all the bureau at dpw to ensure there is a lot of vetting. all of that bureaucracy often does many times contribute to delays and processing of change orders in the time and fashion that we aspire to. >> this change order has gone through all of that? >> that's correct. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner anderson? >> i'm sorry, a couple of things. what is the location of these >> douglas street between 24th. it looks like these change

orders came about because of the contracts for the painting of the courts? it's not additional money that was anticipated. it was money found to be used for this project, is that correct? >> that's right. >> a change order is not necessarily a dirty word notwithstanding -- the audit. there are change orders for a variety of different reasons and i think don noted that it's usually, there is a very complicated relationship between the folks doing construction and whoever it was public works and somebody else from the design team that came up with the initial design of the project to us. often a change order or a contract modification and you will continue to see these is because our strategy is to leverage the amount of improvement for a project. sometimes we take a capital project

and add capital dollars to do surfacing like here when we can. modifications are change orders. sometimes they are good and sometimes they are because of something unexpected that is found when you dig during a project or because of some confusion in the inter play between the design and construction. lots of issues for that and we welcome the audit process to ensure we are holding our partners accountable and the public is holding us accountable. we have a good relationship with the controllers office and they spot some projects and when something happens like with joe dimaggio makes it a constant improvement and better next time. >> my interest for leveraging that to get a basketball court. thank you. >> seeing no other, we

entertain a motion. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? thank you. >> we are on item 9. golden gate park murphy wind mill approval of architectural and engineering design contract. >> good morning, the item i have for you is for approval of an architectural design contract in the amount of $326,373 for the murphy wind mill project. you know that the wind mill project has been a work in progress for many many years. i have had my feet wet in that project for a dozen years now. this particular project that i bring before you is basically an improvement to the existing project that was completed in 2011. the wind mill is operational at this moment

and every saturday as part of the routine maintenance program. the wind mill is operated by our stationery engineer and our structural maintenance yard. the previous director of that division pointed out some safety concerns that he thought were warranted. we worked with jeff in our health and safety division and our engineering team, the structural maintenance yard and hired a consultant to come out to evaluate the facility to make sure it's safer. they identified a whole list of possible improvements to make it a safer environment. we took that information and sent it out for an rfp to help us implement those improvement elements. the firm that we would like to have approved on this project. we've taken this rfp process to the civil service commission and they approved us moving

forward with this outside contract. and the department of public works has also approved this. as part of this design team, we are also bringing as part of the team is lucas who is the wind mill expert that helped us renovating the wind mill and he's going to be in an advisory role on this project for these improvement elements. . i'm happy to go into more history on the wind mill and some of the improvements we have done in the past, but i want to cut it short there and ask for your approval for this particular contract agreement. >> thanks, dan. commissioner anderson? >> good morning, i was wondering if you can just tell me, a little bit about the murphy wind mill. why is it there and why is it called murphy? >> where to start on that one. murphy wind mill was given to the

city as a gift in 1902. daniel murphy donated, roughly about $10,000 to the department. the goal was to basically water golden gate park with daly city. people thought he was crazy at the time with having an aquifer water mill near the ocean. it was built in 1905 and stopped during the earthquake and completed in 1907 and operated as a functional wind mill for about a dozen years and then electricity came in and the wind mill stopped function for moving water in the park.

it has operated from that time forward and deteriorated over the years. in 1998, a friends group came together and interested in revitalizing the wind mill. from that point forward we came up with a multi-base project to get it underway. >> thank you. >> a little note because of the idea of pumping water was to the rest of the half of the park. >> it's actually a well and still in existence today. they pumped water to a lake at the park and the wind mill pumped water to the lake. it's really a significant part of our park stream has been in the 1950s and the two largest one time working wind mills in north america. >> in the world.

and the park was gravity set with irrigation. >> great. my kids played near one of those when they were little. glad to know that. >> dan, you get an a in history. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i will entertain a motion? >> i would like to get this spinning again and move to have this approved. >> i'm rolling up behind you. >> is that more than hot air? >> it's too much hot air. >> is there a second? >> second. >> moved and seconded. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? so moved. >> we are now on item 10. recreation and park department operations plan for fiscal year 2018

good morning commissioners, taylor from the planning and finance division. we are here to discuss and possibly approve or first ever proposed operational plan. before we get into the details, i want to set the stage to remind everyone how this fits into the larger planning cycle now required by the passage of proposition b. we started back in october with the equity metrix which was then

integrated into the strategic plan with a 5-year look ahead and then came the capital plan in december which is a 2-year look ahead, and followed now by the operational plan also a 2-year look ahead, and then the final point, the budget. the operational plan serves as a link between the long-term purpose of the strategic plan and the short-term focus of the annual budget process. as a final note on this slide, we will be repeating the cycle annually for 29 more years. the duration of the proposition b. it's help to remind us what the charter tells us to do. i'm going to read just the

blue highlighted. the department shall approve the plan within the strategic plan the department plans to undertake or accomplish during the next buggery period. -- budgetary period. in other words in the next 5 years what are you going to do during the next 5-year period. it's helpful to remember the structure of the strategic plan. so we have this 5-year strategic plan. it has five strategies. beneath those are 15 object ives and the initiatives of the actions of the projects of the real concrete task that when accomplished will help

achieve the goals of the objective and potentially improve our performance metrix and move towards our strategies. every year there will be an annual results report with the data on how we did in both the operations plan, the capital plan, the strategic plan metrix as well as the equity analysis which is underneath and infused in all of this. and this cycle, this connecting iterative spiderweb of a planning cycle will repeat. the plan itself, i have copies. i'm sorry, i forgot.

it really is a big list of things to do with concrete milestones, which division is going to be leading that action and what the target either the achievements, the steps are over the next 2 years. kind of hard to show. so i actually built a presentation just with highlights. so we are going to take a couple highlights for each strategy that are in the operational plan, but i'm happy to take any questions that are discussed and other details. i wanted to say the way this was done to develop the operational

plan, the staff reviewed, prioritized in sequence really working together looking at what in the strategic plan and thinking about staff resources, financial resources, policy priorities with already currently active and each division decided what it could undertake or accomplish during the reporting period here which is fy 18, the next fiscal year and the year after that fy 19. each year we'll have a 2-year look ahead. starting with inspiring public space. we are going to be implementing a park a ranger staffing model, a community based park -- a ranger

staffing model. we are also going to prioritize deferred maintenance and renewels and discretionary capital resources for the equity zones. to inspire a place, we are going to start a spanish language permit assistance program. instead of going online for a permit on the park, we are going to have spanish speaking staff located at mission playground clubhouse. we are going to expand programs that connect children to nature. and inspire investment. we are going to talk more about this when

katie talks budget. under this larger goal to inspire investment and philanthropy, we are going to engage in projects to understand the equity zone. this is taking our equity analysis to the street and validating it and verifying it with more firsthand experience and people telling us more about their parks. we have an on going goal of developing operational and capital needs that prioritizes equity also to better provide a tool of our

partnerships division, better match philanthropist with department needs. to inspire stewardship to collaborate more environmental leaders in the equity zone and continue support in equity zones also. finally to inspire a team we are going to take our equity focus analysis and metrix out to staff and increase awareness and understanding of equity along with implicit bias. we have already done this this year and it's been a good

team enhancing team collaboration. with that, i'm happy to take questions. >> is there any public comment on this item? please come forward. public speaker: commissioners, i am robert bros on the commission from district 8. we got to preview this last week, and it was pretty much the same presentation and the consensus was that the parks department had done a great job. i pretty much was the lone dissenting

voice. i thought the department could have done a bit more. this is an important opportunity to really nail it down to the little details. i don't think the details were there. in this presentation, tailor has, i feel she already picked what is the basic plan which is table 1, and when i just went through it last week and going through it again at random picking one item off each page, some of it seemed to be taken verbatim along the strategic plan, but there could have been goals on who is exactly going to be responsible instead of just the department thing.

this is an annual effort. i'm just hoping in the future you can take advantage of this opportunity to maybe bring in a consultant that was suggested. i thought there was a line item in prop b for doing that? i guess not. >> prop b asks for a lot and gives very little. i have reviewed it many times and the work done with the equity metrix and the strategic plan is all great. i understand the spiderweb. it will grow, but i think this particular version seems a little bit rushed. for 6 months, it's not bad. once again, thank you, commissioners. >> thank you for taking the time to go through it. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment on

this item? okay, are being none public comment is closed. >> commissioner low? >> taylor this is a 2-fiscal year look forward, correct? >> correct. >> okay. i just wanted to get that clarified. the agenda language talks about fiscal year 18 and agenda wording in the staff report says fiscal year 17, 18, to fiscal year 18-19. that should be fiscal year 17-18 and fiscal year 18-19. correct? >> correct. >> we are now on a biannual plan so that's why it's connected to the 2 years. >> it's an operational plan for fiscal year 17-18, and fiscal year 18-19. i don't know why my numerical mind isn't working today.

i would like to have this matter moved forward for approval. >> i will second that. >> before we vote, i want to make a comment that one, i think the focus on equity is from prop b is really something that i find very encouraging and starts to filter into operational language and budget language. i think that's terrific. as i read this, i think there is another advantage to it and it could speak to the public comment that was made. that next year, when we look at this, the template is pretty much not going to change that much. it's really being operational and being out there. so, i hope we get the benefit of looking back and looking forward. then i think we are going to get into the weeds more and get into the detail that this has the opportunity to present itself with. and, i see mr. ginsberg, did you want to say something before we vote? >> yes, if you don't mind.

just to put a bow on this, for many years from this department, we were very reactive responding to the budget crisis of the day and the challenge of the day. and, i think one of the benefits of proposition b and one of the benefits of the good work and the tough decisions we made early on was to give us the space to do more planning. in the last months between the equity update and the operational plan update, that when we come up with you with items that there are an objective to the strategic plan. there has been a lot of planning. i want to thank robert for his, for caring about this and for his interest and engagement and for the support. i think our objective is to make this

more robust and better, but i do want to pause and really celebrate and thank my staff for embracing this process as much as we have and in particular, this did require a lot of work, but taylor has really been our shepherd. i really want to thank her. this is a 6-month planning cycle with a lot of community feedback and a lot of community engagement. so, while it will continue to evolve and get better over time, i do think it is worth celebrating how far we've come in such a short period of time. >> here, here. >> we have a motion and second. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? . the item is approved. now we are on item 11. recreation and parks budget for fiscal

year 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. >> good morning commissioners, we have already begun or budget process for fiscal year 17-18 and 18-19. i'm here for that official process. i will start with the budget instructions, talk about the positive impacts of proposition b on our budget and then give you a high level overview of expenditures and revenue and the coming budget decision. the 2-year outlook for the city's general fund is once again mixed. the mayor's office is predicting that general fund revenues will remain strong with growth of about $144 million next year and $184

million the year after that. but the mayor is also anticipating that growth in expenditures will continue to exceed growth in revenue. over the next 5 years, the mayor's budget office estimates that revenue is going to increase by 11%, while expenditures are going to increase by 29%. so, this presents the mayor's office with an on going challenge as they contemplate balancing the general fund budget. all told, the budget office anticipates a $119 million general fund shortfall next year, an accumulated deficit of $283 million after that. because of that, the mayor's office is asking the department to reduce their budget.

the mayor's budget instruction also asked departments to maintain budgeted employee levels at current year levels. they are looking for no growth in budgeted staff in all departments. >> the great news for recreation and parks is the passage of proposition b and the creation of a general fund baseline exempts the department from making this cut to our general fund. in addition, the new charter language gives the department more control and flexibility in our budget process allows us to budget at least $15 million in general fund annually to fund capital and deferred maintenance whereas in prior years we would have really been at the mercy of the mayor's office and the capital planning committee around our general fund capital commission. we have the ability to make a policy decision that we are going to set those

dollars aside. additionally, the department is allowed to use growth in our general fund revenue to cover cost and to make budget enhancements. however, with the benefits of the baseline come great responsibilities. we must now absorb all cost increases and revenue changes within our baseline amount. the budget assumes approximately a 3% cola adjustment to salaries in both fiscal years. healthcare is assumed to increase by 7% in each of the next 2 years. retirement is assumed to increase by 2.5% next year and 2 tenths of a percent after that and looking to increase a 2% to our work orders.

the mayor's office is currently in collective bargaining with the majority of the city's labor union and the cola maya -- adjust a little bit. we shall see. so what does all that mean for the budget in the next 2 fiscal years? so, as of today, the general fund support that's budgeted for recreation and parks in the city's budget system is about $72 million in year one and $60 million in year two. the baseline general fund support available to us next year is almost $71 million and over $73 million in year two. that leaves us with just from the get-go, deficit in year one and surplus in year two. but in year two, we need to take into

account the fact that we do want a budget of $15 million in capital. we need to account for the fact that we are going to budget equipment at & -- at least $1 million. and we have inflation in our contractual services. our work orders increases and we have some reserves to offset those increases leaving us with a projected deficit about 45,000, and these numbers are a little stale at this point. i had a conversation with mta yesterday and looks like union parking garage is going to come in less and it has an impact on our budget and we are looking to a reduction to our budgeted revenue of union square of at

least a million dollars and even up to $1.6 million. that is something we are going to have to absorb in these two fiscal years. 2 fiscal years. >> just that garage? >> yes. saint mary's is down a little bit. the size is only about $800,000 where the current one for union square is a million dollars. the reduction in saint mary's is a little less painful. >> is there a prevailing thought about this? >> there is a factor. one is the subway project. that is having a greater impact on certainly transient parking than anticipated. the traffic is terrible downtown. they told me that year over year they

have seen a $600,000 reduction in revenue from transient parking. there is also some thought that the amount of ride shares, the increase in the use of ride sharing has an impact on the bottom line. that is much more difficult to quantify, but anecdotally that feels true. >> interesting. >> thank you. >> one of the things we ought to think about doing is casting some of those hypotheses with respect to saint mary's to particularly let the ride sharing piece and the union square subway central project, it's just a mess down there. i won't drive down there. but, the ride sharing which we talked about, it will be interesting to see. there are several garages in

the area, saint mary's is operated by us, but there is another one by the corridor. >> that is an excellent question. >> we might want to convert parking for ride sharing. >> the budget in the current fiscal year is $208.8 million. operating budget of $154 million, the capital budget 54.4 million. the capital budget is pretty high this year. that almost includes almost $20 million from funding from developer fees for market octavia, eastern neighborhoods. our capital budget seems to be a little lumpier than other

years. this year it's pretty high because of it's action fee revenues. we have 955 budgeted and funded full time equivalent employees in our budget in the current year. the department's budget is supported by 3 primary buckets of revenue. the first is earned revenue at the current year about 28%. 31% of our funded through open space and 41 through our general fund and subsidy savings. >> as you can see the most notable fund is the open space fund continues to grow. that is going to be true in the next fiscal years as well. the comptroller's office is

working on the 6-month report for the general fund and open space right now so i will have a little more clarity on what the outcome looks like in the next couple of weeks. our general fund subsidy, the growth here in subsidy in 15-16 and 16-17 in proposition b. and this allows us to keep the revenue growth in the revenue savings fund. as you all know, the department has generated revenue from its property and resources to support our operations for many many years. we generate revenue from parking garages, from program fees, from permits, rentals of our facilities as well as

from our non-general fund sources, the golf fund, the marina fund. the single largest change on this table is really the fact that in the current fiscal year of the stadium, all revenue from the stadium has gone away. which actually you can see really in graph form right here where that drop of about $5 million between 14-15 means we are no longer generating funds from candlestick. >> what happened at candlestick when the 9ers left, we negotiated a little bit of a bridge so we didn't lose all of our revenue at once and now we are

done. >> in fact the mayor's office back filled most of that loss of candlestick revenue with the general fund. you can see that on the table as well where you can see the candlestick revenue departed, our general fund increased. that included additional general fund that filled in for the fact that stadium revenue went away. roo you can't see it. >> and the big increase in neighborhood and development fund, what accounts for that? >> the neighborhood development funds are managed and allocated through a committee process. so the major departments that are the

beneficiaries of the neighborhood development plans through recreation and parks, mta, dpw, have representatives that meet with the planning department on a monthly basis looking at revenue that is coming in and revenue projected to come in, and then most of the plan allocates a percentage collected for surface improvement, park and open space. so recreation and parks gets an allocation based on the allocations that are set out in the neighborhood plan. >> to back up a little bit, these are impact fees from developers and depending on the type of project and depending on whether it's in the neighborhood plan or a different type of project, there are keys that gets distributed through this process. >> there was a transbay terminal for the fee i would assume that

would show up in this anomaly. >> those funds are not for operations, they are for capital. yeah. we are not relying on them for program stuff. >> no, we are not. in fact, the development fees have been tremendously helpful helping us to make better more complete projects. so, for example, martha margaret hayward program project which is a bond project is getting a significant amount from the market octavia plan and will help us do a more comprehensive project to do there than if we only relied on the bond funds. >> it was the downtown park funds which is essentially impact fees that we used to redo the clubhouse. >> got it. >> so really they are just

part of these projects. you know, so those funds stay with that project. >> so, yeah, so when a developer is doing a project in a certain area, they must pay the city fees and then the fees get allocated to capital improvement to help make that. in many ways, the projects are to help offset the increases in density that these neighborhoods are experiencing as a result of all of this development. >> got it. thank you. >> so just a reminder about how we use our resources. the department spends about half of it's operating budget on maintaining our parks and open space. this includes funding to pay for gardeners and custodians, urban

forestry, integrated task management. we spend about a third of our budget on recreation programming and that includes all of our programming in our recs centers, in our swimming pools. approximately 11% of our budget on our structural maintenance staff. 7% of our budget on administration and these are all the folks who work for me, it, payroll, contracts, finances, the general manager, prop management, etc. 5% of the budget supports park safety and the two remaining places of the pie support the marina yacht harbor and the zoo as well as planning and volunteer services. >> is park safety separate from the salary from the park rangers? >> no, park safety is park rangers. of course the largest single place of

this pie is salaries and benefits. nearly two-thirds of the department's budget is towards staff. about 14% of our operating budget funds services that we buy from other departments, sewer water, heat and power, vehicle repairs, city attorney services, workers' compensation, services. a budget allocated to materials and supplies and equipment. and 8% from services from garbage pick up and management. a percent of the budget is allocated for the zoo and 4% for the marina loan and the open space revenue bonds and 1% on citywide overhead which is the

controllers office and the mayor's operating budget. as discussed earlier, one of the great strengths in my opinion of this great er charter language is looking ahead. as you know, as the charter asks the commission has now approved a strategic plan, capital plan and as of today, an operational plan. the charter intends for each of these documents as well as our equity metrix to guide the development of our budget over the coming fiscal period to the next 2 fiscal years. as taylor just discussed the strategic plan outlines our work over a 5-year horizon. the operational plan

takes initiatives and objectives from the strategic plan and talks about what we are going to accomplish over the next 2 fiscal years. so, as we build our budget for fiscal year 17-18 and 18-19. we are going to be using the operational plan that you have just approved as our guide for budget. so it's early days yet. we have five whole weeks to figure this out, but i expect that we will be using growth in revenue to address our deficits. right now, i'm hoping to have some additional revenue from leases and concessions. a little bit of revenue from programs and then i think the primary resource that we are going to be looking at is the open space fund and

growth and open space over the next couple of years. i mentioned in the gm report we are doing two community budget meetings. we are going to have an all staff meeting next week where i will be talking about the budget. we are going to staff for brown bag lunches to talking about the budget. i'm be coming back and talking to the commission two more times. i'm be at prosac in february and a park advocate meeting. as always the budget is due to the mayor's office on february 21st. we have a lot of work to do between now and then and i will certainly be back before you for some additional input. i am happy to answer questions. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public

comment is closed. >> commissioner harrison? >> yes, i would like to go back to the full time equivalent. >> sure. >> we have 955 budgeted now and earlier on it was mentioned to discuss retirements. >> we are allowed to back fill positions, we are not just allowed 956. >> that was my point. at some point we'll get back to normal. >> absolutely. commissioner anderson? >> i apologize for asking so many questions. i just want to figure this out. at the first page where you have the city general fund outlook. i'm having a hard time reconciling that piece of paper versus the recreation and parks budget.

>> so, the city's,

>> it has to be a race. >> the basic budget -- or they have to cut general fund expenditures. >> okay, and you made the point because of these, we don't have to do

the 3%? >> precisely. that's the good news. >> got it. >> thank you, commissioner bonilla? >> will the department be required to provide data to the mayor's office on its funding and spending allocations consistent with the equity matrix and/or district by district spending as some departments are being required to do? i don't believe the charter, the charter definitely does not speak to district by district. >> so, commissioner, the way that this department has kind of worked through the equity, so don't forget

it's hard to have an apples to apples comparison. we went through identifying each own and collect data at how we are doing in equity zones versus citywide. i think that's sort of the approach that we are taking and when we come in and talk about court resurfacing, we are trying to touch on equity parks. >> we have lots of good data right now and we are able to make some pretty good comparisons. i think we are having a tougher time in making apples to apples comparison because we have different sizes of parks in different locations. i think the equity framework that we've developed allows us to look at a

variety of different metrix some of which, well, you saul -- saw them . there is other data to look at to see how we are doing in equity needs areas. >> the reason i asked is because the department on aging is required to do that, and i just thought, that it would be and for the department on aging is extremely difficult. i thought if that was going to be the requirement of recreation and parks, i would imagine it would be extremely challenging. i was hoping that that would not be the case. >> seeing no other questions, we don't need to act on this. the chair will thank katie for the fine presentation. >> we are now on item 12, general public comment continued from

item 4. is there anyone who did not speak on item 4 that would like to speak on general public comment? seeing none, the item is closed. item 13, new business, agenda setting, any general public comment. excuse me commissioner? >> i'm sorry, commissioner mcdonnell. >> i don't know whether this is agendaized but i would like an update on the open space and the whole body of the playground. i would just love it. thank you. >> okay. item 14, communications, public comment? seeing none. commissioners, this item is closed. item 15, commissioner buell, you have three. >> the chair would entertain a motion

to adjourn in lewis lieu and jen mccarty and ms. star. aye. >> thank you, commissioners. [ meeting is adjourned ] light streets illuminating our ideas and values starting in 2016 the san francisco public utilities commission is xhoefl that light with new led with the did i audits for better light for

streets and pedestrian and they're even better for this vitally lasting longer and consuming up to 50 percent less energy upgrading takes thirty minutes remove the old street light and repeat 18 thousand 5 hundred times while our street lights will be improving the clean energy will remain the same every san francisco street light is powder by 100 percent godfathers hetch hetchy power in one simple word serious as day turns i

didn't o- >> sound familiar do you keep on getting up there's an easier way. >> of course there's easier way get rid of of mosquito they breed whatever this is water no water no mosquito mosquito feed on good blood the eggs hatch and stay near the waters san francisco to breathe and the adult underlying mosquito waits on the as many until it's sexuality hardens water pools in any areas and creates places you'll not normally think of budget and any container that holds water and hidden in bushes or else were

dump the water and do it over soil not into a drain the larva can continue growing in the pooled water is sewage disthe first of its kind the area if the sewage is two extreme have a licensed plumber assist water pools in rain gutters and snaking and cleaning out the water when keep the water from pooling and keep in mind that mosquito breed in other waters like catch balgsz and construction barriers interest crawl spaces with clmg is an issue you may have is week to cause the water to collect this is an sour of mosquito so for buildings just fix the clean air act drains and catch basins can be mosquito ground it will eliminate it as a possible location

keep shrubbery and growths estimated any water to can be seen and eliminated birdbath and fountains and uncovered hot tubs mosquito breed but it is difficult to dump the water out of a hot top can't dump the water adding mosquito finish rids the source of mosquito there are also traditionally methods to protect you installing screens on windows and doors and using a mosquito net and politically aau planet take the time to do the things we've mentioned to eliminate standing water and make sure that mosquito are not a problem on your property remember no water no mosquito

the city of san francisco, sfgtv meeting of the municipal transportation agency of january 17, 2017 will begin shortly. >> borden is anticipated. director heinicke, present. director hsu, present. nolan, present. romose, present. rubke, present. you have a quorum. announcement of sound producing devices. ringing of and use of cell, phone pagers and devices are prohibited. any person responsible for the ringing and use of cell

phone and pager or any other device may be removed from the meeting. cell phones on vibrate cause micro phone interference. approval of minutes for january 3 regular meeting. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> all in favor say aye. >> the ayes have it. >> item 5, communication. i know of none. item 6, introduction of new or unfinished business. >> i like to [inaudible] >> i nominate malcolm heinicke. >> for chair? >> i thought we were doing both at the same time. >> we are just doing the chair. any members care to address the board? seeing none-nominating cheryl to do it this she is dedicated and

knowledgeable person. the agency and staff and colleagueerize very fortunate to have sheryl step in. she is knowledgeable about mta and transit agencies around the country and world. she is very artechulate advocate for the goals of the agency and spend many community meetings during the year so will be a outstanding member of the board. all in favor of cheryl brickman say aye? opposed? thank you. [applause]. call for election of the vice chair. we have a nomination? >> i know this is surprising but like to nominate malcolm heinicke. >> any other nominations? members of the public have comments? seeing none. i like to say we are very fortunate malcolm stepping into the position. so knowledgeable and dedicated and thoughtful and not afraid to take on

hard issues. that is the bft benefit of the agency and city. if no other comments i will call the question. all in favor of malcolm heinicke for vice chair? opposed? . here it is-i can't believe i'm giving this up. i was just getting the hang of this thing. >> thank you. i want to thank tom nol frn nolan for his service for 8 years. he led through change jz been a calm and thoughtful voice and honored to work with him and call him a friend. his leadership shaped my time as vice chair and will continue to shape and inform my time as chair. our city and transit system will be a unfinished project and changing. helping to create a transportation worthy the great city woompt regoing in the right direction even though bumps and

challenges occur but always towards our goal, which is a great city with slnt transportation choices. i think our current and past boards i thank the current and past bord for the work they have done and continue to do. we bring unique speerns and dedication to create a collegeial board and proud to serve along said all och you as well as mr. reiskin and team and thank you to roberta boomer and i look forward being your 7th chairperson. [inaudible] [laughter] >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> let me just-thank you very much. i'll echo comments and thank tom for his services and leadership and i will also say that one of the reason

i am taking the position as i enjoy work wg all you so much and particularly ed and roberta and other staff members and susan, and while you received plenty accolades and echo them. i respect you a great deal. let me talk about somebody. i am the second more senior person on the board after tom so normally in the order of things especially with a ambitious person by my slf i would be in the seat but you don't get it by being the longest you get it by being knowledgeable and dedicated and passionate and cheryl is all those things so i look forward supporting you in the position which you deserve. >> thank you very much, malcolm. i have the gavel so we will move on. >> directors report. >> mr. reiskin. members of the board and public and staff. i will thank the outgoing chair for many years

of great service including the dubiate leading the bubious decision to hire me as director, hopefully the new chair will consider that appropriately but do want to thank tom for his many years of serviceess to the board not just while i was here but long before that and decades service transportation and other public interests then bay area. it will be a different board after in the wake of your service, so thank you for that and madam chair and mr. vice chair, welcome. congratulations, look forward working with you. not to turn on a down note, but in termoffs my report i had a bad week last week on oo few different fronts. within the muni system we had two fatalities the causes of which in both caseerize

still under investigation but disturbing. the first was last tuesday at the end of the line in dally city on a 14 mission bus. a woman was found unresponsive. the woman is on the bus unresponsive. it was 911 was called and corner came and she was determined to have passed at some point on the vehicle. there were many news stories circulating about this over the weekend and discussion about men ingitis as a possible cause of deaths. we understand as of this morning the san mateo corners office ruled out minen jites as a cause of death. we will wait for the final determination and don't think it was muni related but it did happen on a muni bus and thoughts and prayers are with her

friends and family. the next day there was a 57 year old man found dead around castro street station. there is a robust investigation underway which we are providing a lot of support to in terms of video and anything else that we have will help us all understand what happened, but tragic none the less and for him our thoughts and prayers are with his friends and family as well. then, shifting gears, last week we also had two bad collision in the city. pedestrians sthin street. the first-these are both on the same day. the first was a 67 year old man crossing the street at 19th and judah. he had a green light around 8 p.m. and struck by a car and sustained life threatening injuries. this is a intersection that has history of collision. it is also one where there had been improvements such as

signal upgrade in 2009 as well as added leading nrtdivals in 2014. this will be subject to significant upgrade and working with caltrans and going into construction the next couple years but tragic and wish him and his family the best. the same day a scith 6078 60 year old woman was struck at buchanan and was struck and kimed by a truck towing a trailer. unlike 19th avenue this is not a area with a high collision history and along the union street corridor no real trends in terms of collisions there. none the less, will be following up on that

and seeing what there is to be done but tragic all 4 of events happened in the last week. just a reminder, the importance not all f othese were street safety related but the importance of our commitment to vision zero so since we are at the end of the year and have updated numbers for 2016 i like to ask tom mcguire sustainable streets director to come forward and give a update related to vision phreero. >> good afternoon directors. we received from the department of public health the preliminary year end numbers for traffic fatalities in the city in 2016 and before i give a overview of those i want to make a couple caveats. the first is at least one crash is still under investigation by the medical examiner for its cause

and could potentially bree considered a traffic fatality. it is important when we talk about year end numbers there is a lot of year to year variation and a lot of statistical fluctuation so important not to direct too many conclusion. over the last year as many know there is a very alarming national trend towards increasing trafic fatalities. all most 9 percent nation wide in fatalities and that is trend we are working against in the vision zero cities. every year we luce about 30 libes on in san francisco and 200 serious injured. in 201529 traffic deaths and compared to 31 deaths in 2015 and 14 so there was a slight decrease. looking to the numbers a little deeper thrfs a decline

in pedestrian fatalities between 2015 and 16. 20 pedestrians in 2015 and 16, 15 pedestrians. a lot of the 9 percent nation wide is cons trailted in pedestrian deaths rchlt we had 3 cyclist in die in 2016 and one motrist die in 2015. thrfs a increase in the number of drivers killed this year. only one person was killed in 2015 and 5 in 2016. back in january there was a early morning hour collision south of market involving a california high way patrol chase where the driver and two

passengers struck a taxi and accounted for deaths so that accounted for 3 of the 5 fatalities. at the end of the day i think we don't want to draw too many conclusion of this a long term trend. it is a year of data where it went down and up and that is good news going down than up especially given the national trend bullet have a long way to go. december 31, 2024 which is our end date for vision zero is less than 8 years away and still losing 29 people a year on the streets. this year and years to come it is ourjob to get those 57 high priority engineering enforcement education projects underway to change policy about automated speed enforcement and the culture of

speeding in san francisco. the approval of traffic signals in south of market and tender line will make projgress and two year strategy will continue to chart the path to getting the number down from 31 to 29 to zero by 2024. that is my update on the vision zero statistics. >> thank you. >> a few other items that have some vision zero connection. one is that a couple days after your last board meeting, the san francisco county transportation authority commission approved the gearo brt environmental impact report. they certified the report and approved the hybrid design which is bus lanes in the center and van ness and richmond portion and side running brt on the eastern

portion. there was two small changes made, which was the restoration of the rapid stop at laguna street and local stop at collins street. other than that, the project was generally approved as recommended so it is a pretty significant milestone for the gearo brt, which i mention in the realm of vision zero because the project we call it brt is really a corridor transformation plauject with significant amount of vision zero elements that are part of it. so, next steps are a lot of community outreach will be happening over the next 6 to 9 month jz continue to work with the federal government to get the federal environmental impact statement finalized and then we'll bring that with potential parking and traffic changes for the eastern portion of the project to this body some time

in the summer hopefully. so, great progress there. one other item with vision zero connection is that i think it was last week or maybe the week before, the u.s. secretary of transportation, anthony fox was in san francisco to join mayor lee and our past and current chairs of the mta board to announce the federal government awarding san francisco with a $11 million grant to develop innovative transportation tech knowledge to address congestion, but also to make sure that the system is safer and more efficient and there are particular elements within the grant-there are 6 different projects and a couple are specifically aimed making the streets safer using technology to address safety issues. so, we will be implementing these in conjungz with the county transportation authority. there is research support

from university california berkeley, pretty exciting stuff particularly anything we bring technology to try to make the streets safer so pleased to participate in that. a few other items, we have pretty significant storms last week and looks like we may have more coming this week and just wanted you know to there were lots of mta staff out and about trying to keep the city moving during that time. we had 31 signal outages over the course of the storms late last week and into early last week that our signal shop was able to quickly repair and get back into order. we had extra parking control officers to address things such as signal outages and lots of trees down i understand from public works. they had more than 300 trees down in the city over the course of the storms so having the folks out to direct traffic and redirect traffic was

important. there was numerous muni operations and maintenance staff out supporting to keep the systems running. we had a lot of impacts to muni service as a result of the trees and a mud slide, but we didn't have a major flooding including in the subway where we had flooding before and i think that is thank tooz preventative work we did together with public works and pu c. just want to acknowledge, a lot of folks as we are inside trying to stay warm and dry the field staff are out sthr making sure the city will keep moving and will be ready for the next storm as well. i did want to just speak to the next bus ushue which is issue of great discussion of late. i'll start with the good news is most the next bus predictions are restored based on good work by folks inside and

partners, the companies that help us deliver the next bus system. there has been a lot written and said about what happened and why it happened and i guess i would say this, i think there was a confluence of a number of different things from work that we were doing to work that others external to the agency were doing that collide said in a unfortunate storm that led to the outage. we worked very quickly to replace it and worked quickly to provide as much information to the public as we could but i recognize it was very significant inconvenience for a lot of folks so want to apologize for the rider jz anyone else impacted. it increensed a lot of folks and take responsibility for the outage. in hindsight i think there is more we could have done to mitigate it from

happening but have it up and running for the most part. it was a lesson for me in how important the service is to our riders. the reactions we got was amazing. i don't mean in a good way amazing, but it spoke a lot to how valuable having arrival predictions are for the riders. we are just about past it now and don't expect anything like that to reoccur in the future but wanted to acknowledge that was not our finest day and want to accept responsibility for that. two more quick things. one is that mayor lee along with mayors from a number of different cities including los angeles, portlands and seattle made a joint request last week to automobile mrfer inviting to improve pricing and specifications of existing electric vehicles for use in all municipal fleets to help reduce fuel and

maintenance costs. obviously most the transit fleet is electric so we know this but much of the non revenue and rest of city fleets and city fleets across the country are not. to the extent we can move those vehicles rks which are necessary to our performing city service so we can move those to the zero emission electric vehicles that have a impact on greenhouse kbas reduce reliance on fossil fuel, reduce air pollution and quality and reduce maintenance. a lot of folks look to san francisco as a leader because we have a mission free power from hetch hetchy that powers the majority of our muni system and city buildings so i think mayor lee was able to exempify great leadership but have this not just be san francisco's voice but bring together a coalition of cities to

advance for this. there are plenty of products out there for passenger vehicles and sedans. there are increasingly a number of electric buses starting to come on the market. this push was to broaden the market to more municipal fleets. many of the heavy duty truck jz other equipment we use or agencies like public works departments or parks departments, there are not electric vehicles available for those fleets so this was a push from the mayor to the manufacturers to expand their repertoire. and finally, speaking of zero emission vehicles, i was pleased to be joined by former chair nolan, then chair nolan last friday with our director of transit john hailey and his team to welcome thest if of ow neurlight-rail vehicles to san francisco. it arrived

over night in our metro east facility from sacramento. this produced by see mans and the first of 260 new light-rail vehicles we are in contract for. it was 2 and a half years in the making to get to this point from developing the first specification and request for pro posal and bringing the contract for your consideration and finally for the board of supervisors approval and exhaustive planning and design and quality assurance, public vetting to get to the point where we have our first vehicle here that is dollar irfbed, which is great. i remiped you the first two traunchs of 6 or 24 vehicles by the end of nest year and 40 after that are expansion vehicles so will be adding to the fleet and starting around 2121 the vehicles after

that will replace the current fleet under the current schedule so we will have more light-rail vehicles in service starting later this year after the first vehicle goes through its paces and safety certifications, but very exciting moment and huge mile stone for the agency. i want to credit john hailey for his extraordinary effort to get the project to this point and look forward to more vehicles rolling in and hitting revenue service later this year. that conclude my report. >> thank you, thank you very much director reiskin. i know the new light-rail vehicles will do what the buses have with fewer break downs and more comfortable. thank you for highlighting the next bus issue. i completely can appreciate and empathize in the pain that caused riders. how reliant on the on time arrival can't be

overstated so glad we will have that cleaned up. it reminded us again when you first came on board how a schedule if you have predictable reliable service and you got on time demand and arrival information a schedule becomes pointless and watching everybody trying to figure out the schedules on the buses i appreciated the fact the mta blog published the schedule so people had a idea of the headway. directors any questions or comments? seeing none, mrs. boomerpublic comment? >> yes, cathy deluca. a opportunity for members to address matters or presented by mr. reiskin. >> good afternoon chair brinkman and former chair nolan and directors and director reiskin. cathy deluca the policy and program director at walk san francisco and you might not be surprised to hear me today here to urge

you all to be vision zero campions in 2017. that is my message to you today. 29 people were killed last year on the streets and only two fewer than the year before and not a big chaimpg. we need every tool in the arsenal and every leader in the public bodies. eerfben though the pedestrian numbers went down pedestrians make up over half of everyone killed so suffer disproportionate impacts. of the pedestrians we see a huge proportion of seniors. 75 percent of the pedestrians killed last year were 60 or older so still have a major goal to reach here. what i will ask you all today and every other time i come before you is this year to use this power that you have in the position to make sure that the projects that come before you save lives on our street. i urge you not tew proouv projects if they

don't make the streets safer. i urge you not to approve projects with compromises to safety. i would urge you to push staff to bring projects before you that have the most robust safety treatments possible in a comprehensive way. you will see a lot of projects this year along high injury corridors so will have a lot of opportunity to flex your vision zero muscles. folsom, howard and 6th street and taraval so we need you. everyone who walks bike squz takes transit on the streets we need you. walk san francisco is here to support you in the work. the vision zero coalition is here to support you so with your leadership and commitment i look forward to 2017 being different. thank you. >> madam chair that is the last person who indicated interest to address you on topics presented by mr. reiskin. >> thank you. item 8, citizen

advisory counsel report. madam chair and directors the cac chair isn't here so no report. item 9, public comment. opportunities to address within the jurisdiction and not on todays calendarment we will start with lawrence paul followed by robert [inaudible] >> madam chair and former chair nolan and directors, just disclose own a taxi medallion and my medallgen i know is at arrow and green and city wide over the years and i believe that a medallion owner or speak about this that i'm also speaking in the presence of at least economically of the tnc's that

rubundant in our streets. and i wanted to first just mention that i'm aware that the city is trying everything it can do to cut back on costs and raise more revenue and the initial medallion sale and from what i was told a couple years ago by michael harris that several hundred medallions were sold and know this is a revenue stream-previous revenue stream for the mta. and, so what i'm appealing today for is the previous proposal that was brought to the board with respect to selling the medallions to companies. i know the initial medallion sale

was done as a pilot study and turned out to be a very fine revenue stream and i think that with all of the market forces i respectfully request we revisit that at some point in the near future. and thank you for listening. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> robert [inaudible] followed by mark grewburg. >> good afternoon. it is funny how everything always collides. you have never done an environmental study on tnc's, but since there are approximately 45,000 tnc's that operate on a regular basis in the city and we get these figures from the airport so we are all in the same boat, i urge you

to do a environmental study because nobody else is going to do it. and the next think you could do is then start putting pressure to reduce the numbers to a workable majority of maybe 5,000. which sound a enormous amount, but 5,000. but my main suggestion is this, you have to be proactive today and what is proactive is you have to look to all these tech companies and ask for bids for driverless taxis in this city. and the reason i'm saying that because actually they form a perfect partnership with taxis, with

drivers in them. the supervisors last year said that the population of seniors is going to reach 40 percent in san francisco over the next 20 years and most of those people will not be able to use driverless taxis because they need somebody to help them get in, get out and actually understand where they want to go. so, they could bow a perfect partnership, but it is up to you to go and ask tech people. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> mark grewburg, mar cello [inaudible] followed by adam pav locka. >> thank you. congratulations to chair brinkman to vice chair heinicke, best wishes to former chair nolan.

i want to speak on behalf the san francisco taxi workers alliance. i want to put forward some ideas that we will present in a more formal fashion but i wanted to start getting thise out there, ways of improving taxi driver income. this is something that is vital to the future and the existence of a taxi industry in san francisco. if we can't find ways for drivers to make more money, we are not going to have drivers. so, these are some ideas we have come up and maybe others but i wanted to put them out there. first significantly increase the number of taxi stands. we pulled our membership and have a long list and will be providing that to the mta taxi stands. take taxis out of circulation. row deuce congestion, reduce emissions and possibly improve safety.

imlment the system for sharing taxi rides. this has been discussed and discussed and it can and should be done. establish a system of taxi vouchers or online accounts for city employees. cut down on the number of vehicles you need for city employees. develop a universal taxi voucher our own line paying system on all cabs. this is different than a app or e system. explore ways for taxis to compliment the muni services. this is a idea we brouched years ago and never wnt anywhere but the technology we have now it is very doable. >> thank you. >> mar chela [inaudible] adam pavlocka followed by carl [inaudible]

who is the last person bhoo who turned in a speak er card. >> directors good afternoon. my name is marcelo [inaudible] long time member the taxi industry. this month is my 28 anniversary. the mockery and nudge of the taxi industry started right here at city hall when mayor lee took the position to support uber and lift. it is public knowledge in the state of the city address in 2013, mayor lee not only praised uber and lift, he proclaimed july 13, lift day. the only reason you don't have jurisdiction over tnc is because mayor lee gave it to [inaudible] declined your accommodations on insurance, the environment and unanimously

adopted the definition of leased vehicles and perjury vehicles driven for tnc is one in the same. this is your city . there are 45 thousand tnc operating here and they are clogging your streets and destroying your infrastructure and the only thing they give back is foul air. it is so unfair for mayor lee and the mta to continue charging medallion renewal fees at the same time he promote jz facilitates competition. i urge you to wave all medallion fees to holdser jz urge you to tell mayor lee the only way for the san francisco taxi industry to sur vive is limit the numbers. the city must work with the mta. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> adam [inaudible] followed by

carl [inaudible] those are the last two speakers. >> hello. i'm here to talk about the sfmta 4th speak project between 4th and zoe. wealth street was close td. hearing everyone speak about vision zero you sound hypocritical because the last 2 weeks the sfmta refused to enforce no parking and inaction made a one way street two way. there has been no mandate for having a flag man there to direct traffic while two way traffic goes down a one way street. dpp has been called and been told and told us, we don't have any record of this and not going to enforce. various

messages have been sent including up to last friday to am reiskin as well as his subordinates. we keep laering this will be taken care of, it isn't. this morning when i left for work at 9:30 there were 9 cars parked blocking one lane of traffic making it a one way streets. the contractors were there or supposed to be there at 7 a.m. and reports say work started at 3:30 so the contractors isn't enforcing and sfmta isn't if forcing. if this isn't a city project you would lead on the contractors to follow the blue book and have enforcement there. all i can do that is intention it be pushing two way traffic down a one way street with no protection, no signs, no enforcement

and no flagman. what are you going to do about this? >> thank you. mr. reiskin could we have someone follow up with him and get contact information and see if we can address that situation? >> we will and got e-mail about this and have staff following up today as well. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> carlmic murdo is the last speaker. >> medallion renewal fee issuement our monthly lease income plummeted by 80 percent the last 4 years. many medallion holdererize going deep into debt and worse. at the last board meetsing there was a suggestion to advantage medallion holders over others. that is unfair, we are all suffering greatly. last thursday january 12 there was a article in the chronicle saying uber is crushing taxi but muni ridership is up 3 percent so

the spokes person says tnc isn't - here is quhie i think you should regard the tnc as foes and not friends. they are public safety and traffic jam problems caused by tnc. the carpooling models and [inaudible] will cause problems going forward. finally, you could be selling 500 medallions a year andmericing $1.25 billion if you get 80 percent the tnc's off the road so costing you money. enforce the state law on the books for 85 years requiring transportation for vehicles to have commercial license plates and insurance. the vehicles with the tnc logo are committing insurance fraud. this is illegal practice and aids and abets drivers under pricing

taxi by greatly reducing overhead. it is legal to enforce state law. if you are encouraged to do so you may get 80 percent of the vehicles ouf the road. fly wheel sued uber over antitrust violation. uber sells rides below cost and subsidize driver jz reports billions in losses. i note the sf bay guardian had a gument years ago against the sf [inaudible] to conclude-thank you very much. jerk anymore public comment on this item? seeing none, closed. can we move on. >> consent calendar, the considers are retune unless a board or member of the public serves or considered separately. i heard no requests that a member of the mublic wishes to have a item severed and not from the board. >> approval. >> second. all in favor aye. opposed? the ayes have it consent

calendar is passed. ite >> itedm 11, the regular calendar. implement the dolores median pilot for 16 months and approve traffic modifications associated with the pilot. >> i think we have mr. nox white presenting. >> good afternoon. congratulations. john knox white and planning section program manager for sfmta and working on the project nearly two years we are here with a update and overview with proposed implementation for a pilot project that would authorize parking alongside the dolores street center medians between 14th and 18th streets on friday evening, saturday

early morning to noon and sundays all day. this is the location and the time at which this practice has a historically occurred in the area but it will allow implementing this and signing it allow to provide daylighting and pulling the parking back from the ends of the medians that provide significant pedestrian and transportation safety impacts otaerointersections and also provide much better public safety and specifically fire access to the neighborhood, which is currently impacted when vehicles have shortened turn radius because people parking up to and into the intersection. when we were here in august we recommended a 12 month pilot and today we are recommending a 16th month duration which will be a 12 month pilot

and allow us to see how the pilot rolls out over a entire year and provides 4 months and and allow evaluations. again, we have a map in the presentation that was in your package showing it is just the medians between 14th and 18th street. a quick overview where we have been. we had a 9 month committee work, which evolved over 7 meetings with community stakeholders from community organizations, resident and business and park users. we conducted a community survey that spoke to all people who traveled to that neighborhood, but focused heavily on the residents. the outcomes as

you recall of the survey, was less than a majority of the residents of the neighborhood were opposed it formalizing or removing all the packing. in the end there is stronger support among residents to remove parking but heard from community organizations and small business community they prefer to allow it to happen so felt the pimet recommended in august and body approved moving forward represented a compromise that was supported by a majority of the stakeholders across the board. so, today we are here with request to legislate that pilot. there were two items this board highlighted. at that time one of which looked at parking management strategies as a part of the pilot. our parking group has already started to look at those and identified really the parking manager and strategies and regulations actually exist on all but one block of

the area around that. have identified places in which those regulations could be expanded to different days or hours to have that impact and that will be something we will consider over the course of the pilot as well. and then the second item was insuring there was format for community input so we proposed as we did at the time a quarterly stakeholder committee to which we will report out and meetings will be public so anyone interested in the issue can hear how it is going and will be a place to hear from the community as to how they feel it is going and the impacts they feel this had. one of the issues we had through the process is finding business owners who are busy running the businesses who also want to participate. i knew it started with a p. participated

in lots of meetings and so we will be going to the neighborhood on a quarterly basis to fiend out from the business squz other s how they feel this is going so we are not just hearing from 4 or 5 people but have a real sense of the area. so, as we talked about in august, the goals of the pilot which we believe this recommendation meets is to increase the clarity and understanding of when parking regulation allow for parking and when they don't. we believe that not only will this clarify a lot of conclusion whether you are allowed to park in the area by telling you can, it will bring about what we feel is the feeling of fairness in which it will be clear anybody who wants to use this parking during the parking hours is allowed to do so. again, as we daylight the intersections there are safety impacts that will make it safer at the intersections

for all users whether walking biking or dribeing and by setting final hours it will clarify when you can expect to be towed and our cited for parking late at night and should help cut down and hopefully eliminate all of the-not all of the but occasional cars sitting in the dark in the middle of deloris street. so far we haven't had collisions related to that but a matter of time. with that we submit-sorry, we have worked with enforcement folks. if sl a concern to the community it is related to will you enforce this. it is obvious, historically we deprioritized enforcement arond the median jz have commitment of the enforcement staff for the first 2 to 3 month weez will be proactively on site

enforcing the hours. the intention is give arfbd everybody a heads up that enforcement is about to begin so people are not surprised and dont have lots of complaints about citations but very quickly we want people to understand once the hours are done enforcement happens and to set a expectation there is no parking in places that are not signed during hours they are not signed. with that, that our report. >> i would like to thank juliet wilson who has done most the job on this i brian [inaudible] >> thank you very much. just a clarify ing question for me before i ask my fellow directors for any questions, this is reducing the amount of parking space and decreasing by 1 half a spot? >> yes. there will be effectively 50 percent decrease. >> the spots were people formally were parking and anticipating they would have no enforcement those curbs

will be painted red? >> yes. >> people are not just demanding on the signs, the curbs are painting red? >> yes. >> directors questions or clarifying comments before we move to public chaument? >> thank you mr. knox white. >> two members of the public are here to address you [inaudible] >> thank you. madam chairperson and directors. my name is stefonlaser and lives on dolen street off delorss over 24 years. i prefer no [inaudible] parking i realize given all the factors a compromise is necessary. i think the proposed plan is reasonable but request you consider one change and that is that the sunday parking end at 4 p.m. instead of 6 p.m. i ask that for safety reasons. during part

of the year it is dark before 6 pmp causing a hazard for drivers. i'm well aware of the parking and still all most hit cars in the dark. i met with john knox white in november and this is something we discussed. high did not specifically recommend the change he agreed my suggestion was reasonable given the safety issue. regarding the specific implementation i am glad to see there is a plan to do a 30 day, one month grace period because i was concerned what would happen there. the other thing i would request is that i would like sfmta to attempt to facilitate agreement between the archdiocese and synagogue that allows the two mission deloris parking lots. this can eliminate the parking and give the synagogue flexibility.

there was discussion some time ago but agreement couldn't be reached. same applies to deloris park church and board of education. they used to be able to use the parking lot across the street and suddenly the fall the new principle decided they couldn't without warning. i ask the city try to facilitate some agreement there. i respectfully ask you consider my suggestions. thank you. >> thank you. thank you for your continued input. >> [inaudible] anyone else wishes to address the board if you can make your way to the front or turn in a speaker card. >> good afternoon board members. congrat ylshzs chairman brinkman and thank you chairman nolan, outgoing. [inaudible] associate pastor of cornerstone church and part the committee john knox white and team helped facilitate over two years and thank john and juliet and team

facilitating a job for a challenges process. i do want to say i think fellow faith organization members are not able to make it today but i think without formally speaking on their behalf we are supportive of the pilot project and believe this is a compromise for the neighborhoods and faith communities and i think everyone just to communicate to the neighborhoods this will beope toon the general mublic whether going to the restaurants or shopping or faith organizations and i just want to reiterate that i believe it is communicate today the board that the small business administration san francisco has also supported this pilot project and legalization the median parking on dolores. i

believe it was brought up at the last board meeting. one reason the data hasn't skewed too much is the gentrification that happened with the people of faith organizations who had to move out and drivering into the city is the only opportunity for them to attend their faith organizations. once again, i want to say thank you and hope you consider-also, my church actually is part that-parks on cuvaro and independent of the pilot decision so i was under the impression it is a same decision for dolores-thank you. >> thank you. mr. knox, white, a follow up question in light of mr. luzars comment. i see that the dates and times the parking is permitted-friday until 10 p.m.

saturday at noon and sunday 6 p.m. do you want to to the twie lite dark dusk issue there? >> sure, it was something we talked about. as we wept through the conversation even with the committee even though we didn't come to a conclusion there, we looked at everything from adding full day saturday parking to really limiting things to sunday mornings and in that conversation i think what staff came to is the idea of trying to formalize a solution that honored the current and existing circumstances so parking hapbs past 6 o'clock we thought 6 o'clock represented in the hour a reasonable hour that isn't too dark and maybe one hour of darkness in the evening and couple months for a year. we couldn't find data that suggested people were running into the backs of the cars so a

outcome evaluating this is whether at 6 o'clock there are no car thrz which suggests we should pull the hours sknack there isn't a damd for that. i think we felt the issue was single cars in the dark than it was a row of 10 cars parked there in the dark. >> good. thank you. directors, questions, discussion? >> i had a few. >> please. >> thank you very much, mr. knox white. this was a interest progress on this and just a couple follow up spots on the proposal for your consideration going forward and for the commitsy to consider going forward. it is my bet that this parking is going to fill up as quickly as it becomes available by workers or customers or residents who want to park extra vehicles they might

own that they don't have parking for. once it becomes available to the public and the whole public knows it is available, i suspect like every other available parking space in the city it will be snatched up the moment it becomes permissible for vehicles to park there. i'm under the impression the only reason it doesn't happen now is the way it is unofficially managed gave the public the impression they were not allowed to park there because the parking was reserved for the institutions. so, i'm hoping that we have sort of a plan in place to respond to that once that happens and if it doesn't happen i'm happy. i suspect it will and encourage you toconsider the idea of putting hourly limitations like 4 hour limitations on that parking or two hour limitations to

increase turn over and keep people who shouldn't park there from parking there so it remains available for the intended use of the space. if that doesn't work i encourage to start thinking what it will take to meter those spaces. again, from the persperktive of keeping the spaces available for those who need if and funding enforcement. that is probably something that i would encourage you to just think about as you are rolling the thing out, not necessarily to implement it or look at implementing right away. again, i hope i'm wrong. i love the idea of a parking pass. i suspect that the institutions are looking at this. i would hope that the folks from the synagogue would be very open to the idea of letting people park in their lots when they are not there

and the other folks in the christian institutions on sundays will be happy to allow the muslims park on fridays or whatever it might be, but there are plenty of times when church lots are vacant-faith based institutions are vacant and it will be cool for the ecminicle council or any counsels that exist to put toorkt a parking pass for their members that would allow for parking to happen in each other lots. i hope you look into something like that because i suspect with the reduction of parking they will need something to that effect. again, really supportive of all this. i'm glad to see it has come this far. i know this was a divisive issue for a lot of folks in my conversations i had with people about this but think it is step in the right direction and appreciate all the engagement that

members of the community provided in this and again, the leadership on the part of staff and everyone involved so thank you. >> thank you, director ramose. that brings up the question if the parking fills up and the faith based community no longer has the easier access they will want to consider some type of transportation demand management plan or managed parking in the area so that is interesting to watch. any other questions? motion to approve? second? all in favor aye. opposed? hearing none the item is passed. yes, i'm sorry. >> i hope that we use this opportunity in work wg this community on this issue to talk about the homeless issue, which is another issue that came up before where we have people in those vehicles living in their vehicles and no place for them to park and since we have a audience with the community at this point, i recognize it is primarily