstruction -- a seismic reconstruction project
associated with the transbay
two, they need longer work windows in order to be able to get that work done. But what that work means is the
first hour of service that B.A.R.T. Usually provides will
be unavailable on train, and so
starting February 1, on weekends before -- weekday
mornings before 5:00 A.M., muni
will be running early bird
shutting service between the transbay terminal and daily ly city B.A.R.T.
And this is to replace the
first missing hour of B.A.R.T. Service. So our service running for
B.A.R.T. Will run every 15
minutes, and it will hit all of
the B.A.R.T. Stops in the
city -- not every stop. Transbay will essentially serve the downtown stops, and then
it'll go to glen park, balboa
park, and then, daly city.
And of course those people who are coming from the east bay to
the transbay terminal will have also access to service to the
downtown stations, as well. Fares will be provided with clipper, so we have an agreement in place with
B.A.R.T. To make that all function. And this will happen on weekdays for the duration of the project, which is currently projected to be 3.5 years, so
this is not -- this is not short-term, this will be in place for the long-term.
We'll have ambassadors out -- bart will, at first, to make sure that riders have the information that they need to
ensure that transitions are made as smoothly as possible,
and that we'll monitor to make
sure any adjustments that need to be made can be made. Moving onto a couple of our own construction projects, the next
phase of work on the new
platform at the ucsf on third street started last week.
It started last tuesday.
It was projected to be a 16-day
shutdown initially, the issued
down on third street initially
was projected to be 13 days, but because of the rain, it
will be 16 days, it will be
done at the end of this week. The t line will be substituted as bus service through March.
The work, notwithstanding the rain, is going reasonably well.
A lot of lessons we incorporated into this, including scheduling buffer. We've been focusing on
information to riders and ultimately we will have not just the new platform but a number of new crossovers that
will provide flexibility in our service, particularly in
service of our arena events.
And all of this work is
expected to be done by late April.
So that is progressing well, and hopefully by the end of
this week, we'll at least
partially open third street. Moving onto vanness, progress continues.
The work done to date has all pretty much been the undergroundwork.
This has all been replacing 100-year-old water and sewer infrastructure, as well as replacing sidewalks.
The water -- I know it's billed
as the vanness B.R.T. Project, but I want to make sure we're taking care of all the infrastructure on the street from building front to building
front, so when we are done, there are no
there are new sidewalks, and they will be more reliable and
less subject to failure.
But I know the extent of this construction, two miles,
replacing all of this sewer and pressure -- high pressured water for firefighting. right now, we have about half of the sewer work done, and we
have been able to address some
of the issues, and get ahead of
the issues underground that
have not been identified by the utility companies that were slowing us down. Having gotten ahead of those, the pace of the work is increasing, and we continue to work with the contractor and bring our own resources onto the project to try to continue to accelerate work.
Right now, the schedule is to
have service up and running in 2021. We are working our hardest to
try to bring that schedule back and recover some of the time
that we lost. We are providing support to businesses along the vanness corridor through or project outreach team and working in conjunction with the office of economic and workforce development.
We do have the construction mitigation program in place on
the corridor which brings some
of these oewd resources to bear
for merchants on the corridor.
You May recall we have a
citizens advisory committee to bring input from businesses and merchants on the corridor so we can address issues as they arise.
We do have weekly construction forecasts which folks can sign
up for at sfgovtv.Com/projects.
Couple other quick things.
This board has asked us to explore seats on the new light rail vehicles.
We do have, at your direction,
a study underway to determine customer satisfaction with vehicles overall and to inform any future modifications and future procurements and
possible retrofits of the existing trains.
We have customers being
surveyed on board in multiple languages as well as through
focus groups, and we're talking to regular riders and seniors,
and those who identify as
having mobility-oriented disabilities, and we're already identifying from what we've heard from you and from some of the public, some possible
changes, such as lowering the
seats, such as putting in some
transform, as well as longitudi longitudinal seats. So we will be coming to the
next meeting with some
replacements but also with some sense of what might be feasible
and make sense in terms of
retrofitting the existing vehicles, so just wanted to let you know we heard you on that and we'll be coming back tuesday. Given that this is the start of the lunar new year, wanted to
remind you that on February 23, the city will host the annual chinese new year's parade, one of the largest outside of china.
We will participate in the
parade aboard one of the
decorated motorized cable cars.
There's about 25 muni lines we reroute in order to accommodate the parade route, and we do this in tight coordination with the police department and
public works so that the street closures and street reopenings
are as efficient and effective
and minimizing as much inconvenience as possible.
and of course we'll have a full
contingent of folks out on the
streets, muni folks and traffic control to help move and make
sure the rest of the impacted area -- it is something we have practice in because it's an annual event. Just know as everyone's
enjoying the parade, there's a
lot of M.T.A. Resources making that available.
And I did want to report on
something, a little before
9:00 A.M., we had a major
subway delay that was caused by a switch problem for a period of time inhibited any movement
of trains going through the
castro area, so not a direct
impact on the n. And j. Lines,
but a direct on the k, l, m, s, and t.
We had train traffic stopped in
both directions for about 25 minutes. Most of the trains were stopped at the platforms, and so people were able to get off.
We did have two trains that
were stuck before castro station.
The cause of the incident was a
mechanical failure on a switch.
We had been switching a train
back at castro, and the switch
would not go back to its normal straight position that the main line trains use.
This switch was inspected
recently by both rail
maintenance and signal crews but clearly there was something missed in terms of alignment of
the switch that we should have
been able to address.
We did make sure that we were
proactively making
announcements on both subway and vehicles. and we also deployed staff to
nearby stations, out to west
portal and embarcadero throughout the staff to do what we could do provide information. We did have bus shuttles running as soon as we could get them working. So we haven't fully evaluated
the situation.
We had prepositioned some
maintenance in the subway to be able to better respond to issues such as these, but it sounds like we had some staffing issues and communication issues that didn't get the folks on the ground fast enough to the switch in order to either manually or permanently fix it.
We think that we'll need to change our inspection routines because we -- as I said, we
should have been able to identify this issue.
There are a number of other
kind of issues that as we work
through this particular
closure, there are other
changes that we will make. I do want to note that on the upside, before today in the
last week, 1.5 weeks, we've had very good performance in the
subway, and that's because
we've had the t-3rd changes. We've been very good managing around that construction
project, making sure our best
trains were utilized for service every day.
We added P.C.O.S starting last
week to support for increased support at west portal. This is something I think we heard last week at the board
workshop, particularly in the
P.M.P. To expedite trains
exiting the subway where they
also get bogged down, and then,
we also added P.C.O.S at the
A.M. Peak. I think that's really been helpful, and of course
generally, we'll continue to implement subway improvements,
and we'll continue monthly updates on muni service. So generally, the rail service has been good, but today, it was a significant example where
it was not, and our riders
certainly -- many were very inconvenienced about that, and we're doing everything we can
to prevent any such reoccurrence. >> very good.
Thank you.
Any questions for -- director rubke?
>> is there any way for the public to reach out and provide
input if they're not being insepted on the trains or otherwise? >> yeah.
Let me ask our communications director to speak to what kpanl
channels we have for the public to provide feedback.
>> candace sue, director of feedback and marketing.
So the work that we're doing is intercept based mainly, but we
have been continuing to accept feedback through our other channels including twitter and
then also through 311, which we had received actually quite a bit of feedback and are using all of that data together, so
we'll accept e-mails, letters
written or 311 comments or of course the personal feedback. Thank you. >> and we've asked our citizens advisory committee to weigh in on this issue and they're in
the process of doing that.
Director brinkman?
>> yes. Thank you.
Director reiskin, muni taking over for B.A.R.T., we're using our muni buses to do this, correct? >> that's correct. >> and we can do that because
we have enough buses, it's not going to impact our other service to our customers?
Why yeah. This is a time away between four and five in the minute
morning, so it's at a time when we're able to do this, and B.A.R.T. Is supporting this.
>> good. It goes on for quite a while, doesn't it?
>> 3.5 years. >> 3.5 years, so this is going to be a lot of use of our buses
at a time when we need them.
We'll definitely get them back.
I just wanted to make sure that
us using our buses to do that, which is totally great. We can do that because we have
enough buses in the system, and we can do that. >> that's correct.
The compensation that we
provide for really any time we provide bus service is not just
the hourly operations rate but
it incorporates maintenance
costs, too, so we just want to make sure we're recovering and being made whole any time we use muni buses. >> thank you.
>> director.
>> Director Torres: toers I just
I -- director tore -- torres.
>> I just wanted to say thank you for the way you handled all
of the issues. So thank you. [Inaudible]
>> well, so it's always hard
for us to sustain an enforcement presence because the enforcement demands that we have around the city are
greater than the people that we have to do them.
But we're doing that to see how effective it is.
If it's effective and we don't
have other alternatives, we will seek ways to sustain it.
We have been seeking P.C.O.S downtown to facility tate ate muni.
If it's the only way to make muni service more reliable,
we'll figure out a way to do it. [Inaudible]
>> there's one data point we'll add to the mix. >> okay.
We'll go to public comment in a second. I'd like to ask two questions or address two issues.
First of all, on the seating configuration, I appreciate you doing this. I said that a lot of our focus
is going to be on customer feedback, which is great.
That should be the number one data point, but there is another data point that's
really important here, and
that's the overall efficiency of the train. I think the first move from the
one seat to the two seats in
the L.R.V. Is there would be more people standing, and I
certainly think that that's the
reason behind the new york sort
of longitudinal seats.
I personally don't see it. I see people standing two apart. And that's what's happening.
Especially when there's only
two support poles, that's all that can stand safely. So until you're going to change
the support mercnisms, which
I'm not in favor of, you've
changed seating availability is
is -- availabilities with no
change in support mechanisms.
So as you look at the seating capacity gsh
capacity -- at the seating, I
would not look only at customer feedback, because customers are
only going to be focused on the
comfortableability of the lead. If that doesn't lead to added
capacity, which is the primary transit benefit of the new
seating capacity, then I think that really counsels in favor
of going back to the original
muni design of two and two.
But please consider that other factor.
Then, as far as the castro switch issue, director torres was very gracious in his
comments, and I always appreciate you take these
things on the chin and come to us with transparency and tell
us what's going on, but I have
to say, that's unacceptable. I know the report will come to us at the next meeting.
I know we'll have some time estimates between west portal
and embarcadero, and I hope those will show that the service has improved since we at least started asking for this.
But the castro switch issue, as you know -- as I break my microphone, is an issue that we've been hearing about for years ago.
It's not as if you've done nothing about it. You have a rapid response team
on the ground there to deal with it.
And yet, today, with you heard
maybe it -- maybe, we heard today maybe it wasn't dealt
with properly.
Would it make sense to have the people from the rapid response team or at least their supervisor here to hear from
them? Would that help educate the board? I'm not demanding it. It's not my place to demand it, but I'm saying one of the purpose of these reports is to let folks know we understand
what a big deal a 25-minute service disruption in the castro station is on tuesday, and that we have the resources
there and that they have a plan
to deal with it. I'm not sure my fellow riders
feel that way, and so I'm just giving you some ideas at the
report that we're going to have next meeting along the lines of
what this board and I have personally requested, I think
we're going to want some input about this incident because
I've been requesting castro
street switches for years, and
you know it's an issue. All right.
Public comment, Miss Boomer? >> yes.
One member of the public has presented a speaker card.
This is an opportunity for
members of the public to present comment on what mr.
reiskin has just commented on,
not on other matters that May
or May not be before the board.
>> I'm astonished because I'm
asking for the report Mr.
Reiskin didn't make.
He fundamentally altered the
taxi situation at the airport.
Because potentially he has
added 161 medallions that are
not owned by anybody except the savings and alone company, and
you have entirely destroyed any
hope that the medallion holders
will not become insolvent, and
you will become a debtor to
millions and millions of dollars. So I would like you to explain
to me why you didn't even tell us. >> so as you know well --
>> no, I'm going back to public comment.
But he should have made an
announcement when he changed a public thing.
>> you've made your point very clear. Is there any further public comment?
Seeing none, we'll close public comment.
Item eight.
>> clerk: [Agenda Item Read].
Clerk
>> clerk: [Agenda Item Read].
>> clerk: we'll start with
francisco decosta followed by
robert chicanza.
>> commissioners, my name is
francisco decosta.
For the last 40 years, I've
been addressing environmental issues.
I would like this commission to
focus on a carbon footprint, a
real carbon footprint. the reason I say that is anyone can speak in generalities about
our operation, about our inventory, about mishaps, but
the important thing to note is health.
So when the dangerous
particulates affects us, more
are physically and mentally challenged, and the commissioners and the mayor -- and we don't have a toxicologist in this city, and
that's a problem with the health department.
We just can't be focused on
general topics, generalities that don't go anywhere. So anyone can see what I said.
But the solution is to give our
universities, our colleges
other experts who will
volunteer to address our carbon
footprint, and the congestion, despicable.
We cannot call this city a first-class city when we have the congestion that I've seen
with my own eyes.
Sometimes, I task it to Mr.
Reiskin so that he knows that
I'm' on top of things. >> next speaker.
>> good afternoon to the board.
On the 1st of February, you started a new program at the airport supposedly to give help
to the p drivers, the people
who had spent $250,000 to buy a medallions, which in the last
eight to ten years, you have done everything to defeat the cab industry so that the medallions generally have no value.
And you did it with spades because this program was
supposed to help the medallion
holders who had purchased
medallions and give them more revenue by giving them more rides at the airport.
But what did you do? Suddenly, out of the blue --
and nobody knows, you started
issuing the right for the
savings and loan company to run
p medallions with leased drivers.
Now this is going to be a catastrophe, not only for the
leased drivers because the total number of failures -- which you can never tell us
because it goes from one day to the other, but it's
approximately 710 medallions that you sold.
And since the rate of pickup at
the airport is probably 200 an
hour, at peak, 300, that these
medallion holders, if they go
there as their salvation are
going to sit there for probably 1.5 or two hours.
Plus, they're going to drive empty to the airport and back.
Round time, three hours. So they'll do three trips a day.
If they're lucky, they'll do
four, and then, they'll start
cheating and do five or six. >> thank you.
We've got your point.
>> clerk: thank you.
Tracey breeger.
>> and the name after that.
>> clerk: cynthia gomez. >> all right. Are you Miss Breeger?
>> I thought she called mike lee first. >> thank you.
I apologize, mike lee, the floor is yours. >> thank you, members of the board. I wanted to try to quickly share an experience I had the other day when I came over.
I was sitting in berkeley, and I thought hey, this might be a nice day to go to the beach. Nobody's going to be out there. It's kind of foggy and damp and
nobody likes us except us hard-core san franciscans, used to this.
So I jump on the B.A.R.T., and I jump on it, and go down to n,
and I go oh, oh, this hasn't
changed a lot.
Couple vacant storefronts. It doesn't look too bad.
Get all the way down to the
end, lo and behold, I can't get off the train. Why?
Because nobody told me 2k3w imps have to go to the front of
the bus, not the back. To medical he that's a culture
shock because I've been told that people of color go to the back of the bus.
So what happened was is that
they had to respot the train to try to figure out what was going on.
This is during the operators
lay time, instead of doing what
they're supposed to do, taking
a break, deal with me. The other thing was when I was coming back, just real quickly
to finish up, I noticed that there were limited places where
I can disembark. For instance, where the
platform is, I May have to go
ten blocks, for me, that's not
a big issue because I'm in a power wheelchair, but I can't imagine if you're in a manual,
and you have to go back for, like, a doctor's appointment,
but I'd like you to look into fixing that.
Make it more accessible for us.
>> thank you, Mr. Lee.
Thank you.
Miss Breeger, I apologize for
mixing you up, but the floor is years.
>> good afternoon. I'm here today to share some
concerns about the moscone
center garage development, and
ourselves in somcan, we've written you guys a letter.
But today I wanted to really focus on what we see as the
very deeply flawed nature of the decision making process around this project. So accountable development requires that projects contribute to the social and economic well-being in the neighborhoods of which they're
located, and especially support and contribute to those most impacted by the project and impacted by the critical and extreme inequality in san francisco. There's no question that this moscone center garage development has a huge potential and I would say
obligation to use this
incredibly highly valuable
public land for the good of san franciscans especially those who need it most. Getting it right means that these communities must be involved in the decision making in a meaningful way.
So this is an immensely lucrative project for whatever developer gets chosen. Since it's on public land, we
need to make sure the selected developer is ready to support
the community and be a good neighbor. The only way to ensure that the public benefits -- that the
project benefits the community equitiablely and to make sure that the -- is to make sure
that the most directly impacted communities have a very clear
role in the decision making. So specifically, we're calling for a suspension in the
decision making of this project
until a meaningful and transparent community effective process can be established.
This includes holding community
forums and have at least one community representative and
labor representative be a part of the evaluation panel. >> thank you.
>> clerk: thank you.
>> Miss Gomez, well
confidential -- welcome.
>> good afternoon. I sent I
a letter to the board
yesterday, and I urge you to think about the need for the
kind of transparency that our
allies are talking about, and for the need to think long and hard about the type of deal
that will impact the neighborhood and the community for decades to come, and to really think about what kind of development partner you want to
choose and to really think about how this project can serve the needs of all san franciscans in terms of jobs, in terms of housing. So this is not on your agenda today, and I know that you're
not able to comment, but I want to, again, just echo that we've
raised concerns yesterday, we raised them previously, we
raised them in August of 2018,
and we will seek an opportunity to raise them if and when this comes back on the agenda. We want to heed the all of our
allies for a much more defined community presence in the decision over what is publicly-held land. Thank you.
>> thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Welcome. >> hi. Good morning, commissioners.
My name is katrina lee wong.
I'm the cultural director for soma filipinas.
We are bringing up collective concerns about the decision
making process regarding the moscone garage development
project on third street.
Soma filipinas strives to
provide a platform for
"politico" residents to work
together in creating a dis --
filipina residents to work
together in creating vibrant communities. [Inaudible] >> -- between the developers bidding for the space.
The developers that are desiring the moscone garage center will provide by a conventional hotel but the
community at least should also
consider thorough coordinations. Soma filipinas, together with our community members here,
demand the following.
That sfmta and O.T.A. Suspend
the process until a meaningful decision process can be made,
that sfmta hold at least two community forums and require attendance from all four
bidding developers, and that at
least one general community member and one labor representative be included in the recommendation panel, but we'd also like you to keep in mind that the district must be considered for developers, including plans for local targeted hire, that the community must see the details for affordable housing on
behalf of the developers plans
and our continued search for
open community space.
>> thank you. [Inaudible] >> hello. David wu with the south of
market community action
organization. The process that is currently
being undertaken by sfmta by
proposed development at moscone center garage is completely unacceptable and lacked community input. The fact that this is happening on public land makes sfmta's
lack of engagement that much worse.
Any public land that's under
going development must undergo this process. Transparency with the public is
something that has been greatly
lacking from sfmta.
We have seen sfmta planning on
top of communities rather than
working with them including the
scooter, ride share, and other programs. Questions remain about the types of public benefits that will come with this development. City must maximize the opportunity for public benefits
on this public site. Public land should be fore public benefit, period. The affordable housing being proposed must be deeply affordable and meet the needs of low-income residents as well as working families. There must be planning for
family sized units for people
that are on-site and accessible for the neighborhood.
We ask for a project on this site that greaty increased
community benefits. Thank you. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please. Miss March teen
inovich, thank you. >> -- specifically, we demand the following, that there are
at least two public community forums with sfmta staff and
representatives from all developers present.
That at least one community member and one labor representative are formally
included as members of the evaluation panel and formally part of the decision making process to recommend a developer to the sfmta board.
And that there is a more
meaningful incorporation of community benefits into the decision making criteria, including making this criteria
worth more than 5% of the
overall evaluation. We refuse to allow community benefits to be an after thought in this process.
There must be a clear and strong path for maximizing the good jobs on this site.
The developer and operators must incorporate strong and enforceable goals for targeting
hire, retention, and promotion and support for workforce development and training. Given the terrible track record
of marriott hotels and their treatment of workers, we are calling on the city to not
reward this applicant with an
extremely profitable development on public land on the moscone garage site. Thank you. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker.
>> teresa imperial, barry
toronto, mary Mcguire. >> hi. My name is teresa imperial.
By the way, first of all, I'm glad that you guys discussed about the castro switch because I was one of those passengers
that got on the l line at
quarter to 9:00 and didn't get
to downtown at 10:00 -- 10:10,
if anything, so I'm glad that
that's being discussed, but that's a really big issue. I'm here standing with other
community folks regarding the moscone garage development?
First of all, we also want to make sure that you understand
that this is a public land.
Last -- 2014, there is a
surplus city property ordinance
in which underutilized public land sites are required recreation for affordable housing, education, etc.
So -- and one of the example, if you guys don't know what's
going on -- affordable housing,
455 fell street is up for applications and that is a
public land site.
So there's about 72 units in
that.
So that ordinance should be implemented.
And on top of it, there is no
transparency process with the
community at all. Tieco actually invited the community to come in with other
developers in there, and we waited for about an hour, and no one came.
This should be the transparent
process and having -- dialogue with the committee -- community should be happening right now.
But no, we're not hearing anything, from sfmta and even
the supervisor haney's office
are not hearing from this, as well. So transparency and accountability should be first on this. Thank you.
>> thank you very much.
Mr. Toronto, welcome.
>> I'm sure you saw my e-mails
that I sent. Kay lied to you, she lied to us, she lied to the public. I don't appreciate using false statistics, missing -- leaving
out -- leaving out information,
and failing to disclose about
these medallions from the san francisco credit un down, what, is she going to continue to
hide it from us?
We see each other, we talk to each other on the streets. Do you know about this?
Not until you probably got the e-mail that was shared between us.
I think we just all deserve a response, an explanation, and
we should have a hearing.
Yes, there was an amendment
that allowed for this to happen.
But why aren't other companies given the same opportunity?
I asked my manager, were any -- yes, there were other
medallions closed, but there
was never any opportunity to
lease the medallions from the san francisco credit unions? Do they get any credit, how much are they leased for? Who gets to lease them? There's a lot of questions.
Instead, the enforcement in the city is lax because you're using an investigator at the
airport to baby-sit us. One -- your investigators in
the city that you pay for. Also, there's a policy of lot two.
Once lots three and four are empty, it should automatically go into three and four instead
of sitting empty until enough medallions show up in lot four. There's got to be changes and
you're treating us like k4rd rap.
And you should know it's sneaky, and I'm going for
public records and everything. [Inaudible] >> commissioner Mcguire, welcome back. >> hello. Good afternoon.
I want to address -- when --
when kay torin had her posted meetings, in item six, it
called for more taxi stands.
Michael harris created a policy for more taxi stands in red zones, so what happened to that? It's never been mentioned in
all these discussions.
I drove around on saturday
night for 1.5 hours from about 8:00 to 9:30.
I started, I dropped off at pier 39. I drove through the city.
I ended up on castro street,
and market -- at market and
castro, and finally, I had an order clear out on washington. That's how bad I needed an order. This is a industry that bans
plastic straws and you're -- a
city that bans plastic straws,
and you're allowing this to happen?
You don't even have a platform
at the wharf.
This medallions, I grew up -- when I was a little girl in the south, and I remembered, when
we had a swimming pool and
whites were allowed on one side and blacks were allowed on the
other side, and I didn't really understand it because I was so young. But this -- one person pointed
out to me, a passenger -- are
they going to have segregated bathrooms at the airport, or
the p medallions get to use the bathroom at the airport before
the k medallion owners? And once any medallion sold in
your program, it's going to be a p.
So at some time, the majority
of the medallions are going to be purchased medallions, and
we're right back where we started.
As far as corp. Orate corporate sales, who's going to buy a medallion when they know you can change the classification at any time. >> thank you. Mr. Spain? >> yeah. I'd like to talk about the
basic economics of operating a cap. Not driving one, how much it costs.
The first one is $1,000 of insurance.
The second major cost is about $400 in deappreciation.
you have to buy almost a new car. It'll last four or five years, and by the time you're done
with it, it's worthless. Then, there's the upkeep of the car.
It takes about $400 to keep a
car on the street because of
changing of oil and tire changes, and driver's screw up.
And the car, you have to get
them repaired otherwise they can't be on the street.
If the driver's at fault, you have to accept responsibility.
And then, there's the money you
have to pay to the city, about
$1200, and if you're operating yourself, you have to pay to the company for the color, right?
If the company operates the cab
themselves, they don't charge
you that money. Now, what does all that come to?
That comes to over $2,000.
Now, if I'm a driver, how much
do I pay to the company?
If I pay 1500, the company is under water. The company hasn't made any money. The owner of the cab isn't going to get any money, so you
almost have to be at least $80
a day rate in order to break
even in this business, and I --
and I guarantee you drivers, if
you ask them to pay $80 or
more, if they can go to the airport, yes. If they can't go to the airport, it's probably going to be a no. The cabs are going to sit there. Then, the company is going to
say to the owner of the cab, take the cab back because we can't even shift it out. So what's going to happen?
You have a ten-day rule in this city that if you don't operate
your cab within ten days -- [Inaudible]
>> -- you're going to get revocations.
>> we have a -- your views are important, but so are everyone
else's, and that's why we have
an equal time rule.
>> clerk: rachel lastimoso, mark gruberg.
Those are the last two speaker
is that have turned in cards on this topic. >> good afternoon.
I'm speaking on behalf of san
francisco's filipino cultural
heritage district in regards to
the moscone center garage.
At a meeting months ago, bids had not been processed, and the
timelines for the hotel were shared.
As a cultural district, we shared the idea for a multimedia performing arts complex at this meeting, and considering the project is
within the legislated boundaries of the cultural
heritage district, and in close proximity to the other cultural
and ethnic aspects, plus, the 100-plus years of filipinos in soma and san francisco, we had a conversation about how the
moscone garage would be an
ideal location for an arts
complex and received a positive response from the city's representatives. [Please stand by]
>> taking from one group of drivers to another is not going solve the underlying problems.
the only thing that will do that
is to create more retiredship --
ridership for taxis and almost a year and a half ago we wrote to
the board with a series of ideas on the ridership. The simplest of which is give us more taxi stands.
Nothing has been done about any of these ideas.
More taxi stands.
Vouchers for city employees so they can use taxis instead of having an expensive city
vehicle.
Bring taxis on to the clipper
car and escort ways in the muni. None of this has been done. Thank you.
>> Commissioner: thank you very
much, Mr. Rubering. Next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: that's the last person
with a speaker card but there May be an additional person.
>> Commissioner: is anyone want
to speak that didn't line up a side. >> I'm President Of the taco group and for 40 years we've been building affordable housing
and been involved in at least a
dozen developer selection
processes for the parcels.
Yours is the most recent.
First we absolutely want a transparent process. In particular, because you
haven't done it, the issue this paper addresses requiring the same community benefit package
of development in central sow --
soma be applied to this as well though it's on the boundary or
because it was cut out of the central soma plan by the city
several years ago.
That be required for this developer as well. They're important community benefits.
I want to address the political feasibility of the project. If we oppose this project, if
you jam a developer down the throat which is the track you're on and we oppose the project
when it goes to the board of supervisors, we have the votes to stop you, period.
And if you got past that point the planning commission has to
approve a hotel development in that development you May have
the votes but we have the
ability to oppose the impact
report and drag it out as long as you want us to do it. We're in court now. I need you to be realistic. You can't do this to the community.
You have to include us in a transparent open way in the
process of picking the developer first. They're not all the same.
Some work with communities well
while others do not. That's what's in front of you.
It's time for you to change the approach. Thank you.
>> Commissioner: thank you, very
much. Okay. Public comment is closed.
We move on to the next item. Actually, before we move on it
the next item, if I May just
address two issues with you. Assuming there's no other board members who wish to. One, obviously we heard a lot of
from the taxi industry and issues about transparency.
I ask if Mr. Turn since he's not the general comments could be passed along to her. I know there's policy issues
here but transparency to our
valued taxi drivers say must and if she can know those issues are there to be addressed.
I didn't want to ask about the issue Mr. Lee raised which seems
like a pressing issue.
I assume the issue because the
"n" is a two-car train when it
pulls into the platform at the
beach the disabled this disabled portion is in the front and can't serve is that the issue? >> that's the issue with our key
stops throughout the system.
The system designed is not a universal design so it requires the use of the front door.
>> Commissioner: and I think Mr. Lee was gracious and said I wish I would have known. I don't know personally.
I regret I haven't focussed on this more personally. Is there a communication plan
that lets folks in wheelchairs
know, he came from the east bay and came on the downtown stop
and could have boarded either train.
Is there messaging to let a person in a wheelchair know? >> I don't think there's
information real time for that.
>> I can chime in with my two cents on this. First, my experience is the drivers are usually trained --
like if I board in the subway anywhere but the front I've had
drivers come back and tell me to get to the front of and that
doesn't happen here and so
that's a manslaughter -- it's a mistake and it'd be better to
work on better communication to our drivers because that
shouldn't have shapd. Happened. >> there's stencils we can put on the platform floor.
We can bring this up. It's a great issue to raise and one we can do better on.
>> and to Mr. Lee's credit it's just a communication issue so thank you for addressing this. Mr. Lee this is how we learn about these things so thank you
for coming down and telling us.
I will say thank you I can't let
you speak more.
Mike will crack a joke anyway and just did.
Thank you for keeping it light.
With that we'll move ton item 10.
>> Clerk: the consent calendar.
All items on the consent calendar are considered to be
routine unless a member of the
public or board wishes to sever
an item and have it separately discussed. I'm not received an indication
from a member of the public or board any item should be receivered receivered -- severed today. >> second.
>> Commissioner: those in favor aye. Any opposed? Okay.
>> Clerk: moving on to our
regular agenda item 11 approved
traffic and restrictions on
fulton street on the bowdoin
street and university street on
the perimeter of the university
of mound reservoir as follows.
>> we're bringing you a proposal
a simple but controversial
proposal to pose the oversized vehicle overnight parking restrictions around the four
sides of the university mount reservoir. You have already heard from neighbors at previous board meetings in public comment and
we alouded to -- alluded to the location being a concentration of oversized vehicle. Over the past year the problem has become more pronounced. I'll make my comments brief because we have members of the
public that want to address you
and bring testimony to you and
have the director of homelessness and supportive
housing who can tell you what his team has brought to this
particular area and city wide
and carolyn goosen chief of
staff from supervisor hilary ronin's office will be here to bring you comments.
Again, this is a very simple
tool where duely ally posted no
vehicle longer than 22 feet or
taller than 7 feet May be parked between midnight and 6:00 A.M.
Or they get a ticket and it's
about $110 per citation these
days.
In your staff's evaluation of
the situation in addition to enforcement attention bringing
to bear what we could by law, whether it was street cleaning
or the 72-hour rule, we've done
what we could with enforcement
in place and I and others have
observed as many as two dozen
large vehicles, RVs, campers, some commercial vehicles, let's
recognize it's not just inhabitable vehicles. And having heard from the
community repeatedly including
two meetings convened by supervisor ronin which were
attended by at least 100 people
each, Mr. Peskin was there for
those and it was a large and
passionate crowd of neighbors calling on the mtab to resolve
this issue of lots and large lots vehicles parked around the reservoir. We have worked with the
department of homelessness and supportive housing to bring
attention, outreach and services to the folks in those vehicles
before coming to you with this
proposal to regulate.
And perhaps I should just pause
here and let Dr. Kaczynski come forward. Carolyn goosen. >> good afternoon.
Happy lunar new year, commissioners. Supervisor ronin would have
loved to have been here herself but she's in a meeting and I
wanted to share a letter supervisor ronin has written for you all and would like to hand
it to you and read it into the record.
Dear, mtab commissioners, I am
sharing my support to in the overnight parking ban to apply to the four streets that
surround the perimeter of the
university mount reservoir. While I am supporting the ban today, I'm also clear that we as
a city have failed to come up
with a comprehensive solution to
the tragedy of vehicular homelessness. More than 400 individuals an
families sleep in their cars and RVs on san francisco city streets each night often one step away from losing their vehicle and sleeping on the sidewalk.
For years the city's approach has been to ban vehicles on
streets without overarching city policy.
It is in fact the proliferation
of these bans all over the city
that has led to the situation we
currently have in the portola
where the city is being inundated with 20 to 30 cars
each night and it's unfair the
neighbors have to bear the brunt
of the homelessness and the
city's ineffective response to the crisis. For the past many months I've
looked at alternative ways to address the problem and worked
with the mtab and department of homelessness in how to keep the
area clear from the many RVs that have become accustomed to parking in the reservoir and attempted to work on a
legislative solution to
vehicular homelessness with supervisor brown to require the
city to have a vehicular navigation program.
While I support the pilot, it's
estimated in speaking with
various agencies to serve only
30RVs at a maximum.
Nowhere near the capacity we will need.
I'll be introducing amendments. Unhoused residents living in their vehicles deserve to feel safe and should be navigated
into services, benefits and
hopefully more dignified housing options. We need real comprehensive
solutions to the issue of vehicular homelessness.
>> Commissioner: thank you very
much and thank the supervisor for sending along comments which
were clear and hopeful.
Andy, how are we proceeding?
>> thank you, chair.
I am acting as emcee here and I
don't want to get in the way of supervisor kaczynski on what his team is doing and the larger
effort to coordinate.
>> Commissioner: wonderful. Okay. You need to work on your intro
more of an ed Mcmayhon but welcome back.
>> thank you for inviting me to speak. I want to speak about the work we've been doing in the area and
would be speak with the legislation being introduced and
what our city wide response has been if you would like that and share additional data I did not have last time I spoke before you.
So speaking about this particular area, we started working the area at the
beginning of December.
And encountered approximately 24
vehicles that had people living in them.
We did outreach for four weeks
in that area reaching out leaving door hangers saying if you weren't here when we came
buy call this number and we'll arrange to speak with you and provided information about the
many rv parks within a 50-mile radius of san francisco and provided other information. When we were able to make contact with individuals we
provided an assessment of those willing to be assessed to try to
get them in the queue for
housing and/or for shotter.
Desh -- shelter.
We did reach out efforts in those days and nights.
The census of vehicles went from
23 at the original rou outreach
to 12 and it concluded December 31st.
There were a number of tows that
occurred that sf pd and mtab worked on.
I don't have more details because I don't have that information.
Currently we have three families
still there who we are actively
working with in providing services.
Including in our team for areas impacted by a large number of
people in vehicles we have
catholic charities with an outreach team that focuses on families that are homeless.
The vast majority rin -- are in
RVs and they're have them on a
pathway toward housing but we do think there's probably three to five vehicles that have people
in them that are in need of assistance and services.
We certainly would support the idea of the ban at some point but feel we need maybe another three to four weeks before we
will be fully feeling like we've
done all we could possibly do to
provide assistance to the people
in that area and also would want
to make sure during that time
we're coordinating closely with mtab because at the end of the day if we do the work and find place to go we don't want the
area to be reencamped to coordinating with the placement of signs is really important.
I think we had great success on
dooley street doing that and had
a number households get placed
into permanent housing as a result of that work and after the signs went up and there's
only one h
rv left and a legally left vehicle that belongs to a neighbor and the streets are clear and I think the neighbors are happy with the work we've done.
>> Commissioner: that's a superb and optimistic presentation.
thank you for your work.
It's gratifying to see your results and how much joy you're getting from your results. Directors, here's how I'd like
to proceed, if there are any
questions for either member of
staff or the city government
please say so now, if not I'd like to go to public comment and
proceed to discussion and vote.
Any questions?
Director rubke?
Hopefully a quick question.
You said you thout -- thought
three to four weeks is what was needed for additional service
and wondering if we can be told
about the time line if we pass the legislation today. >> of course, director.
If you approve today, anything
is done until I write up a work
order and I'll coordinate with
director kaczynski's team. We were ready to post signs and
were held off and in close
coordination with the hot team
and hsa folks.
>> Commissioner: but to be clear
to our neighbors the idea is
your mandate is to post signs
after you've exhausted the outreach and anticipation is
that would be four weeks after passage. >> that's right and at the
pleasure of this board, promise
and commitment and we will not begin enforcement until we get the sign everything has been done to help folks.
>> Commissioner: but the anticipated time frame is four weeks currently? >> yes.
>> Commissioner: okay.
Director rubke, any other questions?
>> on the proposed legislation
which authorized navigation centers for potentially 30
families or residents, have you
been involved in this legislation and there were amendments referenced.
What's your sense all 300 to 400
families could be accommodated in this legislation.
>> back in November mayor breed with supervisor safai and brown
issued a press release stating
we'd be starting up the vehicle encampment resolution team which
we did in December and would be opening a triage center for people who are living in their
vehicles that will serve two purpose. One is our preferences that people were in vehicles. We certainly understand they do
not want to give this asset up.
It's probably their most valuable and they can go to a navigation or shelter but for people who want to choose to
stay in their vehicles, we will allow a certain amount of people
to stay in those vehicles for up
to I don't want to put a time
limit but until we can find a pathway towards something better for those individuals. The important thing to point out
though is when we did the survey, I presented the results
to you last time I spoke.
There were 432 vehicles and 313
313RVs and did a survey of 12% of the people staying in those vehicles to understand better what their situations were.
The survey design was developed but our data and performance
team and the surveys were completed by trained social
workers who spoke to I can't remember the sample size, I think around 50 people.
what we found is only 18% of the individuals we spoke to say they
were willing to be assessed for housing.
And only a total of about 50% said they'd be willing to engage in services with the department
of homelessness and supportive housing. We believe the number of people
on the streets on the time or sleeping in vehicles needing assistance is about 200 and believe many could be assisted while on the streets.
We'd like time to have our vehicle encampment team be able to work for the next six months and try to reduce numbers that
way but having a small pilot
triage center is something members support and members of the supervisors but it's important it be done in a
measured way given there's 75 homeless people in san francisco
and on any given night 20,000 any given year.
We want to focus our efforts on
the most vulnerable people those literally sleeping outdoors with no shelter at all.
Not to say this isn't a priority but it's a relatively small
percent of the homeless population so piloting something to see how it works is probably
the prudent way to go. The other thing is we can't guarantee everybody in their
vehicle is going to get housing. We house 50 people a week which are homeless which is something the city should be proud of but
who we decide to house is really based on their needs and how
long have they been homeless and
we do an acutity -- an acuity assessment and there's people in vehicles who meet that need but
we can't say all the housing resources will go to this population because we have found some folks out there who don't necessarily want or need that
type of assistance. I think what's being proposed currently and what the mayor
proposed back in November is a prudent and an effective way to proceed.
I think the work we've done has
shown we can do it in a humane way that meets the needs of
people and services the needs of our housed neighbors concerned about what's going on their street.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much. Any other questions?
I'm personally familiar with the neighborhood but it helps inform the discussion to the director's final point.
Can you tell us about the
neighborhood at issue, residential, population of children and other things that have factored into the decision for some board members. >> this neighborhood is almost
all residential. The vehicles are concentrated on the four streets we've
identified as would be posted
with no over-sized or overnight camping.
I also believe there's a lot of commercial vehicles that park
there as well.
I would tell you I believe post of -- most of the people in the
vehicles now in that area have tried to be good neighbors.
They're taking a parking space
and theoretically breaking the law by sleeping overnight in
their vehicles and living in a residential neighborhood and has
had an impact but I'm sure some neighbors have had their own negative experiences they'll share but our engagement with most of the people who are
staying out there are trying their best especially the families.
The other thing I should say and
I'm sorry I forgot to mention,
that when we find a family that
has dependent children who are offered shelter immediately and at that moment if they're willing.
Our priority needs to be on the most vulnerable which are children 18 and under or
individuals with medical conditions that are sick and in their vehicles.
We've been focussing on those I know from neighbors many feel this has been disruptive in their neighborhood.
>> Commissioner: my question wasn't to suggest there's bad guys but there's competing needs and I thought you expressed that
very well in your comments earlier. It's a residential neighborhood. There's children present.
The proposed restriction would be along blocks that are residential in nature. Director torres question for
staff about we go to public comment. >> I was informed there was an element school in this
neighborhood that would be con
converted into a homeless
shelter from 7:00 P.M. To 7:00 A.M. Is that still on the proposal? >> not that I'm aware of. There are schools in the area there's three.
We do have a shelter that we're currently piloting in the mission district open in the evenings but no immediate plans
to expand that program.
>> how is that blan working? -- plan working?
>> working well except
interestingly enough we haven't
had the demand for the shelter beds- beds. It's been very under utilized so we're looking to the school to
determine welcome hether we should continue or expand or change
somehow.
The school community has been great and there's questions on capacity but it's not disrupted the school and for the families it has served, it's been
successful for them.
>> could you use your microphone?
>> in response to director rubke's comment with timetable
you said you need three more weeks. To do what? >> to continue.
I'd like us to continue doing outreach to the vehicles still
there and specifically focus on
the families there to continue to offer shelter. I can't speak specifically about
each family's situation but we're working with them and would like more time to work with them and try to help them find a permanent place to live.
>> lastly, at the previous
hearing I asked a question about
programs in the santa barbara
and east palo alto, are you still of the opinion the
programs are not working? With church parking lots and other --
>> the program in santa barbara has been successful. There's been other programs
around the state that have been
very unsuccessful. I think our department's focus
is on getting people the highest
needs individuals who are on our
streets into permanent housing.
Whether we want to create safe parking programs in the city I
think is a public policy issue
that isn't necessarily for me to speak on.
It focuses on our clients and
how to get them the help they
need whether we want to create
an alternative form of housing for folks who can't afford to live here and choose to live in their vehicles is not something I'm an expert enough to speak
on.
>> you're saying the negotiations took place with the
board of supervisors districts are affect?
>> yes. I do think what we need to focus on as a city are the people who
are the sickest and most vulnerable living in cars and streelths who have no other --
streets and who have no other
alternative to do so and think
of enforcement policies for people there who are working and can't handle the commute or their vehicles aren't equipped to handle the commute. There's lots of types of people in the street. For every person out there there's another story.
I'd lake to focus on the -- like
to focus on the sickest and most vulnerable and get them out of
their vehicles into a place of
safety and relief the neighbors impacted.
the bay view police stations and then it will be easier to meet
the needs of the remaining focus and we should think about what
we want to do as a city to address the needs of people who
maybe don't formally see themselves as needing services
but are still on our streets. I think you addressed the problem.
>> Commissioner: thank you,
director torres and jeff.
How many public comment cards do we have?
>> Clerk: eight.
>> Commissioner: I assume that includes everyone. If you want to speak on this item and haven't submitted a card, please do so. Perfect. Two minutes a speaker. Please call the first speaker.
>> Clerk: ronnie marshal
followed by spencer hudson.
>> Commissioner: welcome. >> good afternoon noon, directors.
I'm a native and my wife say
native daughter and we're in our
home we own directly impacted by the oversized vehicles for over
30 years. We're a small neighborhood. Throughout my community none of
us that I know of don't have great compassion for the homeless issue. This is not a homeless issue.
This is an issue of oversized vehicles and people living in them.
We have some commercial vehicles
everything from trucks, campers,
vans, RVs and motor homes. I support and urge you to pass
the parking resolution before you today.
R. it will at least around the university mount both reservoirs
help with that situation, create
safety for the reservoir and the neighbors directly across the
street on all those blocks.
I want to add to that that it doesn't take any foresight to see what will happen once the
signs go up is that the blocks
just won direction or the other immediately adjacent to those.
We're talking about on the east
side of the south basin the 700 block of whalen and 500 block of
hamilton and 700 block of woolsey are open and they'll go
therap and the 1100, 1200 and
1300 block of whalen and on the
east side of north basin have
you the playground.
The real issue most of us see here is the degrading of the
quality of life for us residents
and homeowners and a major health and safety issue.
I urge you to pass it.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much for coming down today.
We appreciate your input. Next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: spencer hudson. Mike lee.
>> before I start I'd like to
let Mr. Refk skin know if you think
the muni service is other than
abysmal you are woefully misinformed.
I'm spencer hudson and I oppose any expansion of parking restriction for people living in their houses. I'm a home owner. I pay taxes in this city.
I think it's a disgrace we are wasting funds chasing people
around the city confiscating their property and towing their homes. it's pathetic.
What you should be doing is
concentrating on providing houfg, support and services for all on the streets regardless of
whether they are living
completely unhoused or in a
shelter or whether they are in a
tent or living in a vehicle. Towing people's vehicles, stealing their homes is unconscionable. You should be ashamed of yourselves for even thinking of
some of these restrictions on
people who are unhoused.
I'm especially concerned about the motivation for your comments on whether or not there are children living in these neighborhoods.
I sincerely hope, sir, you are not implying people living in vehicles put children at risk
any more than anybody else in our neighborhood.
Thank you.
>> Commissioner: next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: mike lee.
Alan mafey. Is Mr. Mike lee here?
>> yes.
Thank you. We've agreed to disagree on many issues over the years but I hope this board is listening to what
jeff is talking about as a
reasonable and rationale regulation you're considering. Don't listen to this guy.
He's bound and determined to run homeless people off. Once you sign the mandate, he
can do anything he wants.
I don't hear repercussions about
what previous sides about will
because once you side that he's got carte blanche. I'd like to also point out to
you, by giving jeff the four
weeks he needs, it's not a lot of time.
Right now in oakland we are
talking about creating the same type of program you're creating here in san francisco, same
parking program, 150 vehicles
are going to be staged.
It took about $3.5 flon -- $3.5 million and $5 million and they're talking about constructing it and talking
about making it $300.
You don't have to look to santa barbara. Look across the east bay. Those are the innovative solutions we need.
We don't need a stick.
Let's be reasonable and rationale. Give jeff the time he asked for
as a bridge to go ahead and post the reservoir.
Last thing I'd like to say is
homeless people do not eat children, okay.
We don't eat children.
I'm a former homeless individual
and I never ate or threatened a
child and a take real offense
when there's a hint we do so.
I'd rather eat your dog by the way, I'm korean.
Thank you for your time.
>> Clerk: sloane kelly and
melody. >> good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to address the mtab board.
I'd like to start off by
thanking matt laura and richard
kyro for keeping the
neighborhood positive to look to
a solution to keep oversized
vehicles from litter and dispensing human waste and taking advantage of the
neighborhood and would like to
thank supervisor ronin for keeping our concern at the forefront and working with the neighborhood and agencies to find a resolution to this
growing problem in the pore tola
and the details designated for
signage fall short.
On page 2 paragraph 8 details
the streets which are to receive
the signs against large oversized vehicles.
It falls short to eradicate the problems. It needs to be the areas within the neighborhood including all streets surrounding the park.
On October 9, one day prior to
the last community meeting sfpd
made a sweep and towed some
motor homes between bacon and felton and they moved however they just parked around the corner on felton street.
This was acknowledged by
supervisor ronin during our December 10 meeting.
At least one motor home was back on the university street within
three days. The point I'm to make is if only half the streets are posted it will only push the issue to other streets within the neighborhood. Page 3 under alternatives considered acknowledges the neighborhood has requested a larger area be requested for signage in anticipation of the relocation of oversized vehicles.
However, the department of homelessness and outreach has
been limited to four sides and further outreach should be conducted before pre posing restrictions on other blocks.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: lo kelly, melody,
martha bridgeham.
>> Commissioner: welcome.
>> hi.
I'm flo kelly a volunteer with
the coalition on homelessness.
And I want to say I'm a
substitute teach three blocks from this area.
In December myself and another volunteer went to do outreach to folks who live in their vehicles
and in one of the really large
RVs we found a mother, her 4-year-old daughter and a
newborn who were being visited
by the san francisco homeless
prenatal and it made me sad to
think but I saw it's a gorgeous place.
She kept it very well.
And I let her know that her 4-year-old daughter could
actually come to E.R. Taylor if there was space in the preschool
program.
And I'm mentioning this family
because I want people to know
people who live in their houses
in the portola and I want you to know, these are real people.
These are real people. It's not them and us.
And I also want to point out
frankly anyone who's homeless is
breaking the law every night not
just in their vehicle with the laws and tent sweeps it's
against the law to be homeless.
There is definitely a need to
change these laws in for instance. We definitely have a huge
population living as if they were in a third-world country.
>> Commissioner: thank you Ms. Kelly.
>> Clerk: melody.
martha bridgeham, evan owski. >> thank you. My name is melody.
First every time I walk down the
street I've seen people I've
known formally sheltered in RVs now on the sidewalk in piles
stuff now in the rain.
A few wednesdays ago a woman
told he her vehicle was towed and said I feel like I'm losing
my mind.
Another woman who's rv was taken
was attacked with a knife
through her tent and remaining
property pilfered and destroyed.
You cannot imagine the mental anguish of without notice being
given 15 minutes to get out.
The city refers to this as a
team but I can tell you it is an army of people.
Two to four police officers, 10
trucks and several tow trucks, dhs, a team.
This is like 15 to 20 city officials that come and knock on
your door and publicly make a
spectacle of you and bullies you unless you're left standing on
the sidewalk in utter despair watching them seize your property with no power to stop them.
This is about humiliating and punishing people without resources.
I've been doing volunteering with the coalition against
homelessness and I want to ask you to please delay voting in
favor of this incremental further restriction.
I'm concerned the restrictions
are being treated piecemeal
though they're essentially systematically reducing the capacity of the city to house
people in the neighborhood in
the community as neighbors, as
good neighbors sometimes instead of the family flo mentioned who has a daughter who May be able
to go to school three blocks away.
Instead we're increasing the
likelihood vehicular residents
will be segregated and secluded
in a separate place and that's not good for democracy or being
an inclusive city community.
Segregation, inclusion, enclosure and telling people you can't be here, you must go there. There's a place that will take you in therefore you have to go
there.
We're looking at the possibility of the farm mentality and if
there's a way you can delay this vote until you figure out how
people can remain in offends -- neighborhoods and all be part of the same city it's very important. We need a city all one community.
Not a new institutional segregation system which is what we're pointing at today.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much.
>> Clerk: evan owski, barry
toronto and roberta sherman.
>> I work on issues with the democratic socialists of america
and sat on the November prop c steering committee.
We've done outreached to
unsheltered homeless people
including vehicle dwellers and
they face challenges including
the 72-hour rule and smog checks and insurance as well as insurance problems.
I spoke to one woman trying to
make ends meet in an rv who gets
a tow from a friend to keep
ahead of a 27 72-hour rule and
spoke to a trans woman who
doesn't feel safe in a shelter system.
And yet the city has been
increasingly cracking down with
bans targeting the san
franciscans in vehicles and with
respect to the work, offer of
services has been used as a
trojan horse. We all want people properly housed but there's simply not enough supportive housing available. More oversized vehicles bans are not a solution. Without a real solution we'll be back next month and the month
after discussing further bans.
I urge you to oppose these bands
and at the least wait until we
have a legislative solution
crafted with input from vehicle dwellers.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much.
Mr. Toronto.
>> Clerk: followed by maria sherman and david driver.
>> when I used to come I used to hear all the time and the bands are still going on. The proposals to ban.
i'd be a hypocrite to say I'd
feel uncomfortable in my
neighborhood near open space if
I had a group of RVs parked there.
I'd be uncomfortable too. The thing is there's got to be a solution. You can't just keep bringing
them up because they go some
where else and next topic's
about napoleon street and it's
probably a better spot for them
to be because all you have are
cab companies and industrial spaces. Not a lot of housing.
But the thing is that you have
do work win the director of --
with the director of
homelessness performing tucomo
lum and you can look that up
it's a jewish organization and I
appreciate andy thornily for bringing this to you and maybe
he can run the taxis because
he's run compassionately and instead of pushing them to another street and keep folling
them to another street and
another street work on finding a
space for them. Find a spot instead of keep
bringing the bans before you. It's constant. I've been following it for a long time and took a break
because I usually drive tuesday nights and I need sleep but
today I didn't get a lot of sleep so I'm not driving tonight.
The thing is let's work on a
solution and perform tucuno lum
and I commend andy thornily again for showing compassion in this area. And let's work together. Last thing, there's taxi drivers that sleep in their cars and
cabs because they have no place to live.
>> Commissioner: thank you.
>> Clerk: maria shulman, david driver.
Rich kyro.
>> if you give them tickets what
are they supposed to do.
>> Commissioner: next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: richard kyro and dustin nova is the last person with a speaker card.
>> hu for holding the meeting.
I live in the portola for two years and support the legislation before you.
I hope you vote for it. I was really surprised when I moved there from the upper
haight to see what was going on. It's just not the kind of thing
that happens in the upper haight
or richmond and I sent an e-mail
about this but if someone can
explain to me why the sun set reservoir deserves restrictions
but the university mount
reservoir doesn't.
There's a rationale explanation for that besides they got it first and we can't have it, I
would accept that but I don't
think there's a rationale explanation for it.
I hope you vote for it. Thank you very much.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much.
>> Clerk: rich kyro folled
-- followed by dustin nova.
>> thank you, I'm rich kyro and a voter carrier for te service
and have seen the detore ration -- deterioration in the neighborhood more so in the last two years.
All the things happening you would not this across the street
from your house. It's not really improving.
It went from 24 to 12 RVs and it will the same a week or two weeks from now. We need this resolved. If you're going to offer any
more time on this get a drop-dead deadline because the
residents are tired much all the riffraff and the safety and sanitation and it affects
property values and that May be superficial to some people but
we all play patches and the
taxes -- taxes paid are $1200 to $1500 and we're put back in the community and the people there are not helping out at all and that's part of it. There's no free rides.
Back in 2006 I suffered a
nervous breakdown and almost
lost my house and lost my 40 1k and I know how it is to go through these times.
I don't want to seem uncompassionate but you can't live somewhere you where you can't afford. You have to live within your means. I for the first time was thinking of relocating because
for a time there I was going lose my house. I got two kids in college. I just couldn't do it. I do have the compassion but people have to live within their means and if they can't do it here in san francisco, which is
one of the most highest priced place to live in the world, not just our country, it's time to
move.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much.
>> Clerk: justin nova.
>> my name is dustin nova a captain of the san francisco fire department in the excelsior district.
From a public safety perspective
the ra -- RVs have to go. I have a son. He wants to go ride his bike. I want to be able to feel safe he's going around the reservoir
and he'll be okay on the sidewalk without much traffic. Homeless aren't going to eat
them, I know that, but they sure
did offer him drugs.
He sure does have to go around garbage. Five gallon tanks of gasoline
and sewage on the street. It's disgusting and despicable
and I thank you very much for
considering this and so happy
it's come to fruition it's a possibility it will happen with the signs.
I just want a place where my children can go out and I can feel safe they'll be okay. I know my neighbors and who these people are. I don't know the people in the RVs.
I try to reach out and they say
go away or get out of here.
I don't want to dehumanize them.
I care about everybody but living in the neighborhood I
want my kids and neighbors and everybody to be safe and getting
the r Vs is okay.
It's not okay you have bans everybody gets stuck across the street from me. Not okay. Thank you for your time.
>> Commissioner: thank you, captain.
Any other public speakers?
Seeing none we'll close public comment. directors, time to discuss this or ask further questions of our
very able staff. >> I'll jump in here.
I'm delighted to hear we have so
many compassionate members of the public willing to show up and comment on the item. I think many speakers said
things on my mind including just
a very logistical reality that
if we make the ban on these streets, those RVs will go to the next street over and we'll come back here and have another
ban and then another ban.
The question's not been answered, where are people supposed to go. It's premature. Because of what we heard from
the people of housing and supportive services division they need three to for more
weeks to execute the process we all approved in the document you put forward which is to use a
more humane approach and see if there's ways to accommodate people's needs that way.
And given the comment from
supervisor ronin's staff about the legislation going before the board of supervisors today to
try to create that more holistic
solution so many public commenters spoke about.
To me this is a bit premature
and I move to continue this item
until the two objectives have
been accomplished that dhsh finishes their work and we can see a little bit of the
resolution of what's being discussed before the board of
supervisors today.
>> Commissioner: we have a
motion to table the item is that would that would be? >> a motion to continue and require a second. >> I second that motion.
>> Commissioner: a second from director rubke. Why don't we finish the discussion and come back to the pending motion. Other directors wish to comment on this item?
>> substitute motion.
>> Commissioner: I will allow
you to make any motion you want after this is resolved but address the issue which goes to
the substance of the motion.
>> director, no one else?
>> thank you. Thank you to everyone who came
down and Mr. Kaczynski and thornily.
As you can tell, this is difficult work. It seems like the work to reach
out to the people living in
their RVs has been quite successful in this area.
I would assume if we approve the
bans on he's streets the RVs will move to other streets and the work will continue to reach
out to these people and to help
them if they can accept help and
want to accept help.
I keep going back to the
fairness of parking resolution because it's fair to everyone this is a ban on oversized vehicles.
Can you tell us again, I believe
you said other alternatives were
offered such as rpp or a complete overnight ban. Is that true? Am I remembering correctly you looked into other options before
going to just an oversized vehicle ban? >> that's right. Andy thornily sustainable
division mtab.
this is part of the codified
guide abs you -- guidance you approved and we look at the problem you asked us to solve
and take up an assortment of tools and would time limits help something and something else.
A good principle, try to achieve multiple things with a swing and
not just one.
Ordinary daytime time limits, blanket overnight parking
restriction on the edge of the reservoir. We talked about rpp knowing that's a bigger thing we
wouldn't just bring forward une
unilaterally and the maybers are
used to leaving their cars
parked so none of those were satisfactory. If I might volunteer the
oversized vehicle in the parking
restriction is not directed ostensibly at overnight vehicles but dimensional and you heard
many commenters including the supervisor's office say some of the problem is commercial
vehicles left parked on the streets.
There's a food truck I see often. There are box trucks, moving trucks, things that are not appropriate for a residential neighborhood.
It's convenient to talk them up against the reservoir and leave them for a long time. The oversized, overnight
restriction would apply to them likewise. So it's a combined issue of things too big to be parking in
the neighborhood. >> thank you. These are difficult. I don't like the idea of
continuing it because I think
what we will accomplish by
continuing it can be accomplish
by Mr. Thornily said is not
request signage goes up until
the department has had time to do their work.
I don't like these at all but I
will ultimately support this.
>> Commissioner: director torres
you had a motion to make and upon reflection I realize I
should have let you make that. I apologize. Please go ahead. >> I vote to approve it.
>> Commissioner: I think what will happen procedurally is we'll vote on the motion to continue and if it passes we'll
continue, if not we'll vote on
the matter as a whole. Anything else, director torres?
Director hsu. [Inaudible]
>> my sense in working with the
office is it's been a year it's
been a hot topic for district 9. I've been hearing from neighbors
probably at least that long. I think last March I came to you
with an informational
presentation nothing put before you but here's what we're
dealing with and university
avenue I think was captain novo's house.
I showed you a severe situation
around the reservoir in the
portola.
>> Commissioner: my personal view is not to vote for the
motion to continue and I thank
the notion outreach and every
time jeff is here presents so eloquently so please thank him and what I heard on the motion is the signs will not go up tomorrow. They'll go up in four weeks after jeff has had time to complete his outreach program.
Jeff reported to us his outreach
program has shown success and jeff reported he needs about four weeks to reach the same success here. I think continuing this matter is simply going to be delay for this neighborhood when in fact
the outreach will go forward if
we adopt this as you just described. As far as the item as a whole I'll speak to for efficiency's sake, I'll say it before and again for the benefit of those who haven't heard it, if we're
going solve this problem as
city, lift the ban everyone. Let everybody suffer the issue
and everybody see the issue, let everybody play in the democracy
that will solve this issue.
If we are not going to do that
it's not fair to hold one
neighborhood hostage as the guinea pig or the test case
until the city solved an issue
that extremely smart compassionate people have been trying to solve. Please, no applause especially not for me.
Those are the rules. This community has come to us
the same way others have come to
us, you and others have handled this very compassionately. I continue to be impressed the way this is going.
It's pursuant to the plan.
I don't say this because I'm
convinced that I am right.
If our vice chair were here and
she's not do to family crisis she'd give the other side of the
story which is engaging neighbors and politically sensitive people is the only way
to get the momentum we need to solve the problem.
That's an entirely rationale view. I just don't share it. We've come this far and unless
you have a proposal to lift this
everywhere including the sunset
reservoir near my house and other neighborhoods affected by
this I cannot support an unfair patch work and I will support this proposal here today coming
from staff and from the community. So with that, we have a motion
on the table to continue the item. Director eakin's motion to continue the item.
Yes means we don't hear it today and continue to later and no
means we resolve it today. Ms. Boomer a roll call vote.
[Roll call]
>> Clerk: eakin aye director hsu. Aye. Director torres. The motion to continue fails.
>> Commissioner: unless there's
further discussion I'll entertain a motion on the item. >> moved.
>> a second? >> second.
>> Commissioner: we can do a roll call vote in favor.
All those in favor of item 11, Ms. Boomer.
>> Clerk: brinkman aye. Eakin
eakin nay.
Director hsu. Aye. Director torres aye.
The motion carries.
>> Commissioner: so thank you to everyone who came down to speak to us.
It was an informative debate. we know it's a passionate issue. There was a great deal of respect shown. Andy, please do everything you
can to help those people before
the sign goes up, okay. >> that's my pledge to you.
>> Commissioner: thank you. We'll move on to the next item.
>> Clerk: item 12 approving overnight parking restriction on
a portion of napoleon street.
>> Commissioner: Mr. Thornily,
long time, no see.
>> yeah, good to be back.
Again, andy thornily with the transportation agency.
The item is similar but different.
A piece of napoleon street near the creek south of chavez street.
The department of public works burree
burree o of -- bureau of urban
has asked for a portion of napoleon which is often
congested when workers come they can't find parking and a lot of
the problem is long-term parking
and a lot of that long-term parking is large vehicles some of which May be inhabited.
We have been working with director kaczynski's team to reach out and connect to folks living in those vehicles.
There's a larger ongoing en encampment challenge in that
part of the city sidewalk and
open space tent and im provised struck our and the homeless team have been working in the area and the vehicular aspect is further to that.
There's not a special effort on
connecting with vehicularly housed folks.
In this case, to director brinkman's questions on tools we
bring forward, because this is not a residential neighborhood
and because it was availability
for commercial interests and our
own city partners we proposed a blanket no-parking overnight restriction.
So every night between midnight
and 6:00 you May not park anything.
A yugo, winnebago, fishing boat.
It's a short piece of napoleon.
I have a picture but it's about
a block on evans street sigh --
it's a portion of napoleon.
I believe we have folks from
public works bureau of urban forestry on hand and if they're here I hope they'll give comment. That's all I have.
>> Commissioner: okay.
He love being master of ceremonies. >> he loves that.
>> Commissioner: I was worried
you missed the joke.
>> I'm with san francisco public
works bureau of urban forestry
with the request to approve the proposal. The idea came to us when the
deputy director came to an mtab
first half and saw similar restrictions in the mtab site so in the spirit of consistency we
request you approve this.
Our new facility is for our arborists sometimes called upon to perform work in the middle of the night and generally start in the morning and there's an
ongoing issue with parking
available and really significant
illegal dumping and the existing long-term parking has hamp
perked our ability to keep that area clear.
It's a very difficult site to
keep clean. Our crews are moving into the
new fast so it would facilitate two challenges. It would allow us to keep the area much cleaner because the
existing parking is an
obstruction to cleaning the sight.
We had a 10-wheel truck with ten
loads and there's a ton of illegal dumping that happens there and would facilitate our
crews being able to park and
park in close proximity to the work and our routine work. We appreciate the consideration.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much. Directors, any questions for staff before we open public
comment? Okay.
You've worn them down, andy, good job. Public comment. Ms. Boomer.
>> Clerk: starting with melody
and followed by martha.
>> Commissioner: are you
prepared to speak?
Call the next speaker.
>> Clerk: spencer hudson and
mike lee.
>> I can tell you martha felt
she needed to go to the meeting
in room 250 but she wanted me --
>> Commissioner: state your name again. >> flo kelly.
>> Commissioner: welcome back.
>> I volunteer with the
coalition on homelessness and
wanted know give her comment by
proxy which is she's very much against restricting this parking.
I just wanted to say that when I
have done outreach in the bay
view which I've done more often than any other location, I have
been impressed by talking to
certain people who live in their
vehicles who have made
arrangements with the businesses
that are closeby. -- close by.
One guy with his tv on said see
that wire over there, the business that I am parked in
front of is so grateful that I'm
here that he is letting me use
his electricity.
There was another person said
that he's made an arrangement
with the business next to him
and they're kind of helping each other.
So the business man is asking
thoim -- him to keep the
sidewalk clean. Making sure everything is safe
around there and so he does. There's about five vehicles on
that same block.
I just impressed to hear when
businesses and residents living
in their vehicle make an
arrangement to work together in unity, it's a beautiful thing.
>> Commissioner: thank you, Ms. Kelly. Thank you for your obvious compassion. Mr. Newman, please.
And melanie, when he's done speaking, we'll go to you, if that's okay. Sir, please.
>> Clerk: spencer hudson.
>> Commissioner: sorry, I mistook your name.
Mr. Hudson welcome back.
>> last week you May have heard the democratic socialist of america raised $3,000 in four
days to provide funds for us to
go out and provide tents and
blankets and food and socks and batteries and water to people
living on the street.
We spoke to many people living in vehicles and they told us
what a tough life they have even though they had a vehicle over their head, they are still
trying to keep one stead ahead
of mtab and sfpd. They struggled with getting
services from the city. They struggled getting food and water and maintenance for their
vehicles.
But the over arching sentiment was here of losing their home and parking restrictions whatever they are for whatever
reason is cutting their ability
to find somewhere on the street to live in their home. If you live in the sunset, you have a home.
You like I are safe and warm in our beds at entitle.
We have nothing to -- at night.
We is have nothing to fear. These people do. That's not expand on that fear. Let's find a solution to help
them and parking restrictions, towing, confiscation will not help them.
>> Commissioner: thank you, again. Apologies on your name and thank
you for why you eloquent comments. Next speaker, please.
>> Clerk: he
ellen, mike lee and
evan owski.
>> my name is melanie and I'm upset because so many left right now.
I just need to ask you to not do
this. There's going to be nowhere for
us to park.
That means we get tickets. And the more tickets people get
the more chances you are to get towed. Once you are towed they leave
you there on the sidewalk in the rain with a pile of stuff. They only give you a few minutes
to get your stuff and get out. I'm not the person making this
mess on the street. There's nothing I can do about
those other people but please
this is going to be mo -- nowhere for us to go. I'm asking you please, don't do this. Thank you very much.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much. Next speaker.
>> Clerk: mike lee. Evan owski. Is he here?
Maria shulman. Mr. Chair, that's the last person on the speaker card.
>> Commissioner: welcome back. >> I know evan had to go back to
work but he is also opposed to
this and I mean I think that it
doesn't make sense. You guys all acknowledge it's cruel to keep moving people
around from place to place, from
street to street and yeah, we should ban it across the city.
We should not have parking restrictions anywhere but you
guys can start now by stopping this restrictions. Don't pass this one.
Don't pass the next one.
>> Commissioner: thank you very much. Okay.
With that we'll close public comment.
I'll assume there's no further
questions for Mr. Thornily.
If none, are there comments on the item?
>> I'll make a motion to approve with the comment I believe we
have done quite a bit of work to help people not have their holds
they live in towed.
-- homes they live in towed and
can you remind me what we've
done to avoid the towing of the
vehiclely
vehiclely housed dwelling.
>> chair of the sustainable street division. The things we've done to
minimize the rim of a vehicle --
risk of a vehicle being towed
reducing the citations an
waiving late fees and giving
people more opportunities to have people do community service
for the fines.
Anyone at an income threshold at
200 heat
200% of the federal poverty
level can have their late fees
waived and citations can be paid
off with community service rather than through cash payment.
That's a quick summary.
There's more details but primarily our efforts have been on relieving the financial burden of the citation.
>> I'll make a motion to approve
and with the reminder that we
can troll what we control and we
have tried to make this as fair as we've been able to.
>> Commissioner: yes, with a lot of those steps under your leadership when you were chair, Mr. Brinkman. Is there a second? There's a second.
Any further comments on the item. Director rubke, please.
>> I'm going oppose this but I do so hesitantly.
I side with director eakin in
terms of wanting a more holistic
solution and understanding and
appreciating the work staff has
put into this and the thoughtful and optimistic measures thus far.
I think we're premature in six months.
I'd be more optimistic of voting for these when we have legislation the board of
supervisors and and hopefully other nishtds so
initiatives so people aren't
just moving from one street to another. And with respect I will vote against this.
>> Commissioner: we have a
motion and second I'll entertain a voice vote.
All in favor say aye. Opposed.
Director rubke voting no and
director eakin had to leave for travel reasons. That passes.
>> Clerk: and item 13 for a budget amendment in supplement appropriation of $38.1 million
for fiscal year 2019 for to
support projects and mune ir and
environmental review findings.
>> we have two opportunities before us one is thanks to the
city controller we have identified the city has overpaid
in the educational revenue fund
and have counties pick up a
larger portion of the state's responsibility for funding
consideration -- counties and
it comes with caps the city controller found in the last fis
yal year the city overpaid by a
sum of the order of $450 million. So therefore those revenue are
returned to the city.
And are available for allocation
to the general fund and to
various other funds that by
charter receive city revenue including the municipal revenue
fund and there's about $185 million that will go to the general fund and others going to various places including
approximately $38 million that would come to the mtab.
The other opportunity is that the contract that you and the
board of supervisors approved to replace light rail vehicles and
we've already started receiving
the expansion vehicles all 68 in total we will receive by the end
of this calendar year under that
contract and the replacement of the replacement is expected to
start in 2021 and run through 2027 and the opportunity we have is through conversations with the manufacturer would be to
accelerate the replacement with
the new lrv4 vehicles starting
the end of next year instead of
2021 and ending in 2025 instead
of 2027.
Given that no withstanding this morning's infrastructure issue
the reliability of rail service
is I think most jep ardized --
jeopardized with the vehicles and replace them with the new vehicles that would provide much more reliable and better service and better seating ultimately is the single best thing we can do
for the rail system and I think
it's about 2
5% of the ridership is cared ried by the light rail system every day. Those opportunities coming
together is what's before you.
We had already spoken and come
to an informational item about
the benefits and opportunities.
i had also indicated that we
would likely be seeking supplemental appropriation from the board of supervisors to have
access to the revenue now with
supplemental appropriation those revenue would fall into our fund
balance and but we wouldn't have access to them.
In conjunction with the mayor,
we have proposed supplemental appropriation scheduled to be
At the time I talked to you before about the item and
drafted it, we were proposing primarily to use the funds for
the acceleration of the light
rail vehicle procurement for the
replacement vehicles.
The reason why we would benefit
from having that money now is in
order to lock in the schedule I identified and we are still hopeful for a better one but at
left -- least to lock in that
one, we need to issue notice to
proceed to the rail vehicle manufacturer so they can take the steps necessary to get the early start in place in late
2020.
In order to execute that notice to proceed, there's up front
costs we would need to cover. These dollars or a portion of these dollars would enable us to
be able to issue that notice to proceed.
We don't fully know yet what the
net cost of this acceleration would be because there May be
costs in terms of financing the funds for these vehicles are available but they're available
under the original schedule of 2021 to 2027 to bringing them
forward May have some costs.
But on the savings side, we'll be paying less escalation cost
because the contract as time
goes on we recognize the cost of inflation. There's also the cost we'd be
avoiding in term of escalating investment we'll need in the vehicles to keep them
serviceable.
And we don't know with exactness
now and there's funds and we are getting with the manufacturer to know what the costs are. All that said and in the last few days there's been lots of
discussions about the use of
these funds the city portion and
the mta and other portions.
I have a revised proposal for
your consideration rather than
using the full $38 million for
the light rail vehicle procurement, we'd put $19.3
million towards the light rail
vehicle procurement, put $13.8
million towards mta energy
efficiency programs and put $5 million towards small business
impact funds.
Now, where did these other two needs come from?
As you know, with the pg&e
bankruptcy there's been discussion among folks in the
building how the city can start taking steps towards energy
independence.
We have done projects and we put
solar panels on our facility at
700 pennsylvania.
They allow us to consume less
energy which benefits us and puc because the provide energy at
less than market cost.
So the $13.8 million would allow
us to conduct energy assessments
in the rest of of the buildings
as well as fund solar panels on
our maintenance facilities as well as other buildings and projects as determined by the system-wide audit. The second item the small
business impact fund last week
at the transportation authority commission there was considerable discussion about
the impacts of city construction
projects particularly mta
projects on small businesses. Particularly when the construction projects are delayed. So there was a desire indicated
and this is not a new conversation.
You've heard this a lot before.
We as a city step up the
assistance we provide small businesses extraordinarily impacted by city construction projects. I spoke earlier in my report
about the delays on vaness
avenue and the idea with this
second item my revised recommendation to you is you adopt the resolution with
modifying language that would
allow us to finalize the amounts
with the controller's office and
with the mayor and board of supervisors office and the
allocation of these funds, the charter gives you the full and
ultimate authority over these.
>> Commissioner: so procedurally
do we need a motion to amend the current thing before us?
Okay.
Is there public comment on the
item, Ms. Boomer.
>> Clerk: it looks like the individual has left and it doesn't look like everybody in
the audience is making moves forward.
>> Commissioner: is there anybody that would like to
comment publicly. Seeing none, we'll close public comment. >> I failed to note a couple important points in thinking further.
One is that it would be my intention that whatever the
amount is we need in order to
issue the notice to proceed for the rail manufacturer to proceed
on this accelerated path if the
$19.3 of the supplementally
added revenue and we would look
elsewhere and reprioritize
elsewhere within our capital program. There are trade-offs here. I want to be very transparent about that. We don't know what the final number would be. We think it probably will be
more than $19.3 we'll need to
execute the notice to proceed and will need it make other tradeoffs but the change and not having all the revenue available comes with trade-offs but I
wanted to assure you as I said
the acceleration of this vehicle procurement is the single most
thing we can do to improve rail service so it's my intention to move forward with that regardless and if it means we have to reprioritize other areas program and we'd report that back to you, that would be my
recommendation.
Under the revised proposal I'm
not seeking we put at risk the
notice of the replacement of the light rail vehicles.
>> Commissioner: do you have enough figures to know what you
think that acceleration project will cost?
>> I don't.
When I met with staff last week they thought in the order of $30
million. It's why we were seeking the full amount.
We'll know that better once we
can nail down the price with the manufacturer.
>> Commissioner: and that estimate of $30 million is the full acceleration.
It's not doing something partially the full acceleration
of the LRVs in envisioned? >> there's not the lower and faster.
It's the fastest possible the
manufacturer can achieve. The amount of the notice to
proceed cost is really based on certain costs in the contract we
need to provide for up front and
seek the fastest possible accel
rage.
>> Commissioner: someone can say this is a priority why don't we throw more money and finish faster and if I understand correctly the item you estimate
to have a $30 million price tag
is the fastest possible acceleration and if it turns out
to be $30 million or over $19
million the agency will re-allocate capital priority to
go and accelerate as fast as possible.
>> Commissioner: are there other questions? I bet. >> so the staff report and what
you just said articulate very
good reasons to accelerate the
lrv procurement using these funds.
I was curious though to know staff's analysis we have criteria that we use. i don't have them off the top of my head for unforeseen revenue
and how to use them. Ultimately it was my decision
that focussing these on something that could very materially impact muni service
especially at a time where we're seeing increasing challenges
with our older light rail vehicles as a clear winner in terms of the funds. We've not had a whole lot of time to evaluate other needs that have emerged in conversations with folks in this
building. We have a lot of needs.
These are legit nat -- legitimate needs and we have other needs. We have gone through another progress and I presented this
last year of reassigning our two-year capital budget based on updated revenue figures.
We had recently gone through a prioritization process. Wen that was happening --
when that was happening we didn't know the revenue were there. We knew at the end but not at
the time we were going through the process. These are revenue not
anticipated so it frees us up to
be flexible in how we allocate them.
The size of the budget was over a billion dollars so to address
the two needs that have been
identified and things that have hap
happened it's a good use of the
revenue relative to other needs.
>> Commissioner: does that answer your question? Director brinkman.
>> I won't be able to put this gracefully or delicately or even
maybe correctly, but we've been talking about how to spend these
funds for a couple months now.
We've heard from the public when they disagree one us on this and
some of the things they think we
should spend this on.
It feels dodgy to me to save
this at the last moment.
Any public who May have want to
spend it on this, aren't here to
tell us otherwise.
This is input from the board of supervisors how they want us to
spend these funds.
With said we want to spend it on
providing new LRVs for the
public to avoid the break downs and they are saying no.
They have us over a barrel.
I would approve it because I don't see how to get the $19
million and May even hold up more funds. I don't like this.
I don't know why they didn't bring this up earlier and give this a chance to be aired in public.
I hope in the future when LRVs
break down they won't yell us about why trains aren't moving through the tunnel and hopefully
we'll still be able to speed up
the purchase of the LRVs.
I don't like it at all and think they're monkeying in the work we're supposed to do and
supposed to look out for the riders and system and the board
of supervisors is at the last minute pulling the rug from underneath our feet and putting
our feet to the fire to approve something like that that's not
going to stop them from fighting
us and combining about us and tearing into us in the future
when things go badly for the LRVs.
That's my two cents worth and it
May be incorrect and I will support it because otherwise we don't get the money.
>> I appreciate the sentiment.
We did notice the item and speak
and agendize it.
I think the public input is important.
The formal action that that
provesa provesa
that approves the supplemental action starts with the committee and the full board of supervisors.
There'll be opportunity for the
public to weigh in.
>> the $5 million to a small
business impact fund.
Do we know how that will be
administered or decided or a
brand new thing that will have
to be administrated?
>> we hope not to create special
new funds but we have mechanisms
and started building into our project budget a line item of funds that support the work of construction mitigation. Mostly done through the office
of economic and workforce development.
We would ideally be able to use existing channels and not create new mechanisms. In term of how the allegation would be done, it's something we
want to work with our partner at
oewd as well as the other the works and the role of the mayor and board and the processes while the charter gives the mtab
board the full and sole authority ultimately, in all of
our budget processes we try to work collaboratively with the
mayor and board to make sure we
understand what their prospectives perspectives are and in term of
the timing of this being last minute, and negotiations have
been ongoing and probably aren't
done at this point.
I can appreciate your concern or feeling this came last minute.
It did.
We're trying to work collaboratively with the folks in the building for the unforeseen revenue.
>> I appreciate you being so willing to adapt to this and
still committed to moving up the
appropriates of the new LRVs. For the public to know if they
want to weigh in on that the appropriate time to do that is
the board of supervisors meeting I assume.
>> this item will be at budget and finance committee tomorrow. >> tomorrow's budget and finance committee.
Thank you.
>> Commissioner: thank you director brinkman. Anyone else?
Let me address this personally.
I share a great deal of director
brinkman's concern about the
merits of this and the way it came about.
I will tell you if I thought
this would jeopardize the
fastest acceleration of the LRVs I would make a stink. >> and I won't recommendation. >> the reality is the system is not working as well as it should.
The transit professionals and you told us expediting the
purchase of the LRVs is one of
the best things to fix it. It had to be done. You committed you will carry out
the fastest acceleration you can. The reality is the pressure to do other things which is not
money flushed down the toilet
it's just not in my view the highest priority nor agency.
It's not coming at the expense
of the lrv acceleration or folks can say why'd do you that if I can put a finer point on what
