for six years now. i can assure the committee with my own reputation that there is no concern about his safety or the operation of his company. thank you. >> thank you, supervisors. charlesmont quist. along with daniel and here, other tour operators, we do see the segway towards all over fisherman's wharf and north beach, now in golden gate park. especially with their safety record, as well as a personal user of golden gate park, i feel they are very safe. i have never had a problem with them interfering with my walking around golden gate or operating a business at fisherman's wharf. supervisor mar: how long have

you been in business? >> we started about six months after the electric tour company. july 2005. supervisor mar: thank you. >> thank you. i am with silicon segway. we are the folks that started the tours in golden gate park. it was our idea, the routes were ours, and we obtained a six- month permit to operate the stores. after completing six successful months, we went another six months to operate. we had a great time. when it came time to renew the permit, it was opened up to everyone and we did not win the permit to continue. i am not sure why it was. i suspect for local reasons. i am here today to support your

approval of the san francisco electric tour company's use of golden gate park. they are highly qualified, as you can tell from what you have heard today. i am sure they will do an outstanding job for you. it seems strange to be dating segway use at all. here we are in san francisco, where the police officers are, at this moment, at the largest airport, conducting safety and security operations on board segways. it works there just fine. in san jose, they use them as well. around the world, segways are used for various purposes. tours are just a small part of that. supervisor mar: could i just say -- this is in an historic park with many sensitive areas,

wildlife, plants, so it might be different from the airport. >> i am quite aware of the value of the park. that is why we put segway tours in the park. we appreciate the chance to be there. golden gate park is entirely too big to be seen by foot. you cannot walk the whole park. you cannot drive the whole park. there are not trams to take you around. the best way to see golden gate park is by segways. i believe you should not only approve the san francisco electric tour company's tours, i believe you should rent them to everyone who wants to go. you selected a vendor to produce this result. i would urge you to leave them alone and let them do their job. thank you.

>> good morning. warrick farmer. national sales manager for open top san francisco. i would like to speak to you in regards to two points. one as a tourist and one as an operator. i have lived in many cities around the world and i have taken in many segway tours. it is a fabulous way to see the scope of golden gate park. it is quiet, efficient, and safe. but it has been said at nauseam here today. as a tour operator in fisherman's wharf, in union square, and also golden gate park, we deliver thousands of people, especially to golden gate, who want to explore. we feel is a good partnership. we have never had a problem with them on the streets in

fisherman's wharf, and we feel it would be a great opportunity for the city. >> good morning. my name is steven steinberg, owner and operator of segway oakland. i participated in a pilot program to bring segways to the state. i also ran experiments out on angel day. we have a multi-use trails with bikers, joggers, and we share the roads with the tram system out there. we were under close supervision from the rangers department, which is also on the island. they were watching us on a daily basis to make sure we could interact with people. daily, when people were leaving, the rangers would question them

as they believe in, what did they think about us being out there? when we originally started, there were quite a few news articles and complaints in the community that we were going to cause a lot of noise and hurt people. the park system saw that after one year, that did not happen. not only did it not happen, we were one of the safest operations in the country. and we generated $300,000 in additional income in five months that the parks collected 50% of. within a year, the parks decided to run the operation themselves, and have now bought rental fleets to put into three of their park systems. use on the trails show that we did not do any more destruction than bikers and hikers. we were the only people on the island that were actually guided

and govern any type of speed. hikers and joggers could go as fast as they wanted, bikers to do with a wanted. people on our tours travel an average of 4.5 miles per hour around angels island. if anyone was riding on safe, they were warned. if they continued, they were taken off the tour. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. catherine howard. golden gate preservation alliance. i want to clear up an implication in the early testimony by rec and parks. we do not support segways in golden gate park. 2 rec and park, i want to say, please stop doing this sort of thing. there are problems with segways in golden gate park. our main complaint has been with the music concourse.

segways would join food trucks and future bicycle rental of vendors. you probably do not know about that. segways and bicycles will use the area behind a band shell for training and practice. this means that banks and segways will be visible behind performances. this will be distracting. in addition, with all of this going on, there will be a danger in the backstage area. there are performances, there are many children that come to the city. there is the danger of a child being injured by a bike or segway out on a practice run. these are practice runs and there are concerned with people tumbling down the steps. the golden gate park master plan recommends this area be designed as an attractive, high-quality area to match the dignity of the concourse. this current, haphazard increased commercialization of the error does not meet that

standard. the master plan was written by the rec and parks art and as recently as 1998. it is being used as a document to use the hank recycling center from the park, but when it comes to other things that the organization wants to do, they ignore it. the exploitation of the band shell for these commercial ventures is a short-sighted. it does not measure up to the millions of dollars the city has already spent in renovating the music concourse, ban the shelf, and most recently, the historic fountain. our request of new designs have been ignored. we think this is a terrible location. this is just one of our concerns. supervisor mar: thank you. emily wilcox. if there is anybody else, please line up. >> my name is emily wilcox, and

i am a resident of berkeley, formerly of san francisco. i use my battery powered segway as it and assistive mobility device, as a pedestrian. it provides functionality, similar to my battery-powered wheelchair. i am not affiliated with any tour provider or segued dealer. i am here today to support the tour company's request. it is reasonable. it is a way for persons with disabilities who are able to safely use a segway as and assistive mobility device, to try the device. and number three, it is time to stop the exaggerated and hostile environment created -- and some seem to brag about it -- developed before even segways were available to the public.

i got mine in 2004. i had to go through an unpleasant process of getting modification to policy for san francisco's segway restrictions. i could have ridden into this hearing because i am allowed to use it as i would use my wheelchair. i would suggest to members of this committee and board of supervisors, look at emeryville's municipal codes on segways. it allows for -- it requires safe use of sidewise by members of the public. police can decide and enforce. but it also has something very important to me. any person with a disability, as that term is defined, shall not be subject to the restrictions on the use -- blah, blah, blah.

something like that would reduce the harassment. i was a salted once and verbally assaulted many times. supervisor mar: so you are a berkeley resident, and you say that you have been harassed because of your side would use? >> i even have a plastic placard with a wheelchair symbol on the front, and i am still subject to harassment. you should be walking. you are over privileged. get down on that thing and walk. obviously, i can walk, but it is painful. and my distance is limited. since 2004, i have not injured anyone or any property. my primary use is to get to the dental building at the top of powell street, which i cannot do

under my own steam. supervisor mar: thank you. any public speakers, please come forward. >> i am a resident of san francisco, i go to golden gate a lot. i am involved in park issues. i want to tell you, i have edited 3 guides for windchills users to the california coast. one of the primary changes was to allow wheelchair access to areas around the coast. one thing we have learned -- by the way, this was all written by people who use wheelchairs. they were all really knowledgeable about wheelchairs'. not every place can be

wheelchair it accessible that is public. i am not here to oppose segways in golden gate park. but there are some places, particularly in reserved lands, it has to be quiet places where there is just walking. i do not think there are that many in golden gate park. i would plead for you to make sure, where the subway tors cove, where bicycles all sway -- segway tours go, where bicycles also can go. supervisor mar: thank you. mr. salinas? >> good morning, members of the committee. thank you for allowing us to speak. i just wanted to say, i was so impressed with the fact of this

business hiring san franciscans. it is something that i have been aspiring to. it is nice to see that. pars has raised a valid issue, in that staff has denied access to bicyclists on some paths. i am sure that that is something that you will be looking into. i hope they can find a way to resolve that. obviously, it is important that this international destination be open to everyone. there are people with limited mobility issues that would not be in a position to see this glorious park. i am the former president of the san francisco recreation and park department commission. i know most of the parks of the city, and everyone should enjoy this. i have to say, they sound like they have an excellent safety record. i am sure you have looked into that.

most importantly, for me, right now, the department needs the resources. i would hope this committee would take all of that into consideration. i am very supportive of this endeavor. thank you, supervisors. supervisor mar: seeing that there are no others, this will be the and the public comment. >> chairman avalos, supervisors, my name is david hooper. i am a frequent user of the east and west end of the park, and other parks in the city. what compelled me to talk on this issue is hearing that pedestrians were a special interest group. i had not hurt -- thought of it that way before. tourism is a big deal in san francisco. it is a great idea that segway people have been able to have a safe record down at fisherman's wharf, on city streets, and that

they manage them correctly on city streets. but my problem with it is having them on the pathways that are not designated for bicycles, and should be just pedestrians only. if it is good for segway, it is good for seven cisco, i guess, with limitations. -- san francisco, i guess, with limitations. i would suggest that you go back with rec and parks and see which trails would be better. i am surprised that they ever even thought about strawberry fields because that is not even paved. that part of golden gate park is not paved over. i cannot believe that they would even want to run the segway over that. i would suggest that you go back and revisit the paths, find out

what limitation you can put on them while they still do their business. supervisor mar: thank you. supervisor avalos: we will close public comment. supervisor mar: i had some questions for mr. kinsey. i think there needs to be more conducconversation with the vars groups. i would hope that my office and your organization can have a meeting. it does sound like some of those quiet and sensitive pathways, and aids memorial grove, other stuff that may not be a corporate for segway use -- but other areas, if they are well- paved, wider -- i do not have as much a concern, but others might. i was going to ask you about the number of segways in the park at

any number, a maximum number, and what are the hours of use right now? >> 8 guests per one tour guide. two tours a day, one going out at 10:00, the second at 2:00, 3:00. >supervisor mar: so is there any maximum? i have the police in front of me. i guess there is the concern there would be too many segways. if it becomes too popular, there might be too many in the park. >> there is a maximum number of hours they are allowed to

operate out there. there is also a maximum on the amount of space they have to store these segways in golden gate park. i think we are only looking at a maximum of one group being out at a time. supervisor mar: i was just going to mention to my colleagues, i will help to convene the meeting with the stake holders that spoke of today. i want to thank the san francisco electric tour company for coming out to educate us, as well on the use of segways in other areas. through chair at avalos, i would like to continue this item to the call of the chair. i will do my best to convene meetings with stakeholders and at rec and parks, to address different concerns. that would be my request. supervisor avalos: we will do just that.

thank you, supervisor mar. madam court, if you could please call item three. >> we also have the 11:30 special order. supervisor avalos: but i would like to do is continue item 3 to be heard on the 28th. i spoke with the city services auditor folks and they are ok with that. we will have the hearing on illegal dumping and then go on to our 11:30 special item later. >> item 3. hearing on the controller's december 2010 government barometer issued on february 3, 2011, for an overview of the report and a summary of highlights and recent trends in the city's major service areas. supervisor avalos: colleagues, i would like to continue this item to the 28th, but we would need

to have public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, can make continue this to the 28th? thank you. madam clerk, item four. this one we will hear. then we will go on to item six, our 11:30 special. >> item 4. hearing on the status of the department of public works' plans to curb illegal dumping in the city, including but not limited to the scope of the problem, resources devoted to this effort, effective strategies used in other localities, and immediate goals and long term plans to reduce this activity. supervisor avalos: thank you, madam clerk. colleagues, this is a hearing

that i called based on one of the top concerns coming to me from district 11 residents, that is illegal dumping. that happens in various hot spots. please as i see in the excelsior district, along russia street, commonly adjacent to parks, also in the omi neighborhood. hearing a lot about illegal dumping, especially, dumping that goes on furniture that happens close to the time that tenants are moving out. i know it is also an issue that is a concern that many of us have from our around the city. there are different ways that illegal dumping may manifest itself, depending on the region of the city as well.

i am here to speak about the issue and what the city is doing about it. we have been dpw director as well as other members of the city departments here. we also have risen from around the city as well that will be providing comment. i think we will have a little give-and-take on some of the concerns raised, what the response from the department could be as well. >> thank you. good morning, members of the committee. ed riskin, director of public works. very grateful for the opportunity to talk about this issue. it is one that challenges the department, city, other city departments that we work in partnership with. this is a good opportunity to

get you and the public up to date on what we're doing, what we are facing, and two things we would like to get out of this -- raise awareness of the issues and what people's responsibilities are, in regards to the issues behind illegal dumping. also to stimulate conversation on ideas and suggestions on how we can get ahead of this issue. i have a brief presentation that i will run through. we will be putting this information on our website for the benefit of the public. we would welcome any questions then. in terms of the scale of the problem, we get about 17,000 reports of illegal dumping every year, which is a staggering number. if you convert that into the amount of material we are

picking up a year, it is 20 million pounds of the legally- dumped material that we are finding in the public rights of way in san francisco. it is a mind-boggling number. we dedicate about $4 million of our budget to respond to those service requests. this is essentially general fund money. funds from the taxpayer that could be going to schools, parks, social safety net, we are spending picking up other people's garbage. i do nothing that is a good use of taxpayer money. of course, the reason we do it is because the illegal dumping poses health and safety risks, environmental risks, so we have an obligation for the safety of the public to pick it up. supervisor avalos: has that $4 million allocation been steady, hasn't gone down, have we seen a significant change in the money that goes toward illegal dumping? >> what drives the amount of money is more or less demand

for service. i will show you later what the demand is looking like. it has been increasing. unfortunately, our available staff to deal with it has been decreasing. one other point i wanted to raise, in terms of the demand, there is a bulky item collection service, that is part of our agreement. however, we found that that is underutilized. that adds to our challenge. there are two main kinds of dumping, the way we characterize it. one is sidewalk dumping, which happens in two different forms. one is may be well intended,

where people take household items, like mattresses, chairs, couches, put them on the sidewalk, sometimes attaching a sign that says free to it. maybe somebody will pick it up and it gets used. unfortunately, often times it doesn't get picked up by someone else, and the city is left to pick it up. many people believe that is the city's responsibility. we recently engaged in a perception study about the commonness of the streets in san francisco. -- cleanliness of the streets in san francisco. most people surveyed believed that it was the responsibility of the city, but we know that it is the responsibility of the private individual. what also happens when people do

that, once there is one thing out there, others tend to pile up. so the problem is exacerbated. the other thing that happens in the category of sidewalk dumping. we have found a number of people, despite moloch, do not have adequate garbage service. so when their garbage bills up in the house, they dump it on the sidewalk, sometimes adjacent to a city receptacle, sometimes just on the sidewalk. anecdotally come as an outreach effort that we are doing called spruce up before sun up, we are identifying people in commercial areas. we have issued over 700 citations for people without adequate garbage service. that was in a limited portion of the city. so it is clear that is part of the problem as well.