>> [gavel] >> good afternoon and welcome to a special meeting of the government audit and oversight committee of the board of supervisors i am chair and i am joined by supervisor yee to my left.

>>thank you mme. clerk could you please read the 1st and only item.[reading item] >>i want to thank mr. yoder and mr. antweiowe had a meeting last month on the role of the legislative branches together and directing your role in sacramento and there was a bunch of process

improvements leading up to that hearing and i'm very pleased that you are here in person thank you for making the trip on short notice from sacramento in the middle of a very active legislative session in our state capital--and i want to thank mrs nicole wheaton-elliott. and her staff for the work that with a have done and were now getting minutes from the legislation committee that we have been in endeavoring here at the board regarding pieces of state legislation to get them in your hand in our clerk has been giving them to use so that's been a resolution on our part and i want to give an opportunity for the public is watching as well as my colleagues to get to know you're in person it was a

pleasure to get to meet know you over a bowl of soup i confess i am sick and have a fever so thank you for humoring me and i just want to start by giving the 3 of you josh, paul, and karen an opportunity to introduce yourselves to the committee and tell us a little bit about what you do and then we've got a few questions relative to pending pieces of legislation. so can i start with you josh. >>thank you supervisor peskin and supervisor yee. my name is joshua schall and i want to thank you for scheduling this on a friday. we know your hearings are usually on a thursday and they are tough they for us. mondays through thursdays last night we had a meeting that went until 10 pm it would've been tough to get here on the normally

scheduled time. we have 4 other registered lobbyists that could be involved in the city of san francisco we have a pretty big and robust team who have been working for the city and county since i think the fall of 2012 so we're going into our 4th year representing you and we have been nothing but proud and pleased to work with the local electives in the city and county on behalf of your government and more importantly, those who live here and visit the city and county of san francisco. it is a point of specific pride for our firm to be working for this great municipality in california. if you would like the others can introduce themselves individually. >>sure mr. yoder. >>thank you

thank you supervisor peskin , supervisor yee i am happy to be lobbying for this great city and county. we are on the job for you every single day in the california state capital. not just with your three-member legislative delegation but with every member of the california legislature. every key player in the brown administration and throughout the bureaucracy in sacramento. again, it's an honor to be here today and we look forward to answering any questions for you today. >>mrs. lang. >>good afternoon mr. chair and supervisor yee. my name is karen lange i have been working with the firm over 10 years and i'm very pleased to be representing the city and

county of san francisco and it's a point of professional pride to work for you. >>thank you on behalf of the city and county of san francisco. miss wheaton- elliott anything that you would like to go to add? okay no. thank you.so a lot in the state revolves around the affordable housing and the board has takena few specific pieces of legislation and we passed a a resolution that we forwarded to you and i'd like to ask where it that bill is at an as well pending before the board on 24 may i introduced a similar resolution which we will hear this coming tuesday with regard to the governors by

right proposal which we obviously are quite concerned with since san francisco leads the state relative to affordable housing production we do not want to be penalized with a one-size-fits-all solution so we would like to talk a little bit more about that in public if we made but to start with i'd like to bring some backgrounds what you guys did relative to advocating the board. let me take a step back and this is the policy body of san francisco once we take a policy that becomes the policy body of the entire city and county including the entire branch and with that in we did take a position on this

resolutionand i'd like to know where we stand on that. >>as of receipt of your board we expect apple to be heardjune 24 and i would characterize it as making the rounds as far as the key members of the legislature and the brown administration making sure that they understand that that resolution was adopted by resolution in this board and that they understand what that encompasses. >>are we have any success with gov. beal with the

performance-based language? >>i don't want to quantify right now. but am comfortable with saying that the chairman of the committee is very aware and the staff that work for them in that committee are very aware of the board's position and i think obviously that we have one state sen. and i think they are in part very aware of the board's position and the credit belongs to sen. len oh in that respect as well. and so i think that is moving along. i would add that last night in the conference committee you did ask for the governor's proposal as well when that proposal came up before the conference committee which sen. leno does cochair and he did take an issue

procedurally with the measure being proposed so late in the budgets cycle but also to the language being proposed to the brown administration. he did suggest that jurisdiction such as san francisco that are working so hard to assure affordability if that's taken into account if the measurement is going to have legs as we say in sacramento. >>does your firm have contacts with the governor's staff in regard to this matter? >>we do. not only with the governor's staff but part of the brown administration on this issue which would be the ledgeslegislation which is held by ben metcalfe.

>>are there any legislations going on right now? >>will be important to note now is that we are picking up through a variety of sources which the governor and staff have made a claim through their legislative leadership that they do expect a buy write proposal to be in the mix of part of the state legislation in response to the senate legislation in the no place like home initiative and on the democratic side a proposal to augment state

housing programs by hundreds of millions of dollars in their way or of birth of those proposals and their open to those proposals and their indicating to legislative leaderships that they are only open to those proposals of some form of by right how about this? how about if we phrase it as housing reform or policy reform because we certainly don't want to mischaracterize the governor's position. but i think it is safe to say that they would like to see policy changes to housing law in california along with potentially the money that the senate is proposing and the legislation proposing. >>is the governor aware of the

legislation that is pending that we will take up on tuesday? >>to the pending resolution i would honestly answer no. it would certainly be our plan when in it that is approved the make sure that the right folks are aware of its approval. >>mr. elliott, is there any other contacts with either the legislative branch of our government in sacramento or the executive branch that is not going through our city lobbyists? are there any direct negotiations coming from mayor, staff, or executive branch through the legislature or the government? >> supervisor yee. >>thanks for coming down on friday and hopefully you won't rush back. hopefully you will spend some time in the city

and spend some money so we can increase our tax base, right? it's good to have an opportunity to actually meet you because when i was on the school board we had our lobbyists and . come pretty regularly and meet with the board. and we actually got a lot of information from the sessions. one of the resolutions that we passed in the past that we support just recently and hopefully you got a copy of that too, it was related to the budget in terms of the women's caucus wanting 8 million for early education and childcare and its recommended to the assembly

and the assembly is recommending 600 billion and 90 million from the senate and 0 from the governor. can you tell me what process you would take to advocate for a position? >>1st again, i would want to state that when we get the resolution, carcass being very good at making sure- i just don't want to leave her out of this starting with heard delegation everyone is in receipt of this resolution. in terms of how to advocate for that this really is a very astounding year in the sense that you have 3 members of the legislator representing you in 2 members sitting on the dais

cochairing the conference committee. i think 1st and foremost for your board to take a position in for it to be known by the 2 members of legislature who is cochairing as they would have it at the budget conference committee this year is probably the best path to success on that and we can assure you that weand that they are aware of that on that issue. >> as it rates to the trailing legislation that is moving so quickly the city of san francisco that has not taken

a position nor have many of the leading housing advocacy groups in san francisco that and you can't say it paul but i can say it that this deal to basically trade money for a statewide by right policy proposal that is not been a position of this board. we obviously would like to see more affordable housing throughout the state but as of san francisco the by right concept is hypothetical to the kinds of tools that we've used for affordable housing in fact they use processes allowed us and we say this all the time in these chambers to extend affordable housing for beyond our affordable solutions. i think this edible solution could be the solution to

affordable housing to the extent this could be indicated to the government and to the state staff and in front of the conference committee which would be extremely helpful. i would like a what you guys are doing with regard to the california quality act with its local use of a negotiating tool which allowed local legislators to bump up what is required in the state and locally? >>i think on that aspect of

the housing discussion that is underway in sacramento right now i want to make sure that the board members and the public are aware that statewide labor organizations are joined with statewide environmental organizations not once but twice to jointly correspond with the members of legislature and with the brown administration and there have been a very, very, nimble. there was an a in original version of the governments proposal and they reacted to that and there was a 2nd governor's proposal and they reacted to that and they are really calling out not just i will say in a myriad of ways how their current proposal will impact ceqa. and i don't think that we indicated that in either of the letters the 1st or the 2nd and we would like to indicate that in any way that we can. >>i know there are members that would like to testify and we can incorporate any other questions into these proceeding. so come on up.

>>good afternoon supervisor peskin were sorry you're feeling under the weather today. we would hope that the city of sacramento's lobbyists are supporting the governments efforts on our behalf. the plain truth is that are housing affordability and displacement crisis are getting worse years and years because we lack the tools to make a difference. as gov. brown and the legislative analyst office correctly noted

we do not have the resources to get our way out of this predicament were in. and less we have dramatic ways to improve housing production it doesn't seem likely that low income and increasingly middle income families can be lowered much less stopped. asking our state representative to oppose the governor's proposals would in this cause other legislations throughout the state to oppose the request. what exempting ourselves from the imperative to build more housing be more likely or less likely that the governor will give us the subsidies that we all want for affordable housing. the governor's proposal moves us to

[inaudible] we believe will guarantee a continuation of this crisis. thank you for your consideration. >>thank you. next speaker please. >>my name is brian hamlin i'm a housing advocate. i cofounded a nonprofit housing affordable works throughout the state. i think you for being here as well. i do hope that as supervisor peskin mentioned that you inform sacramento the unique position that san francisco faces. with a very convoluted entitlement process that renders our land use policies dead letter and subject everything to negotiation which makes it more difficult to build affordable housing. and 100% affordable housing can be called up for years in legislation before it's able to be built. i want to

discuss the unique position of san francisco's political coalitions. they are opposing ab 2501. the california legal assistance foundation and others there is a strange split between state-level and corporate housing advocates and more politically engaged housing advocates in the city. i do hope you convey to sacramento that what happens and what is happening in san francisco is a large measure and does not represent the voice of all those who care about making san francisco a more affordable and inclusive place. i would also like to address this idea that the governor's proposal is a one-size-fits-all policy. that is nonsense. the

governor propose all suggest that each of the cities follow their own housing requirements and subsidies. whatever local requirements exist that have confirmed that and i think this is all a red herring and if we want to make san francisco a more affordable, inclusive city we should support the governor's agenda ab 2501 and other housing bills. >>thank you next speaker please. >>hi my name is sonja trouts i represent the renters foundation and we think this is the type of bill that will ease the shortage. a week ago on tuesday 15 of us took off

work to the san sacramento housing committee some calls to the senator len office yesterday 800 san franciscans sent postcards to leno. we will have at the polls on the

7th because tang and leno are going to look and say are there boots on the ground there? this is a one-size-fits-all housing on does is direct you to follow your own rules. this is something that is radical for californian totally normal for the rest of the united states. almost every other city has as a rights development because it's redundant for the planning department to make a plan and have the development have to come back to the planning department asked for permission for something that is already put there. >>thank you next speaker

please. good afternoon members of the board and guess locally my name is mr. cohen we are a coalition of local san francisco affordable housing organizations that build affordable housing manage properties and provide advocacy. for the most part the position if you will comes from our coalition and the governor and assembly member bloom and the governor endor blooms bill but they put some serious policy on the board this year and it is

some radical stuff and it is one-size-fits-all and is moving too quickly and it hasn't been designed well enough. there's 482 cities and 52 counties and it is a huge state and there's no one set of policies that play out the same in any city. if you lobby on behalf of the city which is only one of 482 we acid that be made clear. i think it's interesting to hear the supervisors that are here to say that the board of supervisors is the policy body for the city for both executive and legislative and that you folks are representing the policy body. it's nice to hear the opinion of other folks here are but they are not lobbying you. they can lobby the board of supervisors or anything else but if you were advocating the position of the policy body of the city and county of san

francisco and as such you are in an animus resolution on 2501 to seek an amendment to exempt san francisco based on their standards and that the reasonable thing to do. there is a bill with some very serious amendments potentially for san francisco. the rest of us civilians can argue this all they want regardless of it goes to the board are not. this is a completely chaotic place and what hearing it goes to a what time of day it is and what gets called up. it's not like what we have here today members of the board. so, we can jump in the car and drive all the way to sacramento but we need you guys to be supporting that. the

message on the ground in the city is key. thank you. [timer dings] >> vis-à-vis the statewide organizations can you regale us with that information? >> well whether or not in public chambers, the difference between state level organizations and where people work in between as i can to be so smooth. on the governor's trailer bill nor the amendments have been incorporated on the revised bill that came out last saturday. they came to

a very politically pragmatic position that at least they would be able to negotiate some improvements to the bill but having a really robust conversation about what the global implications are on the ground whether it be san francisco or oakland or los angeles or a lot of jurisdictions in long beach and elsewhere over the last week we've been talking to a lot of folks and those local to state conversations did not shape that position. whether the amendments that they asked for are good ones are not is one question but the idea of a trade off or money or implications there's going to have to be a lot more before we sign on to it and we certainly have not. >>can you articulate what the county organizations would like to see relative to the amendments of the by right? >>well supervisor, think in our circumstances and i think other people in the room

would agree can speak to that for san francisco. maybe there is a righteousness a were a purpose for having a pretension policy from san francisco. i think a buy right preemption is a bad policy as you said we produce more affordable housing than anyone besides la we havedo not sit around and wait for

this legislation. it means there is a by right approval from what you have been required to do. there should be an additional premium above local inclusionary to realize there is a real value for developers in exchange for something whatever that assumption is and secondly, as of the amendment that came in last friday that's taken right out of the bonus law for the most part. we have in many jurisdictions and taken from the folks in santa monica today have local demolition controls and the point being if you're allowing the by right approval of a project that simply replaces units

and preempts local demolition control and policy discussion that is a big game changer and then the 3rd thing is that we really think that this is aboutbuilding housing and that is the presumption from the governor's speech and we want to build more housing now not take so much time so a buy right approval does not build units. a buy rate approval get you paper. so, we are setting up a faster way to entitle more development and we are not assuring that it's going to get constructed. even if i would suspend my analytical disc belief in market rehousing filtering we would go from re-title meant to construction as soon as possible and we would have the maximum period of time from when title meant to construction and we want to

see units built not entitlement. i would not claim it is a treat offer by right but it would certainly make a better policy. thank you mr. cohen. we very much appreciate that since you may have figured out that the board of supervisors has for many, many, years look to the council of community housing organizations what has been around for decades and it really has been at the forefront of affordable housing policy at san francisco so that is why ask those questions for you all to see where a lot of the housing thinking in san francisco emanates from. >>we would just note that both sides agree on one thing and that is that they don't like sacramento. >>that is why you make the big

bucks.sorry. >>that is okay. we did not talk about assembly bill 2522 as opposed to 2521 that we took a young anonymous position to push for some amendments and that is my understanding that assembly bill 2522 did not move out a committee that bill is dead. >>yes. >>thank you for your work. >>so feel free to call us. we will be in touch with you. i will continue this hearing to the call the chair so we can check in publicly with mrs. elliott from time to time and we very much appreciate you coming down on a friday and wish you godspeed in your work over the next 2 weeks. >>thank you. we hope you feel better soon mr. chairman have a great weekend. >>thank you. >> >>that will conclude this hearing we are adjourned things again. >>[gavel]

>> good morning and welcome to san francisco county transportation authority. i'm scott wiener the chair and we'll call the roll. >> item 1, roll call, commissioner avalos, present. commissioner breed, present. commissioner campos, present. commissioner cohen, present. commissioner farrell, absent. commissioner kim, absent. commissioner mar, absent. commissioner peskin, present. commissioner tang, absent. commissioner wiener, present.

commissioner yee, present. we have quorum >> okay, i want to thank sfgtv for broadcasting todays meeting, leo [inaudible] and also colleagues supervisor farrell has asked to be excused in adivision supervisor kim is ill and unable to attend so can i have a motion to excuse commissioner farrell and commissioner kim? motion by commissioner cohen, seconded by commissioner compose and do wree need roll call on that or take that without objection. >> take without objection. item number 2 >> chairs report. this is a information item. >> colleagues we have two pieces of good news to share. first i like to congratulate cal trans and

transportation authority with public and private sector partners for winning the california transportation award. we had the opening of the new presidio parkway replacing the doil drive with a safe, modern and beautiful facility. i like to applaud the organization for their work and thank for the recognition as we finalize dlinchy of the innovative project. speaking of invasion, i would like to thank u.s. transportation anthony foxx for making san francisco eligible to compete in the smart city challenge program. this is a way to show how vehicle technology can

[inaudible] through partner shipwise the federal government. tim [inaudible] of sfmta is here and will give a overview the proposal. i'm hearing about san franciscos ideas and how the transportation authority and the office can support the effort. we are still at early stages there is great potential to incorporate new mobility to make the streets safeer and promote cycling [inaudible] with the bay area population expect to add 2 million people by 2040 we are working on transit expansion plans but we must make it easier for people to live without a car or drive the car less. we cant have another million cars in the bay -air roads. technology can help get us to our goal more

quickly. on a less positive note, unfortunately with barts troubles over the past weeks we have seen the consequences of what happens when we wait too long to address the basic transportation infrastructure needs. bart is 45 years old and truly showing its age. at the same time it faces record demand and continued excollation in ridership. the recent electrical problems that are completely decimating barts fleet are just the most extreme example of a system that is becoming less reliable and frankly coming apart at the seams. we absolutely must fix the system, modernize and expand the capacity. in november we will see a capital infrasfruckture model on the bal: it will be a dejaster if the bonds

fails. we need to make sure we as a city are doing our part along with alameda and con trucosta counties for barbts vehicle replacement and acquisition program. what is happening with bart is also a cautionary note for us in san francisco as we make policy decisions that determine whether we are going to invest in muni or not and we need to make sure we are continually getting ahead of the curve when it comes to infrastructure needs of our system. so, colleagues thank you for that and we'll proceed to public comment. any public comment on item number 2? seeing none, public comment is closed and this is a information item. we'll move to item number 3. >> item 3, executive director reports. this is a information item. >> thank you chair wiener.

good morning commissioners. [inaudible] happy to report-thank you for highlighting the good news chair wiener. in keep wg the theme of research and invasion i was pleased on the 14th of this munt to join with staff with los angeles and con trucosta transportation authority at a state hearing. chair fraser held a importance of state funded research in transportation technology. the research we benefited from has been in the area of traffic safety for vision zero, office of traffic safety and numerous other technologies to help optimize our system so we appreciated chair frasers leadership and to participate in the meeting. here in the region our work with mtca and bay area government we have draft

project performance results which we'll bing to plans and programs committee next month. with the release of the data we will be able to sehow our projects compete against other projects then region. we have every reason to believe it will do well for progress but in coordination with a bad and mtc we'll take a look at the land use function as the region has important choices. just untime our bart incentive program is getting ready to launch. you may have seen on the news bart perks we are working together with bart to [inaudible] corroded portionoffs the system, the transbay [inaudible] embarcadero and mun gumry stations and the idea is sign

up for the program and earn points through the clipper card for shifting travel outside of the peak period to ease the congestion problems on bart and extend [inaudible] this doesn't take place medium and long term capital planning but a important way we can partner with the community and public to extend the life and the capacity of our system. you can find more nrgz at sf [inaudible]/bart travel incenseive. in terms of the local work the treasure island management team put together 3 grant applications so hopefully we will be successful working with ticd the [inaudible] community development and [inaudible] we submitted a state cap and trade grant for affordable housing and. we submitted a federal tiger grant for a hybrid vessel we hope

toacquire for the ferry service and applied for federal inclusive planning impact grant. i highlight these because it is terrific to see there are no programs forwarded at the federal and state level that understand and underscore our strategy of nob nab in order to demonstrate new ways of conducting and achieving sustainability development. at the neighborhood level throughout the neighborhood transportation improvement program, we work closely with your offices and staff and a number of districts, district 11 we are working with commissioner avalos team on the park station community work at san jose and [inaudible] on district 8 on elk street and district 6 to look at

[inaudible] in district 9 we have been able to kick off the alameda interchange improvement project with commissioner campos and his staff this is in effort to improve the safety, pedestrian bike safety near farmers market [inaudible] more nrgz on those outreach meetings about the concepts beginning to emerge, visit sfcta.org/alameda change. the crooked street is shared with community members in the area of the crooked street. options are a full range of visitor access and circulation and physical trts to deminsh the high level of vehicle and pedestrian visitors and avoiding the spill over effects to

ajaistant streets. one of the findings we made is there as many visitors here as in the key locations in the city but the lack of management cupsty, so unlike the golden gate bridge and other places with a organization we think that is something that will be helpful to sustain the benefits of the short term programs that are tried. we'll come to the plans and programs exhibit no. 3 was committee and folks can join outreach meetings later march. [inaudible] there is also a final meeting to announce the rail yard alternative and boulevard studthy planning department has been hosting and hold the second community meeting wednesday march 30 at 6 p.m. at the same location at the first which is

potrero neighborhood [inaudible] at 955 [inaudible] come find out more about plans underway to address the alignments options for the downtown extension of cal train in conjunction with land use and free way vision planning. project delivery yerba buena appears to be on time. we have been able toreplace the bridge work and [inaudible] place seismic joints and concrete barriers. we anticipate being able to share that with you all and have a ribbon cutting in the summer time so my thanks go to eric [inaudible] for managing the project for us. and we are also at the same time coordinating with the bay bridge authorities as well as cal trans on touch down and integration of

the bike and pedestrian path, the west path on to the islands later this summer. as far as bicycleing improvements we are happy to report the prop k funding embarcadero and [inaudible] signage up are so thank you for sfmta for putting in signage to help [inaudible] away from king street and on to less stressful streets and paths. the page streets improvement and congratulate mta on thampt the muni procurement is continuing pace. there are 444 motor coaches and 60 trolleys on order. mta received 101 motor coaches and 38 trolley coaches and many are

oon revenue. the prop k funds are put to very good use and bond fund are not eligible for vehicles so that under scores the measure chair wiener described in his remarks for helping bart, muni and cal train meet the vehicle needs. new traffic signals are also being installed through prop k funding at that webster and o' farrell street location to support vision zero and many other places acrauz the city including intersection of [inaudible] thank you sfmta for get thg improvements out with our prop k fund. with that, happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you very much mrs. chang. any question or comments? seeing none, is there any public comment on item number 3? seeing none, public comment

is closed. this is a information item. item number 4. >> item 4, approve the minutes of february 23, 2016 meeting. >> any questions or comments or chairchgs with respect to the february minutes? seeing none, is there any public comment on item 4? seeing none, public comment is closed. can we take a roll call vote onite 784 >> avalos, aye. breed, aye. campos, absent. commissioner cohen, aye. commissioner mar, absent. commissioner peskin, aye. commissioner tang, aye. commissioner weener, aye. commissioner yee, aye. the minutes are approve >> item number 5 >> item fiver, approve the-adopt position on state legislation, this is a action item

>> any questions or comments on item 5? seeing none, any public comment on item 5? seeing none, public comment is closed. the house is changed so can you call the roll on item 5. >> commissioner avalos, aye. commissioner breed, aye. compose, aye. commissioner cohen, aye. commissioner mar, absent. commissioner peskin, aye. commissioner tang, aye. commissioner wiener, aye. commissioner yee, aye. the item is approved. >> item 6. >> item 6, approve the improving west side transit access stuteejic analysis report. >> any question or comments on item 6. ? seeing none, any public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues can we take item 6 same house same call? without objection that will be the order. item

7. >> item 7, appoint john larsson is to system advisory committee. >> any question or comments? seeing none. public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. same house same call? without objection that will be the order. item 8. >> approve the twnt 16 prop aa call for projects programming recommendations. toteology $2,192,934 for four projects and stuteejic plan. >> commissioner peskin. thank you chair wiener, colleagues. as you all probably heard the friday before last there was a fatality at broad way and 4th street the 4th fatality in as many years and condolances to mr. laws widow

and children. unfortunately these streetscape improvements are after-mr. laws passing but pleased we have found the last million dollars for a 8 million dollar project to do pedestrian safety and streetscape improve. along broad way between columbus avenue around gene parker elementary school which is a place a lot of kids go but a dangerous intersection. i request we approve this portion of item number 8 specifically on attachment 1, the third item, subject the too the condition before dpw puts this project out to bid that a little bit further consalitation with the community relative to the streetscape design be addressed. i discussed that with staff so would like to add that condition and then approve

the item. >> that is a motion? >> yes, sir. >> is there a second? second by commissioner breed. okay, any other comments or questions, colleagues? yes. >> through the chair, commissioner peskin where believe the contract has been advertised so if quee can condition it on prior to award of a contract. >> i will accept that change to my motion so prior to award. >> okay, commissioner breed that is a second? revised motion is made and seconded. seeing no other comment, any public comment on item 8? seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner peskin made a motion to amend, can we take that motion without objection? without objection the amendment is

adopted. take item 8 same house same call? without objection that is the order. >> item 9 allocate $10,975,410 in prop k funds and $794,980 in prom aa funds with conditions with 6 requests to subject to attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules >> any questions or comments? seeing none, any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed and can we take item 9 same house same call? without objection that will be theordser. item 10 >> item 10, update on u.s. department of transportation smart city challenge grants. this is information item. >> okay, i believe the mta will present on this mrs. chang? >> yes. [inaudible]

>> tim papandreou should be here shortly. >> this is the last item on the agenda so-- >> i don't think i can give the entire presentation but i'll give it a try. this is a excited development and want to take a minute to brief you and the public about the good news. the u.s. department of transportation named san francisco one of 7 fine finalist cities to compete for a 50 million dollar prize the purpose of the program is highlight the innovative ways technology can help urban areas meet the transportation challenges for mobility, safety standpoint prom emissions and community based planning. so, it is very wonderful we are finalist and don't have the prize yet but expect to continue in the

direction even if we don't receive the big prize. it is something we have been working on in many respects and underscoors efforts under way such as vision zero and [inaudible] and bike and car sharing and other services coordinating. in the city. the project is only eligible for medium size cities under 850,000 people and we just snuck in. the idea would be to demonstrate strategies, demonstrate committed leadership sw capacity to sustain the strategy beyond the grant period over the next 3 year jz integrate our project with existing data requirements and making sure those will beope toon the public beyond the grant period. the smart city challenge is expected to improve safety, enhanceability and climate

change and there is a 10 million dollar portion the prize offered by volcon which a non profit in the seattle area focused on emissions reduction. the smart city vision element you will see are many, about a dozen and they begin with technology elementsism underscooring the [inaudible] and automated vehicles, connected vehicles, intelligence transportation, the idea your vehicle can talk to road side infruc structure such as signals and they can guide you to avoid a incident ahead or to be able to more quickly get to your destination. in the second band innovative approach to transportation include the analytic and logistics part which is behind the scenes but a way to optimize conditions on streets

for road users. finally we have communication technology and land use components as well as community engagement and equity components of the program. there is a couple steps process that we have already proceeded to the 7 finalist city stage and in the proposal where we'll receive $100 thousand to development the local proposal. the date for that is in may and expect to hear award winners announced in june. here is tim and i'll let him take a breath and take over and we'll work with the u.s. department of transportation and private sector partners many public sector partners at state, local and regional level jz the city will receive the prize and if wree not suck saysful receive thg grand prize we expect to continue our

efforts forward. here you go, tim. >> good morning everyone. tim with the mta. thank you for setting that up. so, we applied for the city grant under some specific criteria to try to get through the initant of how it can move out to have the most sustainable and equitable transportation system. [inaudible] resulted in what we call a binary policy system that is incompetable with cities gruth not just in san francisco but many cities around the country. that system has resulted in people who are choosing to are required to use a [inaudible] in the city are [inaudible] 80 percent

empty, there are 4 empty seats that utilized and most of the times the car is stationary so need a place to park and most the cars are privately owned so it is creating a economic burden on people to get around the city with private transportation. because of the design the city and transportation system we have enormous peaks in the morning and evening which creates a large demand on the transit supply but for the rest of the day it isn't very utilized. it is efficiency issue as well. in the mean time we had a plethora of new services that have popped up, referred to as shared mobility or some call it [inaudible] economy system. they started early on with car sharing bike sharing came on board but had a

lot of companies that are based in silicone valley provide their own transportation for employees. we have what some refer to as a [inaudible] and then recently we had the electric scooters and new quad vehicles. none created more controversy for the city than what we refer to as transportation network companies, uber and lifts and the shuttle which is a service to move around the city. what we learned is these options are growing rapidly because they are [inaudible] we are trying to figure oit the best way to manage the services while if they are not going away we want to figure a way to work with them and incorporate into our transportation system the best we

can. now, that is what is happening in the city up to now, as we look to the near future we are working very closely with some the car companies that are starting to test [inaudible] vehicles. recently we had a few companies testing in san francisco and one of the car companies had a collision earlier that got acquired by general motors. there is a lot of change happening in this space but barely scached the surface and want to guide the process rather than chase it or be led by it. one of the things we pushed for in the grants and hope to work with the usdot and california government is we don't want to see the path from

conventionally owned private cars to [inaudible] we want to see private cars to shared a automated cars because we think that is the best use of our street space and the best opportunity we have to meet those multiple city objectives. our goal was in the statement is we will work with the companies to guide them into trying to meet local city goals through a shared connected platform. with smart city proposal is simply a focus on working with companies and services and not on their own, working through the community. we felt it was important to state to the dot that we dont believe we can arbitrarily choose a neighborhood but want to work with the community to figure oit what they are interested in and how they would like us to move forward in this

approach. we will focus on the data driven elements of this and expand and integrate the shared mobility services with public transit and incorporate shared and connected vehicles when they are ready to be brought to market. [inaudible] work better together and provide more access to mobility without the car ownership and also save customers time and money. a big focus of the grant is customer focus and figure out the opportunity we can improve the customer experience in the transportation system. from all the research we have done we know vehicle technology can meet multiple city goals if guided effectively. they can reduce traffic fatality, reach the [inaudible] and reduce [cough]. we think

we combine the suvss together and should be able to see something that is trans formational and [inaudible] shift more priority for things we care about which is walking transit and cycling but also if we can save up the demand for needed to use the parking garages we can potentially transform them and create affordable housing is that is a huge opportunity to reclaim some of our public space dedicated for private car use over to something that is more aminable to social equity which is affordable housing. the grant focused on 3 areas, one is create a city policy framework [inaudible] a lot of the companies are brand new and they are literally all over the place in terms of their ability to meet our city goals and objectives. work on

developing the [inaudible] and then guide the development of the automated technology. we have 6 keep principles we would like to push forward on as a screening criteria before we qualify the companies from now on and that is looking at the safety both in the vehicle and traffic safety approach to the operation making sure they focus on affordability, accessibility, available across the city and make sure they work with each other so they are [inaudible] and leading to the [inaudible] these customer focus objectives will help improve the things people have been telling us that are important. for example, being able to see all the different transport services in one app. [inaudible] and pay in one app. those things will create a simplified approach in knowing the services are available and also utilize around the

city. we are going to work with the companies to create a governance structure how we manage our data and tie that to the open data portal we have with sf open data and create city dashbords and metrics how we can see the efficacy of the work. lastly, which is important, is how do we test all this new technology on our streets? we will develop a community design framework to prioritize the different [inaudible] on the streets and then integrate the technology into the municipal fleets and land use policy because the potential for connected and automated [inaudible] will have a big impact on parking and that will allow us to reassess some of our parking policies we have in land use. now, before we do any of this we need to develop metrix and a process to make the changes so again, data

driven is critical. let's walk through some of the concepts we have come forward on. we have the idea of [inaudible] platform where we filter providers through the 6 goal areas. one area we focus more on is understanding our customer needs, so learning more about what the residents, workers, visitors and commercial delivery services need to move around the city. work with providers to qualify them so they can be considered part the transportation system and work with our technology partner tooz integrate all the technology makeing getting from a to b [inaudible] what pilots we can do to apply the technologies on to our streets whether [inaudible] station squz so on. if we can move

forward with this approach we can see that based on the research this is a hi ypothesis of the analsis, we should see collision, congestion, emissions and street demand go down over time and also affordability and liability going up over time. there is a phase to the roithd right that we should repurpose streets and parking for more aminities we consider important in the city. we have diagrams [inaudible] currently in phase 1 where we are today, a lot of cars on the streets [inaudible] taxi and transit, but mostly a congested experience for everybody. recently we had the increase in the different tnc services which are creating

more capacity for on demand trips but still not a real change in the transportation system. we believe that if we expand the sharing economy in the transportation system to have more car and bike sharing and the different carpooling services that is when we will see travel demands in the city and should be able to repurpsh spots for [inaudible] and things we care about in the city as well. when we get to shared and connected system where the vehicles are connected and communicating they can move much closer to each other and aware of the traffic conditions and safety issues that is when we'll see positive reductions in meeting the vision zero goals and reducing emissions and so forth. [inaudible] we can start repurposing the street space to open space and things we care about as a city. ultimately the vision is that

in the automated version there will be less space needed to move people around and more space dedicated for things we care about and that is basically our vision that we are moving forward on with this grant. the second piece of this is to create a community challenge to ask the neighborhoods how we can start piloting in the area. one neighborhood is selected, we may select more neighborhoods but it will start one first and figure ways to we can provide technical services to the applicants and improve the [inaudible] services and new ideas into that neighborhood. the city team that is moving forward with the grant is a core policy team between my team and the mayors office, uc berkeley and the consultant we are starting with and the technical support team consists of many different

groups inside the mta and city partners with department of technology, the sfcta, metropolitan transportation commission, [inaudible] and california strategic growth council and have a externt support team with different technology providers and we'll work with community engagement organization to help with the community challenge. our key steps in closing is that we are initiating the project team to get this final phase of the grant delivered. we develop the community challenge with community partner tooz create the engagement, website portal, [inaudible] and review panel and developing the qualified technology partners because we are ininidated and want to be able to screen them to help they add value [inaudible] as part of a requirement we have to do a 3 minute video

slaining the vision and concept. i want to mention the smart city grant should we receive it will accelerate the program where most of the stuff is already under way so this will give a big boost. that is my conclusion, happy to answer any questions. >> thank you papandreou. colleagues any question or comments? seeing none we'll move to public comment then. thank you. any public comment on item number 10? >> this time should start when i arrive at the podium so could you reset the button please to 2 minutes? thank you. so, one supervisor asked a question of the grants-there is no

guarantee they'll get a grant, but then we ask a couple of questions. number 1, the southeast sector, 30,000 units are [inaudible] right now if you evaluate the transportation system in the southeast sector it gets a f minus. now, if you travel from the southeast sector to the north, every day you supervisors should go and check the freeways. the congestion is so umbearable people are fighting on the freeways and soon we'll have shooting on the freeways. it is very nice to hear plans as if we are living on another planet. as far as i know we are living on the planet earth

and we need to be realistic. the first thing is san franciscans need to be respected so the public transportation system should cater to san franciscan's. we recently had a report on the newer buses that maybe the performance isn't so good even though some talk that they would be good so we need to reevaluate the new buses and find out if you spend millions and millions of dollars if you are doing san franciscan's right by spending taxpayers money. i appreciate it very much just giving us 2 minutes on the very very convoluted topic. thank you very much. >> thank you. any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. okay, this is a

information item. item number 11. >> item 11, introduction of new items, >> colleagues any introductions? any public comment on item 11? seeing none public comment is closed. this is also a information item. item 12, any general public comment? >> good morning commissioners. when the truth of one is in charge [inaudible] and destiny of origin [inaudible] travel a thousand miles in [inaudible] knowing of true destiny then [inaudible] human way of

life in circumstances should make up proportions to have a way of [inaudible] holy destiny [inaudible] loyalty, parental love, dignity [inaudible] having the wisdom and courage [inaudible] ones existence of true self [inaudible] is ones true heart [inaudible] thank you so much.

>> next speaker. >> supervisors, so i like to address quality of life issues. and i know the supervisors-some of the supervisors who work in our districts trying to do the right thing. we need to address transportation in a different way. often we put the emphasis on consultants and as i look to the right here, i see a lot of change of faces. a lot of change of faces. i do

not see a diversity. we need a diversity and we don't see it here. we are going to visit you all at your office and not a couple people but maybe 2, 300 people just like we did the other day. when we went to two supervisors they were missing in action and than were [inaudible] relevant pertinent questions they couldn't answer, so you know, i'm here to put the san francisco county transportation authority on notice and i can do that because i represent the first people of the area to mark malone and you all haven't been paying to that. a lot of your

eir ceqa and so forth you came here 2 or 300 years ago and took things over you can do as you please. we really don't need to be building so much. we don't need congestion. thank you very much. >> any additional general public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. item number 13. >> item 13, adjournment. >> colleagues we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

>> this coffee memory i remember having coffee with any grappled. in the old days myelogram ma get together >> i was six or seven i made a faces a good face. >> when i was younger i know it did something to my body. >> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> i've been drinking coffee since i was 17 really the only thing i'm good at i was trying to find out what i was good at i

got a job at the coffee shop i decided to do that the rest of my life. i like the process of the coffee and what are those beans where do they come from oh, they come from a fruit. >> the coffee stays with me since i was a kid i grew up and opened coffee shops everybody. in the 8 i visited over 11 hundred coffee shops maybe more to see why people go to coffee shops >> we're searched the beans all over the world from east afghan and tokyo. >> when i wanted to do was get into aspect of the personal coffee and the processing and

everything else there was multiple steps in making coffee and we did have a lighter roost because of the qualities of the keep once you roost it it home gisz the coffee. >> one thing about the coffee they were special blends and i spent seven years on one blend so that's my pleasure. each bean they were all chosen and blended with each with different cultural and beans is like people and those people give me a reputation i can't buy. people love you my clients love me they take me to the moves

movies. >> fell in love with coffee and went to the coffee shops the community aspect i really enjoyed. >> i think it's important to have a place for people to show up and talk to their neighbors and recorrect. your surrounded with all those behalf communicated i communities >> i love my city san francisco has a good name my has every cultural in this planet living in san francisco it's a small city 7 by 7 but it's huge. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> i really like the idea of staying in the neighborhood and living in the mission i've lived here the whole time and the community really stick to it people talk about seattle and portland now they talk about seattle and san francisco. or portland and san francisco but san francisco is definitely on the cutting-edge of the coffee scene in the entire nation. >> there's so many romance in coffee is surrounds the sourcing of that and thinking about where it came from and how and coffee is wonderful. >> i know for a fact i was born to make coffee. i have a notice from the dad let the life i live speak for me and let's have a cup of coffee and

talk about it. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> good afternoon ladies and

gentlemen, happy monday to you this meeting is call to order this is the regular meeting of land use and transportation i'm supervisor cowen chair of this committee to my right is supervisor wiener the vice chair and to my left is commissioner renne's our clerk is andrea ashbury and thank you phil jackson and jesse larson for broadcasting this meeting madam clerk, any announcements? electronic devices. completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the june 14, 2016, board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> >> item one an ordinances the administrative code for registering for persons with aids program. >> supervisor wiener is the author of this item. >> thank you, very much. madam chair this legislation

will close a pretty glaring and troubling will that in our city's rent ordinance one that denies full rent control protection to a population of long term hiv survivors low income hiv survivors who do in the receive rent control in connection with the federal subsidy as many of you may know be locking people living with hiv aids are some of the most vulnerable residents several hundred operate in the housing opportunities for persons with aids. >> substance program for low income with hiv those are frequently long term survivors and frequently seniors those are people who have gone

to hell and back as part of hiv aids epidemic and deserve our support they need housing security and can't afford a dramatic increases in the rent doing everything we can to protect those residents and assure they remain stable in their housing and community currently within our rental ordinance any recipient of a induce is excluded in the protection that exists for other recipients of federal vouchers this means that two nibdz in a regulated building one that receives a subsidy and one that receives a section 8 subsidy has different protections under the rental ordinance where the hopping pa recipient getting fewer restricts max no sense

people living with hiv aids need housing and rent control and it is unclear why this exception was included in the ordinance back in the day when it was adopted as federal law did not in any way require the loophole exists when we learned about this will that loophole none recently why it is there regardless we know about that and have it within our power to limit 24 loophole spending rent control to hopping pa recipients hopping pa a based on the difference of the lower of the established rent of the reasonable rent of the unit and thirty percent of the tonight's in case the rent of a studio is $1,500 a month and thirty

percent of the attendants income is one though dloors dollars the difference however, that same tenant seize there are 15 hundred rent increased to 2000 thousands the hopping pa didn't cover that above the ceiling the tenant is responsible for the $500 tha that can push people out of the hours through probation officer ordinance that will not be included that ordinance will close that loophole we've made the effective date of the legislation may 17, 2016, which is a day we introduced the legislation wanted to make sure there was there was not a small window of time for landlords to learn about that and take advantage of

that i want to thank sxheepdz for waving the thirty day rule open this to allow you to expedite the passage and the chair more quickly and expeditiously calendaring the item i also want to thank my co-sponsors supervisor campos, supervisor president london breed and i believe that particular you added your name if i'm not mistaken so add supervisor cowen as a co-sponsor and the aids panel for its advocacy on this issue as well as the san francisco apartment association which supports the legislation as well colleagues, we have an opportunity to take a step forward and protecting some of our month vulnerable residents and making sure we close the loophole i ask for your support. >> thank you, supervisor wiener would it be all right to go to

public comment i'll note the mayor's office of housing is here to answer any questions. >> i have 3 speaker cards (calling names) if anyone else that wants to s.p.c.a. after the 3 speakers. >> first up jamie and next will be bill and others. >> my name is jamie. >> staff attorney with the eyes referral pageant and speaking in support of the proposed amendment for the last ten years i've safety clients living in hiv and aids for in their housing i i have to tell you when folks are at the point ever seeking an attorney they're scared and many of my clients are con fronting a reality they didn't contemplate as surviving of the aging we all know for people knowledge

with hiv and aids the ability to maintain their health a only possible to have long term access to stable and affordable housing and at the same time this population is facing immeasurable gallows in remaining much housing loma prieta like programs like the hopping pa address the hiv positive tenants with the stability they need to stay healthy the unprecedented surgery in the rental market is facing decided and supervisor wiener said the protection for the hopping pa are unequal to other subtracted tenants imagine being told you receive a funding source that there is no legal protection against massive rental increases your neighbor has a section 8 can fight those increases but you can't

and you're only choices are only to stay in your housing and with your subsidy or move without your subsidy and facing new housing the language that supervisor wiener amendment targets is just a few words but those having a life-saving program in the hopping pa program. >> thank you. next speaker. is bill. >> good afternoon, supervisors thank you, supervisor wiener for your leadership on this issue the aids referral support this moiftsd amendment that creates legals protections for assisted tenants living with hiv and aids as it stands the ordinance makes a distinction been low income tenants with rental assistance with the federal section 8 and those federal assistance through the hopping pa program while neither class of tenants enjoys the protection under the

ordinance section 8 assisted tenants are afforded protections under some circumstances pursue hopping pa assisted tenants are completely exempt from protections under all circumstances supervisor wieners proposed amendment will get rid of of this ini ill logical thing so they can maintain theory health an having stable housing an amount 2kr0r79 to this that forced them out of their homes thank you. >> thank you. next speaker is just for the record. >> good afternoon. i'm a housing rights i'm just for the record thank you for considering this for rent protection for hopping pa understanding i 100 percent support it and it may not be too light the two late i may try to help i'm a

transgender woman and building in the stabilize and acknowledge any sisters have history and aids being homeless is no fun and homeless can be deadly but especially for people with commodity immune i'm glad this is considered only applies to current tenants those are are gentrified are out of luck it is a silence equal that equals jurisdiction and equals death and homelessness equals death and criminalization equals a death that message is relevant as in the 80s having said that, i one hundred support this legislation as i meet the sponsors so they can paint wash to gentrify and general fizzing the poor and shell for the sfpd and these things are bad for people with hiv and aids and the

lgbt community supervisor wiener you've only card about those who line our pockets with the dirty money now doing something nice too little too late for the did not movement we stand in solidarity and see right through you go back to new jersey. >> wow, that was incredibly mean and unprofessional. >> good afternoon. i'm charles i am with the apartment association we're asking for you to support this legislation to not mississippi make mementos and with a positive recommendation we firmly believe that make sense and appreciate your support with the outreach to supervisor wiener's office. >> any public comment on

number number one seeing none, public comment is closed. at this time and thank you colleagues, any discussion if not and guess entertain and motion. >> thank you, madam chair and thank you, colleagues for hearing this i move we forward to the full board with a positive recommendation motion made that motion carries unanimously madam clerk item 2. >> the property open a parcel two known and a as admission park. >> we have from the supervisor kim's office and presenting on this item. >> thank you chair cohen and land use committee i'm april i will have very, very brief comments today as to what is before you but that is formal

acceptance to accept mission bay park as many of you may know a new and emerging neighborhood a former redevelopment area with many, many new families and children and many of the families have been anxious to have this park opened this is an important step in that process to have the city accept the park on behalf of ocii and mission street mission bay park it is also be a unique park for totes to school-aged children i just want to thank supervisor president london breed who is waved the regular thirty days and knowingly for switzerland this is a committee report so we could have the ordinance passed and so that the park can open i also, we do have one amendment to the legislation that i believe supervisor peskin will move and that is to make the

operative date july 1st when this park will open i believe that dpw is here if any other questions from the committee thank you. >> supervisor peskin. >> oh, supervisor wiener. >> yes. just a question to i guess the supervisor kim's officer who is going to be operating 24 as a park but my understanding not a rec and park who is going to be managing and running this. >> yes. barbara from dpw in the mission bay redevelopment area from the redevelopment area that will be maintained and managed by the mission bay park because i believe that it is go m j m will be managing the park. >> good afternoon barbara from

public works at the m j m under contract to ocii and the management parks through a funding mechanism that will help those parks stay alive and vigorous. >> why is not rec and park involved here. >> this is been the way they've been managed for at last 15 years it was a redevelopment ear and to be managed by the agency it is up for discussion ocii vufrn will be dissolved. >> okay i know there is concern has been expressed to me and this is i've never received a briefing on this and needed to have every item on the agenda i know that

there is some concerns i think rec and park learned about this or they starting to be briefed like last week and my understanding m j m is terrific and it is we have a rec and park department and everyone assumes all of our parks are under in their jurisdiction but parks not under their jurisdiction i think that brings some challenges along with that. >> it as solid polarizing discussion that should be continued. >> agreed? >> okay. i'll, curious to know what the authors i don't want to put you on the spot. >> staff from ocii is here if they want to address that. >> just because there is several former redevelopment areas and current ocii areas in our district most of the park

activities within those areas are managed through m j m or some similar i think actually m j m the one off the top of my head is the yerba buena gardens a similar structure as well as the coming transbay park in the transbay area and all of the parks within mission bay of which there are several also have the similar structure where ocii continues to hold the park while the management company m j m manages and maintains it. >> supervisor mark with ocii i don't know all the legislation

process but the way that ocii and mission bay has their parks they have appendixes has a lease with the city and the department of real estate and from that they hire m j m to manage all the parks and ocii is still responsible for the park area i know there is discussions at a higher level with any deputy director has been talking about with people. >> whenever he get an express of questions from rec and park how properties will be managed i think there are briefed and i just a little bit confused with the city family is not necessarily i hate that phrase but for reference not on the same page i don't i've i'm a

little bit confused by that. >> i don't expect you to answer. >> there have been discussions but discussions with rec and park and they've been talking with the director my director about the future. >> okay. >> i'm sorry i don't have more. >> this is a committee report. >> yes. >> is there something magic will tomorrow as opposed to to the efficiently or. >> we can open up for public comment i think corin wants to speak. >> i do have an amendment it is a very similar amendment on page 5 that speaks to the length of time it is actually taken to open that facility i'm proposing on behalf of the chief sponsor supervisor kim to add a section

5 that with read the action so forth in the ordinance and section 3 with the acceptance of p-6 and ocii maintenance should be open active as july 1st but that speaks to the fact this has taken quite a bit and the subject of many details i actually asked a similar question that supervisor wiener is asking of dpw staff that's why this is not entitled up to rec and park and i maybe coming at 2 from a slightly different reason he actually think that going forward as we create those new parks in expanding the areas the city they should be parks under the jurisdiction of rec and park which is subject to the voter approved mandate proposition k with shadow impacts i'm interested in over the long term

having a policy discussions about transferring this to the rec and park department but given the evolution of mission bay given the fact that there are many people that have been parkinson's waiting for this dpw is still in the process of accepting streets around that park that have to not think pubically accepted the scheme proposed by the staff ocii and dpw is one that i'm prepared to move forward that didn't in any way preinclude us from working with rec and park and ocii and dpw to add a transfer to rec and park although i have to say i know there many residents that are worried about rec and park ability to properly manage the facility and given their funding and other constraints with that

section i'd like to move the amendment and respectfully accepted this forward as a committee report to get this park open for people moving into many part of town. >> did you read into - and i read it was that simple. >> thank you for those comments which seem very reasonable and appropriated to make i appreciate that clarification. >> all right. thank you supervisor wiener and supervisor peskin let's go forward and open up for public comment at this time if you like to come up i have one card from corinne woods join us for 2 minutes at the podium. >> good afternoon chair cohen and supervisor wiener and supervisor peskin