the tenderloin district and have been doing so for the last 6 years and through the last 6 years i have seen the tenderloin go through many transitions. some fwr the better and some still for the worst. yet, through often the darker side the changes the tenderloin has seen, sthra constant on eddie street between taylor and mason that consistency is real a the lights provided by pandora karaoke. if you are not familiar with the 600 block of eddie street, just giv me a second to paint a picture. during the day when pandora business is closed a mix och professionals walk through the area of drug deal squz people sleeping on the street and resident that call the tenderloin home. at night it

turns into a darker place with a different walk of life but a different version orphwattio sign it day. that is until pandoras lights come on. that sign seemingly insignificant brings back light to a otherwise darker place in that part of town. also whenia hear music and voices of the singing patrons through the front door it takes away from that grimyness that you see in the neighborhood. i know this because i work next door and there from the morning until night. i see the difference in the neighborhood on the days pandora is open for business and when they are not. and when they are open for business, the neighborhood feels a lot more welcoming. pandora attracts a lot of visiting tourist and groups and friends >> thank you. we only give two minutes for each member but thank you for your comment and thank you for having your

business in the tenderloin neighborhood. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is putact and am here as a resident of the tinder loin. i have been there forever. i want to talk about 3 things one displacement, work in the community and safety issue. i believe pandora is being displaced and kicked out and the riseen he is request the new one. while he is there he participated thin community take back the block. all the actirfbty moved to eddie streets and worked with the merchants and non-profits to make sure they decrease the amount of time happening on the 100 block so as the gentlemen mentioned earlier during the day they clean the streets and make sure none of that happens and during the night time there is security there and they present all these things from

happening in their space thin fronts. i feel sair walking at night when they are around. the last part is they-i actually live further down but i'm will toog walk around in front of their store front to get home because i feel more safe with them there. if you imagine them moving to 50 mason, that will change because they will by there and presence and there will be security and will walk that way and not go on eddie because they won't be there because they are getting kicked out. i think i have 30 seconds left. >> thank you so much. any other members of the public that like to speak? seeing none public comment is closed. someone who has been to pandora myself i want to thank you for being dedicated and responsible small business owner in the neighborhood and look forward to continuing to work with you

on increasing safety as well as working with us to help continue to activate the neighborhood particularly on this block of mason street. colleagues at this time can we take a motion on the iletm? >> i think the folks the applicant are here to say- >> if you don't need to hear from us . they said ere were no letters of support and don't know if i can give them to the clerk but have 8 letters of support that were sent to abc and police department including one from tend r loin safe passage which states they never support a liquor license [inaudible] and just finally, there are 13 conditions that have been prooffered by the san francisco police- >> i'm so sorry because i would call you up if we had questions. so the applicant at this time the committee doesn't have questions mptd we just

have a long agenda and think this committee will move forward with the item if that is okay with you. i appreciate you being here. in the future let our office know you want to make a presentation. you are also welcome to speak at public comment as well. but if the applicant would like to say something becauseia made the trouble coming down here--jeff, thank you for being here. >> jeff i'm the owner and operator of pandora. as stated we are trying to move to 50 mason street and love the neighborhood and put our heart into the neighborhood and are part the block group to insure safety ure in the neighborhood and feel the scurpt staff is with me for 6 years. the same staff and have gotten to know whether the resident and a lot of people feel safer when we are open. we are trying to

keep our doors open and later to help the public, to help the neighborhood bring good folks in. there is a lot going on in the area and we like to encourage that type of growth and think that karaoke is good for that and good for the neighborhood so hope we can stay. thank you. >> i believe karaoke is also good for the neighborhood and for all things so thank you. >> thank you. >> so, at this time- >> where is walter [inaudible] when you need him? >> we have a motion to move forward with positive recommendation to full board? we do that without upsition. thank you for the applicant and for the members to be here on the item and appreciate the patience. we vanumber of public comment as well. at this time madam clerk if you can please call item number 5.

>> item 5, ordinance amending the police code to provide a process for the removal of encampments when housing or shelter is available for encampment residents, and authorizing the department of homelessness and supportive housing to develop protocols governing the removal and storage of personal property when removing and encampment. >> thank you madam clerk. we have moved this item up in order for staff to present on the item. i believe that the chief deputy of the department of homelessness is here today, sam dodge. jeff [inaudible] could ntd make it today. we wanted to hear from you about the ongoing tent encampment mapping and dismantlement process. i did want to ask you to come and present on what is ongoing today. as we know tent encampments is a big public issue and something thin discourse particularly over the course of the last 8 months.

we have a number of different legislations trying to test t

test test test

>> the mission to become this place and what we have understood from the very beginning is when it comes to clearing encampments moving people out of a specific area without giving them a place to go is not a solution. it doesn't work. in fact, what we see in terms of the problem that is out there, is that some of the folks that are camped out are peachal who had been previously moved or pushed along from other encampments

and if you don't give people a place to go, they just move down the block or come back to the same spot, which is why we focus in my office on legislation with this board to create more navigation centers so people actually have a place to go. and so, that is what we have been focused on for the last few months and we have been focusing in the last few weeks with the new department of homelessness on actually implementing that policy. clearing out these encampments because we recognize that people companying out in these tents is not a solution and it is not something that works for them on so many different levels and it is not something that works for the neighborhood. it is not what we want to be and what we want to do in san francisco. we have to do better than that. i want to make the point because i want to thank the residents

of the north mission especially who have been sort of dealing with the brunt of this and want you to know that we are working on this and want to thank mr. dodge and jeff [inaudible] because in the last few weeks we have been working to make this is a priority and are in the middle of that. i just want people to know that there is a way that we can be humane but also pragmatic in dealing with this and that is what we are trying to do and we already actually have cleared out a number of these encampments and the rest is in the works. but this idea that simply clearing them out and throwing out the belongings doesn't work. we won't do that because it does want solve anything so look forward hearing more from the department and i want to thank all my residents who are here. i see some of them here for

what they have been going through. with that mr. dodge, thank you. >> thank you supervisor, sam dodge department of homelessness and supportive housing. i want to echo what you said. like you said, we are in the middle of this and the department is up and budget authority since august 15, relatively babies but doesn't mean we are not working on this. i was asked by matthew dorty to help the drafting of the dialogue document they pub lished around resolving encampments that were referenced by supervisor kim and they have been great assets to our community and talking about best practices and look for us and see what worked for

us. i just say the local context the homelessness in san francisco is quite a challenge. you know, in 2005 we had a homeless of 6248 people. 2015 we had a camp of 6686 but given the context of the extreme housing crisis and the rate of families living in poverty that is be seen as a success even though we don't see it as a success. half of our homeless population is sleeping on the streets every night. they are in crisis and challenge and our sister cities are facing an even higher crisis where we are able shelter 50 percent, in california 70 percent find themselves unsheltered on the street and 1 in 5 people homeless in the united states

are homeless in the california. it is a very specific crisis we are facing in california with our street homelessness. some of the measures we have taken thin past few years is open the navigation center from street homelessness. it is successful for over all most 700 people but that is a demonstration of the fact people want to leave encampments and are ready to muchb move on with their live jz it is not a fun or safe place people find them sechbls and given the opportunity they are more that willing to give up tent and living on the street corners and come into our system of care to try to change their lives. and even with the successs of the navigation centers and the expansion that we are taking, clearly we are struggling with

street homelessness in san francisco. we track homeless camp with tents and see between 70 and 80 locations. best practice the department convenes a weekly encampment resolution team meeting with representatives from the homeless outreach team, department of homelessness, public works and representative from our local homeless coordinating boards to coordinate efforts. the goals are to learn and refine the best practices by following a basic framework. prepare, coordinate a cross sector and systems, perform intensive outreach and engagement. provide low barrier pathways out of the encampments and into shelter and housing and prevent encampments from being re-created. we have seen

success but we clearly have not refined the practice to the point where it can be codifyed. we ask for your time to identify lesson that can strengthen the communities overall homeless crisis we sponse system. we met repeatedly with the coalition on homelessness and aclu and lawyers committee on about evolving of the law when it come tooz encampments i people on the streets and how to work with possessions and their own civil rights while also helping to address health conditions and disease vectors as we can. of course we kill comply with any legislation passed by the board of supervisors, but as we go we need to continue to improve our practices and i think we are

all unified about from the homeless on the street to advocates to xhoo unty neighbors is that the current state of encampments is unsustainable and not desirable and want to make steps toward a system that we want that helps resolve the homelessness and not forced to live on the street. our recent practices have included [inaudible] with the good advice from advoicate squz other communities is the addition of bringing in portable bathroom and dumpsters to help people take time to sort through their positions and be be able to have access to toilets. that encampment was at a high walter mark of over 50 people and were able to resolve it and offer all people access to shelter that were there. there were no arrests.

we did in the final clean up remove over 20 thousand pound of debris and i think it is a nice success and the first time we are using our newest iteration of what we learned in the encampment response team so our next efforts as supervisor campos was talking about is move into the mission and know there are large scale encampments in the mission. it isn't for lack of trying or lack of trying to bring in resources, and trying to coordinate but need to do better and that is our current efforts there. we don't have the perfect prescription yet and need to keep at this and lead with our heart and understanding that these are humans and people that are homeless and need to-do our best by them. again, it is just not okay to keep going the way it is going right now. it

is dangerous for those homeless and dangerous for our communities so those are our next steps and that is how weem we will try to move forward. >> thank you mr. dodge. just a few questions. is it helpful to have legislation on the books in terms of how to administer the process of addressing tent encampments in the city? if so, what would be helpful to have on the books that would giv the department more tools or help you be more effective in the process? >> i mean, just open book. i would love if there was a income eeligibility for section 8 voucher or eligibility for housing in some way. i know that is hard to opraigdsalize in a city like ours but that would be a asset that would make a game changer. we are

regulated by a number of laws and codes and court precedents. it isn't as if cities are low aed to do anything when people find themselves homeless. it is a constricted and contested place >> do you think it is helpful to have legislation that dictates how tent encampment removal occurs? >> um, no. i don't. i mean i think the best it is to point to a northern star and keep iterating and finding the best practices. if we were able to have a best practice that was good in all context, then that would we the place. i just dont think we are there yet. it isn't just san francisco that is struggling, all our neighboring communities and talk to a lot of other communities, dallas recently and helping them take down a large encampment. i don't think anyone has the magic

thing. >> i think because this is homelessness is a issue that frustrates all of us on so many different levls. one, there are people without homes, two that housing is so unaffordable even for those working full time that the streets are the option of housing for our residents. three, seeing your neighborhood with traish and feses because people have no where else to go is frustrating. it stirs up a lot of emotion jz everyone want tooz act on it somehow. we struggle with from the legislative bodies perspective because one of the main functions we have is to write law jz that is how we respond to constituents concerns is say we'll write a law on that. i think the bigger policy conversation for us at the board is think about whether

that is the best tool to address encampments and eliminating homeless thin city. i think that is a larger conversation and have this legislation before us and legislation going before the voters this november and thing we should focus on the fact that we all want the same outcomes which is house and provide service to as many people struggling on the streets as possible and really think about what is the best pathway sfr us to go. legislation could possible be one, we can pass a legislation that is at this committee before us today and say that we are doing something about homelessness but i really want to push our body to ask whether that will get us the results we need to and there is administrative flexibility we should give in trust that we have the best folks working on the issue. so, thank you for your comments in terms of

providing us context in terms of what the department of homelessness is thinking about right now and the vision as it gets started. it only kind of transspired in june so there is a patience we need to provide but it is helpful for us to understand from the department how we can best support you. whether it is around looking and examining a section 8 option, perhaps there are enough laws around. i'm not saying there isn't because i'm the sponsor of the legislation but i want to put that forward and hopefully can continue the dialogue. i know there are many members of the public who would like to speak. colleagues comments or questions for mr. dodge? thank you for being here. >> thank you. at this time i want to open for public

comment. any member that would like to speak on item number 5. >> jennifer freedenbalk, good afternoon. realally appreciate we have this discussion. i think from our perspective it is unacceptable there are so many who are forced to sleep on the streets. the health is disintegrateed quickly. it is thousand times worse than myself as a neighbor in the mission. that isn't to displiss there are concerns

about that but i think thin center of the conversation has to be homeless people and what it is for them that is so much worse. they are forced to sleep on the streets, they have no choice. we have over today over 900 people on the wait list for shelter. we have people trying to get shelter every day that are turned awayment we have 8 thousand house holds that are homeless on the wait list for public housing. i can go on and on t. is impossible to get treatment, getting mental health treatment is difficult, it is impossible to get well because you are traumatized over and over again and being treated with a high degree of hate. the realty is when we are trying to resolve encampments we can't move people quickly within 24 hours. it takes 3 days to get a tb test. it doesn't make sense to do like housing not tents when there is now housing

involved. we need to do change and invest in actual solutions to move people from the streets and into housing. thank you. >> thank you mrs. freedenbalk. >> hello supervisors and my supervisor david campos. i'm [inaudible] representing here the northeast mission business association and we believe we are ground zero for tent encampments and i see our supervisor is agree. it has been a very serious health and human safety issue with theitant encampments that are up squ dounand down 16th street, folsom, harrison. we must have a solution for this. a few weeks ago we counted on a walk around just one block, 42

needles discarded so along our street we have children running back and forth to catch the bust to go to school. the tent encampment situation has to be imealierated as quickly as possible for heblth and human safety. our hearts go out to the people who are homeless and want to do what we can to help that, but to have tent encampments in front of our businesses is very very serious matter. so, as a gentle woman i'm not going to describe the illegal business that goes on in these tent encampments because we all know about it, so i want to ask you to please be realistic about the timeframe for moving the tents. thank you. >> thank you, so much. >> good afternoon. patricia

[inaudible] representing san francisco travel. i'm going to emphasize on 3 point why san francisco travel is going to support measure q as a alternative to supervisor kim's measure. number 1, the city should not geeer tee affordable housing to anyone who sets up tents. number 2, the permanent housing component will just incent vise more tents on the neighborhoods and sidewalks and the 7 days to 14 days notice for removal of tents we think for public safety reasons it should be sooner than that. thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors. jim [inaudible] san francisco chamber of commerce. i looked

a that handbook for the 1986 election and there was a bond issue to build a mental health facility and that argument said we had ofern 6 thousand homeless people on the streets of san francisco every night. that was 30 years ago. we have 6 thousand people give or take today. the difference is, we had an agreshive shelter program until 1988 through the sro's and through shelter facilities and there were not encampments. why do we have encampments in 2016 with a portion of that over 6 thousand population of homeless that we didn't have then? public policy has changed. supervisors before you mayors before you have defunded programs, have reduced the amounts of available shelter and turned to the streets in front of peoples businesses and homes and these are not all people who just happen to lose

their housing last week and got a tent. there is illegal activities of every type and crime occurring in the mission and throughout encampments. this should not be allowed in any civilized city and it is chronic problem on the west cost of the united states i recognize. the chamber wants to work with you on a solution to put people into shelter by our standards of humane streement and not the standards the homeless people want us to abide by. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. [inaudible] president of the san francisco council of district merchants. like to thank supervisor campos for calling pee back about the encampments [inaudible] i want to point out a few things, one is, there are homeless people all over the city. noe value,

castro, [inaudible] all over the place. but you don't see encampments everywhere. encampments there were some under the freeways that are no long there and businesses have encampments and these effect the businesses. don't we care about our businesses? that's what we should look like. when it comes to housing i asked others about this, i believe on treasure islands we have empty weir houses that can fill housing for them. supervisor kim, you do a great job with portable toilets and all that, we could place those on treasure island and provide housing for them. wouldn't that be a better place to live rather than in the streets and effecting the small business? it isn't fair we are not lookic into this. i have not been

[inaudible] but i think we will need to look at it. my concern is how these encampments effect small business. when i look at others areas of the city where there are no encampments, over on th castro and 24th street there a couple people that are homeless and really nice folks and really am concerned about how they live. at least they are not taking up a place on the street where people can not come into the businesses there. thank you very much. >> madam chair, i would ask sf travel given the statements may make without solutions means they have the decency to stay for the remainder of the hearing so actually hear-they are about to leave it seems, so at least have a chance to hear from the rest of the community who come here and make these

grandiose statements and just walk away, i hope you are better than that. >> thank you and thank you mr. colonel woods. >> my name is [inaudible] been working as a social worker and a advocate with homeless people in for 11 years in my career for 20. within that time, within the past few minutes i heard some the most disgusting and disrespectful comments about homelessness i heard working here and in new york city. i have to say ignorns intolerance and nasty public discourse like this hurts us just as much as the current state that we have where we don't have enough resources to help the vast number of people who are suffering oon our

streets and want nothing more than a safe place to sleep and live where they are not subject to violence and not subject to ridicule and not treated like pieces of trash. we have to decide how we will respond to homelessness in the public sector and as public conversation because it effects all of us. unfortunately when that happens we often have to fight against the myths and the misinformation as hard as we have to fight for the resources for our people that have been taken from us, that have been seen as unimportant based on political whims. i'm here to say, i've been fighting for real solutions. we need to work together and do something

real and something respectful and understand the people that we are talking about. encampments are made of people. human beings. if you have trouble believing that i suggest you go out and introduce yourself and talk to your neighbors. >> thank you. >> kelly cutture a human rights organizer. i was out of the encampments and going out on a regular basis and the other day there was a sweep going on and we went to the police officer and said, where should they go? he said, i dopet have a answer for that. he knows just like everyone else there is all most 9 hundred people on the shelter wait list and don't have the housing. everyone i talk to want housing. they are like, how can we do this? it is this

whole myth that people are choosing to stay out and don't want housing, it is just not true. i thipg it is really important-we are making progress and having to deal with a measure going the ballot which is frustrating because i felt like we were making progress. it is important to be looking at strategies that are effective. the city has done and been effective. such as when the encampments on 4th and king we had addressed and it took time. they did the encampment and i was out there the other day, [inaudible] creek and you have great people working down there. they are doing really good work. they did need a little more time because this takes time to make permanent and real solutions to get people into housing. based

on the federal guidelines. we know the tools, we need to just say on that path and-i also definitely support what collin said before me because it is frustrating after doing this for so long and hearing this stuff it is like--thank you. >> thank you mrs. cutler. >> good afternoon. jordan [inaudible] davis. formerly homeless. i'm a few formally homeless people here. i just want to say nobody in this room i'm pretty sure wants to live in a tent encampment. i know i didn't want to live in a tent encampment but let's face it, there are not enough exists to tent encampments and those exhibits that are there are substandard. shelter, we have been through this thousand times before and why we had to do the navigation center and why we are expandic the

concept. all the housing are usually non-profit hotels which are lack of safety. there is a lot of vandalizing rules. a lot of like health hazards that are probably worse that encampment. it is a haaseal environment for lgbt like myself. you live with rapist and pedophiles and arsnist and deal with health issues. i'm not saying we are spoiled but unless we give a safe, decent affordable place to live people will reject this. i'm sure a lot of people if they offered what they were offering utah, they get the heck off the streets. of course what we are offering right now is often triggering the many people not to come. basically i just want

to say to everyone that you know, that standing with us that's want to listen to us, that you know very much and for those people who have no idea about what it is like to be homeless and no idea-you think you know what is best, just sit down and shut up, okay. thank you. >> thank you mrs. davis. >> my name is [inaudible] i represent [inaudible] for the homeless, which is mainly homeless [inaudible] i have been homeless activist for 30 years in san francisco. i have seen this criminalization going on over and over and over. it does not-it makes peoples lives more miserable. it doesn't solve the problem. i'm glad the lastest thing is being questioned and glad san francisco is really attempting to look at something more

systemic about housing people. weir houses are not housing. nob nab behind raiser wire isn't housing. people would rather be in a clean safe place and actually their own apartment rather than in aitant or in the street or doorway. but until we can guarantee that they can trade that tent for that, there shouldn't be a single tent knocked down or a single pick up or arrest for the crime ofbying poor and not able to afford the horrible rents in san francisco. it is only going to get worse, so i just want to also say that you open up any survival manual and the first thing they tell you is seek shelter. so, if the

best people can do is have a tents to get out of the elements a little and give them a little bit of privacy, then it is criminal on our part to rip that away. when there is no real alternative. i hope we can focus on the alternative and not the criminalization of people who are not committing a crime. >> thank you so much for being here. >> first of all, board of supervisors you are contributing to the problem. you sit up and act like you want to help homeless people and advertise and campaign that each and every brands new apartment building coming down the pipeline is low income and affordable housing. you manipulate the hud income scale

and set the requirement for every building built at 55 percent of the medium for low income housing. low income 55 percent of the medium is 49, 500 that means avenue wns income below the 55 percent the medium can not even apply to move in these brands new apartment buildings. you got discriminatory practice where you campaign and advertise low income housing when the truth is the requirement to move in the building is people in high income brackets. you did that for the mission rock apartment building. you take a hispanic female with a child and be her pitch person and she loves to live in the mission rock and show the daughter. the lowest income to be eligible to move is 70,000 a year. you

literally undermine people to vote for a measure that doesn't supply housing. now, you sit up there and deal with the navigation centers when you should use that money to build affordable housing brand new building for people in lower income like santa clara. you are are in violation of the american with disact act. you sit up there and act like you want to help. you spend more money on homeless programs than you do building apartment buildings to move off the street. i got through talking to you about this and he agrees with me. >> thank you so much. >> my name is [inaudible] i have been coming here for the last 6 months saying the same thing that housing is a solution and it isn't just simple housing, supportive

housing. same soma, a lot of the servicess that are supportive housing for people on reconchy and experiencing trauma and community violence, we use today have supportive services in soma that we could put a person-you can go to take a shower here or do this and gelt you into housing and that is not the case anymore and it is really aggrating because we continue to build and build and build and not build frg the people that are here. we are just continue toog exploit them. pretty basically capitalism. so many people have to lose for one person to win and we are create aghuge divide. we sit and talk about illegal activities inside tends. if we opened other peoples doors there may be people doing illegal things there but they have the security of the house. when there are no supportive serves

for case managers. they are the only people that can give vouchers. there is not enough funding for that. there are not enough people that can do that. people have a wait list of 100 people until tay get to that person and that is aggregating because we try to work and work and have no resources. caents tell and continue to hear how they are raped and brutalized by police just keep going from trauma to the other and complex trauma is very hard to support. as twee continue to haul people it seems like the only solution is housing and it is specific housing for different communitiesism i'm tired of we continue to have all these companies that come to the city that have no employees that live here. >> thank you so much. >> good afternoon. i'm heidi

[inaudible] member of the executive committee for city democratic club and i just want to first applaud supervisor kim for her leadership on this issue. it is fantastic mpts as a endorsement member we spent 15 hours debating and interviewing candidate squz looking at all the various ballot measures and we came out with a recommendation in favor of proposition q and i am not here today as a representative of the democratic club. i'm here as a attorney and citizen and self prescribed [inaudible] i want to say that it impresses me supervisor kim when you open yourself up to hear about the weeds. you are asking okay, we need legislation, is this the right legislation? and there are certain things in your

measure that are in disagreement or that differ from proposition q, and i love to see them more aligned because i am fearful that they don't accomplish what you are trying to accomplish. specifically, you're legislation requires 7 day notice proposition q requires a 24 hour notice. the city must first identify a shelter in both of the propositions, but yours of course has to be available for 90 days and it is belter to get people off the street now perhaps rather than make sure there is a 90 day space available for them. and then the final one was the group of encampments. in that, it is desfineed as 6 or more would have special additional protections that the city first have to consult with the group and put together a written

legislation plan. so, i'm offering some friendly advice. >> thank you so much. any other comments on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. i don't know if mr. dodge is still here . or any other member of department of homeless ness is. okay. i do think an issue of the importance does require some time and process as we continue to move forward with what is the best approach to addressing homelessness on our streets. we want to resolve the issue and reduce the homeless count and number of people suffering on our streets and there is a variety of different very passionate perspectives on how to make that happen. in response to caumpts about the legislation that is before us today, i was the only office that reached out to department of homelessness to ask what they

thought would be a reasonable amount of time by which they provide notice and remove tent encampments and the number of days we provide is actually based on what the department of homelessness told us. i think in many wayatize is important to be realistic. 24 hour notice may not be possible for the city to do in every case. providing some type of shelter for one night as the means we move a tent doesn't solve the issue for that individual. we may sholeter for one night but the next night they will be back on the streets which is why we thought it is important to insure there a 90 day bed or shelter to provide because that is a more permanent solution to homelessness. anything less than 90 days won't work. they will just come back and have to find shelter again. that being said, i think it is important to continue the dialogue. i

have to say i was surprised to hear from proponents of measure q affordable housing shouldn't be guaranteed to live in the tents. i don't know any other solution to people in tents if we don't provide affordable housing. i don't know where we expect to pet them or disappear or vanish into thin airment the only solution is housing mpt i think everyone is in agreement. i think if we make the promise we should have the resources that showcase we can meet the commitments we make to people who live on our streets. that being said, i do think that it is important for us to continue the process and finetune the measure. i think it is also important for us to give time the department of homeless synchronize because they have a plan in terms how they map encampments and provide servicess. i certainly understand the frustration of

so many of the residents who feel this impacted the quality of life in the neighborhoods but also because many residents dofent want to see people suffer and want to see the city do more. so, i think what i would suggest to colleagues on this item is continue to it call of the chair so we can continue to work with department of homelessness around what legislatively would be the best structure to support them in their work. at the end othf day no matter what process we legislate it will be the resources we have on the back end to offer to insure that we are actually permanently addressing homelessness. thank you to the members of the public for coming today. colleagues david campos has closing comments and if any other committee member would like to as well: >> thank you chair kim. i'm fine continuing this item so we

have ongoing discussion about this. let me say this, what i'm looking for is action, not rhetoric. and with all due respect to the people who came out to talk about prop 2, in my estimation prop q offers rhetoric, no solution. i think that you know, i respect the view that some of my colleagues have in proposing prop q, but i think you have to live the experience of having encampments in your district to know that the thing about encampments and moving encampments that it is not like you say i want encampments gone and wave a magic wand and it happens. that is what is so frustrating and disturbing about sf travel coming here on

this high horse saying we want encampments gone. well, i don't know of anyone who doesn't and as we heard from the advocates the homeless want encampments gone. living in a tent is the last place they want in their lives. but, if you really believe and are committed to making encampments go, then don't just say it, do something about it. i have yet to see-i have yet to see sf travel do anything other than engage in rhetoric around this. we don't need rhetoric, we need action. the action that is needed is the action that is taking place right now as we speak in places like the north of mission where you have the folks on the ground from department of homelessness that

are going to each one of those individuals who is camped out and from what i understand the-we monitor this a number of times each day. at some point the count of the people who are out there in that area of the mission is 102. to get each one of those people out of those encampments you have to address the needs of each and every one individually and with each of them there is something unique. it may be mental health. it might be substance abuse. it may be something else. and then there has to be housing. otherwise, you are not going to solve anything. and so, i'm looking for solutions. i know the businesses that are impacted by what is happening are looking for solutions and that is what we are trying to do and that's

not very glamorous. it is not about press releases, it is about rolling up your sleeve s and getting down to the nuts and bolts what it take tooz help each one of those individual jz that is what we are doing, that is what i'm interested in and you know, i think that if people spent a fraction of the time they do talking rhetoric actually doing something i think we would be in much better shape as a city so i invite sf travel to actually do something on this issue instead of grandstanding the way that so many people are. thank you. >> supervisor avalos >> thank you i concur with the rhetoric as well. seems like

everyone is crying justice as long as there is business first. i was working on legislation to provide guidelines for how we look at homeless encampments and respond as a city sfr that. i started that aroubd february of this year and after that mr. [inaudible] came on board and even before him i quirked with sam dodge and want today put forward policies accordance with the people on the ground doing the work and people have the relationships with homeless people and peep who know the conditions and people who do the outreach and learn what the needs of the people are. i think it was important i not impose what the policy should be, but really work with all the departments to make sure that we had a sound approach and then out of the blue after

we come together on deciding we will put more resources towards homeless services and more towards housing a measure comes on that is about rhetoric and all about what people want to hear but don't offer a real solution. so, i concur, we should continue this to call the chair. i think we should have a process that works with the people who understand the conditions and we make legislation based on that. and not just on what the public would like to hear and get crossed up into all the different cultural ways we think homelessness should be resolved or at least how our door step should be cleared of people that we didn't want there. >> thank you supervisor avalos. i should mention our office

did work build upon the work that your office had done prior to measure q being drafted so thank you for the months of work before it become a media piece for folks to talk about. i do want to take a motion to continue this item. again, i think that we need to think about what in the long term will sausk the issue. in regard to the time issue, what i heard draecktly from members the homeless outreach team and glad jason [inaudible] decided to come back to work on tent encampments in san francisco, it takes day tooz build relationship of trust with those on the street and feel government failed them so many times. if we are going to provide permanent exist to homelessness we need permanent

housing and need folk ozthen other side to trust the process and that takes time building that relationship. while that may be frustrating for those that want encampments to geaway today, in the long term it will provide a more permanent reduction in homelessness because we want everyone to participate thin process and trust the process will work and that happens through relationship building. i'm glad we have a department that is compassionate and doesn't want to rush the removal of encampments and believes building relationship of trust is more successful in reducing homelessness and the promise we get rid of everyone in 24 hours. i think that is important. i question the judgment of putting this into legislation, i think we need to trust the experts and works and if we feel the departments are not accountable to our residents and representative i think at that point it may be

appropriate to set parameters in terms of how the processes work. our legislation was in response to figure out a better way of eremoving tent encampments and want to do that with department of of homelessness and obama administration. i do want to provide more time as we continue this thoughtful dialogue so and for a motion to continue to call of the chair. >> so moved >> have a motion and koothat without opposition. thank you for everyone who is here. can we please call the final item before us today. >> item number 4, hearing on recent bicyclist fatalities, bike lane safety, and enforcement city-wide, with special attention to the sf vision zero's high-injury network area, and requesting the san francisco municipal transportation agency, police department, and the department of public health to report. >> thank you madam clerk. it has been over two months since we have lot the lives of two of

our rez dntsd cyclist cathlen flatterly and hillary miller who lost their life to reckless driversism one of the fatalities is the district i represent, a block away from #3450i house in a corner i pass by every day, howard and 7th. i call this hearing a long with my colleagues because we have a responsibility to those who live work and commute thin district and throughout the city to insure we are doing everything we can to make our streets safe. we want our streets to be safe for our drivers, our cyclist and our pedestrians. back in 2014 when supervisor avalos uand i called for vision zero with the goal of reaching zero fatalities the city stepped throughout all department said including sfta, [inaudible] to think what it

means and what we need to do to put in the engineering redesigns and education and awarenesscome pain and enforcement pieces that we need to put to make the city safer. glad to see the mayor issued a executive director on the matter and think that today will be a great opportunity to discuss the timeline and mile stones. i also understand very similar to the issue before us it is frustrating for the constituents and residents as the city commits to zero fatalities and continue to see people killed and injured on the streets. the question becomes what are we doing and working with the urgency that we need to take to truly address this matter. i think with the incident that occurred this summer it was timely we wanted to bring sfmta and sfpd to talk about the two [inaudible] one the engineering

and second, the enforcement. i really believe that if we are going make san francisco safer for our cyclist and scr a healthier city we need protected bike lanes so a big piece and sat with sfmta is to talk about what we can do to get to that place. i love the pilots. i love all the changes we are making along folsom and howard and more bike lanes but i think if we reduce conflictess we absolutely need to move toward protected bike lane jz one the questions i'll ask the department is talk about how to get there, the resources you need to make this happen and also because i want to hear the members of the public who are increasingly feeling frustrated two years later we are not moving fast enough as a city to address this isue. second rkts, we will have sfpd talk about

enforcement issues because in these two particular cases, it was clearly reckless driving and speeding that led to the loss of lives of these residents so we absolutely need to see what we can do to help reduce speeding in san francisco. it isn't appropriate in a dense city for cars to move as quickly as they do and need to accept the changing realty this is a city where cars need to move slowly to be respectful members of our city and community. so, i want to bring up luis montoya and [inaudible] from sfmta to speak but i want to give members of the committee a opportunity to make opening comments. seeing none, we'll have sfmta come up and want to recognize rob osullivan from sfpd. not luis, tom.

>> good afternoon. tom mcguire, director of susustainable streets and joined by luis montoya and lead person on all things bike related. thank you for the opportunity to come and talk about improving bike safety and thank you for the ongoing commitment to vision zero and recognizing it isn't just engineering and enforcement, it is education working together that will get us to that challenging but critical policy. we at sfmta believe we should be able to write a bike safely in san francisco whether you are 8, 80 or between. as you noted supervisor the tragic death occurred within 2 hours of each other remind us we are not there yet. we have a long way to go and that is why we

are working towards the vision laid out in vision zero, the challenges given by the mayor to build that city wide network of protected bike lanes to keep the cyclist and road users safe. we installed over 13 miles of protected bike lanes so there were no protected bike lanes two years ago but made progress, we have 13 miles but that is the beginning. luis will give details of what we have in store. we have in construction or in design or ready to roll out 15 miles of prethed bike lanes over the next 15 months and that is the future of the bike network in san francisco. rapid expansion to protect bicyclist. with that i like to turn it over to luis montoya >> thank you tom. members of

the board. i want to give a presentation and bike lanes and where we have come and going. give a update about the projects related to mayors executive drether issued a month ago and give the opportunity to have a conversation about enforcement as requested. protected bike lanes i couldn't have said it better they are really important to us improving the safety of the streets not just for bicyclist but people who walk and drive. we have 13 miles of protected bike lanes. they go from golden gate park, various neighborhoods. here is jfk, the first bike lane in san francisco as well as [inaudible] on the bottom. with these projects we have seen increase in bicyclist and reduction in crashs and reduction in speeds and increase in rider ship. here is a map showing the 13 miles

we have done so far as well as the pipeline of projects we plan to see in the next 15 months. we are planning doubling the mileage of bike lanes that include projects like masonic which broke down, pullic street and second street which will break ground soon and 7th and 8th street. we want to make more improvement said to folsom and howard. >> just a question p. we have come distance now where we actually have a approved bike plan, but i don't think the protected bike lanes were a major component of that, so are we looking to have a new city wide bike plan that is being rolled out and is this the start of it or is this just piece meal for the protected

bike lanes? >> that is a great question. the bike plan was sort of a traditional bike plans and called out programs and what we do. it was a long period of time for development, there was a lawsuit and we learned the nature of the design of bike ways is evolving and that instead of trying to have a hol istic plan we know what we will do on every street and should decide which streets to invest in and what types of facilities we should invest in and go neighborhood by neighborhood, street by street and work with communities to figure what that should be. that plan is called the bike strat ag. it was done in about 2013 and refined since then. we are rolling out many sof the projects actually. i went ahead and flipped ahead a slide to show what the network looks like. this is a network

of safe and connected bikeways that are comfortable for rise riders from 8 to 80 that include protected bikeways but also traffic calm streets in residential nairbld neighborhoods like the excelsior. we do understand now we have a fragmented network but have a plan for major investment and know where it goes it is a mat rb work wg the commune ities how each street should work. >> you have a bike plan and mention the bike strategy, so is the plan continuing but sthra strategy that includes protected bikeways that is a overlay? >> that is right. we are

committed to completed the sxickt projects in the bike plan. we completed the vast majority. there a few remaining like 5thstream street and soma and we will go beyond what we said we would do in the bike plan because in 2010 when we were implementing that. we look at completing the commitment in the bike plan and going above and beyond. >> thank you. >> just to follow up on supervisor avalos, curious if you can provide the timeline for those that are design completed so you on the map it is amasonic polk second and folsom and see [inaudible] do you have a timeline of completion dates for these projects?

>> i do. happy to report that construction on masonic has begun. expect construction to take about 18 to 24 months so we are looking at into 2018. i had a picture i think. sorry. just showing what we are talking about is curb to curb complete reconstruction replacing utilities that are 100 years old. that is why it takes a long time. when we get to the point of breaking ground-the other projects you asked about are 2 street which we plan breaking ground on just look toog finalize the bids for construction, though i believe it is early 2017 for construction. polk street will break ground in september, work wg neighbors to meet the needs the xhrjs district there during construction. man sell we hope to wrap up in

october. i think there were a couple blips during construction but my understanding is they are moving past those with the contractor and will wrap up construction. >> the problems were on the side with the cars? the other side seem s to not move very much >> we are told they will be done in october. >> man sell is spected to be done in two months and expect to break ground on second street early 2017? and polk street september 2016. you said masonic has baracken ground. for all these corridors you expect 18 to 24 months for completion. i have to ask this question because i get asked this all the time and the question is, how did new york do it so quickly? protected bike lanes on 9th and

10. tom mcguire you were in new york city but i struggle to answer the question so are we doing it on the same timeline and look at new york and think they are doing it faster? what are the-if we are not doing it as quickly as new york, what are the differences? >> it take quite a wile in new york to build the projects. if you look from the community engagement through the opening of the bike facility most took well over a year. the owe other difference between new york and the projectss here is that here we are looking at a more comprehensive approach where we couple the bike lane with full streetscape project so replace the utilities and drainage and doing street trees in addition to the traffic changing. new york focus on get thg traffic changes done immediately and not couple the

two together. >> i ask this for the sake of discussion, is it better to prioritize safety and just go down the route new york city look? i like the comprehensive approach and not saying i don't want to take care of old utilities and streetscaping but have to push and ask when making those decisions is it sometimes better to just say, we have to save lives and move forward with these >> that is the right question and think the executive director challenged to get bike lanes built ij9 month period and those are the project where we dont wait for comprehensive instruction and use the tools at mta to get the bike lanes built thin new york style as quickly as possible. >> thank you very much. >> um, to add to toms point about how our projects are

different is that, we have a lot of policies around street use in san francisco. we have priority for transit first, safety, but also we want to make sure we are managing a transportation system hol isticically understanding there are folks that drive and park in many of our merchants find it important to have the parking access in their neighborhoods and then also there is curb management we need to make sure we have access to transit, xhrjs louding, emergency response and these are things that we take very seriously and we try to work closely with the neighbors and merchants on the streets to come up with sensitive designs that are responsive to the needs of that street. obviously keeping our goals of safety and of making sure we have transportation options

and how we can be flexible with the design. photos how we have done that. the top photoon polk street where we have a loading zone there. very unique set up. it is probably not the best for someone trying to unload their car or maybe not the best for the bicyclist that have to carry things, but both groups get their needs met. in the lower portion we want folks in wheelchairs to unload the ramps to the sidewalks. we need to make sure they have spontaneous to land in that keeps them out of the way of folks riding their bikes so everyone can be safe. specifically with the mayors director with a number of

projects we are moving quickly on, tom mentioned goals highlighted. i want to give a update on some of them. golden gate park, we is a larger study to try and reduce speeding thin park and reduce folks using the park streets a cut through to get where they are going. we want them to stay on the arterial streets. but as a first step we will be implementing speed humps in the section of the park where we had the fatality. a hear frg the speed humps are held this month and plan to implement them in november but also starting the larger conversation about how we can calm traffic throughout the park. 7th and 8th street the site of the tradagy we are moving quickly and have a open house planned for later this month and plan to take a proposal for protected bikeways

the board in december and implement in early part of 2017. church street we want to learn from what we did on golden gate and have the standard bike lane and heard a loud cry that protected bike lane would have been a better choice so are pursuing a protected bike lane on church. that project is going enter departmental review so working to make sure the design works for everybody's who uses the streets but hopeful to have a proposal to the board later this year as well. >> golden gate >> we are making modifications approaching market street. we added separation with plastic [inaudible] we will change turn lanes so we think we can mitigate congestion. we have

some minor tweaks but the plan is implement the producted bikeway on chunch, learn from that so we can then go to golden gate and make sure we get the right on golden gate. >> what is the plan for west of polk on those two streets? >> west of polk street we have a plan where we are working through the western addition community based tran portation planning effort going on there because that neighborhood has a little different needs than the tenderloin. i'm speaking west of van ness. but, we are work wg those neighbors to come up with a plan for what is appropriate for either turk or golden gate or east/west connection. what is the right street to put bicyclist. folsom and howard, we did projects on both streets understanding we have a major investment thin next few years as we implement the soma

plan and do curb to curb rebuild. in the mean time we need to do something sooner. [inaudible] we are now revisiting that pilot and want to do parking protected bike lanes. we hope in 2017 we have to conduct outreach and work with other departments but this is part of our push to get more producted bike lanes on the street. more projects listed and happy to go into them but recognizing time i will keep going. looking ahead, we couldn't have gotten to the point where we are on the precipice of doubling our mileage of protected bike lanes without the political support of the board and policy makers for vision zero, for our bike plan historically and other bike projects. and we hope to

continue to have that support as we work on these projects block by block with each neighborhood group and merchant to make sure we design the streets in a way that are context sensitive and meet the needs the folks using sth streets. we also know that requires a dialogue about the flexible use of space on the street because we know that through our history work wg the projects that ultimately nobody gets 100 percent of what they want. we can't provide 100 percent protection because we need the curb access for paratransit or people with disabilities but understanding that we may have to limit on street parking or focus commercial delivery on certain spots so they don't conflict with the bikeways. we ask everyone comes to the the table with a open mind and safety goal squz [inaudible] in mind and work together towards designing these streets.

lastly, we won't get there with engineering alone. we can design or streets to be great but we know that it is up to the personal choices people make, the behavioral choices people make and we can influence those behaviors through education and enforcement. we have kicked off a vision zero awareness campaign and running radio ads now and hope that will make a big impact. we are stepping up enforcement and have representatives from the police department here but also the parking enforcement lead is here to talk about parking enforcement and bike lanes if you so desire. really it is through the conjunction of engineering, education and enforcement that hol istic approach that will get us to eliminating traffic fatalities in san francisco >> thank you. you spoke about

speed enforcement and so we were the cosponsor of the resolution urging the stat advocates to implement automatic speed enforcement cameras and allowing san francisco to do that. we are prohibited by state law doing this today even though we know that in countries like sweden that successfully implemented vision zero and really initiated this initiative and said that speed enforcement cameras were the number one tool that allowed them to have safer streets. they are prohibited from doing that and curious if you canbroid a update where we are in sacramento? i heard there was positive news so like to see where we are at. and also what the constituents can do to support this effort because we know that sfmta can't do it alone so what can the board and

constituents to push this at the state level >> thank you, you have been the champion on this and appreciate the opportunities to come back and sthair with you the work we have been doing. we have a work plan we are executing that is quite robust in terms of targeting state level stakeholders that we know what it will take the eerfbcome the hurtles that are deeply intrinched thichb state legislator opposing camera enforcement. we have had over the summer as you know the legislative session ended so we did a opportunity to sit with the key stakeholders who were in acknowledging the work on their plate which is crazy, very appreciative of san francisco's request to sit down with them now to discuss approaches that will be necessary to get to a place where key with be successful

withthal approach we are posing is a pilot program with a limited number of cities. i think san francisco has clearly done more work than any other city in the state to build a foundation of support with the leadership of the board of supervisors both as the board, the transportation authority and mayor lee. there is auneimity of support that givers such a foundation to work from. in termoffs the community, we had and continue to have a fantastic partnership with the advocates from both the bike coalition, walk sf, partners megan weir is here from dph working in partnership with them and their engage ment in the community. you can see the growing list of community groups and stakeholders that have gone on record and continue to provide briefings locally but we are turning our attention to mobilizing at the

state level. in october we have asked work wg the city of san jose and 5 other cities joined us to seek a resolution to support vision zero. that meeting is october in long beach and it is our perspective that by having a organization like the league make a strong statement in support of vision zero we will have a foundation going into the next legislative session to have these conversations about proven initiatives like automated speed enforcement. >> thank you so much. for those that are listening, are there easy ways they can plug into the campaign? >> yes, on the website vision zero sf you can sign a pudition to ask for support the silty to use automated speed enforcement there is a link to walk sf

petition to show support for this. >> thank you. um, seeing--i have a lot of questions but want to make sure we get to public comment. i'm happy to see there is movement. i will focus on my district and howard and folsom and 7th and 8 and turk and town snd. those are the corridors i hear a lot about and well uselets butologist good corridor tooz make safer even with just the bike lane pilot on folsom it is amazing to see increased use of cyclist ridership on folsom. i can only imagine how many more riders we'll have once we make it a protected bike lane. i am glad to see sfmt a is moving forward on the corridors. i did want to give sfpd a

opportunity to speak on its current efforts around enforcement so commander if i can bring you up. thank you for being here today. we really do appreciate sfpd's cooperation on the focus on [inaudible] and we did two years ago holds a joint hearing with the police commission understanding this was something that was a priority for sfpd, commission and boardf supersurprisers to work together to provide support and resource squz prioritize this knowing we are losing live jz injuring folks in a significant way if we are not addressing the issue. i know given all the things sfpd needs to address we appreciate your focus on this and hope you can talk a little about how sfpd ramped up its focus on 5 campaigns in the quarterly reports. i'm interested in the efforts on folsom, howard and golden gate and around citation

and how that is going. >> good afternoon to all of you. my name is rob ocellival with san francisco police department and assigned to san francisco municipal transportation agency. talk [inaudible] was at the police commission to give a quarterly presentation for the safe streets report that was the second quarter presentation. to start, i was here in 2014 sitting among the captains when there fsh a joint session and police commission and vision zero was adopted as a city policy. our effort are mainly data driven and have great partnership with sfmt a and department of public health and identified the high injury corridors. we sent our officer at the district station level and the traffic company .

those officers are most the motorcycleophorouser to the areas. the mayor issue td a executiveorder in august. it ordered the san francisco police department to meet the goal around vision zero. our prime or goal is reduction and elimination of trafic collision fatalities and injury collisions and also 50 percent the citations those would be enforcement citations we issue are for the 5 factors associated with collisions. those are speed, red light running, failure to yield unsafe turns and stop signs.

red light. our marching orders are 50 percent the citationerize for those factors. we did achieve that goal this past august and first time the department has done that. it is a mile stone. through august the department 40 percent of citations are for the factors. we ended 2015 at 35 percent and two years ago we were around mid-20 percent so we made significant improvement. we are here in large part dreth relation to the tragic incidence that occurred in june shortly after i took over my new position and it was very sad to receive two phone calls let alone one that evening with regards to the

bicycle related fatalities. speed was a factor in each of those incident. there were other facts associated, but those collisions of representative of many collisions we have where speed is the factor. during the last 3 months members of departmented issued 3 thousand citations. education through vision zero, you may have heard on npr and kcbs the vision zero spots that are playing. talked about vision zero and zero fatalities and transition talking about speed. that is the educationally component and next month begins enforcement cument pount and we will be a large component of that. through a generous grant the department purchased 40

additional lidar units which is radar. it is very difficult to eye ball a speeding offense. when is obvious you know that but the lidar is a tool that we first the radar then the lidar we are sorly missing so we will have come october over 100 lidar guns in operation and enforcement efforts will be on the high injury networks throughout san francisco. what that means to us practly speaking is the traffic company and district stations make speed enforcement a priority every day, we have a additional 150 plus hours of grant funded overtime to conduct speed enforcement operations. year to date through july there are 19 traffic related fatalities in san francisco compared to 17

this time through july 31 of last year and two bicycle related fatalities. there were 4 all of last year, 2015. supervisor kim i know you mentioned folsom street, it is-the bike lane on golden gate avenue wnt in recently. folsom street is in for some time and it was as traffic fatalities occurred on june 22, things became very to the surface in terms of vehicles driving and stopping and traffic lanes. for the period june-august sfpd issued nearly 400 citations to motorist dribeing in bike lanes or stopped in bike lanes. recognizing the has ers it creates. i had the opportunity to ride that day and came up

valencia and there rfs a car double parked. it was a primary example of what we are talking about today and had to go around that parked vehicle after we spoke with the occupant. the enforcement of the rules around being in and out of bicycle lanes we are paying particular attention to that. >> thank you. ial think it is helpful for the public to know how much enforcement sfmta and sfpd is doing awith double parking. it is something cyclist can say i i say i see every single day and it is frustrating. i know enforce nlt is a key piece and know many businesses view it as a cost of doing business and incorporate the parking tickets so it may not actually decrease some types of double parking but i really believe that if we stup up the enforcement and say

it isn't acceptable hopefully we see a vast reduction in the bike lanes. for someone like me who isn't a very strong cyclist it is scary when i see a car double parked and center to move into traffic. i often get off my bike because i don't feel comfortable going into moving traffic. i really hope that we can step up enforcement. it isn't just sfpd, sfmta can use the parking control officers to ticket. we get the twitter messages so appreciate members tweeting photos and showing a daily occurrence this sh for a cyclist but it is good to report how we doing on this and see what we can do the step up the effort in the short term so haep thin long term the residents get this acceptable behavior. seeing no comments

or questions from the committee we ptd to move to public com. there are many that came at 2:30 to speak so know this is hard because we have so many items but those that are able to stay, we will start public comment now. if you like to speak for those members of the public that have to leave but watching this at home thank you for coming. i know this can be difcult but are hearing you and look forward to hearing you feedback on this issue. thank you. come on up >> good to see you. i want to give out to sfpd doing a great job on traffic safety. i think enforcement is one of the 3 pillars, but i think engineering and design will be the ones to reduce fatalities. there a lot of projects but i want to talk about 7th street.

october of last year i e-mailed sfmta of the dangers and developed design and [inaudible] they did chbt do anything about it and kate died june 22 and it is two month. i e-mailed chairman nolan about the updated timeframe for the project and said construction doesn't begin until spring 2017 and this is reoccurring pattern since i looked into traffic fatalities is the prom eblths are delayed until they are forgotten about. on soma there is a street project that is dead. second street is delayed by a few years. masonic where

nils was killed in 2012 that is 6 years since he was killed before any improvements are brought to the street. new york city has done a graut job and tom knows because he works there is they were able to finish the projects in weeks not years. the 8 avenue bike lane they finished in 3 weeks of announcing it and they moved the cars out and put in soft tip post and think we need more of that in san francisco . >> thank you so much for being here. >> my name is jans lee and director of bike coalition. i give thank to supervisor kim for literally the day after the fatalities occurred on june 22 move forward to call a hearing for protected bike lanes t. is

important and glad to hear it. david campos and john avalos we know your districts are impacted [inaudible] hit and killed that was district 9 back in december and also dj pinker ton outside mclaren park who was hit and killed while biking. we know people are hit and killed throughout the city so pushing for what is the standard of bike lane and what is the street infrastructure we are pulting in and what our streets looked like 10 years ago and far different than today and we are seeing older generations of bike infrastructure put in but still celebrating them but can continue a do more. i know this is informational item but would urge the supervisors to find ways in your power to find how you can help the city overcome the road block so quee

can proud city like new york and transform a street. if i were a parent and said i let my kid bike in soma you would say i'm irresponsible. what type of world do we live in where we say that. [inaudible] our kids can bike and that wouldn't be a irresponsible thing because that is the vision we have for for the streets. thank you for your attention and look forward for to good work and thank the mayor for his support. >> thank you for being here and really appreciate the largest bike coalition membership work ing with us on the issue. any other members that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. this is not a one hearing issue. we are actually fortunate we will have vision zero subcommittee i believe

next week on thursday and i work wg chair norman yee plan to continue the conversation next week. we will advertise the hearing again and provide as best we can more precise time for people to come because we recognize people are taking time off from work and using their lench breaks to be here and not realizing there are multiple agenda items so we will reach out and work with the bike coalition so memberoffs the public can come. we get e-mails and tweets so continue to do that but look forward to the continued dialogue but glad we have headway mubing beyond the pilots we were happy to support we because we needed improvement but have a path way to permanent solutions which will make the streets safer. glad to hear we are making

movement on enforcement speed cameras in san francisco. colleagues i'm seeing no comments. motion to file and do that without opposition. thank you for being here and thank you to sfpd and sfmta as well. thank you. [meeting adjourned]

>> [gavel] good morning and welcome to a special meeting of the government audit and oversight committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i am the chair of the committee aaron peskin joined to my right by norman yee our member london breed is in the nation's capitol today and won't be joining us. madam clerk do you have any announcements? >> please silence all cell phones and 21 electronic devices and all documents submitted to the clerk and items will be on the. board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you msjo