at city. they created safety zones, which were an 1/8th mile from a school or park and that is where we they were able to implement their cameras. when implementation first started they had 40 cameras. and their revenue did go to the general fund, but about 5% was invested in safety initiatives. they have a 30-day warning period, and their warning was per license plate. for the first license plate, they didn't have to pay a fine and got a warning. by threshold, if they were speeding between 6-10 miles over the speed limit, it was a $35 fine and beyond that was a $100 fine. new york city passed legislation in july of 2013, and when we spoke to them, they said it was ten years' in the making. it took them ten years in order to gather the legislative

support and craft legislation that was accountable to both the public and legislature. they finally did pass a bill in july of 2013 and it was also for cities of 1 million or more and that allowed for a five-year demonstration program and they started their pilot in 2013. they located with school zones and it was only in school zones when school is in session and children are present. that speaks to some of the limitations that these programs endure based on what is palatable for the legislature. their violations are enforced by the parking violations bureau. so they are kind of treating like a parking ticket. and the new york city department of transportation receives the revenues, but due to complexity, they didn't earmark them for a specific purpose. but it does go to that

department. and they found a flat fine of $50 is what they could put into the legislation that they could get to pass and having a flat fine was also simpler for administrative reasons. they did not actually post signs or post locations. where chicago on their website, you can find a list of locations. so some of the legislative challenges that the city would be facing when pursuing an automated speed enforcement bill are the right to privacy. and so potential solutions there, as i mentioned photographs just of the license plate and not of the driver. having privacy policy, and data confidentiality and ensuring that data is only used for the

purposes of the citation and only for law enforcement reasons. another issue is in some cases and this is say while ago, but vendors were incentivized based on volume of citation and the solution is that vendors should only be compensated on cost of maintenance for equipment and it would not be based on the number of citations or fines. the purpose is to remind the public and legislature, that the purpose of this is to change behavior and it's really about safety and not about generating revenue and that is what we heard from many jurisdictions. the next is liability. we found that the registered vehicle own and not taking into consideration who the driver is, but sending the violation

to the registered vehicle owner; that that is a solution for liability there. in cases where maybe a car was stolen or something like that, that is a law enforcement issue that would be handled differently. but in most cases it's the registered owner of the vehicle and jurisdictions aren't necessarily changing violations or citations based on who was driving. in some cases some citis would have a sworn affidavit somebody could sign saying i wasn't driving. and they have a process that they can go through. other jurisdictions only send it just to the registered owner of the vehicle and say that they are responsible. the last thing that i also wanted to touch on in the next slide is about public perception and community support. many times what you hear about

ase is that the public sees it as a cash-cow for the city and it's just another tax and there is this public perception and idea that everybody speeds. so potential solutions there are education and outreach about the effectiveness of ase and also making it a data-driven process, especially here in other jurisdictions we spoke to, we have data on high-injury locations and we know where collisions are occurring and knowing those problematic spots and to let the public know this is to deter speeding for safety reasons. it's not for funding and this isn't driven by revenue, but it's driven by creating a safer environment for all road users. so the level of public support as the data shows us is

actually higher on roads where cameras are near schools and where fatal collisions have occurred in the past. something that helped them pass their legislation just a couple of years ago, they had some high-profile collisions and fatalities. they found that the public supports putting speed cameras and really curbing speeding near schools, and where fatality incidents have happened. also earlier this year the aaa traffic safety culture index came out and they asked 384 licensed california drivers and found that 46% actually supported speed cameras on residential streets when ticketing 10 miles plus beyond the speed limit. so just about half there. so public opinion it seems to be in the direction

that in certain areas, depending on how the program is employed, that the public does support it in some areas. so just briefly about next steps: again, this is preliminary research that we did last year, stemming from the walk first project. and so our next steps is that our office will be working with the mta to identify research gaps, specifically on key privacy, revenue, technology, and other implementation considerations. we will be reaching out to the six jurisdictions that we did last year and doing some follow-up with them. we have identified key research questions and we'll be sending out a survey and doing follow-up with those jurisdictions. and then this fall we'll be putting this into a report and have our findings and more in-depth analysis that the mta will then use with their efforts as kate mentioned, to find an author for the bill in

the next legislative session. with that, i can answer any questions. >> can you, in regards to the legislative proposal, the two things that i would like to know more of, and the thinking behind it, in regards to who would get the notice of violation? it would go to the owner of the vehicle, rather than the driver. and related to that is giving a ticket as a parking ticket when it's a moving violation. so why are we doing that when it's a moving violation? i think is did because it's easier to pass legislation? what is the rationale? >> sure. so what we heard from other jurisdictions is

that it has been difficult to pass legislation when they are considered a moving violation, when there is a potential to book points to the license. some of the issues about privacy and actually having a police officer witness the speeding and those kinds of questions have come up in response to those concerns. so what we found was that a couple of ways to address those issues is just to take a photo of the license plate, rather than of the driver. so that people don't think that they are being tracked or that you can see who is driving where? there is some conception that the cameras are always on and they take video and that they are going to be following people and that is really not the case. so each jurisdiction does implement it differently, but we found for effectiveness purposes and also

from an administrative standpoint and to pass legislation, to just focus on the license plate and vehicle owner, rather than focusing on the driver and who was driving. that that could potentially create some administrative confusion. >> so i guess the question for me is has there been any studies or research done to support, if we were to go in that direction? that it actually has any impact? >> that is not something that we looked at as part of this research. but going forward, we are going to ask more about those kind of privacy issues and implementation questions. so i think that is something that we will get in the research that we are doing in the coming months and then once we have that report, and that information, we would be happy to come back and share what we find. >> okay. commissioner farrell, do you have any questions? thank you very much.

any public comments? come on up and if you could like to line up to make comments. >> good afternoon again. committee members my name is nicole executive director [speaker not understood] and we strongly support this program. what we have seen from the literature where it has been done, it actually not only reduces the incidents of speeding, but it actually reduces the severe and fatal injuries on our streets. to supervisor mar's question earlier about how are we actually going to achieve vision zero? this is by and large one of the most critical measures to getting there, and because of how successful it has been in other places. and it also can help create this revenue stream for projects that also encourage people to slow down, and not speed. so it's not just the

stick, but creating those projects that create that carrot. i wanted to thank also the mta for their leadership on this, kate breen and the controller's office for all of their great research. this is something that is going to be a tough battle politically, but i think it's -- especially in the sacramento area, we need the approval. but they have been putting together all of the research on how effective this has been and it's really remarkable. thanks. >> thank you. come on up. >> hi. madeline, founder/director of polk and vision zero coalition and task force member. i also would like to support the idea that we really push for this in the city. i have lived in a place this has been very, very effective.

and i also further suggest from that experience, that we try to aim to make it be the drivers. recently we have seen several cases where there have been stolen cars, or non-registered drivers for that car, who have been riding rather recklessly and also killed people doing so. there are several problems with that, but it more carefully assigns responsibility. yes, so those are the two -- depending on how this is framed as a public health and public safety issue that this is totally doable and hope that we will. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners, alice rogers from the south beach rincon neighborhood association. our neighborhood strongly is advocating for red light and don't block the box automatic

enforcement. a recent survey done by mta last year shows that more than 50% of us walk to work. we're on the streets all the time. and just coming here today, every intersection that i walked through was blocked and there simply can't the person-power to enforce. it's really not the best use of manpower. we would rather see the police targeting more serious behaviors. so we feel this is really, really important and appreciate you continuing work on this. >> thank you. any other public comments? if none, then public comment is now closed. [ gavel ] can you please, mr. clerk, can you call item 5. >> item 5, vision zero education strategy, this an information item.

>> good afternoon. i'm john knox white with the san francisco municipal transportation agency. >> i'm ana validzic program manager for san francisco [tko*-efrp/] doh. >> as you know, at the beginning of last year, launch of vision zero, supervisor yee and the full board of the transportation authority challenged city staff to find a better way to coordinate and collaborate on education across the city. since that time, we have adopted a project charter that includes seven agencies and departments across the city. we have been working monthly, working and meeting monthly to develop a strategy, to identify best practices, et cetera, so that we have a citywide strategy for moving forward for the long-term. i know we have been here a

number of time and talked about how it's important for us to start identifying a way to do education long-term over the ten-years' of this. rather than kind of three months here and three months there. i wanted to acknowledge the very large amount of work that aerial flescher from mta has done in creating this document. i hope you have a copy of it. we brought a copy of the actual strategy for you today and it will be available soon on the vision zero website. the strategy outlines an approach that is going to guide the efforts of our education over the next ten years. including how we're going to work with engineering, enforcement, data and policy subcommittees in eliminating danielle and serious injury from san francisco streets? our goal is to utilize educational out reach to change san francisco's traffic culture towards one that prioritizes human safety. a a culture, where the community norms

reject that behavior and encourage individuals to take steps to make our streets safe err. historically or over the last few years, san francisco has run a number of different education campaigns including safe routes to school, which the department of health and department of education and individual groups also go into the school and do campaigns. we have run banner ads through the police precincts and community group and media campaigns that have been run by the department of health or da or the police department. so while these effort were notable, they were carried out by single agencys and silos and again with our commitment to vision zero and the creation of this subcommittee we have spent some time to work together to identify what are the educational priorities for

the city? again, seven departments, mta, department of public health, police department, unified school district, district attorney's office, department of the environment and the ta, meet regularly, typically once a month, to discuss what it is that we want to be doing? we're currently writing an active transportation program grant in support of our educational efforts. it's money that we won't see until 2017, if we are successful, but it's one of the things that we discussed as a committee. this committee has not only already developed a strategy, and working to approach campaign concepts, but is and will continue to provide feedback on safety campaigns. while we've spent the last year strengthening our partnerships we are committed to doing more in the future. >> so when it comes to the

educational campaigns, what we are really trying to achieve is a culture shift in san francisco. and that is -- that is not just dependent on teaching people individual skills. we have adopted the spectrum of prevention as our working framework in our theory and how we are going to move forward an educational campaign. this is a public health theory that we use quite often and what we are trying to do is change both the micro level and macro level all at the same time. most people when they think of education campaigns they think of the bottom three rows that we're teaching individual behavior and doing media campaigns that reach communities, but it's really the full spectrum that you see here. where we want to be fostering coalitions and changing organizational practices and influencing policy such as the previous item on the agenda and helping to provide education towards that first effort. so

the perfect example is the training that mta just recently rolled out that is targeting drivers, but an organizational change at mta, reach all of those drivers who drive these huge trucks on our city streets. so this is an example of how we are addressing multiple-levels all at the same time. and so all of the agencies that have developed this strategy, we have committed to a certain set of criteria. it's an effort that we are putting forward as vision zero educational effort, that they will be meeting these criteria that we have some -- that were data-driven and that we have research that reflect the various communities we have here in san francisco, making sure we're cultural competent with them and using best practices. >> so in terms of the actual

program that we have identified and i will spend just a tinily bit of time -- i know last meeting was discussion of branding vision zero, but it all starts with needing a brand to rally behind. i know she explained that the brand is vision zero and we're asking people to buy into the concept that everybody has a role and we're asking people to pledge -- to make a pledge that they will personally do the things that they can do to make our streets safe. we have campaign -- media campaign elements, the safe streets campaign. we have identified multi-faceted campaigns. three of them that go after violations of pedestrian and right-of-way and unsafe turns. these are the behaviors out on the streets that result in over 50% of the collisions that happen on our streets each year.

this isn't to say that we won't have other smaller campaigns, but we feel by targeting these three major behaviors in a campaign that continues year after year, we have a better opportunity to see the change. i think that is one of the changes in terms of how we're doing education, that we are proposing just as audi doesn't run ads for their cars for two months and assume that you know all about their new car. they run them every night, month after month, year after year, because they know they are competing against a bunch of other messages and in order to get the brand loyalty, in order to get your attention, they have to continue. so we are proposing to do these three campaigns over the coming years. additionally, we are proposing two campaigns to work -- again, to commissioner mar's comment earlier, directly with people who walk and people with

bicycles to develop campaigns that help them walk safely, et cetera. these are not campaigns to blame them for being hit. but working with the advocacy groups to ensure that rules are followed on our streets and doing so in a way that keeps themselves and others safe. >> some of the near-term items that we would like to focus on is safe routes to school which is up and running now, but can be expand into the entire school district and in various other ways. we also would like to establish a safe streets for seniors program that was actually mentioned earlier. and talking about working with the professional drivers, both large vehicles, taxis, muni, to educate them, but also that they can be serving as ambassadors for vision zero and spreading the word to their

colleagues and peers. and we believe that we really need to integrate education into all of the other efforts. education effort on its own is not going to achieve vision zero. we need to have an integrated into capital projects. we need to have it integrated into enforcement and policy initiatives, any internal organizational trainings or public-private partnerships that we establish. utilizing our partners -- particularly the medical staff highlighting the human facing as supervisor mash had highlighted earlier. and doing some outreach and incorporating the muni drivers into the outreach that we do. however, we need to build the staff capacity in order to achieve this right now. we just don't have the people power to reach all of these aspects at this point in time.

>> so again, i know that a couple of weeks ago, we had a budget hearing, and the budget needs of the education part of vision zero were discussed. those were about $2.5 million out of the total $6 million. not here to make the case again for that, but did want to break this down for the next three years of what we have funded and what we don't? that the red on the table -- are the pieces that currently do not have funding identified. we are working, as i said, currently on a number of active transportation grants, including a $3 million one that would fund some of the activities out in 2017-2018. and we'll be working as well with our various departments to identify ways to incorporate future programs into our budgets. lastly, i just really think we knew we were talking a little

theoretically and thought we would look at a successful campaign that used the spectrum of prevention. the truth campaign, an anti-smoking campaign was funded by the tobacco settlements. i think there were two key things that this campaign did. the first thing it did was really step back and identify what it wanted to do, which was to get kids to stop smoking. somebody finally identified after 30, 40 years after telling kids smoking is bad for you, don't do it, it wasn't working and teenagers are not receptive to the "man" telling them how to behave. so we found teenagers who were maybe open to smoke, but hadn't yet and identifying the messages that would be impactful to

them. what they found very quickly was teenagers react against authority. so in this case, they had a big smoking corporations that were trying to get them to smoke. and the campaign was really developed around the idea if they got the truth, they could rebel against "the man" by choosing not to smoke. they launched social media campaigns and with trucks going to concerts that had grassroots and youth peers, who were there involved in activities during these activities. they informed the kids what was going on and they filmed videos. this is one of my favorites. they put together some hotel hangars that says "quiet, i have trouble sleeping because of what my product does to people." they snuck into a hotel during a tobacco summit and filmed it and released it into the web and tv commercials et cetera as a part of the prank culture that was big in

the mid-90s. we're not proposing that we're going to copy the truth campaign. it really -- you know, i think the lesson learned there you have to know your audience and you have to know how to communicate to them. what we have heard in the focus groups that we're doing is that people know that they are not supposed to speed and just telling them to stop speeding is probably not going to work. i think one of the key things of being data driven at the beginning of our education program is identifying the people who do speed and what are the messages that will get them to realize that they themselves should take that action and stop speeding? and then develop the messages for that. ? >> so we just presented a short list of what we would like to achieve in next two to three years, and of course, this is at least a 10-year effort, if not longer. we have a laundry list of ideas that we can continue for that full decade. such as working with our visitors bureau,

talking to people who are visiting our city, our commuters, developing a multi-modal safety curriculum and working with crossing guards, developing a toolkit for community organizations, and then, establishing a place streets program that. is just some of the short list and it's obviously not closed, but open to things as they evolve over the next ten years. but we want to make sure it meet our criteria, so we can continue to be innovative and achieve vision zero. that is the end of our presentation and we're very open to any questions that you may have. >> i just want to thank you for the presentation. i know that you have been working real hard on this concept of the education campaign and you have come a long ways, i would say, from a year-ago -- less than a year-ago actually.

the feeling amongst us were things were kind of scattered and it wasn't any common thought in trying to get the education program started, and i think this is a good beginning. we still have a long ways to go. i just wish you luck in this, and i will be there to support whatever you guys are going to do. so if no other comments, any public comment on this item? >> thank you. >> thank you. come on up. >> hi supervisor yee, i'm matt from the community ywca and run the bicycle program there and i wanted to make sure that i called out the wonderful work that we have done through the mta over the past few years to expand bicycle safety and education through our schools. this year we'll reach over 850 kids ourselveses. we just hosted