looked like the program is an d disincentive >> so it's okay for us to be speculative too in assuming there won't be further environmental impacts for a classic exemption for a pilot program. >> sequa says you can't assume there's impacts based on speculation you need to support our conclusion so there's got to be demonstrative prove or foreseeable impacts and sequa has a say over a direct impact that's directly connected to something proposed by the project. >> so when issuing a class 6

exemption we're not required to insure there isn't going to be a greatest impact from the pillow program. >> we're required to insure there are not unusual circumstances the whole idea of a categorical is on the whole would not be exterminated did expectation is no that the won't result in significant books. there are situations for unusual circumstances that render it with sufficient impacts. in the case of this project we're talking about a passenger vehicles operating in an ushering setting it's not a

unusual circumstances around the activity >> so to ask the question we should have to identify it florida there are unusual circumstances but we don't have a guarantee of a greater quack beyond today, we don't know. >> the reason i'm hesitanting we need to make sure there are not unusual circumstances but that has to be based on evidence but we're not obligated to consider whether or not there would be any possible impacts on even those that don't have sundown evidence to impact.

>> back to the case law i'll go back to lake tahoe the appellant stated the district report was silent on how they defined baseline. on whether they have referring to the abstinence under sequa could you respond to that our deputy city attorney >> deputy city attorney marla the tahoe case is not relevant to our sequa it's a federal district case it's trillion level case in court when it was piloted to the ethnic circuit they overturned it because the appellants relied on its not part of the lion of the cases we

need to rely on her it's as state law cases. so it's not part of the lineup of the cases and more often the addict opinion was overturned so the ethnic district court of appeals decided they're not going to state it puts improper to include illegal existing conclusions as part of the baseline analyze. instead what they found is the agency hadn't made use of abstinence so it's arbitrary and capricious to do that that's consistent that the lion of california cascades we need to look at. sequa requires we look at the exist conditions as they exist open the ground today and

compare to what's prupd on the project. here we're heard testimony today and the planning department and the sfmta talked about those shuttles open the street we are compare that condition to the proposed project which is the forgotten o information gathering and you know short term permitting program so you compare those two things >> first of all, i had trouble finding the ethnic circuit position. >> it's not published because it was unpublished. the district opinion cannot be.

one case the appellant case from 2002 addressed whether or not to consider the existing conditions as as part of the baseline conditions. you've asked me about the other two cases. the appellant said i'm sorry if i'm not getting that correct but under the sequa the the

appellant is stating that's are relevant to this case that sequa was considered 0 and were silenced on the definition of whether or not there was activity to the baseline do you have a response to the assertion >> your legal advice the only case law that the board of supervisors can rely on to support the determination is that sequa is the body of law we need to rely on. so that's when - >> even when they consider sequa. >> right. >> i think that needs to be explained. if the tahoe resemble body needs the sequa and that's the case before the federal district court we considered that but why

not been able to use their definition? there you two reasons first it's a trial court kinds when it was sent to the appellant court they reversed it >> they said it was arbitrary but they didn't say it was either okay or not okay they were silent on it they sent it back to the revokable body. the only reason i bring up the ethnic - 9 circuit court >> the reason the ethnic

circuit court of appeals sequa law is the case law from the state court that's what's relevant to our decision we need to look at here what do the state court of appeals say and the we don't have any california supreme courts. >> okay. thank you. okay. i will end my questions for now and supervisor campos >> i'll remind you, we have not heard in the project sponsor that will be forthcoming. >> i'll defer my questions i

know there's probably members of the public that wyoming want to speak on that. >> director reiskin our presentation. >> good evening members of the board and public. i appreciate the tint as our sfmta director we're charged by side board of supervisors policy we've been tripod in the industry educator to advance the city's charter of employee shuttles that are the proposed pilot subject are a form of permit that at least on their face is vance the cities policy

consistent with virtual policy. however, as i've said we've heard very clearly and well articulated before i many speakers and public in the past there are effects that those shuttles are having that are not supportive of our policy goals liquor details on muni to name a significant one for us. so that's exactly the reason why we're proposing to bring structure to this as a means of elevating this transit system to development a regulatory benefit to capture the good while eliminating the bad so allowing the politely to proceed it will allow to us build the regulatory framework to bring order to the

system that right now is visually unregulated will give us the ability to regulate the impacts the positive and negative ones. i know there wish many larger issues her i appreciate that this board is doing to he'd the larger issues but we know what's before us there is the adequacy and the appropriateness for the review for this politely this exemption is one we use to elevate the pedestrian and other projects that's a valuable tool to test to develop the policies and programs. i thank you i'd like to take this opportunity and ask ms. pain to quickly walk you through did program chevy covered it and we'll answer questions

>> thank you members of the board of supervisors. as a presentation could you, i don't know who to direct it question to. before i start i'll say there are slides i'm going to go quickly through since we've covered the content but i'll be happy to return to if you feel they demand additional attention. the counterpart shuttle shoekt as not new to san francisco it enthat you see shuttles that i employers and institutions such as medical a building and developments. we're not tubing tour buses or site car lifts arrest taxis or party buses but shuttles there

are two operational markets in san francisco or serving intrust the shuttle sector that xhoipz about 80 percent of the shuttle and the recreational shuttle. the sector is to large our counter approach is not sustainable we ago with what many people have appointed the conditions are questionable by the need a solution and we're putting forth our proposed solution one we want to test to insure as we move forward as the manager and stewards are suggesting we move forward we

want to establish clear policies that impact and capture and take advantage of the benefits that the shuttle sector provides. the work that we've done and this pilot that's been approved by our board was informed by the department of transportation authority their board adapted in 2011 which called open sfmta to do regulation of the shuttle sector. i'm not going to reiterate the conflicts that we ail know are take place on the streets under the current existing conditions only to say that counterpart have unloading and loading in the city and half are in muni but also i mentioned in the question and answer section conflicts are not hatch

everywhere that there are southern kinds of stops with few identified conflicts. the shuttle sector also delivers benefits ic f international our revokable transportation agency conducted a survey of shuttle riding to identify their finding without the shuttle many shuttle persons would ride alone and to get to the shuttles which of them have gotten rid of the cars because of the access to the shuttles 43 miles are reduced

because of the shilts and green house gases a reduced and from any cf we have a representative hereafter my presentation they can answer questions. we used the following principles to guide our presentation first, the safety of all yours that's our number one priority and making sure that the shuttles do a.d. verizon affect the operations it includes we're consistently improving the communications. those are the problems lack of enforcement clarity we feel a responsibility to recover our

costs and lack of comprehensive costs as i mentioned most of our information comes from volunteer sources. the pilot approach helps us to act now and builds on the information we have provided and test out on approach why we gather for information to include the improvement costs are. i don't have to go through what the pilot entails it addresses the operating guidelines and compliance with the c puc and address the detail and congestion and will address the challenges with identification the permit fee will include fund

for overcame pcos and help with the enforcement if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them and as i address the question from supervisor cowen what will be evaluated what improvement is needed and the actual transportation costs and needs. all of this is intent to allow us to act now and get the information we need for a longer-term solution and any longer-term solution will need for reviewed by the planning department if this is upheld the sfmta will concrete our pilot in

july will continue to operate without permits they would not be permitting a number of locations and stops we'll continue to address the solutions and not being able to address the pcos through this and >> thank you very much. supervisor campos. supervisor kim >> i have that on quick question question from the city attorney i only have the city code what are you relying on

with a local jurisdiction that they will have discretion who to ticket and not. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney frankly supervisor i cannot by the code section i didn't ask the attorneys from the mta to attend this because the questions that we've voiced the mta open does not voices the board. >> i agree that will be great to get an understanding of what state code our relying on. >> any further questions we can come back to them after the. why don't we here from the patient members of the public that are waiting to speak in support of the program and the

sfmta program i'd like to ask the observing members of the public to respect the various folks we're heard from today. let's hear from our first speaker >> i'm a little bit nervous. >> if you could speak closer to the microphone. >> no way thank you to the board it's been a long day i'm a constituent in district 5. i'd like to work today, i went to muni yesterday in the rape. i work with an operation of shuttle that we enter ride no one in the city we suffer from

2, 3, 4 hours for transportation. we want to stop people from directive the cars in the city and with the bay area air quality recently passed program that specifically recognizes where to provide shuttle that will allow sfmta to bring shuttles under their. per view they should obey the law. the shuttle drivers allow the sfmta to - i'm asking you to support this pilot and lastly it was suggested the only ways to prove the commute is wound the

roll an alternative would be to give people for o more alternatives and thank you for your time >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, i'm david carlos i'm the republican candidate in 87 e. it seems to be clear it allows red zone exemption for two cases only for common carriers not private carries and pursuant to an ordinance not by if he at at the can't do that. i'm really happen to have gotten on any phone and have the wonderful technology that smart phones can give us but diving deeper into the code section 502 is a special dissanitation by

the city of long beach they respected to the legislation they got 3 years in a carefully mapped zone. it suggests that long beach believed in comploil with the vehicle code i'm wondering why it mta does not. we should not be create by 43 on the, however, we do need a pilot program in white zones on private property and let's charge the real costs of the one-hundred 07 million dollars costs that the mta is sacrificing we're going to be having the rule of democracy should roll >> i want to clarifying it is for folks supporting the sfmta shuttle program thank you. i support the program i urge you to reject the

appeal i'm a homeowner knowledge in supervisor yee's district i'm not an attorney but i think the testimony you've heard from your st. particular the sacramento sound like great if so e this is a first transit city and this program is consistent accident private sector stepped up to consider the employees nodes both the inner center city needs. this will provide a data to set the sound public policy you need the public policy and the program will facilitate that and bring that to our professional departments to allow them to analyze and ultimately develop

importing the sound public policies i urge you to relocate the appeal and support your departments and >> next speaker. >> >> i'm dominique i'm a resident of san francisco for 21 years in supervisor wiener's district i've been following this process and there's some very fine and supplemental arguments in that, however, i think it is valuable to take a step back and take a look if we step outside this chamber we see the rest of the bay area it's obviously gets people out of cars and into buses is environmentally good. and people are looking from the outside and looking how to get

people on buses. xhoi said will be the recycle plan so two points it's obvious there recent other political goals being served by this appeal so i ask you to relocate the appeal >> next speaker . president chiu and members of the board matt from the bay area council we are happy to play some minor roll in getting us to the point today we've fascinated conversations with the operators of shuttle so one conversation would take place and that's the process to get us to the piloted program today. as you heard from several speakers the shuttle systems has

been growing over a decade and that's spiked in the last number of years to the point with regulation is absolutely necessary the reason is 3 fold the growth in the economy and the growth from employment and san francisco's first transit policy with the commuters with the employers providing the shuttle buses to pick up them at home and obviously finally the lack of investment in our public transit infrastructure primarily the city of san francisco and the employment centers has facilitate some private involvement in moving people

noun the pears this is an anecdoteal story this pilot study is designed to mitigate those and will regulate the operators and give the public the signages when they're they can when the rourlz are breaking the law they can the as i understand or sanctioned >> hello. thank you for your time andrew i live in district 2. i've been a retained of the city for about 10 years and riding the shuttles for the last 2 1/2. they've definitely allowed me to not drive everyday. 90 millions there and back to my job