>> i can give you just briefly. we can arrange another time to come. i know we were trying to schedule a time to talk about specifics. i can tell you that in general there are about 46 cases that are enrolled. commissioner kim: how many? i'm sorry. >> 46. and most of them are kristin cavallari and habitual. and there's been an estimated 36% decrease from chronic to habitual. some of the profiles we're dealing with, we're talking about youth that are multisystems involved so jdp and h.s.a. have been at the table to talk about dealing with wrap-around services and addressing some of the needs young people have through sfusd. we've worked closely with student support services. the referral process has really been from sfpd, from the d.a.'s office, all the active partners have did referral services

inside tark. >> have local businesses and parents been referring students, as well? >> oh, yes. parents have. we haven't received too many local business referrals. part of our efforts were just to out-reach and have the community involved with preventing some of the truancy. but besides that, we've mostly received referrals from parents in that area and there are parents that have come specifically with their children on an ongoing basis that just say, please help me with some of the issues dealing with young people but we can arrange a specific presentation so you can hear more. commissioner kim: i'm curious as to what has been most successful so far. >> the success has been, according to what we hear on a weekly basis, is really having the case managers engage and identify the agencies that are already involved and coupling some of the mental health services, like, for example, with d.p.h., and offering

multiple opportunities for some of the young people. the case management is one piece of the puzzle. so walking these young people back to the school environment, having the school community engaged, all of those have been the successes or the anchors that have really resulted in improvement in attendance. commissioner kim: have we thought about, for the students that aren't going to civic center, for example, or principal center, have we thought about calling those families and door knocking to see what we can do to get them back in school? >> at this point, i know that the d.a. has tried to communicate with them on that heavy hand lens. there has been notices. we've done some calls but definitely that's an area where we need a lot more staffing and support. but we have done a couple of phone calls and i know that there are some efforts through the city that we were all going to purposely commit to per

agency. so there's different calls in different ways. there hasn't been something that's been done large or systematically. commissioner kim: i would be very interested in that because i think that sending letters is not the best way to outreach. i brought this up at the last school board meeting but i have been meeting our truant students on the streets, door knocking, and i think it's the best way to reach out to them to find out why they're not in school. i personally feel uncomfortable asking you to pick them up with the police. i don't feel comfortable doing that. it's not because the police are not friendly, but i feel bad after i build that relationship with a student to have the police officer come and pick them up. i wish there was another way to have someone come to their door and bring them another way. >> we have found a good solution

is having the c.r.n. involved. commissioner kim: that's right. yeah. >> so what we've done is that some of the young people that have been truant know that -- especially with the northwest c.r.n. chris commissioner kim: that's a great use of c.r.n. >> so we've been providing the safe transportation they provide to get young people back to the center and reengage with their education. >> what's the break on elementary, middle, and high school students of the 46? do you have round numbers? >> they're all high school students. the 46 are all high school students. there are no middle school students enrolled at the moment. and the elementary students, they're not tark-focused. >> commissioner mendoza. commissioner mendoza: the other thing i want to add is that we

have parents that bring their kids to tark which was really surprising. but there were a series of things that they were not successful in doing so they brought their own children down to ask for support. >> i want to piggyback on this a little bit. i know the board of ed members know this, but the supervisors may not know that in addition to the wonderful work that tark is doing, the school district also employs at this point six -- i wish it could be double that number -- but six child welfare and attendance liaisons that work out of student support services, and nine attendance liaisons that work directly out of the assistant superintendent teams, and they are, in fact -- and i couldn't agree more that what really needs to happen oftentimes is to go and knock on a door and say, gee, we're here because we care about you. we know you're not attending

school, can you talk to us about what's going on. so that is happening, not on the scale we wish it would happen. i do know that at civic center, they have a full-time attendance liaison there who i believe is doing some of those home visits now to try to find some of those students that were assigned there and for varieties of reasons didn't go to school there. so we also have retired teachers that we have making phone calls and in some cases home visits, as well. >> colleagues, i think we've handled the questions that we've had. i want to thank the presenters. i think this is an excellent continuation of our hearing and we're glad to know that tark has got clients and to talk about the big issues ahead. and most importantly, about the collaboration. i want to acknowledge

assemblyman reano with proposition h. that created a whole different dynamic where we were investors and supporters of the success of the school district and it opens doors in both direction and it's much, much more than just the money. beyond that, i think there's a whole area of collaboration. i did not open this up to public comment. if there are any members of the public that wish to be heard on any aspect of this hearing, we'll open it up to public comment. seeing none, we'll close public comment and with that, we will continue this item to the chair and thank everyone for their participation. we are adjourned.

supervisor campos: good morning and welcome to the tuesday october 19, 2010 meeting of the transportation authority plans and programs committee. my name is david campos, the chair of the committee. to my right is carmen chu. present our david chiu, commissioner john avalos should be here shortly. bevan dufty is in route. covering the meeting for sfgtv are derek fernandez. do we have any announcements?

>> no. >> please call item 2. >> approve the minutes of the september 21, 2010 meeting. this is an action item. supervisor campos: is there any member of the public debt would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. second by david chiu. without objection. item three. >> citizens advisory committee report. this is an information item. >> good morning, members of the commission. i am the chair of the citizens advisory committee. we only have one item on our agenda which is also on your agenda, your item 5, allocation of prop k funds for traffic calming, traffic signals, and

amending the five-year plan. there were a few questions from cac members, particularly about traffic calming adjacent to the visitation green way valley. there was a difference between the overhead multiplier for muni and d p t, and questions about whether there was a national standard for traffic signals designed. as i said, it all passed unanimously. that concludes my report. supervisor campos: thank you. colleagues, any questions? any member of the public that

would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. item four. >> item 4. presentation on the future of bicycling in san francisco. supervisor campos: i know we are waiting for what proved to be, i am sure, an excellent presentation on the future of bicycling in san francisco. >> good morning, director. this item was originally requested by commissioner david chiu. we briefed you last month on the launch of our investment in this program over the next 25 years. following that presentation, commissioner chiu asked us to provide a plan for bicycling in the future. this is the time to talk about our vision for the bicycling network and overall transportation system.

as we know, bicycling is a wonderful mode that is growing in san francisco. it is a zero emission, healthy and active way to travel around the city. in recent years, we have seen a place making and economic development benefits across the u.s. banks to this. we have seen evidence of this as well in the city. bicycle sharing and tourism also represents significant opportunities for us. in 2004, the countywide transportation plan did prioritize bicycling through a dedicated prop k tax category. in the past five years, even

despite the bicycle plan in junction that limited the projects, i am sure they will speak about this later, but there were 128,000 daily bicycle trips in 2008. mta's manual bicycle count shows a 56% increase in the number of cyclists. we expect demand to grow in bicycling. this means we have to keep routes clear. there are 25 or so miles remaining in the card was a " plan, bringing the total mileage to 79 in san francisco. the total billed out of the

network, the board approved the five ypp for bicycling, which includes a five-year prioritization program. it includes $5.4 million in prop k funding for bicycle network development, and identifies a further $19 million in leveraged funds. these include funds for bicycle to work day promotion, education, safety classes, and importantly, $3.1 million for the actual network development for bicycle lanes and paths, facilities, installations, and innovative treatments. funding for bicycle projects is not a major challenge. the greater constraints is achieving consensus among agencies that and the public on

where to put facilities and what type of treatment we should use. treatments could be different depending on the project in vision. however, we are aware of the benefit of taking up a multi modal approach, rather than focusing on a single street. this is the approach san francisco agencies are taking on market street. either way, it is important to plan now to prioritize the next goals of the next-generation of bicyclists. supervisor campos: thank you. i think we are going to hear from david chiu. supervisor chiu: it is good to be on this side of the aisle. first of all, thank you for presenting the item. the ta and city is engaged in long-term transportation planning and i thought it was appropriate to think about the future of bicycling in san

francisco. i first want to know, i think we are at a crossroads. we have a lot of political support for moving forward many different modes of transportation, particularly bicycling. with the lifting of the bicycle in junction, we have a lot of short term plans of what we want to do. at this time, it is fair to say there is a lot of planning we need to do in the long run. i want to thank mayor newsom for building his commitment to this. i know that the 11-0 vote that we had in relation to this program shows that we are a body committed to working with the larger san francisco community to move the vision forward. in this regard, during the legislative recess, i decided to travel with a number of mta officials as well as the head of the department of public works, as well as elected leaders from around the bay area, to look and

what best practices existed in europe and in particular, the netherlands. i would like to give a brief presentation on some of the things we learned and then invite the coalition to present their own thinking. when i came back, i had a number of meetings with the bike coalition, and i realize that our long-term vision was shared. it is that shared vision that we would like to present today. if i could have our slides. >> by the way, we wanted to label this, what i did last summer. [laughter] supervisor chiu: we put these together last night. i also want to thank the bikes belong program which looks at best practices from around the world. many of us who have looked at this know that the statistics of

biking modal share in europe and in several countries really contrasts with what we have in the u.s. i would describe the reason why we went on this trip to understand why these statistics are why they are, and what was on the ground. looking at the statistics, at this time, 1% of americans bike on a regular basis. that compares with the netherlands at 27%. most european countries fall in between those two. if you look at san francisco -- in the american context, we are doing pretty well. we are fourth or fifth in terms of beit kucinich -- bike usage. if you compare that to major

cities in the netherlands, you can see these numbers pale considerably. and just as an example, if you look at the mobile split between biking, transit, cars, it is quite dramatic. here in san francisco, 6% compared to 36% on the biking side which equals, at this time , essentially what you see from public transit and car trips. if you look at the percentage of trips taken into the city center and the heart of some of our major cities in the netherlands, including amsterdam, over 50% of the trips taken into the city center are done by bike. so we went there trying to understand why this was the case. it is difficult, i think, to

show the phenomenon that you see on the ground. i want to show you a couple of pictures that demonstrate what we saw. it is fair to say the one big observation many of us had is everyone in the netherlands bikes, whether you are a child, whether you are a family. we saw many scenes of three, four individuals on one apparatus. whether you are a senior, riding bicycles -- we need to insure that however you are traveling, you can do so safely. more importantly, in the netherlands, folks bike in the rain, in the snow, and for those

of you those ofhills, they have ski lift-like contraptions that pull you up the hill. in the netherlands, the history of that country, until 1973, tracked the history of our own country in terms of automobile usage. but the country made a significant decision during the oil embargo that one of their national responses to wean themselves off of oil the dependence was to invest in biking infrastructure. if you look at this chart from 1975, when a number of policies were implemented, the number of individual riding bicycles, which had been declining in previous decades, started to rise again. similarly, bike fatalities, which had been increasing over

time, started to drop precipitously in the mid-1970s. at this time, in 2010, given the issues that the world is facing with oil dependency, given what we know about global warming, about the importance with regards to the health and safety of being able to bike, it is important to consider whether we can replicate this type of transportation. we visited various cities and we noticed five specific things that cities are implementing. it was not a cultural thing within the netherlands. there were specific policy measures that they decided to implement in the mid-1970s. i am going to quickly run through what these elements were involved in a bicycle networks, parking, safety,

prevention efforts, theft, education. first and foremost, in every city in the netherlands where you have significant bicycling, there is a freeway system for bicycles. a rich network of paths and the roads that connects writers -- riders to every part of the city. secondly, in many cities there is a real investment in bike parking. compared to car parking, and average space could be replaced by 10 to 12 bicycles. here you can see the type of density that can bring literally hundreds of thousands of individuals into the center city. -- city center. bike safety is an enormous issue that has been tackled successfully in the netherlands. there are specific engineering

improvements like signals, mirrors attached to traffic lanes, specific areas of the road protected for cyclists which has led to a dramatic increase in safety. if you look at cycling fatalities in the netherlands, the united states actually has a rate 6 times higher than what you see there. the more investment unit, the saver is for everyone on the road. given the number of bikes on the road in european countries, there are significant theft policies. everything from being able to tag them, track them, and law enforcement who takes bike theft seriously. finally, one important cultural element of the netherlands is

just as we spend time in our high schools and with adults engaged in driver education, in the netherlands there is significant education started at a young age, often at the early elementary school years. the last thing i want to mention, there are questions about the business case for why we want to consider in this area. transportation experts understand the return on investment of investing in a dollar into biking compared to other modes of transportation is significant. in portland, which is one of a number of cities leading the way in the u.s., the total cost of a 300-mile network, $60 million. in comparison, the total cost of being able to develop 1 mile of the urban freeway for cars, the same amount, $60 million.

if you look at the impact of biking on the local economy, is even more extreme. there are many cities for which they have seen a significant boon to local merchants, businesses, the local climate, because of improvements in investment. if you look at portland, toronto, canada, if you look at valencia street coming here in san francisco, when you add bicycle lanes and parking, it helps the local economy. where are we going cu ? we established as a city to have 10% of our cities heckling by 2010. we are not there yet, but we are making significant headway. i believe it is a good time for us to set some goals. it is important