years 70 new assigned people, meaning richmond district station is not going to ask for 70 more new officers. it may be they increase it by 5 or 10 or whatever. so, my concern is we are taking 70 senior officers off the streets of san francisco to the airport. no fault of the airport. so, i don't have a solution, but maybe the police department is aware of that already. >> right. i mean, we do -- what we do is, that's an excellent question. what we do is we look at, so, myself as the deputy chief of the airport and the deputy chief of operations, who oversees patrol and investigations, when we are timing out the transfer, we are looking across the year so we say all right, let's move these people in these groupings so that we don't create a sudden drain up in the district

stations and what events are going on during, throughout the time of the year, so we time it when we can move people, train them up into the airport because as you know, it takes a little training to then convert to san mateo county protocols, we map out how the transfers happen to mitigate that effect on the districts. and they are pulling from ten areas of the city and also from investigations and also from special operations, so that the impact can be spread out across the board, across the year and across the -- >> supervisor cohen: reality, it's not a decision you necessarily make, it's a decision the chief of police makes. we heard yesterday in the rules committee hearing, we talked about language access, and we did have some conversations around senior members of sfpd. heck, when i come off the board of supervisors i'm joining the

team, who does not want to go to the airport. so i completely understand. i think i have -- kathy, carry my message. oh, there he is, ok. so, but, so, i echo the concerns, too. we don't want all of our rich resource knowledge base going out to the airport and i'm not implying that they are hanging out, the airport is very high stress area as well, they are not going to chill, right? >> that is quite true. they are not there to chill. >> supervisor cohen: but you do understand our concern, we represent different neighborhoods, different environments and we also want the benefit of the senior members of the police department to be out on the streets, to be patrolling, in my mind, senior members would know how to handle tense situations in a more efficient manner than some of the new rookies, naturally, like the rookies on my board.

and a rookie over here. they look to us veterans to show them how to hold it down and how to do it, it's just natural. i was a rookie once, you were a rookie once, and you just keep at it. i'm sure you can understand our concern. i understand completely what you are saying supervisor yee, but unfortunately, i don't know if we can address it in the budget but probably can begin to address it in our discussions with the chief as well as maybe through the police commission which is the poll at this authority for the commission. thank you. >> and if you could keep in mind the same process that brings officers down to the airport also returns officers back to the city. so, our officers get notified that their opportunity to transfer back up to the city comes up, and some take advantage and move back to work in the city. so, there is an ebb and flow of experience that comes back and forth. >> supervisor cohen: thank you very much. any other questions? all right.

>> supervisor fewer: you know, i -- so, deputy chief, not about you, personally, but i do have sort of this question about why a deputy chief is needed out at the airport when you have a commander. i just think that why would we have a, you know, a deputy chief out at the airport. i just think the command staff is pretty heavy out there, and i know that you are the deputy chief out there, so i know this is a very awkward conversation. but just why would we need a deputy chief out there? seems you already have a commander, you have captain, you have a lot of lieutenants and you are adding lieutenants on and also a lot of sergeants. so, why would we need a deputy chief out there? >> so, the deputy chief meets first with the airport director and also the director of

operations and security facilities and also the senior staff to make sure the mission is carried out but the three separate bureaus. also meets with the sheriff and the police association members regularly to make sure the county policies we meet the obligations, that they don't infringe on san francisco policies and police department policies specifically. we, we serve to ensure that the federal agencies that are out there keep, that the police department operates in the guidelines of how the federal agencies operate, that the -- that where we come up against each other follows the policies of the city and county of san francisco and the police department. and it's a very, very busy place, you know. 65 million budget to manage, all the materials, the training, the management of personnel.

the commander position meets regularly with the captain, and reports up. the deputy chief meets with the budget director and the fiscal side of the airport to make sure that all stays in line. so, there's a lot of functions the technology division of the airport, pretty much falls directly under the deputy chief and we meet with the airport technology side. so, there is a lot of administrative function that goes into the task, and there's a lot of investigative patrol and traffic investigation and special operations that falls mostly to the commander through his captains. >> supervisor fewer: ok. you are telling me it's more of a high level administrative coordination and oversight of the airport and something that a commander can't do. >> it's the -- it's the 3, 5, 10-year planning position for the police department at the airport.

how do the changes at the airport industries, having to carry out all the projects they have going, the capital improvement projects, building of the airport hotel, the expansion of the air train, all of these long-term capital improvement projects or construction projects, retail projects, how those are going to impact the demands on the police department and then part of my job to convey that to the chief of the police through my assistant chief and make sure the chief of police is aware of what the priorities are down at the airport. and what opportunities there are to partner with the airport to make sure the city does not bear an unfair share of that expense. >> supervisor fewer: ok. thank you. >> you are welcome. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. deputy chief, i have a question for you. just over here, though. over here, a side bar. so, at this time we have heard the b.l.a. presentation and i would like to make a motion to -- wait, we have to take

public comment. public comment on items 1, 2, and 3? public comment is closed. thank you. i would like to make a motion to accept the recommendations from the budget legislative analysts. is there a motion? motion made by supervisor yee, take that without objection. thank you. excuse me, i would like to table item 1 and continue items 2 and 3 to the call of the chair, my apologies. >> supervisor yee: are we going to call other departments before performing that function? >> supervisor cohen: good idea, absolutely. my notes are hard for me to understand this morning. yes. we need to hear from the port. rescind the vote. we'll do that unanimously. thank you. port of san francisco. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is katy patricione,

deputy director of finance for the port, here on behalf of our executive director, elaine forbes. i would like to say that the port is in agreement with the budget and legislative analyst's recommendations about our budget. i would like to thank mr. rose, ms. campbell and mr. hulliber for their time and attention to the budget this year. happy to answer questions. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. colleagues, do you have any questions? we have one. before you ask that question, i want to give some port highlights. 30% of the budget, 30% budget increase in year 1 and 15% decrease in year two, minimal f.t.e. growth, like what, .87, and that has to do with -- >> annualization of prior year positions. >> supervisor cohen: the budget is really driven by the seawall and ferry capital projects.

so, both very important infrastructures that our city needs. go ahead, supervisor, and then hear from the b.l.a. shortly. >> supervisor fewer: i want to know if you have plans for expansion in work force programs. >> work force development programs? in particular, we are very conscious of the fact the seawall program, knock on wood, is going to launch with i hope approval of a general obligation bond this november. and that that is going to be a very large opportunity for us in terms of work force development. we are very committed to developing a program, probably in partnership with the office of economic and work force development that really does, i hope, focus on locating and training folks from low income communities in the city and really funneling them into what

are going to be a good number of high paying construction jobs when that program really does launch. >> supervisor fewer: ok. thanks. because actually, i am looking in the fiscal budget about work force development and how we can get more people actually to work and in the city department. so, thank you very much. >> supervisor cohen: seeing there are no other questions at this time, katy, we are going to go ahead and hear from the b.l.a. >> yes, madam chair and members of the committee. on page 29 of our report, recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 581,336 in 2018-19, and of that amount, 270228 are ongoing savings and 311108 are one-time savings. still allow an increase of

40.5 million, 40,571,055, or 30.5% in the 18-19 budget. recommended reductions total 576,483 in 19-20, and that amount, ongoing savings, and 1831350 are savings, and does concur with the recommended reduction, shown on pages 30 through 33. >> supervisor cohen: i have a question about the programmatic cuts. what was the process that you went through to determine which programs you were going to be taking from? >> collaboration with the port, understanding where they had some excess capacity. >> supervisor cohen: and done to control growth? >> that's -- yes. >> supervisor cohen: ok, all right. >> also, supervisor, we base it

on prior experience as well. and projected expenditures. >> supervisor cohen: i know, that's what makes you so wonderful, prior experience. you are the best. all right. that's good. so, i appreciate that. colleagues, do you have any questions, anything about the problematic cuts or the port budget? all right, thank you. we will continue moving forward. san francisco library. >> madam chair, may i call the associated item? >> supervisor cohen: yes, you may. call item 4. >> clerk: resolution authorizing the san francisco public library to accept the grant in the amount of $813,350 of in-kind gifts, services and cash monies, from direct support for a variety of public programs and services in fiscal years 2018-19. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. welcome. yes. >> good morning, chair cohen, supervisors. thank you again for the opportunity to present the

library's fy-19-20 budget last week. finalized the reductions with the board's analysts and we are in full agreement with their recommendations. i would like to thank the board's analyst, hampton smith, sefrin campbell and menard for the time and help. and jillian johnson and kelly kirkpatrick from the mayor's budget office for your guidance, and special thanks to the controller's office for your ongoing support. maureen singleton and i are here today and more than happy to answer any questions you may have. [please stand by for captioner change].

-- ongoing savings. $300,000 one-time savings. reductions would further reduce the planned decrease of its 1920 budget to the a decrease of $9,508,737 or 6% in the 19-20 budget. as i understand it, the department does concur with our reductions shown on pages 37 and

38 of our report. >> supervisor cohen: so the savings include capital expenditures and savings? >> that's right. >> supervisor cohen: and savings from retirement and lower freight delivery and licensing fees. >> correct. >> supervisor cohen: last week we talked about rfid. it was a spirited conversation, if you will. do you want to make a presentation about it? >> i can certainly offer some additional remarks. let me first state that the only risk or way a patron's borrowing habits could be compromised is through unauthorized access to a secure staff database. rfid has no bearing on that risk. that risk appears today. we do have safeguards in place that would mitigate that from happening. with regards to rfid, our

intended use is from direction of american libraries association office of intellectual freedom and national information standards organization. our privacy policy governs our use of rfid technology. we have a plan to use a passive rfid tag. this will entail not placing an rfid tag on a library card. there would be no patron information stored on an rfid tag or any bibliographic information. the author or subject of a given book would not be stored on an rfid tag. all that would be on that tag is a series of numbers that is plainly visible on every item in our collection on the bar code sticker. i stand by my earlier statement that there is no risk whatsoever to patron privacy. >> supervisor cohen: okay. supervisor fewer. >> supervisor fewer: i wanted to mention that after last week's

conversation with rfid, i met with mr. lantern and i feel very comfortable in approving the recommendation for that expediture. and i also just wanted to say that we had a conversation about if we should be building some affordable housing above our libraries that are to be renovated in a short period of time. we think it with probably be good use of public land. thank you. >> thank you. >> supervisor cohen: any other questions for this gentleman? thank you. we appreciate your presentation and clarity. >> thank you. >> supervisor cohen: however, i still think the conversation will rage on about rfid. >> okay. [laughter] >> supervisor cohen: m.t.a. >> madam chair, i was wondering if you want to do that based on what you did at the airport and also at the port. i don't think the committee -- >> supervisor cohen: took office. >> as to whether or not you accept our recommendations.

>> supervisor cohen: you are right. i realized that and was going to come back to it. let's go ahead and complete item 4 and then take action on -- >> madam chair, i'm sorry to interrupt. should we also speak to the accept and expend for the friends and foundation? >> supervisor cohen: sure. the $813,000. >> thank you. the resolution before you today would authorize the library to accept and extend up to $813,350 of cash and in-kind contributions from the friends and foundation of the san francisco public library. this amounts to an 8% increase over last year's gift and we're extremely fortunate to have such robust support from our friends at the library. these funds allow us to enhance the level of service we're able to provide to the community and it funds popular programs like our open house events the a at neighborhood branches, summer stride, our one city-one book program, and innovative initiatives like science bio

blitzes. we appreciate the partnership with the friends and we appreciate your consideration of this grant award and i'm available to answer any questions you have about that as well. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. i don't think there's any questions about the grant. it's pretty straightforward. donations are cash and in-kind gifts. colleagues, am i wrong in my assumption? okay. looks like we're okay. just so there is clarity for the men and women in the chamber, items 1-3 will remain open. we'll take the b.l.a. recommendations as each department comes before us, but item 4 we're going to take action and take public comment on. since there are no other questions, why don't we take public comment on item 4. please come on up. >> excuse me, i'm not clear. are we doing 1, 2 and 3? >> supervisor cohen: no, we're not. 1, 2, and 3 are remaining open. and we're taking action on item 4. >> deputy city attorney john

gibner. i believe the committee opened public comment on items 1, 2, and 3 after the airport presentation but before taking any action. so now you are taking public comment on item 4 and the additional items on the agenda as you go through the day, bun, -- but 1, 2, and 3 have received public comment. >> supervisor cohen: it's open. maybe i should make a motion to reopen it. >> if there are people that missed the public comment call, committee could reopen public comment and take public comment on 1, 2, and 3 as well as number 4 now. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> i understood that you did public comment on that department and then went on to the next department and that the action on items 1, 2, and 3 related to the first department that you heard. i certainly would like to make public comment on 1, 2, and 3 and the acting city librarian has just given you an extensive

description of what his thoughts are on items 1, 2, and 3. i think that merits public comment, separate from item 4. >> supervisor cohen: back up. so for items 1, 2 and 3, we haven't heard the full -- i'm going to keep it open. there will be an opportunity for you to take -- for us to take comment on items 1, 2, and 3. >> today? >> supervisor cohen: yes, of course. what i would like to do is complete item 4 and take public comment on item 4 at this time. if you would like to speak on item 4 -- >> i think that the committee should take a very close look at what the library is not only taking supposedly from the friends but in particular what is being provided to the friends in a whole range of benefits that are not mentioned and invisible. so the first thing is, we've

repeatedly found that the friends are keeping some 90% of what they take in and giving the library 10% or less. that certainly was true in the past and there's a whole range of things that the friends are giving -- supposedly giving. for example, at the library, it's shown as a $9,000 donation, but it's a gigantic advertising piece for the friends that they get exclusive use of and extensive use of in that publication. they get to have a bookstore for $1 a year in the main entrance of the main library as the first things that you see. and it contradicts the library slogan of "free and equal access." the friends get to essentially sell library assets for selected donors at various levels. so the naming of rooms, and the

naming of bookshelves, the placement of bricks on a revamped library. there's a whole range in essentially they're selling off the public good. and i would certainly be concerned with the friends -- some other ways in which they use funding and it's not visible. we know that the fppc in sacramento found the library in violation of open government law with respect to the prior reporting and luis herrera did not follow the law and had to sign a stipulation that he had violated the law for three years in a row by claiming that he had gotten nothing in the way of donations from the friends. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you for sharing your perspective. next speaker, please. >> members of the board of supervisors, ray hart, director of san francisco open government. and can i get this to work? >> supervisor cohen: sfgov tv,

overhead, please. >> and could i get my time back while we're waiting for -- can i get the 30 seconds i've lost waiting for that? politics author frank hubbard says that politics is the art of appearing candid and completely open while concealing as much as possible. you have seen something similar to this, the friends and family grant. and they will come in and say, we want to get $820,000. this is what they do.

they put other people's money, the designated donors, as an inclusion as if it's from the friends. what the friends in this particular year gave was $410,000. this from the website charity navigator, the numbers were provided by the friends to this website and they tout its wonderful thing. if you look at what they spent during the same year, $4 million. so when you were a citizen of san francisco and you go to the library's website and there's a link directly from the city department website to the friends, you think your money is going to the library and only 10% or less is actually going to support the library. 90% of it doesn't go anywhere. i've gone to the library commission meetings and said, this is a fraud, this is a scam, and they don't bother -- and i said, if you can prove i'm wrong, i would think you would want to shut me up by proving

him wrong and they never do. and the bottom line is, mr. warfield previously stated, we took the former city librarian to the fbbc in sacramento because for three consecutive years, he filed his statement of economic interest saying he got nothing from the friends and the fbbc after investigation ruled he was getting $5,000 a year of stuff he was supposed to be reporting and failed to report. so basically, this whole thing is a scam the citizens give the money thinking that it's going to the library and 90% of it. >> supervisor cohen: next speaker for item 4. >> good morning. my name is carol simmons and i'm a san francisco resident and a former library director in the bay area. i'm speaking to congratulate the friends and the library on their wonderful partnership. i have to tell you that as a

former director in daly city that the san francisco friends and foundation has been a model for us in how to create a successful partnership between the library and the city. and so when we were forming our foundation in daly city, we turned to san francisco friends and foundation for advice and for mentorship. and they were extremely gracious in giving both to us and have helped us as we've come along and really raised some money for the daly city library. so i did want to congratulations the friends and family for this wonderful donation to the library and celebrate the partnership. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. >> good morning. i'm maria sapella, executive director for friends foundation of the library.

we're happy to be here. we've been a backbone and partner that allows the community to support its library. we do more than this gifrt -- gift to the library. the interpretation that you just heard is not correct. all of our audits and annual reports are on our website. half of our budget is in our book program. and so it's pretty much a neutral, sometimes profitable program of our book selling, which is a community organization of our own and we have our philanthropic piece and we're a very big advocate for the community. much of what we do is make sure that the library preservation fund is maintained, that can be renewed and that the library has a very strong public base. i will just invite you to continue to look at the numbers. they mean different things to different people and can be interpreted in many ways. when you look at the breakdown of restricted and unrestricted

funds, the restricted funds that are being referred to are funds that we -- we manage five endowments on top of the restricted amount. there is management of these assets that are managed and released in a way that's strategic to the library. once again, we're happy to give this money and continue to be the community's advocate for probably the best library system in the country. thank you so much. >> supervisor cohen: any other member of the public that would like to share their ideas or comments? seeing none, item 4 is closed. colleagues, can we take action on this item? may we move with a positive recommendation? >> yes. >> supervisor cohen: all right. we'll move with a positive recommendation. mr. clerk, i want to -- i'd like to clarify to the public that item -- and would i like to take public comment on items 1, 2,

and 3. public comment for items 1, 2, and 3 are open. yes, we're reopening it. >> again, ray hart, director san francisco open government and i'm talking about the budget of the library. i have 36 orders of determination finding violations of the sunshine ordinance, which are violations of either the brown act or california public records act. a dozen of those are the library either trying to keep me from getting public records to substantiate the phrases. the previous speakers -- i presented statistics and documents and they say, it's a wonderful relationship. i will tell you what's happened in the library. i've been going for 10 years now and the friends never show up at that meeting anymore. they used to show up and show of those false numbers saying, we're giving $700,000, $800,000, hiding that the money was coming from other people and they're

taking credit for it. they never show numbers and they have access to all the numbers. one of the things that is hard to to try to get the library to take any responsibility for the financial arrangement. they're supposed to look out for the benefit of the library and yet they know absolutely nothing about where this money goes and how it's spent and they've stopped talking about the friends at the public library commission meetings because they can't prove me wrong. bottom line is, in all the people over here in the controller's department, etc., you know that if somebody walks up with numbers and statistics that are actually from a public source and they're confronted -- and the only response they get is, oh, we do wonderful things. and we have all this. we have all that. if they could have proved me wrong, they would have done it to shut me up years ago. and they can't because i'm right. 10% of the money they raise goes to the library. 90% of it is questionable where

it goes. and by now, the friends or the library, if they could, would have shown that i'm wrong and instead what they do is actively scam the public. >> supervisor cohen: next speaker. again, this is for items 1-3. if you would like to comment on any of the budgets for the -- regarding the airport, the port, the library, m.t.a., environment, building inspections or public utilities commission, now is the time. >> thank you, chairman, and supervisors. i'm carol simmons, san francisco resident and former library director in the bay area. and i would like to speak in support of the library's budget request and in particular in support of the implementation of rfid technology. having read the article in the paper last week, i think there's an unfounded fear of privacy

violations. and so i wanted to speak to a little bit of our experience down on the peninsula in implementing rfid beginning in 2009. so i have touched base with my colleagues down there to see if there has been any concerns or any reports of privacy violations and there have not. and as acting city librarian michael lambert said, it's because of the way that libraries implement rfid technology. they only use -- there are many types of rfid chips and labels and they're used in many industries, including retail and shipping. but the tags that are used by libraries are for inventory control only and they're used in order to increase efficiency of operations. they've only two elements on them. the bar code is through a reader and interfaces with the system. when you check an item out, the security toggle is set to off, so you can walk out of the item

with what you have checked out. when it's checked back in, the reverse takes place. the security toggle is on and libraries use that to prevent theft. but i just wanted to say that rfid in libraries is industry standard and it also really increases the efficiency of the automated handling system, which is -- allows you to check out and check in large amounts of items and have them fed more quickly through the redistribution process either into patron hands or on the shelves. one of the other things that's really important about rfid is it prevents repetitive motion injuries to staff. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you. next speaker, please. >> madam chair cohen, supervisors fewer, stefani, yee, thank you for the opportunity to

speak before you. i'm joseph bryant. i'm the regional vice president of sciu 10-1. we're here to speak on a particular issue that we're facing and it pertains to some of our employees within the sfmta. i think we've made all of you aware of this issue in regards to the school crossing guards, you know, school crossing guards provide essential services to ensure that kids can get to school safely and on time and so forth. with this position, a number of these folks just faced challenges in terms of the way that their employment is structures, essentially short hours that don't allow them to reach the levels where they can benefit from pension, healthcare and so forth. so we're asking with this budget, the $1.2 billion budget within the sfmta, to consider

correcting this problem of our school crossing guards to allow them to live and prosper in the city and county of san francisco. sfmta is a department we've worked mutually with on many issues and been able to resolve many of these. we also feel this is of mutual benefit to resolve the sfmta has referenced challenges in terms of retention of employees and so forth. from our perspective in regards to the workers that are dealing with it and struggling to stay on with that, but we ask through this process is we try to correct this issue. again, we feel it's mutually beneficial for the department, for the workers, that we give those an opportunity to prosper in the city and county of san francisco. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, chair and supervisors on the budget committee.

i'm michael weinberg, political organizer sciu 10-1, and i'm speaking to you about the crossing guards as well. we've been to you before. we've been attempting to raise the issue with the mta and they've been unable to address any of the issues. so we're asking you to address the issues so that not only these workers can be treated appropriately, but that the service is provided in a safe and fair manner. we know that crossing guards provide a valuable service that is very popular service in the city. the way the program is management now, it's not fair to either the taxpayers or the employees who are being mistreated and given poor opportunities to provide services and the department

spends an inordinant amount of money doing constant recruitments because of the low wages and compensation and hours. and those are things that need to be addressed. got copies of the m.t.a. presentation on the crossing guard program, where they identify all of these issues and challenges with the program and yet are refusing to address. so i have these issues here for you to take a look at. so we're asking for your assistance in giving guidance and direction to the m.t.a. to meet with us to work on addressing these issues this year, right now. thank you very much. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. mr. clerk, could you grab the -- >> clerk: yes. please leave it in the box and we'll pick it up. >> hello. i'm mary midonord.

i'm working as a crossing guard and i'm speaking up for them. i've been there for -- since 2014 to now. let me tell you something, it's really, really dangerous to work in that place. i work and cesar chavez and harrison and sometimes the cars don't pay attention and the kids have to run away the other way on the street and it's very, very scary because sometimes we can get hit and nobody looks like anybody cares about us. and also they don't appreciate us. they just don't appreciate us. so, i don't know. >> supervisor cohen: is that it? >> yes. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. you are appreciated. >> thank you. >> hello, good morning, members of the board.

i'm hector cardenos, union representative for sfmta and paramedics. the sfmta presented the difficulties for recruitment and retention for school crossing guard program, illustrating the high turnover rate of employees performing this important work of getting children, disabled, elderly and general public across the streets of san francisco safely before and after school. we believe this is because the school crossing guard job is hardly treated as a real job by the city. currently, it's a temporary exempt job without grievance procedure. it is the lowest paid and no benefits for a job requiring putting one's self in harm on the streets of san francisco. the sfmta has refused to meet twice to adequately address the

issues along with the request to review the equipment provided for the job. when asked for a review on proper care resistant rain gear, the sfmta provided the following response. "sfmta has issued 90% of the protected rain gear and access listed in your draft proposal to the sustainable streets division. unfortunately, we cannot entertain any new proposals at this time. you are encouraged to address this during contract negotiations in 2019." please put that money in the budget, so we can negotiate to make it a proper position for the city and county. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. good morning. my name is reese isbel, regular library user. and would i like to speak to the rfid issue. and i regularly check out

graphic novels. i check out a lot, actually. and along with other books that i check out. and, as you can see, you can check out a lot when you go to the library with your library card, which is great. part of what our rfid does is allows -- as you know, when you check out a book, you have your library card. you put it under the scanner. and then you scan each one. this is for librarians as well as the public, like me. and it takes several seconds and several amounts of time. the difference with rfid is, you just put them in the block and it goes ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. you don't have to go through the separate scannings. that's very important for large amounts of borrowing. and it sounds small but it

actually adds up to 12,000 to 15,000 hours or the work of six to seven full time employees annually. so that's quite a big deal. it also assists them and our community members using the self-serve with issues with the continual use of this, as well as when you check out an audio visual or a cd, the rfid will tell you if it's already in the case or not. you don't have to open it and then close it to check. so there's a number of benefits with rfid. and i would encourage you to support it. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm karen strauss. i'm the past chief of the main library at san francisco public

library and i'm here in support of the proposal for implementing rfid at the library from the perspective of protecting our investment and our collections over the more than 125 years of the existence of the san francisco public library tens and hundreds of millions of dollars has been provided to build up a glorious collection of materials and books and video and other formats and one of the things that rfid does in addition to the benefits you've heard about, it provides much better access to the collection for staff and patrons alike in terms of being able to find things. and one of the difficulties of a system as ours is so large and spread around so many locations in our city is that things -- things are not always exactly where we think they are at any

given time for a host of very legitimate reasons. and so rfid, in addition to all these other benefits you've heard about, is inventory control, which is no small issue when we talk about the $10 million every year that the library devotes to enhancing and improving the collection for all of san franciscans. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> madam chair and members. my name is bob finebaum. i'm chair of save muni. and i suspect, madam chair, that you will hold a comment period after the m.t.a. budget as well, is that correct? >> supervisor cohen: no, that's not correct. now is your time to talk about the m.t.a. budget. thank you. >> thank you. two things. first of all, we've submitted a statement. i will submit a written copy for you today, which should be in your packet, where we're asking you to reject the m.t.a. budget

and send it back for further work. today you will hear a report from the budget analyst on every department other than the m.t.a. i understand the m.t.a. decision you have to make is to vote for it or to reject it. but that does not excuse the fact that you need information that can appropriate i will be given by a budget analysis. we call upon you to not take action on the m.t.a. budget today but to ask the budget analyst to do a thorough analysis, focusing specifically on the additional personnel, additional budget, that is being asked for by the m.t.a. and whether those services cannot be provided within the existing budget as it is few constituted.

so we think that the m.t.a. budget should be rejected. we think it needs more work. and we think that the process by which it was adopted at the m.t.a. board is very flawed and we would commend to you to use your extraordinary powers to reject the budget and i would like to give the clerk a copy of our statement. >> supervisor cohen: please. you can put it in the box here and we'll collect it and make sure it's reflected in the file. is there another speaker? >> good morning. i'm gregory williams. i came in here yesterday. and i indicated your unprofessionalism as councilmembers and you will be terminated. now i have a question. it is in regards to the indications that are being discussed now.

is it in general or is it one specific category we're discussing at this time? >> supervisor cohen: it's public comment at this time. >> okay. again, what i identify on your paperwork, which is proposed that it must be reviewed because there is so much excessive financial means that is being futilely spent and it goes to the question where we don't see any change, where the actual financial stability to the specific category doesn't provide any change. so where is the funding going? and whom, one of you, are allowing this excessive funding? i'm the beneficiary. i own this wealth. what are you doing with the financial means -- education, libraries, law enforcement? what else? where is the funding going? because we shouldn't be continuing over and over talking

about the same concept in the proposals. and when we got to overreview the proposals because some of them don't make sense. you are utilizing futile spending form things that we don't see betterment or advancements. so it's important that we understand what we intend to do. i will be sitting in that chair i am the chair. so hopefully before the day is over, constituents will rise and escort you out of this building. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm peter warfield, executive director of library users association and we strongly oppose and join with others in opposing if i funding whatsoever for rfid.

when the library says there's no risk to patron privacy, that's them saying it. and conditionally, they're basically saying no risk to access to the database because without that, you can't tell what the title is. the first issue is, there's authorized access very much available from one of the prime people that people are concerned about with privacy and that is the government. the government with subpoenas or through the patriot act can get at that library database with no problem whatsoever. but it isn't even required to have access to the database to provide privacy threats. who said it's perfectly safe? the library. the aclu and electronic frontier foundation have centers will to luis herrera. i've provided copies of those in

which they say, oppose and continue to oppose rfid use in libraries because of its privacy and free speech concerns. also an early study, which i've also provided the supervisors said, current conventional wisdom suggests that privacy risks negligible unless there is access to library databases. we show that's not the case. there are books about this problem. spy chips, how major corporations and government plan to track your every move with rfid. it's a serious privacy threat. it has many other functional problems, expenses. you can get fines and fees for years with the cost of this. >> good morning, supervisors.

my name is bill calledman, first floor manager at the main library and sciu 10-21, having worked in two other libraries that utilize rfid, i can tell that you it covers greatly increased efficiency. it frees staff from the routine process of checking in and out materials, affording them to do what they're there for -- serve the public. despite what other commenters continue to report there, is no increas increased privacy exposure. of i've talked to berkeley public library and contra costa library who are in position to know about privacy concerns and they state there has been no concerns of patron privacy in regards to rfid.

we're in a position to replace the technology we have in the library that we already have regardless if we implement rfid. the example i would give you. if you had an 8 track player in your car and it broke down, you probably with not replace it with an 8 track player. you would upgrade your technology, which is exactly what we're doing with this project. i appreciate your time. >> supervisor cohen: any other members of the public that would like to comment on 1-3 or the department budgets, airport, library, mta, inspections or puc. seeing none -- no, no. you have made your public comment. public comment is closed. all right. public comment is closed for items 1-3, however these items will remain open. now i would like to call items 5

and 6 together, so we can hear that. we're going to hear from m.t.a. >> item 5 is a transfer up to $4 million to the general fund for overpayment and duplicate payments to the city for parking and transit violations between january 1, 1994, june 30, 2016. item 6 is a resolution authorizing substitution of a letter of credit offered by sumitomo mitsui acting through its new york branch not to exceed $100 million to support the municipal transportation agency commercial paper program. >> supervisor cohen: last week the issue of crossing guards was raised by supervisor sheehy, who is out today. i don't know if there's an

appetite on this body to hear your update. so maybe you can make it brief. the other thing i want to remind you is that the issue of taxi medallion strategies was also raised and perhaps you can weave some information into your presentation. but the rest i give the floor to you. thank you. >> thank you, madam chair, members of the committee. ed briskin, director of transportation. with regard to the budget items, i appreciate the feedback that we got from you last week. i think it was four of the five of you, including supervisor sheehy, that had indicated some interest in us doing more with regard to crossing guards. to remind you of the context, large part of our capital budget is directed towards investing in physical changes in our streets to make them safer. a lot of them are targeted on the high injury network on the city and a lot of those school

locations and other areas where we have vulnerable populations. we, moreover, do extra work at some of the areas in the yellow crosswalks that we do at schools, lower speed limits. we have an engineering program where we have an engineer dedicated to working with schools to put further improvements in play and we recently assumed management of the safe routes to school program. so we are, as you, very focused on assuring performance and safe passage to and from schools and other such facilities. the crossing guards are really one part of that. and certainly an important part of that. as i indicated to you last week, we are proposing to increase from 195 to 215 crossing guards. and that would allow us to fulfill all of the outstanding requests that we have for crossing guards. and changes that we have made

recently to how we recruit crossing guards means it has brought us to the point where we're at the highest staffing levels, i believe, that we've ever had. nevertheless, i did hear from many of you last week that you would like to see us go beyond that. so what i sent to you yesterday is a proposal for the further increase at the level of $150,000 that would allow us to do a menu of things. it could be up to 10 additional crossing guards. it could be for other services that support our safe routes to school and safe routes to seniors program. and that was really -- it was the spirit of some of what i heard from you last week, particularly supervisor sheehy's comments, in that he would like us to have funds available to fulfill any additional requests for crossing guards, if needed, but not to lock up those funds such that they could not otherwise be used. so this proposal, which i have

confirmed support for from my board chair and vice chair, would give us the flexibility to either add more crossing guards, if there are more requests than we currently have, that it would make sense for us to fulfill, or to flex those funds for other school-supported activities. that's what the add -- additional proposal with crossing guards. with the taxes and tncs, we would have an opportunity to get into that in detail at the hearing, supervisor cohen, that you called for in july. we have released a study that was commissioned last year by us to take a look at the issues that you've raised in the past and that you raised somewhat with the airport in terms of the situation with taxis relative to

tncs and we're taking comment and feedback from the taxi industry. it's certainly available for public comment as well. from that, we will be making our recommendations for steps to take moving forward and we will use the hearing that out all have proposed holding as one of the essentially public hearings for that process and a way to vet community feedback as well as to vet any recommendations that we come forward with. so those are the budget items on items 5 and 6. item 5 is the result of a state law requirement that we -- for any overpayments that we have for parking citations, that we make known those overpayments and try to seek return of those funds to those who have overpaid for whatever reason. people do apparently overpay