the night. we prepare the cable cars and -- when the system stops at 2 or 3:00 in the morning. no way for the employees to go there. but a bigger problem yet at our contract this past practices has parking available in it. it is not a meet issue, it is contractual. we signed the contract. it is the contract they signed which they seem to do regularly and don't want to meet with us over the things they sign in the contract, then that's a bigger problem. the signed contract that says people have parking. and then to ignore that and employees coming in all hours of the night and day that -- that don't work those hours and can't afford to live in the city. i wish the guys could live on cesar chavez and enjoy the things you presented today. they can't afford it. they live outside the city and have to commute in. it is not like they could come together and meet in one place

or anything like that. they work all kind of different shifts in different areas. i wish you guys would respect that and look at that. >> thank you. next speaker. >> the last speaker on this matter. >> thank you, directors. the -- i understand that the parking comes with the -- with the union contract. if you don't honor your union contract, this is really improper use of political process. this is not the place -- you don't say, we -- we signed our names over there but over here we're going to work it out some other way. that's just rotten. the other thing i like to point out is that -- the wording of this item is boilerplate. it is not possible to read this and know that you're talking about taking a parking place away from people. it sounds like you're trying to charge for space that is yours.

that sounds reasonable. if it doesn't sound like what -- what it says, then what you have is -- is a wicked cipher with no difference between word and deed. i really am disappointed to see this kind of boilerplate put in front of the public. thank you. >> there's one more. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. thank you so much. members of the board of directors. my name is kevin luse. i'm business representative with local number six. regarding item 13, speaking in opposition. as far as equitable treatment goes, we say if we charge the public for parking, why don't we charge the employees that provide parking to the public? as far as -- as far as the reason why they should -- public transit employees should be

treated differently is they don't have a choice. as far as transit first policy, we encourage the public to utilize transit. as an employee you may not have the selection, due to the fact that you're off, off peak as it relates to your ability to travel to work. that is an exceptional and unusual circumstance as it relates -- in my mind as it relates to transit employees in particular. in addition if you're a city employee who provides public education at unified or community college sdefwrict, you don't have to pay to park. if you're employed by the city and county of san francisco, the city doesn't seek two extract revenue from you to provide the public service. yet if you're a public transit employee, you're expected to be held to the public standard versus the other similar situations of public employees.

with respect to collective bargaining agreements, i believe that the terms of the collective bargaining agreements will trump, i suggest if you haven't got an opinion from council -- counsel you seek that. and then also look for a cost-benefit analysis. if it hasn't beep done as it relates to -- been done, cost to install, implementation. the impact on adjacent neighborhoods, because you're going to have impacts on adjacent neighborhoods as it relates it -- relates to -- >> that it? >> yes. >> i guess you have something to talk about. >> thank you, chairman knollalen. the speakers have raised a number of good points here. in fact what the m.t.a. board is being asked to vote on today is in fact a modification of -- to the transportation code, which will prohibit any nons.s.m.t.a.

property on a s. is s.m.t.a. property unless it pays $55 for a violation. that's a narrow description of what we're being asked to adopt here today. i'm okay with adopting that narrow language with the very important caveat and that's that the -- the motion would be amended as such that under no circumstances will this action by the board violate any collective bargaining agreement and is signed by the m.t.a. of the city and county of san francisco. >> second to that? >> seconded. >> discussion on the amendment? >> is there a staff reaction to that? is that acceptable to -- >> to the board. >> we're -- we're not in the business of -- of breaking

contracts. >> you're just making explicit -- what we anticipate happening. >> make it explicit. >> absolutely. >> and the issues raised. >> to be a part of the motion. >> i just want to make sure that doesn't give the impression that we assume that contract will complaint to have that parking in it going forward iner. tutey, but it would always be up for renegotiation. >> assume that's correct. >> that's correct. >> and the term of the existing agreements. >> it doesn't presuppose all of our contracts have such provisions. what director beach is saying underscoring if -- >> i didn'tcy if, i said we will not violate the terms of any collective bargaining agreement. >> it is not writing terms in an agreement that doesn't exist. >> or that will exist going

forward. >> coming up the -- >> we have 22 different unions that are represented in the m.t.a. specifically in terms of debra, would you have that number of the contract that is have language related to -- to parking and which ones the -- the number that don't. they have 20 collective bargaining agreements, we negotiate eight of those contracts. in reference to -- to the collective bargaining agreements that have language, i don't have the document in front of me. i would have to turn to staff to see if they have that readily available if you allow me to do that. i pool jice. i didn't bring that with me. in reference to -- in reference to mr. hughes comments regarding that contract, local six, i do

know that's included in the contract. i also know that 144 in reference to mr. gonzalez when he made reference to the contract, it is included there. there's not a direct reference -- i know in regards to local 258. i do know that. i can double back with you once again and provide you that information. i apologize, i don't have that forlede present with me to outline each and every one of the labor units. >> to be clear. i don't want to put words in director beach's mouth. i think we're on the same page. if a collective bargaining agreement has a provision for parking that we're not oning to that. this is adopted for those workers that do not have it in the contract. that's how i understand the amendment. >> it is but i want to make clear what we're voting on is only a penalty if a vehicle does not dismay a appropriate proof of payment. >> yes. >> we put this as part of the

budget last year and i understand that people don't pay a lot of attention to it. it actually starts to happen. this is a clarification. i have to say though that i found it disappointing that that flier that -- that a couple of gentlemen showed me, that flier that appeared last week, my mind the intent of the couple of weeks was that -- as a courtesy to the drivers and employees to get their input and see if there were extenuating circumstances that we didn't know about. to have that go out, to my mind, is an unfortunate mistake. i don't know if you talked about that at all, but because of his right, this body's decision to do this -- or not, and -- i think jump the gun on that at the very least. >> right. our original schedule was much sooner in the year then it got moved to february 1st. we continued it once again. it was clearly a situation where our managers who are -- are

1307bsible for those area -- responsible for those areas in parking, they understood we were moving forward february 1st based on the original board decision with the approval of the budget. i guess it did not filter down that we were debating and discussing this issue. >> i wouldn't have a problem with it a week after or something. the whole point of the thing was to be respectful of our employees. to my mind that's not. i don't think there's malice behind it. it 150e78s that way. >> okay. >> -- nothing to say about that. >> [inaudible] >> great. >> chairman is lipping here this afternoon. >> okay director beach's motion. for the to stay together. >> my -- my motion is that under the terms of what the board is being asked to adopt today that under no circumstances will this

violate any of the terms of current collective bargaining agreements. it does not preclude this item coming up for negotiation in the future. >> that's the motion. there was a second. so further discussion, all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> and an amended resolution. is there a motion? >> i have that. where. as i understand it, this sort of authorizes you guys to enforce this. when i say that, i should be more specific. >> this just set the penalty for violation of it. it does not speak to whether you're going to do it or not. that action in terms of whether the board is implementing employee parking or not was made back at the approval of the budget. >> we did that in the budget. my question to this is now we're going to enforce this policy, if this passs with this penalty, the -- does staff have a plan to address the situation, where for example you have a mechanic who is working from 11:00 a.m. to

4:00 a.m., and these odd off-hour shifts. is that something that will be addressed as this plays out over time. maybe the better way to ask, what is your reaction to that specific concern? >> in our discussions regarding this, clearly there's no one size fits all. while we have -- a memo that came out on inadvertently, our plan is to be sensitive in how we implement this. we value the employees that work off hours and the impact this will have on them. we'll work facility by facility and deal with the unique situations and work environments to make sure there's no -- no overarching burden on our employees. it is not going to be easy. but this concept we're there. i think in terms of the details and marching it out vas ilt -- facility and by facility and work group and those that have

it in the bargaining agreement and those that don't, the actual paying of fines and things of that nature, we have ideas but ultimately we're going to have to deal with these on a case by case basis. >> okay. on the -- the motion? the total resolution. the resolution as amended. do you have one? >> so moved. >> second. motion and second. further discussion. all in favor say aye. opposed. thank you. >> mr. chairman moving on to the next item. item 14 recommending the approval of amendments to the transportation code, one by amending and establish [inaudible] parking meters and establish, for broken parking meters for off street parking.

do you want to address you on this matter? >> the public. >> okay. >> good afternoon. i want to say that -- i think i'm going to -- support this and say that this was a fair resolution to this. and address the concerns of the public and also the board. i urge you to pass this. as compared to the last measure which i think is insensitive, charging police officers for parking on their property now, you're going to charge bus drivers for parking on their property. >> one of the big concerns is the vandalism to the parking meters. so our hope is that the two-hour time limit will reduce the vandalism and just to remind everyone if it doesn't -- as we discussed, we look at it again

in maybe a year or whatever reasonable amount of time and make sure the vandalism gone down. >> second. >> any further discussion? all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> authorizing [inaudible] contract number 1239, track improvement project with n.t.k. construction. and for a team not to exceed 710 calendar days. no member of the public has indicated an interest on addressing you on this one. >> a question for staff. the duration of this contract is -- is you know, almost a two years, at some point will we get a presentation on what -- what provisions are being made to replace the n. and j. lines when we do track work in this &. it is something the public will have a high level of interest in. >> yes. we're going to be prepared to

present that item to you in the upcoming meetings. the construction is going to start around september. before that, definitely we'llee we'll come back with more on the construction sequencing and all of it. >> socon instruction runs into september -- contrucks into 2013. >> from the proceed date. >> i'm sorry, it goes into 2013. thank you very much. i move the item. >> second? >> discussion? >> sorry. >> me again. i was very involved in this biff came on the board. the track y. project had a lot of community involvement and i think the staff helped move this along. i know one concern that the community had going forward, without signalizing the intersection, which nobody wanted to do, not the m.t.a. or

community, not to make it cheer who has the right of way when the train is going through and how to get the cross traffic and pedestrian twrask to get -- to stop and let the train through. there was discussion at the the meeting. maybe we should look into doing a study not to just handle that intersection but other interseconds where trains are moving through a crowded intersection, with just a sign, to make sure that the trains move through and get the right of way. there was talk of just maybe looking into it, a small study, getting a consultant on board. it is not an issue just at this intersection. it is an issue at intersections in the city, where transit goes through. it would make it worth our while to figure out how to address that, which is not happening in the cannot fines of this project. it is not appropriate to be a part of that bigger project. it is something to consider going forward. >> yes. >> and look into that. come back with a recommendation.

>> thank you. >> thank you. we have a motion. a second? >> second. >> director hunnicutt. the motion and second. resolution. aye. >> aye. >> and -- >> the discussion whether to have a closed session. >> so moved. >> second. >> all say aye. >> aye. >> we're in closed session. it'll take u >> 0 out of closed session. the members spoke this closed session. the they voted unanimously to settle the case and discussed -- there's a motion to disclose or not disclose. >> not disclose. >> second. >> say aye. all in favor.

>> aye. >> the meeting is adjourned.

>> i would like to call the meeting to order. second item please. >> [roll call] 0 commissioners are present. -- all commissioners are present. president vietor: i would like to welcome commissioner courtney.

pleased to have you. next item. >> the approval of the minutes of the december 10 special joint meeting. are there any additions or corrections? president vietor: a motion? >> so moved. >> second. president vietor: questions, comments, amendments? all those in favor? motion carries. >> general public comment. members of the public may address the commission on items that are not on today's agenda. we have no speaker cards, but i see a speaker. >> i just wanted to say hello to the commissioners, it is great to have a full commission. we are excited about commissioner courtney.

we think it will be a big year. we are excited about all of the commissioners, it will be an exciting year. and the caliber and expertise that is on this commission, a lot of people in the disadvantaged communities are working together to help accomplish the commission's mission. president vietor: thank you for those comments. any other public comment? next item. >> the commissioners have received copies of all the communications listed in the letter summary. additionally, you will have a revised letter summary with three additional communications that were received after it was posted. the commissioners have received all of the print copies and

electronic copies hundred staff report-- under staff report. president vietor: questions or comments? >> i have a comment on the calendar. commissioner caen: i can't find it, but i think we have lost our statement. we have all of this excess real- estate we have not moved on. i would like to bring that forward. >> we are expecting that that will come up on the february a calendar -- 8 calendar. we will keep that to one month from now. as a reminder, this is a month that we are asking for a lot of

time and attention. the budget hearings will be on the fourth floor, not in this building. both meetings start at 9:30 in the morning. on the twenty fifth, we have a regular meeting for the commission scheduled and we do not think we need that meeting. if you want to discuss that here and now, we can cancel it if you like. on the twenty seventh, we have the capital discussion. the planning commission should be hearing the environmental review that day. we were hoping that to happen in the planning commission and then have it come to us. we have reserved a room in this building in the morning, but we are not expecting it to happen.

we have meetings scheduled at 9:30 on february 3 and the regular meeting on february 8. those meetings are to finalize discussions in the budget and adopt it. you can decide whether you want to cancel the meeting in february 3 or have it that day. we are asked a lot of questions, and that is why we have scheduled that meeting in case you want to have a more involved in discussion of some of the questions. we can see how far we have gotten and get to february 3 or just go to february 8. we have to fit in the mayor's schedule for delivering a budget in the middle part of february.

the meeting at the end is a good time for it. we will be asking for discussion given your direction for what you want us to come back with or answer questions if you want us to answer. the first question is on the 25, we don't believe that you have to have a meeting that day unless you believe you need an extra meeting for budget discussions or other items. it doesn't seem to cause any difficulty in terms of timing. president vietor: because we would move a couple of items from the 25 to the 27, starting that meeting a little bit earlier? >> we can do that. one item cannot be voted on until the planning commission gets to it. it might be at least the middle of the afternoon.

president vietor: can we get everything done starting at 1:00? gosh i think so. president vietor: and we can move on to the proceedings? >> it has not caused any issues. other things are simple updates. it is really the capital discussion. we have a very flat budget and we are not proposing to do a lot of different things. some of those discussions might be less involved. you might want to rearrange what it is we are left doing. president vietor: commissioners? commissioner torres: i was in

sacramento yesterday for the swearing in of commissioner courtney, and i had a chance to speak with the secretary and i wanted to extend to him an opportunity, whenever it is appropriate, i think we will have a different perspective and a different vision for california. his confirmation will be delayed a little bit because the supreme court nomination is going to be forthcoming. at the end of the day, i think we will have a very good relationship with the secretary. >> we have sent him our first letter. commissioner torres: i saw that. president vietor: other items? >> on the 25th. >> if we can eliminate the meeting, i am all for it. president vietor: objections?

>> we will wipe off the 25th meeting. on march 22nd, the items of interest are the wholesale rate in the environmental enhancement surcharge. i believe we can postpone those to the following meeting without any problems. but i wanted to make sure that we were not going to bump into somebody else's schedule. instead of having those items on march 22, we will have them on april a -- april 12. if that is not a problem, we will move that also. president vietor: that will not get us into any issues with compliance of the water agreement? >> we can push them back until later as far as i have been