going out to mountain view and so forth, how has that being taken into consideration. is it more to continue the same route or has there been some discussion about different alternative ways of reconstructing some of the roadways or putting in measures to allow the buses to flow more quickly because if there is more vehicles added there i don't know how much money they can throw at the same thing. i'm curious what kind of ideas were discussed? >> it's a really interesting question. i wish i knew what the next new thing will be. the t and c, i couldn't anticipated that. who knows what will come in the next 15 years, but from a very basic standpoint, you have a limited amount of street space which we do, we are bound by water on three

sides. there is a limited amount of space. so we have a certain number of people trying to move through the street. what becomes important and this is really just a physics question is how many people you can fit in which ways. when you put people on a bus. those 75 people on a bus is taking the space of two or three cars. you have as many as 75 people, maybe 60 is more ideal. but you have as many as 75 people and in those three cars you might have three people. from the broadest standpoint, the way for the city's transportation system to really function over time would be to, for some folks are always going to want to drive or need to drive and that's completely fine. but not everybody can be in a vehicle at all times or the system will shutdown. the key is really to make the

alternatives to driving feasible and attractive to people and that means that muni has to be more reliable. it can't take so long to get from the outer shut -- sunset to downtown. it's not feasible to spend an hour-and-a-half to get where they are going often times. it needs to be less crowded. we have a director on our board who uses a wheelchair, she talks about there is traffic and crowding. she gets through with more space to get on a bus. those investments are critical or people won't want to make that shift into the form of transportation that actually from a physics standpoint allows everybody to move effectively around the

city. >> my follow up to that, i'm glad you were able to put it in a succinct form. is this part of task force moving forward or a separate task force being done to exam what can be done for alleviating the stress. it's sort of a catch 22, you have to make it quicker that means you have to get rid of the cars. is there anything that we as a council can do in working with the department in anyway possible just getting the word out about possible meetings coming up. what can we do? >> i would absolutely love to take advantage of that offer. there is a lot of work that mta does on a daily basis to sort through these questions and there will be different opportunities to engage certainly as part of transportation 2030, this bond measure, that first recommendation that came out of the task force but there are other components of

this program that will take another few years to see implemented and we very much want to engage a really broad base of stakeholders in terms of considering how and if to move the rest of that program forward and would really appreciate working with this group on that. thank you. >> thank you. >> i just have two questions: one is financial and the other is practical. the financial part, on the recommended funding sources page will be the bond that you are trying to get passed by voters in november and the additional bond in 10 years. although first bond be paid off by the time the second bond is being issued? is that the plan? you retire one and bring in the other one? >> right. the city has and this bond, the mta is not trying to get it passed we are not advocating for anything, we

can't. but the city has a program called the capital planning program and there is a capital budget that is a 10 -year budget. that budget identifies the infrastructure needs and paid over time. the city has run a general obligation bond for years. in 2006 the city adopted a policy that says we will not issue another general bond debt until we address the old bond or until san francisco grows enough so that property tax rates can remain constant. >> you mean level? >> right. >> okay. the other question is about elevators in downtown. why can't we add more

elevators. it doesn't make sense to walk five 5 blocks to find a muni rate -- elevator that works. >> that is what we are trying to do. >> thank you. we'll move to public comment? is there any comment from staff. >> i still want to say something. i think a suggestion is do you need to be some kind of social awareness out there or some sort of advertising where people that drive their cars need to know that in 15 years we are going to have a million more people and more cars on the road so if they are going to drive their cars to have more paengz -- passengers in their cars rather than just one. i think there needs to be some sort of social awareness just to let people know that.

>> yeah. thank you. >> director johnson? >> just a quick comment. thank you so much for your presentation. it was a very comprehensive and clear description of the process that the committee went through. there are so many worthy projects that are bundled into this list of recommendations and the second elevator at the muni stops on market street was definitely one of the worthy projects that i helped to advocate for because of the need. i wanted to build a little bit on the comment you made about paving and curb ramps to provide a little bit of context . for the last three years 3 years we have had a paving bond and over time when you look at the number of curb ramps built for paving and under the ada transition plan, it's 3-1.

meaning the paving plan builds as many curb ramps as we do from the curb ramp construction. that will be a great benefit. >> thank you. >> all right. we'll move on to public comment. i have bob plant old. >> i'm bob plant hold and i will talk about this plan and the task force. i'm going to be raising questions because people need to learn more and to think. you saw in the presentation 20 percent of immune easy riders are 55 or older. the population over all there

is 18 percent of us that has a disability. 15 or 18 percent maybe seniors. membership of the 45 people on that task force, we've heard carla johnson. one other person was appointed but almost never came. so two people out of 45 to represent 20 percent or more of the city. nobody from the para transit councilman from amongst you folks from adult adult services from the committees, nobody from the committees was a part of this. there is some statements made about the benefits of some of the funding proposed. the elevators, we all agree there is a need for elevators. but i pointed out and nobody yet has responded. the stations are owned by bart. it's their property. muni is a renter.

typically a tenant doesn't give a landlord free improvements. i have general asking is muni getting a rent credit. silence doesn't build confidence. another thing is millions of dollars on canopies at entrances. the claim was it will reduce wear and tear. when you walk on the street, anybody can throw anything on the para pit. anybody can drop anything on the escalators. it doesn't make sense. you saw a diagram on muni. you have to realize some of the proposed funding would then make for

separated bike ways. that means that every muni passenger would now have to leave the crosswalk into the street to board a bus. every muni passenger. that's not the case now. now the 71 inbound, 521 outbound, you board at the curb a. it wouldn't happen under the proposed for this plan. hundreds of thousands of people ride the muni erd. everyday. is this consistent. it also funds pet to cut out bus stops to make us walk farther. do you think this benefits us or is this an ploy? >> next howard chat ner.

>> okay. good afternoon. first i echo bob's comments. he's very knowledgeable. he really knows what he's talking about. the clock hasn't begun yet. at least not that i can see. i try to use meany whenever i can but there is major disability access problems which has only worsened in the past decade. it's impossible to get through muni during rush hour. some bus line-ups have been

limited at all together. part of problem is that powell and montgomery they let you off in the alley in a dark platform. back in the 1990s about the need to have safe elevators. no plans yet to do that on montgomery. of course the muni elevators smell of urine. in may i was in naples, italy and went to a metro station there, grant it, it's new, but you can eat off the floor. that's how clean it was. it all about more money and more money. nothing about the cost side,

nothing about how well run or poorly run is mta from a financial standpoint. i was at a meeting at haight street a few months ago where mta was trying to pose their vision for haight straight in the face of people in the neighborhood there were transportation engineers and planners and about 5 or 6 federal -- from the planning department. many people way over staff. it's all this presentation is about more money and more money. nothing on looking really seriously at how things are run. mta's budget keeps going up year after year with nothing to show for it. in the past year it's

increased to $945 million. the amount going to access, that's about $170 million increase in four 4 years. but the amount going to access is i -- accessible services. i'm not going to vote to give mta a $500 million blank check. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? >> good afternoon, honorable councilmembers. my name is arnold wong. when we heard about the transportation task force we followed it carefully and attended some of the meetings and were surprised that 21 of those members were government employees, many department heads, many

reporting to the mayor, about 11 were from the business community. so very lopsided. no neighborhood people, no advocates from your community and week before this report came out we wrote a letter to them and predicted what their findings would be and what their recommendations would be. we said you are going to recommend a $500 million bond, new transportation taxes and a vehicle license fee. well, we were close. there were two $500 million bonds. so the whole process actually everybody knew it was about funding. but yet this report, what's the funding in this report? only 49 percent of it goes to muni which is i guess okay for some people. but the bond measure is even worse. the $500 million general

obligation bond has $500 million interest according to the controllers statement. 1 billion in debt but the property ordinance doesn't even guarantee that money will be spent on anything related to muni or anything related to disability. any bond contracted that you and i sign says money maybe allocated to, not shall be allocated too. it's essentially a blank check. what do we think it's really going to be spent on? well, probably cost over runs. muni has every large project according to 2011 audit has major cost over runs and also the project mentions implementation of transit effectiveness project. essentially the philosophy of tep is to move

neighborhood services to rapid corridors and we have already seen that. we have seen the higher speed buses, but where did that come from? it came from the elimination of bus stops and elimination of routes, the shortening of routes and less frequency of neighborhoods. so all the people who live in neighborhoods that need to get to the major feeder lines can't do it. so what has happened? muni rider ship has declined from ten 10 years ago. the only top sixth of declined. >> thank you for your comments. we will now take a 10 -minute break. >> >> [break] >> >> >>