previous reports on previous data. i think on also skilled nursing and as we're looking at numbers, there is that whole question of short-term skilled nursing versus long-term skilled nursing which is really important. and short-term skilled nursing and maybe that's more the hospital level responsibility than the long-term skilled nursing kind of gets into this whole issue of ageing in place and ageing where and what type of facilities. i think that also is part of our confusion when we look at gross numbers without looking at that type of division, and then, places may get all concerned about all of a sudden the undifferentiating numbers in which they themselves may have a limited responsibility as a post acute care type of service. and i know that where you have

been discussing with a number of other facilities, that's certainly in your mind. certain places are not. looking at long-term or short-term, and so i think that's important to continue to did differentiate. i think the other point i'll just make and we'll get onto other discussions, it's important to also have an understanding of the sub acute area. i do have one question, which in fact -- and i forgot which presenter had said that somebody was here from cpmc that might be able to answer the question that was raised in terms of if the sub acute patients are being placed into the davies does that reduce or current snf beds as -- or in fact maybe they were never used, and therefore it's open space. so is there somebody from cpmc to explain to us how this transition is? and i know for our new

commissioners, the sub acute issue at st. luke's was an enormous subject over our past several hearings, and we would like to also understand how this is -- and the cpmc responded by being able to keep these sub acute patients within the city and moving them to davies. now we'd like to understand the implications of that upon the snf beds that you may have had over there. >> good evening, commissioners. i'm emily webb. i'm the community director for bayview center health. we had 38 snf beds at our davies campus. those are the last beds in san francisco. in order to change our plans and keep the existing sub acute patients that are kushl at the st. luke's campus within the cpmc system, we need to convert

17 of the existing 38 snf beds to sub acute, which would leave us with 17 sub acute beds at the davies campus and 21 snf beds. you'll recall we came back to the commission and made that commitment to our existing patients, and also shared that as the sub acute beds are no longer needed, we would move those back into skilled nursing beds. so over time, the mix of sub acute and snf would shift based on patient needs. >> okay. so thank you. and i think the question there might be as you've described it, about whether or not that actually might create a prop q hearing. and i don't know legally, but it sounds like if you're reducing one of the services, that that is in existence, i'd only ask staff to assist you in

understanding if approximate a prop q hearing is needed or not. i don't need more hearings. >> yeah. i'd be happy to talk to staff about that. i'd say sub acute is a designation under the snf license. there's not a license change, there's a designate through the department of health care services, so i would think that's a legal question for us to talk to the city attorney. >> right. i wouldn't want you to be in violation -- >> we will follow up with cpmc on that. >> thank you. >> commissioner, i don't think there's any -- i don't know if there's anymore questions, but i just wanted to emphasize that commissioner chung brought up, and that was what we were grounded in was the predecessor documents that informed us about data of the need and sort of p.a.c.c. took it from there. just one final comment, and this is sort of speaking as a former deputy city attorney,

the employee for 14 years. to imply the motivation of p.a.c.c. members, people like daniel, kelly, margaret, austin, ruth, elizabeth, everyone here is -- is i don't think an accurate characterization of how we went about our business. i'll just leave it at that. >> i do want to note, though, that we should take the information gathered because that was one of the issues that we did talk about, the importance of getting other members' voices in the community, and so we would like to have their reflection as an addendum to this report, 'cause i do think that's 30r7b. >> thank you, director. >> thank you chow right. and thank you, and of course in public testimony, we are receiving everyone's opinion,

and i appreciate it. and i think we have already noted and staff has noted the importance of the cooperation that has brought about the report and also, obviously, the staff work that is creating a work plan for us. mr. marens, public testimony is currently over. thank you -- unless it's a point of clarification, which would accept. >> this issue of the reduction in skilled nursing -- nursing facility beds at the cpmc is a very serious one. we had in san francisco hundreds of hospital based snf beds, and we're going to be done to 21. there are people, and i -- from my own practice, people who are discharged from the hospital

with heart failure, with pneumonia, with an acute stroke. putting them into a community based snf is a recipe for disaster. and what's happening already is that people who are discharged into the community based snf's are being sent back to the hospital. and because the hospitals don't want to readmit them because it interferes with their medicare reimbursement, so what they're doing is hospitals have now created an observation, and so people are kept in the emergency room for up to three days. >> dr. barnes, i asked you for a point of clarification. >> this is a clarification. >> i appreciate your interpretation; however, the chair will rule that that is not a clarification. thank you. we'll proceed -- >> and if i could -- chair.

>> yeah. >> i do think that we have to work very hard to look at this issue and this need, and i just want the public to know that they have the commitment of the department to really do that. and i also think that, you know, we do need to work with our other partners. ucsf is willing to do this. i've asked cpmc what would it take to keep those 17 beds open because i think we need to ask that question, because we're losing ground on this. as we move more beds, then we need to figure out how do we stop more beds leaving? so i've asked that question, and i'm very -- you want to look at that. i also think that if following the direction of our proposal that we've put in front of you, we are going to submit that to the board of supervisors in terms of, you know, we have an incredible provider sitting here with us of jewish homes and services and she's very interested in looking at how to

expand, but it's not going to happen over night. it's going to take some time to develop this. maybe the criticism for us is we didn't start this fast enough, and as federal changes how, who, what they pay for, and this is the driver of some of the closing of these beds, that's what we have to look at as well. what do we need to look at, a critical conflict in the ways of what the federal government has decided they're going to pay for and what they're not. i do think we have a responsibility as the health department to look at this, including what our commissioner asked about data, and we also have a responsibility to ensure that people can age in place, and when they do need that next level of care, it's there. i do want to say that we have not closed snf on san francisco general and we do not plan on doing that, and i think that's

an important program to continue. and we have over 700 beds of skilled nursing at laguna honda, so i believe that the department has really been a leader in this, and we do need all of our other health care systems to also continue with this. and maybe it might not look the same for them, but we do have to continue to work together in trying to meet this overall need. >> all right. commissioner? >> i think funny in these conversations, my concerns are less about those using the county's resources or the uninsured. these are more issues about the working poor who might have a very minimal kind of insurance plan but had high medical costs, and this would be additional burden. and when we're talking about this, i think that we have to be really careful. i'm not saying that we're not,

but -- but there are a couple of considerations here. are we creating an environment that's not conducive for the working family to stay and i think that the answer is yes, and i think that's something that we have to looking deeper than just how many snf beds, but we have to start the conversation, because this is a crisis in the making, and it just didn't happen today. i still remember how many times we had to listen to closing of snf beds in the hospitals and have the same conversation. it's really concerning to me that this is happening, and i'm not saying that anyone has intention to avoid responsibilities, but it's a clear issue, it has a bigger picture to consider, and i just want us to take a step back and look at what that impact would

be. >> commissioner chow: thank you. any other comments from our commissioners in regards to this? i do think that the department has put forward the next steps that we were taking as we have as a commission asked the department. i'm going to ask that they quantify what they are intending to do for us in a resolution for consideration at the next meeting. i think the issues have been brought up by -- by the public are very important, and should be part of the resolution that's in the resolution in terms of at least responding to those areas of concern that have been raised. and that the department has put thoughtfully, what, three, four, four items here which are parts of the next -- which then follow with next steps, but it does allow us, then, to move

the next step because we have resolved that the p.a.c.c. was continuing. they have produced their report, they have indicated their areas that create parts of the solution the department has then expanded on, which we have asked for. i would ask the department to then present to us a resolution that we can then review and vote on in terms of our next steps as we do try to respond to not just snf beds, as commissioner chung had pointed out, and need to be sure that we are addressing everyone's needs, and i think beginning with the principle of supporting ageing in place that brings this whole work as to what is needed and where, and that probably will also change some of the projections. those projections, as you know are based essentially okay, the population keeps going that way, and we have a certain

ratio. it doesn't take into consideration this change which we actually -- a change has been occurring over at least 30 years when even the blue ribbon committee at laguna honda looked at how many beds were actually needed. and the issue there was more understanding than are there different approaches to here, and taking into consideration if there are different approaches to care, how can those be funded, because that is a real problem? that's not institutionalized right now. i mean, the idea of the residential care if a ilt is has is -- facility has no backing, they would get a reimbursement that allows that to happen. and the idea that we need to perhaps change some of our planning codes in order to encourage that, to ask whether organizations would like to add

those areas or their mission. i think that's where the department is going on this, and i believe that that, then, even though it may be a little late right now, looks to see whether or not we cannot then continue this not just dialogue and not just a report but to get to responding to the need and in a thoughtful way as a comprehensive solution. so i know i haven't forgotten the fact that we all want the sub acute beds to be addressed in this, and then to address also what i think the department has noted as helping with some of the impediments that prevent some of the other solutions to be available to the public. does that make some sense to the commission? and if so, then, we will ask for a resolution to be drawn up for our next step. if there's no other comments,

we will then proceed onto the next item, and i really thank the public, thank the -- our committee. i thank the hospital council for the continued dialogue, and we are going to move towards a solution. >> commissioners, item nine is other business, and you have the calendar before you. i will note that i'll be contacting all of you to get your schedules probably for late -- late summer to schedule a -- the community session, and then also possibly a planning session in the fall, so that will be coming up probably as i contact you. otherwise, any questions about the calendar on here? all right. so commissioners, also, as is our tradition, especially for our new commissioners, once a year we will have a meeting off-site in a neighborhood so that we will give an opportunity for the community for input also and for us to

understand the neighborhood's needs, and currently we are considering the outer richmond, but we'll have to see if we can actually work that or not. so previously, we had asked for suggestions, so we've taken those, and with that, move forward with a designation. if our new commissioners have some other ideas, they can let me know, and possibly, hawaii is not an option. >> the outer richmond, that's my neighborhood. >> all right. once again, we welcome our new commissioners. we would like to understand your interest as we then set new assignments for our commissioners in the coming year. so i'd appreciate that, and we'll try to get that information before our next meeting so we'll put that on the schedule for the new

members of the committee. next item, please. >> item ten is report back from the march 27 vfg meeting, and i believe commissioner thousand will end up doing that. >> commissioner chow: yes, we received the regulatory report. the hospital continues to undergo a number of surveys, which are routine for hospitals today, and they are doing quite well in all of the surveys that were experienced over that past month. we also reviewed the hospital's 2018-2019 strategic plan presented by dr. aaron, and the hospital's administrative report, the patient care report, the hr report in which our hiring is actually on target at the moment, and the medical staff report. following the medical staff report, we did approve the family community medicine rules

and the rn standard practices in our closed session. we approved the credentials report and the report of the pifs committee and and that's the performance improvement committee work. if there aren't any question, thank you. >> and the next item is consideration of adjournment. >> so there are no items for other business. a motion for adjournment is in order. >> move. >> okay. and a second? all in favor, please say aye. this meeting is now adjourned. thank you. .

>> shop and dine the 49 challenges residents to do they're shopping with the 49ers of san francisco by supporting the services within the feigned we help san francisco remain unique and successful and rib rant where will you shop the shop and dine the 49 i'm e jonl i provide sweets square feet potpie and peach cobbler and i started my business this is my baby i started out of high home and

he would back for friends and coworkers they'll tell you hoa you need to open up a shop at the time he move forward book to the bayview and i thinks the t line was up i need have a shop on third street i live in bayview and i wanted to have my shop here in bayview a quality dessert shot shop in my neighborhood in any business is different everybody is in small banishes there are homemade recess pesz and ingredients from scratch we shop local because we have someone that is here in your city or your neighborhood that is provide you with is service with quality ingredients and quality products and need to be know that person the person behind the products it is not like okay. who

. >> could you please call the roll. [ roll call. ] >> madam claire, director heinicke will not be with you today. you do have a quorum. i will read the prediction of sound producing devices during the meeting. this is really loud. please be advised that cell phones set on vibrate do cause microphone interference, so the board respectfully requests

they be turned off. item 4, comments on the regular public meeting. >> item five, kplungss, madam chair, i have none positive you today. item six, introduction of new or unfinished business by board members. >> board members, anything, anything? seeing nothing, thank you. >> item seven, director's report. >> mr. brinkman. >> members of the staff and public, at least those who are not at the jients game, or watching it, i'd like to first direct our director of transportation to come forward to recognize a few of his outstanding employees. >> good afternoon, board

member members, lyon. it is my pleasure to recognize ryan price who i will point out, this is our first -- more progress on succession planning. ryan, i would point out is the youngest station agent. sometimes instincts kick in, but on the night of march 23rd at church street station, we had a fire on the platform. any time you have fire around electricity or certainly trains, it's a very dangerous situation. not potentially dangerous, dangerous. ryan, being both young, alert, and i would say fleet footed immediately secured the booth and went down to the platform with the fire extinguisher and put the fire out, which is very significant because you'd say wow, how big a fire was it?

we had to make a snap second decision to send the fire department into the stations, and fire around electricity, i don't need to draw a picture. so any quick action not only avoided any potential injury, it kept our passengers -- good customer service to our passengers and really represents what everything that we would hope to have a muni staff person do in that, so it's my honor to introduce you to ryan. he has been an agent for three years, and it gets to move around the system because the other side of being youth is the lower on the seniority, but he's done a great job whenever he is. wes valeris is the station

agent, but i wanted to introduce and recognize ryan price. >> thank you. mr. price? >> i just want to say thank you for having me here, wes, and mr. haley. this is a very big deal for me. i've never even been in this building. first time is a very good reason to be here. i mean, what i can say about the incident is, i mean, we get trained well for incidents like that, but in the heat of the moment, you just want to make sure you don't forget your keys, you know, you don't forget your keys, you don't forget the fire extinguisher, you don't run over somebody trying to get to the fire. i'm just glad everything went right and no one was hurt. >> thank you so much mr. price, on behalf of this board, on behalf of the agency and the city and behalf of all the commuters who were on the system this day who did not have their workdays disrupted, at the for your quick actions, we appreciate it, and we look

forward to having you here again, something hopefully less dramatic, but i'm sure we'll have you here in the coming years. thank you. >> thank you. [applause]. >> so quick, i had to chase him for his certificate. he also -- by the way, his motion deni modesty prevents him from saying this. he was a basketball champion. he won a three on three championship at the oakland coliseum, and his prize was he got to go on the big court. despite my enthusiasm in trying to train him, he refuses to root for the celtics. he is a warriors fan. the next honoree is somebody

who has been among the busiest in the agency than anything since january 13th, 2017. manny enriquez has been leading of effort of several people. many of those have been selected and trained and developed by manny, but he is now the person responsible in this agency for having now seven new lrv-4's into service. we put four into service in the month of march. we will put four into service in the month of april and expect to go forward on that pace. this is -- i could say this is all a result of his technical skills as a mechanic. i could also say it's a result of his work ethic, his ability to not only work with staff and

the agency, but the vendor could also say it's a result of his energy, his initiative, his tirelessness. but i think the key thing that stands out about manny is his leadership. and at some point when you're introducing new vehicles into our system, we -- about a month ago, we got the dreaded message that we've -- don't ever want to hear, which is lrv-4 had a 718, which is our code for a collision with an automobile. and i happened to be in the shop at the time and watched the reaction of many of the lrv-4 team. it was oh, my god, how are we going to tell manny? it wasn't, was anybody hurt, how much damage. how are we going to tell manny, because if anyone is most

associated to getting us to where we are now with the trains, it's manny. and i've also say i've asked him to limit his speech to under ten minutes. right now i think he is chomping at the bit to go back. right now all seven trains are out this afternoon, so he wants to go back, but it's my honor to introduce emanuel enriquez, who's been leading the effort to get the lrv's into service. [applause]. >> thank you for this recognition, but it's not me that deserves the recognition, it's our team. first of all, i'd like to thank mr. haley in his support and his guidance to getting us where we are right now. the timeline was very short, and without mr. haley's support, we would not have been able to do it. the whole lrv-4 effort is a

whole effort from transit, not only from lrv-4 personnel, but from all the other departments. it seems like when we ran somewhere, we broke something in the system. so we've fixed all that stuff now, and the cars are runtinin good, but it's the people that i work with that deserve the actual recognition. the lrv-4 mechanics, the lrv-4 operators, the lrv-4 engineers. then, we have the people from mow, the overheadlines people, the people from the track department and people from mode of power and operation. so the lrv-4 project was not just the lrv-4 folks, but it's basically transit in general. and without any of them, we wouldn't have been able to do what we would have been able to do in this amount of time, and

hopefully, we'll get you as many of the lrv-4's as we good. our goal as mr. haley guides us is one a week, so we'll get you one a week. thank you. >> thank you, mr. enriquez. thank you for your generosity and acknowledging the entire team behind you, so thank you very much for all of your hard work. [applause]. >> so continuing on, i want to take the opportunity of this report to make a formal disclosure of a proposed amendment to a labor agreement, and this is an agreement between the sf mta and the transportation workers union local 200, service critical classifications within that unit. the local 200 is the labor organization that represents transit supervisors, so a lot of the folks that you see out on the streets with the blue uniforms and the folks who are

in our control centers, these are the folks who are represented by local 200. we entered into negotiations with local 200 and between sept 2017 and february of this year to amend our current mou regarding the definition of work and shifted assignment seniority for the 9153 transportation controller classification, which is a relatively new classification that we've created for the opening of our new transportation management center. it's particularly for those who are in the 9153 classification who transferred from classifications in position 9150, train controller, to be based on the start work date of the 9153 train controller position. in other words, making sure the folks who are transitioning from being 9150, the old classification to a 9153, to retain their seniority that they had when they started from

a 9150. that's what that was meant to say. after several meetings between our transit, our human resources, and executive board of local 200, we came to agreement on this tentative agreement that's been signed by both parties. there's not an impact -- fiscal impact to the operating budget, and we are required by the charter section 8(a).104 to publicly disclose in advance, at least 15 days in advance of this board considering whether to approve the amendment, so that's what we're doing today. the amendment is available at the--we have copies of it here today, and it's also on-line at ser sfmta.com. and now a couple of activities now that it's springtime in san

francisco. first, this thursday, april 5th is the sixth annual walk to workday, which is sponsored by walk san francisco. there will be 11 stations throughout the city for beverages, awards, and competitions, just as longest walking to work site, and best shoe bling. the hashtag for people is walk2work, with a "2" in the middle. we celebrate that san francisco is one of the most walkable cities, but encouraging people to walk for short times that they may otherwise make and other modes, we're -- as you know and as you'll see, particularly in item 12 today, we're making significant

investments in making our streets safer, so walk to workday is also a good opportunity for us to see some of those improvements and celebrate them. we'll be turning on a new signal in the south of market on thursday as part of the walk to workday activities, so hope to see you all there. shortly therefore is annual bike and roll to school week. the week of aprilth is bike 6 and roll to school week. if any of you are around schools for morning drop off and afternoon pick up, you can see why this is so important and how beneficial it would be to -- for school communities, the kids who go to the schools, parents of the folks who go to the schools, and the neighborhoods who go to the school. bike and roll to school week is really about trying to again, get kids and their families

acclimated to different ways to get to school that are more healthy, more fun, more sustainable. sfmta is a sponsor of different ways to get to school. we started that here, the city started that here in 2009, and this was an important part of our safe routes to school efforts, as well as the collaboration with the unified school district. and finally, bike to workday is a month out, and that's on may 10th, also a thursday. it's sponsored by the san francisco bicycle coalition. i'll give you an update on that as it gets closer, so lots of opportunities in the next month or so to celebrate ways to get around on your foot or on a bike. and then finally, madam chair, you want to speak to this, but today, chair brinkman and i had the opportunity to go down into

the chinatown station of central subway with mayor farrell and abililbert ho. chinatown station was the last to complete excavation. it's now complete. that puts one of the highest risk construction activities behind us, and the concretes trucks were already there, lined up on washington street, getting the concrete down into the station so we can start building it from the bottom up. we remain on a course to have revenue source open in december 2019, and it was just a great opportunity to be down there and see the progress firsthand. because i see the photos every week, and they just don't -- can't capture the magnitude of the space down there that before long will be a beautiful new muni subway station. so that concludes my report. i'll be happy to answer any

questions. >> thank you, director reiskin. i'll just second, that station, now you get a sense of what it's going to look like. the people coming down through that station and i am going to be so happy when the nakeds e neighborhoods are relieved of that construction, and the community gets to go down there and see what's down there. i know people will be amazed at how much is down there and how big the station is, and how big the tunnels are. so i'm so glad -- thank you for including me. i'm glad i had a chance to go down and see it. directors, any questions on the director's report? >> i'm just it's just a change for seniority, there's no financial implications of that change? >> there's no fiscal impact. >> thank you for clarifying

that. all right. do i have any public comment on the director's report? >> madam director, there's no speaker cards, and no one is coming forward. >> all right. we'll move on. >> item seven, i don't see mr. weaver here, so i'll skip the report. item 8, public comment. this is the opportunity for public to address the board on matters not on the agenda in the board's jurisdiction. would you like to set a limit? >> three minutes. >> all right. mahmood? >> on thursday, at the san francisco airport, gtu airport ground transportation, san francisco police, they raided

the taxis. the ones that were entering, they blocked them into one lot and not let anybody get in. they were holding 10, 15 taxis at a time and not letting them go anywhere, investigate their tires, their air, their -- smallest thing, where's your badge, where's your registration? no car can be there without registration and insurance. where's your this? where's your that. it scared the heck out of the public. they stayed there for six hours. and then, the only thing that was said, we're not working anymore, one company taxi. this is what your sfmta's sleeping, and when i talk to the airport, they say mta authorized us. you're unhappy, talk to mta. this is what we are going through. instead of --

[ inaudible ] >> and what is it -- you got a credit union case already against you. some other things are coming. what are you doing to save the taxis? are you going to sit down with us and work out or no? i don't understand that why you are lingering on this whole situation. [ inaudible ] >> -- and every time a report come back, mta tell them no, change this, change that. i say give me a copy of this. no, we're not disclosing. thank you. >> thank you, mr. mahmood. next speaker, please. >> carl, and then brian. >> hello, chairman brinkman and members of the board of directors and director reiskin. my name is brian no, and i handle communications for spin,

founded and based right here in san francisco. you may have seen or heard about spin's pamphlets around town, so i wanted to tell you what we're up to and address any questions that you might have. i had actually hoped to bring in one of the scooters that i had with me, but the security people kindly informed me that scooters are not allowed in the building. in less than a year since our very first city, which was seattle, we're now proud to be operating our dockless bike share system in over 50 markets here in the united states. none of this would have been possible had it not been working collaboratively with local governments and other stakeholders, and it's why our entire public policy team has government experience at all levels, including myself. and as we've grown, we've learned that different modes

suit different folks, which is why we've really worked hard to bring scooters as spin's next iteration of personal mobility. our responsibilities have been remaining transparent to the mta and other organizations. as our team finalized plans to pilot our scooters in the soma area, we reached out and met with the sustainable streets division about two months ago and shared our entire plans. we sought injections from them, and we made sure we addressed any concerns they had with their plans. we provided briefings to supervisor kim ease office to make sure they had no objections whatsoever. since we've been deployed small batches of our scooters two weeks, we've been providing regular updates, including our usage, trends and data. >> thank you very much. >> we look forward to working collaboratively with you in the

future. [ inaudible ] >> thank you. last week, the credit union lender for the medallion sales program filed a lawsuit against mta for five causes of action: breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty mandated by the code, negligent misrepresentation, and then, they asked for relief. they want $28 million plus. they wi they want you to buy back all the medallions. one of the things that the credit union says is that they go back to november of 2016, when you were supposed to put transportation code amendments before this board, it would revitalize that program and

include getting rid of the medallion program for corporate holders, but the corporations could buy up to 50 medallions each. they're close to 2,000. there might be ten corporations out there like google and ford and gm who would gladly pay $12.5 million who would have 50 san francisco medallions as an investment. i think that would be a way you can get off the hook against the claims you have right now. [ inaudible ] >> i think also there are other stakeholder groups who have been disadvantaged, including the disabled community, but the other 600 people who bought medallions, the individual driver's, they're all going to

have some kind of claim, they're going to have a claim against the credit union if the judge agrees, so i think it's time to put the amendments on the agenda please and do it. thanks. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> tom, and herbert, who's the last person to turn in a speaker card. >> opening day baseball search, entertainment. entertainment. so after the game, why do we pack them so tightly into the cars going downtown that if you're one or two stations over between embarcadero and the ballpark, you cannot board the train? so it's entertainment, and then, we stuff them so other people at other stops can't board them. happens every year. maybe it'll trickle down from

here, okay? my issue with more cars, more light rail, is to get more light rail, and then, i kind of have an idea that is a little funnel problem at west portal, maybe the embarcadero and the turnaround. what i understand from other driver's is there's a problem in the tunnel. when a train breaks down, we can't -- it delays everything, backs everything up. we're building new -- we're into new tunnels, so why not put a third or side track somewhere down there, and somewhere maybe at west portal so we can get more cars out. there's a dilemma. i understand we're in the hotel business or we're soon to be. i hope we do better there than

he with did with the taxi debacle. you all want to do something, but you don't do nothing -- or you do nothing. maybe that was a threat from the administration from above. i consider what happened at 19th avenue, you guys losing your way, and i'm hoping that there's more supervisor influence in this commission soon. thank you. >> thank you mr. gilberti. next speaker, please. >> herbert weiner. >> herbert weiner. i just noticed that a bus was removed off of gary. this is the 38 gary, and i felt outraged. i don't usually use that stop myself, but very infrequently, but i think of the cruelty that's being inflicted to the

seniors and the disabled in deference to the members of this board. it has been brought to your deaf ears several times, and you have nothing nothing to address this. it is war against the seniors and disabled who have less status than the bicyclists. if you were to remove a bike lane, there would probably be a riot in these chambers, but when you do it to the seniors and disabled, it's bullying, and you thrive on it. >> next speaker, please. >> madam chair, that's the last person. >> i see somebody coming up. one more. >> okay. >> i think board needs to have a reality check. we are like the jilted bride of the mta, the taxi division. you hate us. you don't spend any money.

you tell people that you're going to put some legislation in, but you don't. so i'm telling you, we are at the end of the road. i think mr. morrow did indicate the size of your financial liability, and that is another 600 medallions that you sold and were bought in good faith adding a few million dollars, at $250,000 a time. then, of course, you have the taxi companies that are going bankrupt, and then, you have a promise to including people like me that yes, you were going to be in business, and it was okay not to sell me

medallime -- my medallion because you were going to continue to support the taxi industry, but you have not. well, we have arrived at the end of the line, and you have two choices: do nothing, which is what you do, or come and talk to us and come up with a plan, any plan, that you will still have a taxi industry, because in a year's time, i don't think you are going to if you keep ongoing like this. i will leave a card here that possibly a member of the board or a p.a. or an assistant will talk to under the circumstans.s >> thank you. thank you. sorry, your time is up, sir. [ gavel ]. >> do i have anymore public speakers? no. seeing none, public comment is

clos closed. we'll move on. >> clerk: madam chair, this is the agenda calendar where everything is requested with one vote, but there is one to be severed. >> i will go ahead and ask for a motion to approve consend calendar with the exception of items 10-j and k. do i have a motion? >> second? >> let's call roll. all in favor? all opposed? let's go ahead and take item 10-j and k. >> they do have to do with establishing general parking limits on taraval at various locations. kristina, sam, and grace. >> thank you.

two minutes, please, miss boomer. >> good afternoon. my name is kristina mcgee, and i'm a resident on the south side of taraval between 43rd and 44th avenues. concerning this proposal, i would again like to voice my opposition. while the planning group asserts that these blocks are business oriented, that's not the case. my block has one business on either side -- [ inaudible ] >> i have some pictures, but this one business has its sales in the off hours. >> your pictures are up if you'd like to rotate them? >> oh, all right. >> there you go. >> this is one side, and the business in question ease 's o

left. there's the other block, with no businesses. >> okay. >> overall, this proposal would increase the ratio of parking spaces to businesses on parking lot like shore avenue. i would like to offer the following suggestions to augment parking. one, bifurcate parking on taraval by having transit downtown and a local bus. two enact residential parking on effective blocks. three, create diagonal parking on the portions of side streets where businesses that front both taraval and the side streets are, such as businesses on the corner of taraval and 44th. while i will not very discouraged if this measure passes, the sfmta should

perform analysis to determine the efficacy of this change. i hope it will take into account any data that the community provides. transit is important -- >> thank you. thank you. [ inaudible ] >> just as a clarifying question, which block are you referring to? it's tear val it's ta it's tear a -- taraval between -- >> 43 and 44th. >> i'm going to go fast because your time is valuable. in total, you have 36 residential buildings, eight stand-alone businesses, five businesses that are split with a business on the bottom, residential on top, and you have one residential building, a synagogue. the language they use in this proposal are these spaces have very little turn over. that's because it's a neighborhood. it's not a business park, okay?

you're not giving us residential permits as you do other places. why, i have no idea. you seem to prioritize the merchants over the residents which out weigh them on a massive ratio. between 46th and 47th, there's a lot of new businesses. they have chosen to do business in an area where there's all day parking. that's the location they've chose. you're telling me i have to walk farther to my house now? why can't customers walk further? the most laughable part of this is your solution. you talk about a proposal for angles parking on ulloa and santiago. it was rejected by a majority of 81% of residents. that's because residents don't like you messing with their parking. i can't see the future, but a measure that was denied by 81%

of respondents i don't think is going to do well. i've been politically active for most of my life. never felt my voice has been heard partly because it's all about the money. frankly, i think you get to make your voices heard. you get to do it under the guys of protecting local businesses, when in reality you're hurting everyone who lives there. if you can prove me wrong, i hope you do, but if you don't, not surprised, nothing more to say. >> ray scarza followed by herbert weiner. >> grace garza. i'm here to represent my hair salon. we always had ample parking, but due to all the growth in the -- in the area, which i am excited about some of the things that are going on. it's pretty cool, but we have a

lot of parking that's taken up by commuters all day long. i do understand that people have to move their cars also due to street cleaning, but it's making our clients and our elderly clients, it's harder for them to access us. they're doing the best they can, so i will hope that you can take into consideration approving it. in the spirit of cooperation, i was thinking that maybe 43rd and 44th doesn't have to have that. i don't think they have any businesses there, so i mean, i think it would be a blow to them. it would be really, healy hard fore them. so that's all i wanted to say. i hope you take it into consideration. our business has been down. i've lost clients, good clients, because they just can't deal. they have a hard time walking, and i understand that, too, because i have physical issues also, but that's all i want to say. thanks for listening. >> thank you, miss garza. next speaker, please.

>> herbert weiner is the last person to turn into a speaker card on this matter. >> herbert weiner. this is my own individual viewpoint. basically this is a fallout from twisted planning, from an ugly plan, and you've pitted residents and businesses against each other. and it places me on the horn for the dilemma. you know, i certainly -- i wasn't for this plan for the taraval street at all. i thought it was ill thought out, and i think it's done great harm. maybe what can be done, and i don't know how this is going to fly. maybe parking can be halftime limit and unlimited parking, so maybe both residents and businesses can get the benefit of both. it's not a great solution, but you have created this problem, and it was really an ugly, twisted plan that never should