>> good afternoon and welcome to -- >> control room, can you zoom out on the interpreter bubble, please?

other way. we okay? can you tilt it down a little bit, control room, please? so that we can see the interpreter's hands? okay. okay, i think we are ready to start. thank you for your patience everyone. go ahead cochair madrid. >> good afternoon and welcome

to the mayor's disability council friday march 15, 2024. this is an in-person and virtual hybrid meeting. >> [indiscernible] >> okay, go ahead. thank you. thank you control room. >> this meeting is broadcast to the public on sfgotv and open captioned and sign language interpreted. if you need any accommodations or have difficulty attending

these meetings, please send an e-mail to mod@sfgov.org or call, 415-554-6789. the mayor's disability council holds 10 public meetings generally hold on the third friday of the month. for information about past or upcoming meetings, please visit mod website at

www.mod.sfgov.org/mod. our next regular meeting will be on february 19, 2024 from 1 to 4 p.m. and will be also hybrid meeting and broadcast on sfgovtv. thank you for joining us. our clerk today is-- with the

use of a asl interpreter. >> hello, this is john costy. i will go through the roll call now. alex madrid, here. sherry albers. sassouni. denise senhaux, presents. patricia clark-arack, i'm here.

>> great. thank you. okay, that concludes the roll call. back to you cochair madrid. >> one moment. i'll read the agenda. we have finished the roll call. now we'll move on to action items. there will be time for general public comment. >> no, no, no, clerk, could you read the agenda? thank you.

>> i'm on number 4. information item from cochair alex madrid. number 5 will be information from mod director nicole bohn regarding the mayor's office on disability. we have discussion item for number 6 regarding efforts to address the problem of malfunctioning elevators in hsh residents including the notice of funding availability for elevator repairs. number 7 is another discussion item. the access for all problem to enhance the availability ramped taxis. then we have another information item, correspondence and then

adjournment. excuse, 9 is general public comment, 10 is information item, and then the last would be member comments, council member comments and announcements and number 11 is adjournment. >> thank you. >> back to you cochair madrid. >> thank you. at this time, do we have general public comment? >> at this time, members of the public may address the council on items of iftrust to the public within the subject matter jurisdiction of the

council, which are not on today's meeting agenda. each member of the public may address the council for up to three minutes, unless the cochair determines that in interest of time, comments may be limited to a shorter time when there are larger number of public comments. with respect-hf- >> [indiscernible] >> control room, can we have the camera on the clerk, please? thank you.

>> great. with respect to today's items, specific discussion items, your opportunity to address the council will be afforded at the conclusion of each discussion item before council discussion begins. reminder that the brown act forbids the council taking action or discussing any items not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. if you would like a response from the council, please provide your contact information by e-mail to mdc@sfgov.org with subject, mdc comment reply request or call, 415-554-6789. if you join the webinar using your tablet or smart phone

webex app, click on the three horizontal dots the icon and then click, raise hand. we will recognize you when it is your turn. you may also use the q & a feature in webex in the webinar to make a comment. it is located on the top part of the video after touching the screen. if you are using a desktop or laptop computer, press raise hand and q & a icons are located at the bottom of the video screen. if you join by phone dial star 3 to indicate you would like to make a comment. we will prompt you when it is your turn. now, we'll start with anybody joining us in person.

do we have any comment cards mrs. kaplan? any comments from the public at this time? if you would like to make a comment? do we have anyone online? no one online. that concludes my comments and turn it back to you cochair madrid. >> thank you. now, we are going to my report. since february 2024 meeting, the mdc sent a letter of-- >> [indiscernible] the interpreter bubble back please on the screen. thank you. go ahead. thank you for your patience. go ahead, alex. thank you. >> let me state one more time, since february meeting, the mdc

sent a letter of support for the recommendation in the housing needs assessment implementation plan indicating support for continued staff support for implementation and a specific recommendation for enhancements of the dahlia hotel to provide more information to people in accessible housing needs. the committee met with the staff

in the human resources department to learn about recommendations and discuss possible-- the housing committee continues to focus on elevators maintenance and repair in the public housing, a topic that is addressed on today's agenda. that concludes my report.

we are going to item number 5, report from the mayor's office on disability. nicole bohn. >> thank you. good afternoon everyone. thank you for joining us online and via sfgovtv and here in the hearing room today. i have quite a number of updates for march. if you would like to engage with any aspect of this report, it will be posted in full on the mdc web page along with the agenda items for today. by early next week, monday most likely, you can also engage by

e-mailing mod@sfg0v.org or by calling 554-6789 and as a reminder, our website is sf.gov/mod. okay. so, i will start with some local legislation happening. i mentioned this before around the council maybe wanting to monitor remote public comment. reasonable accommodation. in the last month, mod educated the commission secretarys to help them better understand their obigation to provide reasonable accommodation. mod continues to receive feedback from disability community members that accommodations may not be consistently granted or implemented, so you might want to call for update on this item in a future public meeting.

similarly, the legislation around disability access improvements for places of public accommodation, but known as abe, accessible business entrance ordinance program is still in consideration of legislative amendments at this time and mod met with the supervisors office this month about this again. in the one year anniversary since the passing of judy human, i wanted to remind folks that we are still in process in terms of commemorating the honor of her in un plaza. honor of her and protest own 1977. i encourage the council to continue to engage on this and/or work with community alliance of disability advocates on this.

at state legislation, the two items that we continue to monitor are cpuc autonomous vehicles . within the past month received operating approval so if you like to continue to engage as a reminder, the city doesn't have jurisdiction over autonomous vehicles, but if you like to engage on this issue, you can contact mod and sfmta and we will get you connected members of the public or council members. and then the federal legislation that i wanted to draw your attention to is, over the next month we'll be working with other colleagues in the city around advancing some support for the air carrier amendment act which is still stalled in congress and we'll

be working on that over the next month. okay, and then some announcements and things you might want to consider for engagement in future meetings. so, thank you for sending the letter as a follow-up to our meeting last month regarding the affordable housing needs assessment and our joint commission meeting with our disability and aging services commission colleagues. the council is strongly encouraged to continue to engage on the affordable housing needs assessment. mod spent a considerable amount this month on actions relatesed to the assessment and might want to consider carrying this as a ongoing item in your subcommittee. we also continue to work this month with 311 and the department of emergency management to streamline how encampment and other parts of

public right of way complaints may be reported and i'm happy to report, we can now do so through 311 without requirement to wait for law enforcement unless there are other emergency responders are needed in the event of a emergency. thank s for the council for calling the agenda item that helped get thes moving. thank you. another thing i want to had make you aware of, is the san francisco health order requiring masking in healthcare and other facilities, masking is set to sunset on april 30. mod heard from disability community members in opposition to the sunseting and is also committed to work ing with the community and department of public health and others proactive accessibility measures outside of this health order and the council is strongly encouraged to work on

this item. also want to announce there is a new career center in city hall that opened this week through department of human resources. it is the first ever municipal career center that san francisco has had. it is for current employees and for perspective employees. it is in room 110 of city hall. council may wish to learn more about this item. on ongoing items i'm not going to list all of them. the full list of suggestions for ongoing items will be posted in the report distributed to you, but i wanted to highlight a few things that are new. one is, our city's response to communication access. i wanted to mention that in response to public comment that we received in the meeting last month and our ongoing need to address and improve

communication access for deaf individuals, mod is in discussion with the department of human resources and others and so the council may wish to call for a update on this item and how the city is doing with communication access generally. i also wanted to mention again that the council is very aware that the controller's office is working sro elevator audit and we'll learn a little more about funding in just a few minutes from colleagues in hsh, but reminder that this is expected to be complete in may of 2024 in advance of budget hearings. mod also met with supervisor stefani's office this week, regarding potential legislation regarding sro elevator reporting that is still in progress, so it is not been

brought to board yet, but just wanted to give you some awareness that mod has been contacted and given advice on that. it has provided advice on that. i apologize. you might want to consider calling for a update and monitoring how that legislation goes in advance of the may, june budget hearings that the city has. and let's see--oh, one more thing i wanted to mention that is new is in this month in particular, mod has been actively involved in multiple work groups and planning efforts related to disaster response and persons with disabilities, including power outage response, mass care and shelter, hazard, climate and resiliency and extreme heat and air quality. those are four separate efforts, so there is a lot

happening that the city is really pulling together. the council may want to consider an update on how these collective responses, which mod has been involved with address disability access in the event of an emergency or disaster in san francisco. and that's where i'll end my report for now. again, the full report will be posted on sf.gov/mod or /mdc. thank you very murch. much. >> thank you. we'll go forward to discussion item, which is efforts to address the problem of malfunctioning elevators in hsh residents, including the notice

of funding availability nofa for elevator repairs. rachel gage, san francisco department of homelessness and supportive services. >> one second. >> control room, please can you pull up the presenter power er point presentation? and can you also pull up-- >> try again, rachel. >> good afternoon council members and mayor office staff. my name is rachel gage, supportive housing programs project manager with the

department of homelessness and supportive housing. thank you for the opportunity to present this afternoon and share with you the efforts that the department of homelessness and supportive housing has implemented to address malfunctioning and capital improvements and permits for housing. before i review the funding projects we have in place, i want to provide a quick overview of the permanent supportive housing portfolio under the jurisdiction of department of homelessness and supportive housing. i think this provides important context to better understand thim pact of the department's efforts. currently, there are 150 permanent supportive housing sites in san francisco providing over 9 thousand permanent supportive housing units. this includes 9 new permanent supportive housing buildings that lease up in fiscal year 2023, and includes 68 single resident occupancy buildings.

approximately 500 single resident occupancy buildings in the city of san francisco. 68 are city funded and under the purview of department of homelessness and supportive housing. 66 percent of permanent supportive housing buildings are non profit owned. 30 percent are master leased, and 4 percent are city owned. and currently in the pipeline are 9 new permanent supportive housing sites providing 514 permanent supportive housing units that are expected to open in the next 24 months. please note that these numbers exclude shelters, transitional housing and tenant based rental assistance subsidies, also under the department's jurisdiction. now let's review the efforts the department of homelessness and supportive housing employed to address the problem of

malfunctioning elevators and capital improvements. february 16, department of homelessness and supportive housing issued a notice of funding availability to address unreliable and antiquated elevators in privately owned city funded permanent supportive housing buildings. there is a total of $10 million available through this nofy nofa. the maximum award amount is $500 thousand per building site, however i'll explain shortly how an award up to $500 thousand will result in up to $1 million toward the cost of elevator repairs. sorry about that. this is the slide i just read over. the schedule for this project,

the nofa issued friday february 16. the preproposal conference was held on february 23, and answers and clarifications will be posted this coming monday, march 18. deadline to submit proposals is thursday may 16, 2024 at 2 p.m. the evaluation period will commence after this deadline where applications will be scored by an evaluation committee comprised of city staff with expertise in permanent supportive housing and housing preservation. the intent to award notification will be issued during the summer of 2024 and agreement commenced in the fall on a rolling basis. eligibility requirements for the solicitation, the program incentivizes for profit owned master lease single resident occupancy buildings.

of the 68 city funded single resident occupancy buildings, 38 so more then half are eligible to apply for funding through this solicitation. the building owner must agree to match the city contribution towards the cost of elevator repairs by making a cash contribution up front or commit to partial rent abatement over the term of the lease. this is where the city contribution of up to $500 thousand becomes $1 million towards the cost of elevator repairs. the master lease term must have a minimum of 5 years remaining or party to the lease, so the non profit tenant who operate the building and there private owner must agree to enter into negotiation to extend the lease to minimum number of years. i want to emphasize that this is a relatively new model to use public funds to support the

rehabilitation of private owned buildings historically landlords have been responsible to maintain their buildings, including elevators, however to support the vulnerable residents and permanent supportive housing, many who are disabled and need consistent and working elevators, the city is stepping in to provide match funding. in addition to the elevator modernization nofa, supported additional funds. capital improvements address items needed to maintain habitability and improve functionality and suitability for the target population. awards range from $50 thousand to $490 thousand per building, and non profit owned buildings

not eligible for funding through the elevator nofa can include elevator repairs as part of the capital needs request. the schedule for this project, again the funding opportunity was announced tuesday january 23. the deadline to submit proposals was tuesday march 5, 2024 and selected projects will be announced in april 2024. we anticipate agreement commenced this calendar year on a rolling basis. eligibility requirements for the capital needs funding opportunity are existing city funded master lease buildings and non profit owned buildings. priority given to older buildings that have not been significantry renovated or rehabilitated in the last 15 years and have no alternative

funding source for improvement. master lease buildsings must have minimum of 3 to 5 years remaining on the lease or parties on the least must agree to extend the lease depending on there amount of funding requested. and that concludes my presentation. happy to stick around and answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you, rachel. thank you for the presentation. we are going to ask people from webex-- >> public comment. >> public comment. clerk, please open public comment at this time.

>> are there any public speaking cards filled out? we are not seeing anyone in the room that would like to comment. do we have anyone online wanting to make comment? chair, there is nobody online as well for public comment. we return-hf >> okay. >> just hold one second while we start the timer for public comment. >> hi, and thank you for letting us speak remotely. easy access remote public comment should be a part of all city meetings. i'm a housing organizer with senior disability action.

we organize and educate seniors and people with disabilities to live independently in the city. seniors and disability action has been organizing the issue of the broken elevators for a decade. our service on seniors trapped for weeks on the floor or elevators themselves. we have taken over-had to take over the elevators at city hall at lunch one time to make the point of saving the funds from cut. it is appalling it has taken this long to release the funds. now that the funds are released it is important to expedite the funds. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you for your comment. do we have public comment at this time? >> we are checking, one second. no. no, not at this time. >> thank you. we will go on to council member

questions. can you please-- >> no comment, no. >> thank you, patricia. denise. >> thank you cochair madrid. thank you mrs. gage for the presentation and going through the city funding and breaking down the available funding for elevator repairs. i kind of want to piggy-back on the public comment that received a couple minutes ago. i understand where the funding is coming from. there is legislation now we are identifying the repairs and what needs to be done at this time, because through the housing committee and have seen some of the report and complaints against some of the various locations here in the

city, so my question is, i think it is important, what are the next steps? we have the funding, we have timeframes, what is the implementation of going after these various structures and areas that need repairs? how are we going to do this or be a part that process? >> i can speak to the permanent supportive housing. for the elevator to address the master lease building, this is approximately 38 buildings eligible for this funding. again, privately owned for profit buildings that are operated by non profits. this is the applicant pool eligible for this funding. >> okay. >> deadlines to submit proposal is march 16 and so there-after, the reason there is a two month

time frame from the nofa released to when submissions are due is because of the need to get the existing elevator evaluated by a elevator consultant and also get estimates. those need to be submitted along with the proposal to justify the cost. in addition, both the tenant and the owner tenant being the non profit, and the owner need to agree to extend the master lease and the owner if not at least 5 years remaining on the term and this is to insure that the city is not investing in properties that isn't used for permanent supportive housing over the long-haul. so, there is a negotiation that needs to happen before the proposals are submitted where the owner and the tenant agree to extend the master lease, and the owner agrees to either pay dollar for dollar match the

city contribution up front, or through a rent abatement, so reduction in the monthly rent over the term of the lease. that needs to happen the cost estimates and evaluate the elevator needs to be evaluated and submitted with the proposal so that is may 16. evaluation period will commence thereafter, roughly 4 week jz this is where the colleagues mayor office of disability, potentially even mayor's office of disability may be asked to sit oen the evaluation panel and staff from hsh will review the submissions and select the projects essentially and announce that. thereafter, what happens is the actual negotiations. much of getting the money out the door-some of the onus is on the non profit and the owner to act quickly, because again,

they agree to extend the master lease and rent abatement and letter of intent, they actually have to execute that and amend the master lease. that needs to take place before the city will dispurse any funding and then these funds are being dispersed through grant agreements with the potential for up to 20 grant agreements, the city the objective is get the money out the door as quick as possible but that depends how quickly the owners and non profits act. >> i thank you for that explanation. the concern with the process is the accountability in this process to make sure that things move forward. there was a article last month about various residents and sorry, i don't remember exactly if they were city owned or hso

or the situation, but some of the tenants were coming together to form some sort of lawsuit, because they were tired of being trapped in their room. they couldn't go out and shop and do anything and to read the stories was disgusting more is not being done. i appreciate the fact that there is some movement now, and i know mod has been working on it and it is a very important issue for the council, but i can't express strong enough how important it is to get through this process, get the elevators fixed, or have some sort of process in place from the people that will be involved in this to make sure people have a backup plan so they are not left in their rooms and not being able to take care of themselves. i think that is really-trying to think of a less harsh word. i think it is disgusting and the problem has been going on a very long time and now it

reached the paper and media and people have been waiting long enough and there needs to be something in the process and we'll continue to watch this. i'm not blaming you, i'm just stating my frustration. i have been hearing about this as long as i have been here, so i hope this time is there is movement forward from the different departments and people involved, because people deserve respect. they should be able to do what they need to do, take care of themselves, be able to leave their place of residents to feel safe. they shouldn't have to go through always public resources just to be able to get out of their room or have their health impacted by climbing stairs. i don't think that's right to treat anybody that way that lives in the city and county of san francisco, so i appreciate you listening to my feedback. >> i appreciate the feedback and i share your concern. >> okay. thank you for your time. >> i have some questionst, if

you may. if i may. i have a lot of questions-hf -can you-i just want to understand these funds start this year, right? maybe you could educate me or educate us on the funds. allocated that has been used or has been used or touched or

whatever. maybe you can educate me or us on how that fund has been used for this project. >> i understand you want to know if the funds allocated in last fiscal year's budget are being used this year? >> yes. and if there is-hf-have funds available last year, which is 2022-2023. let's start with that. >> sure. so, i'll back up a little bit. in 2022, 2023, the hsh budget

included $5 million for capital improvement. that money was allocated already. it was awarded to multiple sites. i don't remember the number. sorry i don't have the statistics with me. that money has been deployed. the money was prioritized to address accessibility and safety and security in permanent supportive housing. and the fy22-23 budget this is where $10 million for elevator modernization was made available, but i want to preface or emphasize that this is a newer and complex process to distribute taxpayer dollars to fund a privately for profit owned buildings, so it was imperative that we have the

proper financial and legal systems in place and appropriate levels of oversight to support responsible utilization of public funds. this is fairly new for hsh. hsh was established in 2016. ypt to say this is probably the first time we have dealt with cop bonds which are taxable bonds, so this is something that we had to have conversations with the city attorney, the office of public finance who is issuing the cop bonds, and understand prevailing wage implications and so forth so there was quite a bit involved before we had the model to effectively and responsibly release the nofa. >> thank you for that. >> certainly. >> my next question is that, i

are understand that there is deadlines that-i forgot the name that you mentioned about they can qualify if they want to apply for these funds. has your department reached out and did a study that let's say this building x needs this x, y and z and recommended them to apply? >> i don't know that's actually specifically taken place, however, we have been socializing with our provider

or housing provider part ners. we have been socializing the funding opportunity for-since early spring in 2023, last year, and there is a lot of enthusiasm internally with the housing providers to get these elevators repaired as well. they are just as eager as hsh is to address failing elevators, and also other accessibility issues which is why we have the other $10 million available as well for other capital improvements. >> i think that is so amazing.

--there are certain buildings or non profits that would be hesitant or confused or don't know much about this and reluctant to even apply, so i want to encourage all of us to reach out to everyone. this is what we are getting--i think it would be good for you to apply and improve these accessibility issue. just a suggestion that i think it would be good for the committee to take a look at it. >> i agree and i can assure you

that it is being communicated often. we meet with the housing providers on a monthly basis, and again, there is a lot of enthusiasm and there is a lot of information sharing and various forums. also our housing providers each have a hsh program manager that works on my team, and so they are responsible for a portion of the portfolio. it is divided up over the various program managers, and there is lot of interaction happening and conversations happening in that space as well. >> this is my last question before i turn it to the staff. a question that i think--a lot of providers are happy and

eager to use these funds, but of course, we know there will be push-back, and i am just curious on right now, when is that happening? i'm just curious on what's the plan when elevators or accessibility issues happening was this fund allocated? >> i'm sorry, can you repeat the question? >> the question is, right now, the fund is that going to be allocated until fall of 2024? i'm just curious on what the department plans on if there is

a issue right now and there is a need to be adjust. >> i understand. in the interim, what is the department doing to address elevators that are not working? >> yes. >> i understand. we do share the mayor's office of disability elevator guidance outage guidance with providers. we also work with them on their relocation efforts as needed to make other units in the portfolio available to residents, to help meet reasonable accommodations. i also want to mention that permanent supportive housing buildings are staffed with site based support services staff on site 24/7 that includes case managers so residents are consistent have access to linkage services, whether in-home support services or

runners, so there are a lot of efforts and obviously we are insure that housing providers are being transparent and communicating with residents as well. our program managers are on the line also working with providers to insure that again, we are addressing and meeting residents needs. hsh also has a internal transfer request office, so if a housing provider cannot accommodate a resident within their portfolio, most of the non profit agencies that operate these buildings have multiple sites that they operate, so a lot of times they are able to actually more quickly assist residents with relocation into another building. but if that is not-if they are not able to, if they are at

capacity, the providers submit transfer request through the transfer request office and then they are-they step in and work with the providers to provide external transfers outside of their portfolio. se, there are a lot of things happening when that happens, but we are definitely sharing the guidance and making sure there is follow-through and following up on a regular basis. >> thank you for that. i just want to offer our time if when the time comes please reach out. >> we will definitely do that. >> i'm going to ask the staff if there is questions? >> is this on?

i don't think so. trying again. hang on, is this picking up? >> yep. >> okay. hi. >> hi. >> sorry i'm in a awkward- >> it's okay. >> [microphone cut out. unable to hear speaker] thank you for the effort. [indiscernible] to encourage the continued outreach we'll do. my questions are about the-[indiscernible] if you don't know and want to come back or have a more discussion then that's also fine. wondering [indiscernible] we

need the interpreter bubble back. and i need to get closer to the microphone. here we go, because they are having a hard time hearing me. okay, there we go. so, sorry about that. so, in terms of what they are required to submit, can you talk a little bit about if you know, what's being asked in terms of the reporting on the status of not just the functionality of the elvariety, but is there attention being paid in the criteria of the accessibility of the elevator itself, and how is that being handled through this so that's one question? and i have a follow-up

question, but i'll start there. i don't know rachel if you have more information about that. >> i don't. the capital improvements, there are two allotments of $10 million, one is to address specifically elevators. obviously if there is ancillary issues or other buildings system issues that are directly associated with that elevator, i would assume that would be something that would be-that we would become aware of or part of the evaluation along with the proposal. i dont know of any specific situation so it is hard for me to get to the elevator. >> right, so i guess, the folks doing-that would be doing analysis, have we required that they have accessibility expertise? or can we find out? >> i can find that out.

i'm not sure. >> so, it is just because sometimes we have elevators and we need our elevators to function, let me be clear about that. that's the first priority, but also, many of our elevators have accessibility issues within them that make it difficult to use. for instance, we have some elevators with pull-back greats that people with disabilities wouldn't be able to use. we have buttons that are out of reach. that kind of thing, and so i'm wondering to what degree that analysis is going to be part of how we determine how the funds are awarded and again, if we need to talk more about this outside of this meeting, very happy to do that, but just really want to elevate that from a architectural perspect

ive. we have a opportunity here that goes beyond whether the elevator is functioning or not and making sure that people with disabilities, people with mobility disabilities or devices are actually able to use and so, i just wanted to flag that. that's all i wanted to flag that. if we need to talk more about that and again, i apologize i can't see you, but let's definitely do that or connect with the right people in homelessness and supportive housing that can do that with us. >> absolutely. i appreciate that feedback. that is very important, so made a note and i'll be sure to follow-up. >> great. great. the same in the rating criteria. if be are still developing what we'll use to rate eligibility for the funds and i want to

emphasize, i'm so happy this is happening. this has been needed a very long time, as everyone knows. we just really want to be also taking accessibility of the elevator itself into account as we are thinking about this. that's all. that concludes my comment. >> thank you, nicole. >> i have a question. >> okay, go ahead patricia. >> okay, thank you alex. i just want to follow-up what alex-his question about what is being done in the interim. i was wondering rachel, has your agency every considered putting in air lifts? i have a stair lift in my home.

i can't imagine--i cannot imagine being stuck with no access up or down stairs. stair lifts are probably much less expensive then the elevator, and even with this $10 million, this repair isn't going to be done for quite a few months. has there every been discussion putting in stair lifts? >> not that i'm aware of. >> i just wanted to throw that out there. >> no, i will-if i can respond to that question at a later time, i'm going to take this back to my superiors and have a conversation if that's okay. >> yeah. if they are straight with no curves they are really not that

expensive. they get expensive when you have to put in a custom stair with a curve, but just a straight elevator, they are not that bad. thank you. >> thank you. >> go ahead, debbie. >> okay. one more staff question. >> sure. >> this is also related to the condition both in the interim as well as during the repairs. for buildsings where there is only one elevator or both elevators are often in disrepair, wondering if hsh is doing anything or envisions doing anything proactively to require as part of the

agreement with the building operators and owners to make sure that they identify in advance people who might be effected during the repairs, and engage in either proactive relocation, or other measures to make sure that we are not waiting until people have to you know, file complaints, or realize that the repairs are making it difficult for them to go places. >> that's a very good question and i can say yes, we have actually-the proposals, if residents are going to have to be relocated, if there is going to be elevators down for a substantial period of time, the proposals must include

relocation in their budget and the plan and timeline as well, so that's information that will be evaluated as part of the proposal submissions. >> great. and then, one other question has to do with funding for capital improvements that was made available in january. in the criteria for providing the funds, was anything included to prioritize capital improvements either related to either as you said earlier, safety or accessibility as opposed to say, capital improvements that might be nice, but not necessarily as essential? >> yes, absolutely. so, we have the eligibility

criteria requires the buildings be older, older then 10 years of age and not substantially rehabilitated in the last 15 years. there are 5 high level categories that we have prioritized. one of which is relocation of tenants. one is safety and security and the other is accessibility, so within their capital improvements they have to describe or define what that -based on those categories, what the work will entail for those and also submit cost estimates and so forth to justify the amount requested and the scope of work. >> great. thank you. >> thank you staff. i just-i forgot to mention, which i apologize. i just want to encourage--let

the residents know that this is happening and asking them a wish list that what would want things that they like to see when it comes to accessibility. i think it would be good to start engaging with the residents. again, thank you so much for coming and i hope this is a start of working together. >> thank you so much. it is pleasure and again, thank you very much. have a wonderful weekend and thank you for all your wonderful feedback. >> thank you.

>> take care. >> now, we are going to take a 20 minute break. >> 20 minutes? >> that's a long time. [recess] [meeting reconvened] >> welcome back from the break. we are going to item number 7,

discussion item:the access for all program to enhance the availability of ramped taxis. presented by jonathan cheng, san francisco municipal transportation agency. welcome, jonathan. >> thank you. hi, thank you all for having me today. i'm here to present a update about access for all program. is it broadcasting the powerpoint? thank you.

so, to provide a overview, the access for all program was created based on sb-1376, access for all act, which was passed in 2018. this program was meant to address accessibility for persons with disability as part of the state regulation, particularly on-demand service for wheel-chair users. to fund the access for all program, tnc collect a [indiscernible] for every trip they provide to create a state-wide access fund. which is overseen by the cpuc, california public utility commission. tnc are able to meet benchmarks for on demand service for

wheel-chair users they can request a exempson contributing to access fund or off set to pay if the cost of providing on-demand wheelchair service. any unspent funds are distributed proportioninately to each couny or area to administer service that address on demand service for wheelchair users. the tnc's have in san francisco have been unable to meet the requirements to request a exemption or off set, so as a result in june of 2023, sfmta applied and was approved to be the local access fund administrator for san francisco. this means that we have approximately $4 million in grants to distribute to proposers to provide and improve on demand

transportation for wheelchair users. of this 4 $4 million, about 15 percent can be used for administrative purposes. next fiscal year, so fiscal year 24-25, we will have $1.7 million to distribute in grants for this program. so, as the local access fund administrator, sfmta is responsible for conducting a competitive solicitation process to distribute funds to local access providers. this generally includes taxis and non emergency medical transportation companies. tnc are not eligible to apply for these grants. as local access fund administrator , we are responsible gathering input from the disability community to aid in the planning process and i'll discuss later about the working group we developed.

we also responsible for creating a web page with information about sb-1376 and provide information about the application process. so, i want to get some of the terms clarify some of the terms. access provider is define as a organization or entity that directly provides or contracts on demand transportation services that meet the needs of people with disability. and on demand transportation refers to transportation service that do not follow a fixed route or schedule. so, as mentioned, one of the requirements as a local access fund administrator is to engage the disability community in the planning process. sfmta convened a working group comprised of wheelchair users, residents from community based

organizations that serve it disability community, and other city agencies. this working group helped contribute to the development of the request for proposals, the rfp for access for all grant by identifying local priorities that should be funded, and feedback about the funding allocation. so, for all applicants, they must indicate how the proposed project will address priorities identified by the cpuc, which include improvements in the completion and response time for wheelchair accessible vehicles, also know as wav. increase availability of wheelchair accessible vehicles in san francisco and outreach effort to promote service to the disability community. additionally, as mentioned, recollect the working group identified some local

priorities that applicant need to address in the proposals. among the-some of the local priorities-sorry, sorry- >> [indiscernible] >> oh. sor ry, thank you. some of the local priorities that were identified include, increased availability of wheelchair accessible vehicles during the weekends, nighttime and outlaying neighborhoods of san francisco. more comprehensive driver training on disability sensitivity, passenger assistance and wheelchair securement. a centralized mobile application and or phone number that--sorry, my bad.

-centralized mobile application and or phone number that is accessible to all users, including riders and drivers and does not impose fees on users to use. another local priority was, expanding the availability of accessible vehicles currently in service, including making available spare vehicles and also improved outreach, especially to short-term visitors and tourists requiring on demand wheelchair service. so, what's next? so, the request for proposal was issued yesterday and is available on the city's procurement website. proposals are due on april 11. sfmta will have an evaluation panel to review all the proposals. this panel consist of

wheelchair users, as well as representative from city agencies and community based organizations serving people with disability. this panel will also reflect the gender and ethnic diversity of the city as well. grants are expected to be awarded in may with the expectation that the projects will begin on july 1. once the projects begin, sfmta is required to submit quarterly reports to the california public utility commission, and we will then undergo the same competitive-similar competitive request for proposal process for the fiscal year 24-25 local access fund, which is again will be about $1.7 million. i have links to the sfmta website for access for all

page, as well as the cpuc, tnc access for all program. and that's the end of my presentation. thank you. >> thank you jonathan. now we are going tool open to the public comment. please open public comment. >> control room, if you can turn the camera to the clerk, please. >> control room, if you can turn the camera to the clerk and we'll begin instructions for public comment. there we go.

>> alright. debbie, do we get any cards from the public for public comment? okay, not seeing any. do you see anyone online? >> let's just do a quick reminder of how to raise hand for public comment and then we'll check one more time. >> if you are joining through the webinar, on the monitor or at home computer or the phone, please look for the horizontal three dots that to raise hand, and we'll recognize you during that term. if you want to use the q & a

portion for public comment, that's listed on the top of the monitor. if you are using a laptop, or computer, the raise hand for questions and answers icon are locate d at the bottom of the video screen. off to the right. if you are joining by phone, please dial * 3 to indicate you like to make a public comment, and we will recognize you when it is your turn. okay, debbie, do we have anyone that you see online? >> nobody online. >> alright. back to you alex. >> thank you. patricia, do you have any comment or questions?

>> not at this time. thank you alex. >> thank you. >> thank you cochair madrid. jonathan, thank you for your presentation. excuse me, i'm making reference to the hard copy here because i was trying to make notes. so, the first thing i want to comment, i want to appreciate your outreach to organizations that serve people with disabilities. i think it is real important to get their input on this and around the training around these providers for people thal have mobility issues and sensitivity. that's real important that they work with the individual and understand what they need during the transportation process. under your program overview, when you basically stated that the cpuc required

transportation network companies, tnc to operate to collect 10 cent fee with each vehicle trip, how come they were not able to do that? >> [indiscernible] >> yeah are, to either off-set or contribute? >> yeah, so the cpuc requires tnc to provide-meet certain criteria to get the exemption or off-sets and the tnc failed to do so, so therefore they were unable to use the funds that were collected to pay for transportation service themselves. as such, this program-the access funds that are given to san francisco is meant to fill that gap that the tnc fail to provide. >> okay. under the discorruption and maybe i'm not understanding this correctly, so educate me. under the various descriptions

between access provider and on-demand transportation, where do the tnc fall under, because dont they provide transportation? the mode of transportation is usually a app downloaded to the phone, but what category as far as what kind of service, because if somebody requests, they have to provide some sort of accessible transportation mode for the person requesting the service, do they not? >> correct. so, the tnc's to clarify the tnc's fail to meet certain threshold set forth by the cpuc. >> okay, that is what i was trying to get-understanding what that is and why they can't do it, so thank you. i was trying to be diplomatic, but you get it. yes, why? >> why? i am not sure why the tnc were

unable to meet this requirement. >> okay. well thank you. didn't mean to-i wanted a better understanding because i know there has been challenges in that area, so i wanted to see if there was any headway, but thank you very much. sorry about that, but i appreciate that. thank you. >> thank you jonathan. i want to follow-up on denise question, when it comes to tnc can not meet the requirements of cpuc and i understand that. there is a certain organization or agency that have an

accessible that people with disability can access on demand, correct? >> yeah, i believe if you open the uber app they should have a wave option. my understanding is whenever-they fail to meet certain thresholds in terms of response times for those-anyone who requested a trip through uber wave and that is why they were unable to claim exemption or off-set. >> do you know if the uber wave is--i guess, if you can't answer my question that they didn't meet the requirements,b is that correct? >> yeah, they failed to meet

certain requirements set forth by the cpuc to claim exemption or off-set. these were standards that were created by the cpuc, california public utility commission at the state level. >> so, if i might just clarify, because this was a nuance that i needed to understand in the beginning also, and jonathan, please correct if i misstating, but i want to make sure everybody understands. this program in itself is not-this program that the sfmta is about to facilitate is about enhancing wheelchair vehicle options outside of the tnc, because the tnc's are not able to effectively address that gap in the time allotted to the tnc's, so because that, the

cpuc is allocating specific funding to jurisdictions to fill the gap a different way and then by that, still meeting it wheelchair access requirements. is that correct? >> yeah. >> thank you. second question i have, you mentioned fy22-23, about $4 million allocated and included -hf-i am just curious what

happened about $3.7 million? does it go to providers or it goes to taxis or what happened to the money? >> yeah, so sfmta received 4 million $4 million for this fiscal year. $600 thousand is allocated for administrative cost that allow sfmta to hire a staff person fully dead caitded for the program. the other $3.4 million is used-this is a grant opportunity, so what we are looking for is proposals that address both the priority that identifies by the cpuc to meet the gap that were left unfill

ed by the tnc and local priorities identified by this working group to enhance wheelchair transportation on demand wheelchair transportation in the city. >> okay, that makes sense. my next question is, what are we doing right now to meet the demand? >> so, sfmta has several initiatives to improve-to enhance the ramp taxis program. currently we offer a per trip incentive to paratransit wheelchair users and general public riders. that is $10 per trip on top of the meter fare. if the trip is completed at night time, so between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m., or in the outlying

neighbors of the sitdy so the richmond district, sunset, park merced area, bayview hunter point, excelsior area, we increase per trip incentive to $15 on top of the meter fare. we also have a vehicle incentive program, so if drivers themselves purchase a wheelchair accessible vehicle, we will give them $800 to a thousand dollars each month if they complete a certain number of wheelchair trips. we also offer airport short taxes that allow the taxi drivers to cut to the front of the line at the airport. right now we will issue 30 passes each month if drivers meet trip thresholds, a certain number of wheelchair trips.

>> i know this must be a touchy subject and tell me if this is not related to this fund about increase of the taxi fare initiative. is that different- >> increase in the meter rate was a totalally separate. >> okay. looking for someone that offered more taxi to the city? >> chair, can you repeat the question? >> i know the mta is looking for more taxi drivers to

operate for the city. >> are you talking about this taxi program? >> yeah. >> so, the city-sfmta is always looking for more taxi drivers. we want to encourage more in the ramp taxi program. we are hoping that-we want these-for this grant we want the proposers to provide-we are opening up to proposers to figure out what the best way to encourage increase on demand transportation services for wheelchair users, so whatever they propose, hopefully that brings in more vehicles, more drivers, better training, more services at night and weekends to improve ramp taxi service. we don't-we are really just-waiting for the proposers to come in to see what is being

offered. >> the last question i have before i turn to the staff is, do we know how many users that utilize the ramp taxi right now? >> i don't have off the top of my head the number of active paratransit wheelchair users who use taxis. i will say that for like for example for the airport short pass, we do require them to do a number of trips to unique riders, so we require them to at least serve 8 different riders, so that would prevent a ramp taxi drivers from just serving one clients to meet their trip requirements, so we are looking for ways to-i couldn't say how many riders

off the top of my head-we hope improvements it the ramp taxi program will increase the number of those who use the service because it is more readily available. that is one of the goals of this grant. >> i think it would be good to let the public know about the taxi program, because i think a lot of people, including myself doesn't know about the taxi program. thank you and i will turn it to the staff if there's questions. >> this is nicole speaking. thank you jonathan and sorry i'm not in a great position. >> i can see you. [laughter] >> we are okay. we are okay.

so, i said some of this before, we had the opportunity as mod to provide feedback as the solicitation for proposals has been developed. i do think though towards cochair madrid's point that, it would be-it is important to make sure that either within the proposals or as part of the awarding process, we also work to emphasize reinvigorating aware ness about the availability of ramp taxi and ramp taxi drivers in san francisco, because i'm not sure that post-covid folks with disabilities who are wheelchair riders are readily aware of how much-the additional fleet that we have on the street now, and

because it got pretty low for a while there, as you know, and now we are slowly building our numbers back up again. again, i advocate for even more data about night is and weekend requests in particular. that is still a place where we have a growth area, but we want to encourage as much multi-modal publicity as we can to help residents and visitors and understand this is a mobility option available for folks, whether it be through the paratransit card, or private pay. we just need to let as many people know about it to support both the industry and also the ability to get around faster

then we can now, and as equivalent when you can as you know, hop into a tnc, and get somewhere in 10 minutes, we are still not there with the equivalent with cabs, and i think this is part of the reason why we are so lucky to have this grant. we have opportunity here, let's use it and help the public understand that it is available. those are my comments. anything from you? >> nothing from me. >> thank you jonathan. please let us know if you need people with disability on the committee. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> if i might through the

chair, when sfmta is at a point where ready to talk about the proposals, i think this council would be interested in what we learn through the proposals. >> more then happy to come back to talk once we select the proposers and what the proposers are proposing and give you a overview of-update. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we are going to item 8. deputy director debbie, information item. correspondence. >> okay. so, in the last month, we received 69 e-mails supporting the proposal for a city wide no

red turn policy. no turn on red policy, and similar to the correspondence that was shared at the mdc meeting in february. in addition, there was one letter sent in from constituents to the mdc, mod and the airport and this has been responded to by officials at the airport, just for your information. i will read the contents of the letter. i am writing because of the lack of disabled parking in the old parts of the sfo long-term

parking lot. you only have disabled parking on the bottom floor. there is no signage to drivers. the disabled parking is only on the first floor. secondly, you took all the disabled spots away on the other floors and placed electric car charging stations instead. next to the elevators for their convenience. at the very least, you could have disabled parking on the 5th floor of the older garage near the elevators so physically disabled people can use the bridge to the air train and newer garage, or keep 2 or 3 disabled parking spots on each floor of the older parking garage. secondly, the new parking garage is all most always blocked off with cones from anyone entering. many times there are disabled

spots available and not reserved in the newer garage, but you block it off with cones and trying to ask the parking attendant to allow entrance, if you do they won't. the person who is sometimes there refuses to allow any entrance, even when the disabled placard is shown. there are physically disabled people that need this access and the sfo airport long-term garage can do a better job. stop blocking off the entrance to the newer garage. place signage at the older garage letting people with disabilities know that the disabled parking is only on the first floor. when i went to the manager at the sfo airport window to asking, they basically did not care. they said to write to you so here i am. please take this feedback and

are consider making some much needed changes for people with disabilities. thank you. and i am happy to report that the airport ada coordinator did respond and many of these changes have been made. >> thank you for that report, debbie. now we are going to open up to general public comment. >> general public comment for items not on the agenda. >> control room, if i can have my camera on myself and the clerk position, please. >> control room-there we go. >> camera on the clerk, please. >> on the clerk. >> this is not the clerk.

>> if we can move the camera to the clerk position. by the computer. there we go. >> great. thank you. we will also-we don't need the interpreter bubble at this time. so, at this time, members of the public may address the council on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council which are not on today's meeting agenda. each member of the public may address the council up to three minutes unless the cochair determines that in the interest of time, comments may be limited to a shorter time when there are large number of

public comments to be made. reminder the brown act forbids the council from taking action or discussing any items not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. if you would like response from the council, please provide your contact information by e-mail message to mdc@sfgov.org with subject line, mdc comment reply request or call, 415-554-6789. do we have anyone online that is wishing to make a comment? i'm seeing no one in the room as well, so we have no one online. cochair alex madrid, there is no public comment at this time and we return the meeting to you. >> thank you.

at this time-before i adjourn the meeting, i just want- >> we will do announcements now. >> yes. >> okay. >> do you have an announcement or comment at this time? >> not at this time. thank you. >> thank you. denise? >> not at this time, thank you cochair. >> thank you. i have a comment. i just want to say to all mother's, happy mother's day. happy woman's month. happy woman's month, and before adjournment, i just want to say thank you for the staff

and for interpreters and for the speakers and my fellow council members. with that, i without objection-- [meeting adjourned]

>> >> (indiscernible) faces transformed san francisco street and sidewalks. local business communities are more resilient and our neighborhood centers on more vibrant ask lively. sidewalks and parking lanes can be used for outdoor seating, dining, merchandising and other community activities. we're counting on operators of shared spaces to ensure their sites are accessible for all and safe. hello, san francisco. i love it when i can cross the street in our beauty city and not worry whether car can see me and i want me and my grandma to be safe when we do. we all want to be safe. that's why our city is making sure curb areas near street corners are clear of parked cars and any other

structures, so that people driving vehicles, people walking, and people biking can all see each other at the intersection. if cars are parked which are too close to the crosswalk, drivers can't see who is about to cross the street. it's a proven way to prevent traffic crashes. which have way too much crashes and fatalities in our city. these updates to the shared spaces program will help to ensure safety and accessibility for everyone so we can all enjoy these public spaces. more information is available at sf dot gov slash

>> it was an outdoor stadium for track and field, motorcycle and auto and rugby and cricket located in golden gate park, home to professional football, lacross and soccer. adjacent to the indoor arena. built in the 1920s. the san francisco park commission accepted a $100,000 gift from the estate to build a memorial in honor of pioneers in the area. the city and county of san francisco contributed an additional $200,000 and the stadium was built in a year. in the 1930s it was home to several colleges such as usf, santa clara and st. mary's for competition and sporting. in 1946 it became home to the san francisco 49ers where they played nearly 25 years. the stayed de yam sat 60,000

fans. many caught game the rooftops and houses. the niners played the last game against the dallas cowboys january 3, 1971 before moving to candlestick park. the stadium hosted other events before demolition in 1989. it suffered damages from the earthquake. it was reconstructed to seat 10,000 fans with an all weather track, soccer field and scoreboards. it hosts many northern california football championship games. local high schools sacred heart and mission high school used the field for home games. the rivalry football games are sometimes played here. today it is a huge free standing element, similar to the original featuring tall pink columns at the entrance. the field is surrounded by the

track and used by high school and college football and soccer. it is open for public use as well. [music] >> san francisco is known as yerba buena, good herb after a mint that used to grow here. at this time there were 3 settlements one was mission delores. one the presidio and one was yerba buena which was urban center. there were 800 people in 1848 it was small. a lot of historic buildings were here including pony express

headquarters. wells fargo. hudson bay trading company and famous early settlers one of whom william leaderdorph who lived blocks from here a successful business person. african-american decent and the first million airin california. >> wilwoman was the founders of san francisco. here during the gold rush came in the early 1840s. he spent time stake himself as a merchant seaman and a business person. his father and brother in new orleans. we know him for san francisco's history. establishing himself here arnold 18 twoochl he did one of many things the first to do in yerba buena. was not california yet and was not fully san francisco yet.

>> because he was an american citizen but spoke spanish he was able to during the time when america was taking over california from mexico, there was annexations that happened and conflict emerging and war, of course. he was part of the peek deliberations and am bas doorship to create the state of california a vice council to mexico. mexico granted him citizenship. he loaned the government of san francisco money. to funds some of the war efforts to establish the city itself and the state, of course. he established the first hotel here the person people turned to often to receive dignitaries or hold large gatherings established the first public school here and helped start the public school system. he piloted the first steam ship

on the bay. a big event for san francisco and depict instead state seal the ship was the sitk a. there is a small 4 block long length of street, owned much of that runs essentially where the transamerica building is to it ends at california. i walk today before am a cute side street. at this point t is the center what was all his property. he was the person entrusted to be the city's first treasurer. that is i big deal of itself to have that legacy part of an african-american the city's first banker. he was not only a forefather of the establishment of san francisco and california as a state but a leader in industry. he had a direct hahn in so many things that we look at in san francisco. part of our dna.

you know you don't hear his anymore in the context of those. representation matters. you need to uplift this so people know him but people like him like me. like you. like anyone who looks like him to be, i can do this, too. to have the city's first banker and a street in the middle of financial district. that alone is powerful. [music]safety. >> folsom street in san francisco south of market home to some of the fill pens and lieutenant governor culture integrity and major it 25er789

and decisions the streets originally developed for industrial activity and move vehicles and goods through the area now the area is a culture at that particular time economic and residential and has more people walking and biking and taking public transit the folsom goals include improving safety and for walking new street trees and ailed street light. thank you very much. sass decorative crosswalks and part of vision zero high energy network part of the 12 period of time of streets in san francisco that gets 58 percent of cashes and industrial challengers pedestrians not sign by car vehicles and walk to

block to block bicycle challenges the future bike lanes in full protection next to the moving vehicle and no way from vehicles to park in the bike lane and with the people thank you for the opportunity right creating unsafe actions at the folsom will include for a moment from 2 to 11th street two-way abag and medians and transit only lanes and street crossings and beverages and now street trees and landscaping the folsom street part of the greater effort to howard street and went there a three year public engagement set the record straight in 2016 improving

traffic safety to people walk and biking and folsom street within second streets yerba buena benefit district is a significant tree place no our neighborhood home to the residents. it provides access to the gardens that includes children's facility and have a traffic hub and offers buildings and small businesses and a lot of excellent restaurants as well. so insuring that into it is safety for the variety of entertainment is important and the be available improvements insuring the safety for transportation and the measure to keep contract at a safe course for drivers as well as pedestrians who walk along the streets we the the hold outs an

excellent amenity for our seniors and children for the streets and provide opportunities for businesses for amenities and beneficiaries to enjoy the neighborhood outside and, of course, the graphic crooks is exciting to us as we pride ourselves on the hub of san francisco and bringing in those additional artistic elements that safety officer as safety features for biking and some of the filing pens directors think that residents and community work in the south of market work with the sfmta to help with the straight projects and access to address pedestrian safety when it comes to biking and the transportation network and making changes that address the high speed of cars impacting

some of the sidewalks. and she states we're excited please keeping and place making component like and some of the street signs and proposed giveaway will be bio street neighborhood improvements to the today's experience of residents and community members. and the sfmta is partnering with sf puc and a contracts engineering for improvement only folsom street and it is expected to begin in early 2024 the project team will work with the community and for outreach and businesses and openhouse in here stay tuned as we describe for

the meeting of the municipal transportation agency. board of directors and parking authority. commission to order. call the roll. item two. director hemminger. here. hemminger. president. director. henderson here. henderson. present. director. hinsey. present hinsey. present. director. so. here. so. present director. tarloff. here to present. chair eken. here. eken. present. director is not expected today. for the record, i note that director hinsey is attending this meeting remotely. director hinsey is reminded that she must appear on camera throughout the meeting. and in order to speak or vote on any items, places you on item number three. the ringing and use of cell phones and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. the chair may order the removal from the meeting room. any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone or other similar sound producing producing electronic device