the resources available when the person needs it and wants to reach out. i think we have done a better job over the years instead of being reactive. often time it's was a very informal way. hey chief, or firefighter so and so, please give someone call, he is struggling. he is having a marital problem, a substance abuse problem, he is having a hard time with the call we just responded to. that happens and it happens very productively, but to your point, representative cleveland, we recognize it whether people want it or not. in there's a traumatic scene, we automatically send a team out for debriefing. the natural response for people who do what we do is okay, i'm fine, and we move onto the next call. we have formalized that well, i think, over the last few years. certainly, i will commit to

working towards taking a look at what we have and seeing what we can do to rework it, or add to it, and i'll have to put a team together, but i'm confident we can do so. and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, chief. commissioner covington, did you want to say something? or did you want to go to commissioner hardeman. i see your name was up there first. >> yes, that's before commissioner hardeman chimed in. i think this is a very valuable discussion that we are having. and i think we are moving in the right direction. the chief needs input. she needs input from, you know, a variety of sources and a variety of people.

she perhaps will need continued direction from you as well. they all had commissioners involved and still have commissioners involved, as well as people at various ranks within the department. and i think that's a valuable thing. we really have to make sure that people feel included in this process. that all of this doesn't have to come out of the chief's head. that there is a meeting of the minds, as to how best to proceed. so i think we are on the right track. >> it's a collaborative process. >> yes, definitely. >> commissioner hardeman? >> yes, thank you, mr. president. commissioner alioto veronese, i'm just really surprised hearing the names involved

helping you draft this, they want to hire a medical doctor, specializing in treatment of mental illness to be a full time employee of the fire department. i don't understand it. if you are saying drug addiction is a mental illness, which it's not, it's an addiction, some people may refer to it, but i think that is pushing it too over the edge. i just don't understand that. is that a group decision? who -- without naming anyone's name but how did that surface? it shocks me. >> would you like me to respond? >> yeah, how did that come about? >> there are departments that have looked to the assistant of

different types of physicians to form their units. some departments actually have some within their units. i'm not saying that we need one. that's not what this says. and so, it's very clear to me that the language and the format of this document is misleading people on this commission. because that's not what this document says. this document says, what this document really says, is there are experts out there who know more about addiction, that know more about suicide, that know more about the effects, the symptoms of p.t.s.d., more than yourself, myself, we're not experts at this. the point of this document is who are those experts? identify those experts. give them the input. essentially create the working group that commissioner covington was talking about. and maybe that's why this document should be more clear.

because the document is more of an instruction to create a working group, figure out who the experts should be and tell the commission at the end of the day what that unit looks like so we could make it a part of a budgeting process going forward. so i apologize for misleading you. this document doesn't say in it that we need a full time employee that's a physician, i don't know that's appropriate at all. i don't have the expertise in this genre to know whether or not that's true. it may be true. it may not be true. i don't have those expertise. i'm sorry i mislead you to think somebody in some group i talked to said we absolutely needed that. no, that's not true. but we should be consulting the experts in this area that are doctors. and frankly, you may believe that drug addiction is not a symptom of mental illness. i don't believe that.

in some circumstances. that's why these conversations are important. right, commissioner? with all due respect, this is an amazing conversation because there are commissions and departments all over this world that are not having this conversation. so if we don't vote on this tonight, in my mind we have made progress, because we are talking about issues. if you talk to people who actually had addictions within this department, you may find those addictions have something to do with some p.t.s.d. injury they have had. and as a result of that, once we have people that are looking at this issue, commissioner, we may find that the alcoholism, or the pill addiction, or the oxycontin addiction, or whatever addiction may exist with any particular member of

the department, right, some people prefer to go to third parties to talk to people. some people will only talk to people that are firefighters. some cops will only talk to people who are cops because they fully understand them, right? some people like to be more anonymous. some people will turn to alcoholism, pills and other addictions. right? and all of that is more than you and i could ever understand. but this document is basically asking us, is asking the chief, which is really the only thing we could do. our authority, the public should know this. if you are watching at home, the commission's authority, does not go beyond the chief. we cannot tell any of the members of the command staff what to do, when to do it. the chief is the chief of the department. she runs this department. we set policy for this department. and so what i'm trying to do is set a policy this is an issue that is important to us, we would like the chief to look into it.

this is something that needs to be explored and nobody is talking about it. they are starting to talk about it. and we're talking about it now. but i think that when the report comes back to us, once we have a model that the commission will accept, and the report comes back to us a year from now, or six months from now, or whatever it is, i think we will all be surprised what the state-of-the-art unit looks like, it's not, with respect to the chief and all the efforts so far, it's not what we currently have. >> well i hate to give you the bad news, but i've been going to aa meetings with firefighters for 42 years. and police officers. and i wrote my unions addiction policy way back 35 years ago. i have dissected it, rewrote it, had reports given to me monthly on every hour, every minute of every conversation, practically.

and discovered that most people's problem is, is drugs and alcohol, without question. also what people worry about, it's problems at home, children, wife, domestic violence. a member could call up just like you could do now, could you call alex, ask for anything. with my union, retired, my members were able to call up and ask questions about anything. i need to refinance my house, i need to get an auto loan, where is the best place. that's what it ended up being, more than an addiction recovery. my union, if you look at the suicides, and you take the suicides nationwide, they are

fishermen, farmers, lumber workers, factory workers, construction workers, carpenters, miners, electricians, maintenance workers, mechanics, repairers, installers, factory workers, production workers, architects, engineers. then firefighters, police officers, and protective services, probably sheriff and etc. and rent-a-cops. and then artists, designers, athletes and entertainers that's what my union was made up of. almost identical suicide rate was firefighters. so i know a lot about this issue. i have spent many, many, 42 years. i could sit down and write a document that would blow your mind and you would say, that sounds good to me.

so i do know some worker does know a lot. >> commissioner, that's the great thing about these commissions. i didn't know that, if i had known that six months ago, i would have put you to work. >> i don't advertise it, but i thought it was a good time. >> commissioner, i respect your experiences. we all come from different experiences and have different things to add to these commissions. that's why these commissions are great and that's why they are unique and that's why they are important. i have deep respect for every member of this commission and their experiences. i don't mean to down play and i don't think you took my comments as down playing your experiences. for sure i don't have that knowledge. but i appreciate it deeply. i think that's why this is so important. i think that's a very good example of why this conversation is so important.

because we all have different experiences, we know this problem exists, right? we all have different experiences. all i'm trying to do is find a better solution to it. that's it. so when the chief comes back, if we pass something, if the chief comes back six months ago, you could say through your experiences, no, i don't agree with this, because of this. i think the stress unit should have no doctor. but the point is, and i think everyone here would agree, the point is, it's an important issue to look at. so let's look at it, let's put the right language in this resolution so that we can have the chief take a look at this issue, do a deep dive into this issue, come back to us whenever that date is, so we can budget to deal in a more appropriate way than the way we are currently dealing with. that's all this is.

>> vice president nakajo. >> commissioner veronese, i want to thank you for the hard work and the passion. about a year ago when you came, one of the first statements you stressed with your fundraiser was in this regard of stress of the members in terms of the regard. at this particular time i would like to acknowledge and appreciate the commissioners on this commission as well as the chief and everyone of you command staff, and every member in this audience that has been with us for the last three hours. i totally agree with commissioner covington, a good, healthy, robust discussion. and i appreciate you being in it at the forefront so we could discuss it. for me, in terms as well, with the contract question that came about for individuals, it's about options. and it's about options to be able to have the options.

and of course, within our own family and our own house, i think we want to reach out to our members in terms of our own, but i also share the feeling that sometimes i like to go to someone who doesn't know me at all. because sometimes self esteem and guilt is tough enough when one asks for help. so for me, a healthy discussion around options is really important. just one question in terms of logistics. chief hayes-white, who is the administrator of the program. >> the stress unit is built on a lot of confidentiality, there's an ability for members of the stress unit to come directly to me. if there's something that comes to my attention, we are a paramilitary organization. members are given a lot of

latitude and they deserve that latitude. there's a lot of trust that goes along with that, having said that they report to the assistant deputy chief overseeing homeland security, in this case michael cochrane. >> that's what i wanted to hear. the bottom line, responsibility and we have a structure. i'm not saying the structure is sufficient, because obviously there's concerns. and again commissioner, i appreciate you being in this conceptually all the things we are talking about. i can support that, the detail things we are talking about, the budget issues and everything we talked about. thank you for the clarity in terms of the intention of the resolution. when i first read it, it certainly sounded like we were creating a new unit. not that there is anything wrong with it but i think this calls for the response we as commissioners have, that is oversight. that's purely on the level i

dialogue, i personally enjoy the dialogue and the frank discussion among all of us and i thank you all for your time this evening. thank you mr. president. >> thank you, mr. vice president. commissioner veronese you are going to take this resolution and streamline it, bring it back to us in a couple of weeks, for reconsideration. is that correct? >> yes. i will do that. >> all right. i don't know if we need to vote on that. do we need a vote? i don't think so. all right. very good. thank you. we will move to the next item, madam secretary. >> item 8, agenda for the next and future fire commission meetings. >> well we have one item already. for the next meeting. commissioners, any input here?

any public comment? >> i want to congratulate commissioner veronese's cousin on winning the british open. he looks like your cousin. >> does he? >> anybody disagree? there's italian heritage there, connection, he has got to be sicilian. >> i will look him up. i wasn't aware of it. >> this is the win of what? >> british open. he is italian. >> oh, right. >> i think we wanted to put the chief's residence on the next meeting's agenda to discuss that. >> i have the chief's resident's update. we do have a closed session settlement that needs to be approved. are we going to put the mayor's transition update on the next -- >> i don't think we will be ready at that point.

>> and commissioners, just as a reminder, i will not be present for 8-8. deputy chief gonzalez is a good fill-in for sure. he is limited in one aspect and that is of the chief's residence, he doesn't have sort of the knowledge i might have but chief rivera is very well versed on it. i just wanted to raise that for you. >> okay. >> any other commissioners have any additional items to add? >> just a clarification, between now and the next meeting, are we going to be looking for a place for the retreat? we have the google doc that will be coming around. we will need a facilitator for that meeting.

usually at retreats you do have a facilitator who is the person who keeps things moving. >> and does an agenda need to be posted for that? >> yes, it would have to be, yes. >> like a special meeting? >> yes. >> all right. the chief and i will discuss that and come up with a facilitator, if you have input on a facilitator. i know one person that might be useful as a facilitator. >> okay, great. >> we will get a facilitator. >> anybody in the department you could use? >> all right. very good. >> madam secretary? >> item 9, adjournment. >> so moved. >> second? >> second. >> all in favour? favor? aye.

>> aye. >> this meeting is adjourned.

>> good morning, everyone, the meeting will come to order. welcome to the july 25th, 2018, regular meeting of the public safety and neighborhood services committee. i am supervisor rafael mandelman, chair of the committee. to my right is vice chair supervisor ronen and to my left is supervisor peskin and we are also joined here by as a guest supervisor fewer. the clerk is john carroll who is going to be guiding me through this first meeting and telling me what i'm doing wrong. >> clerk: so far so good. >> supervisor mandelman: and i woullike to thank those at sfgov

to staff this meeting. clerk, do you have any announcements. >> clerk: silence your cellphones and electronic devices. and documents to be part of the file should be submitted to the clerk and items will appear on the july 31,2018, board agenda unless otherwise stated by the committee. >> supervisor mandelman: call the first item. >> clerk: hearing to consider that the premise-to-premise transfer of a type-48 on-sale general public premises liquor license for zechsan business development, inc, doing business as executive order, located at 848 mission street [district 6], will serve the public convenience or necessity of the city and county of san francisco. >> supervisor mandelman: good morning. >> i'm sergeant george from the a.l.u. unit. and i have a report for the executive order that have applied for a type-48 license and if approved this would allow them to sell beer, wine and

distilled spirits. there are two letters of support but those have been withdrawn. i mean two letters of protest -- i'm sorry -- but those have been withdrawn. and there's zero letters of support. they are in plot 210 which is considered a high crime area. they're in tract 176.01 which is considered a high saturation area. there is no opposition. a.l.u. approved with the following conditions. number one, sales of alcoholic beverages should be permitted between the hours of 10:00 to midnight, sunday-wednesday, and 10:00 to can, thursday-saturday. and number two, the sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off-sale is prohibited. number three, between the hours of 10:00 and 2:00 a.m., or any time that the premise are providing live entertainment the petitioner shall provide three

uniformed security guards in the parking lot and/or premise and shall maintain order therein and prevent any activity which would interfere with the clientel enjoyment of the property or by nearby residents or surrounding community. the licensed security guard must be licensed by the state of california department of consumer affairs. number four, no distilled spirits shall be sold by the bottle. and, number five, to actively monitor the area under their control and in efforts to prevent any damage to the properties adjacent as depicted or in the a.b.c.253. and it should be noted that the applicant has agreed with all of the listed above recommended conditions. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: yes, i have no questions, and i just wanted to mention that i did receive a letter of support from

raquel radondesz with the filipino cultural district. and she is supporting this liquor license and particularly i just wanted to mention how happy they are that the owner is community-minded and agreed to support filipino art in the bar itself. and also to host up to 12 community events or fundraisers to support some of the filipinos during the year and hosting six annual pop-up dinners for aspiring filipino food businesses. and so that's very exciting to me as a proponent of cultural districts and i just wanted to put that on the record. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. all right. i think that with that we can hear from the owner. is john eric sanchez here?

>> this is my first time also. good morning, supervisors and rafael mandelman and peskin. and i know that there's issues to address and i would like to first thank you to give me the opportunity to speak with you today. i am john eric sanchez and i was born in san francisco and attended the university of san francisco and i am a 17-year resident and soon-to-be business owner in south of market district 6. as you have read, as you have may have read in my application, i own and operated sit bar and lounge in the hancock women chinatown and north beach for close to 13 years on broadway and powell street. and i have been displaced due to city mandated earthquake retrofit work required of my former landlord. i stand before the committee today on behalf of my new business, potential new business, executive order bar

and lounge, to request that this committee and the s.f. board of supervisors approve my request to transfer my type a.b.c. liquor license into my new location at 868 mission street at jesse west at the westfield san francisco center with the adoption of a p.c.n. resolution. this resolution will allow me to continue my work in the neighborhood that i call home and will allow me to proceed with the a.b.c. with the state to move forward with the next steps in the liquor license chance for process. a little bit about what my plans are. executive order bar and lounge is a 21 and older cocktail bar and lounge whose theme and decor pay tribute to the more benevolent acts of our country's founders, presidents, abraham lincoln and theodore roosevelt and the notable figures, movements, lives and times surrounding each of their eras in american history.

through its theme executive order aims to promote what we consider to be not only san francisco values but mutually understood american values -- equality for all, the important role that immigration and diversity has played in america's progress, and the importance of equal work opportunity for all to contribute to the greater good, and to promote the importance of conservationallism and our duty to be good custodians of the environment. including the packets before you are the findings of the reviews conducted by s.f. planning and the s.f.pdlau and i have collaborated with the sfpdalu and agreed to the conditions on my liquor license that aim to promote the spirit of being a good neighbor, safety and security to both guests and the neighborhood and the city as a whole. and i have reached out to and i have received support from the community benefit district, and

soma filipino cultural district for which we are a part. i respectfully request your adoption of this resolution and i'm happy to answer any questions that you might have and i thank you for the opportunity to speak before you this morning. >> supervisor mandelman: great. thank you. any -- appears that we have no questions for you. so, thank you. >> thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: are there any members of the public who would like to speak? speakers will have two minutes. please state your first and last name clearly and speak directly into the microphone. those persons who have prepared written statements are encouraged to leave a copy with the clerk for inclusion in the file and no applause or booing is permitted and in the interest of time speakers are encouraged to avoid repetition of previous statements. >> hi, i am desede can know on and our director raquel asked us to read a letter of support. dear chair mandelman, thank you

for your support and i write to express support for item number 1. we are very excited to work with john eric sanchez and has team to open up on 868 mission street. currently in the westfield. mr. sanchez expressed a first commitment to being a good neighbor and working with the cultural district to advance our goals and cultural celebration and visibility, community development and economic and social justice. we are happy to support a filipino business that is community-minded and has committed to working and creating opportunities for local organizations to create entry level job opportunities in the district. and there's an interest to work with our arts and culture committee to create additional art pieces in the space to celebrate filipino culture. we're excited that the executive order bar and lounge has committed to hosting six annual pop-up dinner for aspiring filipino food businesses and to explore the commissary for the kitchen for growing food

businesses and the hopes for our pastry chefs to provide baked goods for his daily coffee program. we're hopeful that the executive order lounge will continue to contribute to creating a lively commercial corridor for the cultural district and creating commercial corridors is one of our top challenges for the cultural district because we're so large. and yet we have no economic base. and we're hoping that more business owners like john sanchez will come to the table and to help us to develop that and we hope that you support his liquor license transfer. thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. any other members of the public who would like to speak before public comment is closed? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues? >> to make a motion to move this forward with positive recommendation. >> supervisor mandelman: mr. clerk, does that work. >> clerk: this would determine that the public would be served. >> yes. >> supervisor mandelman: is there a second? i do not need a second,

fantastic. thank you. and does that include all of the conditions or have those been -- >> clerk: the resolution will track the recommendations as recommended to and agreed to by the parties involved. >> supervisor mandelman: okay, fantastic. so without objection. yeah... great. all right. mr. clerk, call the next item. >> clerk: special on-sale general liquor license -- verifying completion of preapplication meeting -- 341 judah street la puesta del sol cantina and section 23826.13, for the issuance of a new non-transferable, type-87 neighborhood-restricted special on-sale general liquor license. >> supervisor mandelman: great. do we have a departmental presentation?

jessica speaking on behalf of supervisor tang. >> good morning, chairman mandelman and committee members. i am jessica ho and an aide to supervisor tang. and our office is committed to helping small businesses to open and thrive along our neighborhood commercial corridors. the office of economic work first and development, also shares this goal. and they have engaged with the states to allow additional restaurants to also provide alcoholic beverages in order for these businesses to succeed. in light of this effort, cbtw incorporated was selected to submit an on-sale general license application for la puesta del sol cantina at 3414 judah street. this resolution before you today is put on record that the product sponsors conducted a community meeting about the proposed restaurant in which we are aware that six members of the community participated. we are hopeful that this proposed restaurant if

established will bring more vibrancy to the judah street neighborhood corridor. thank you for consideration in advance. thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: we are joined by supervisor yee. >> thank you, chair and members of the committee. good morning. i am with the economic workforce development, just to provide a very brief sort of overview of this process. this is a unique process to san francisco and something that this is now the fourth time that this type of resolution has been considered by the board this year. in 2016, the state legislature adopted sb1285, authored by then senator leno to create a new affordable, nontransferable restaurant liquor license for businesses located in some target commercial corridors, including the sunset, excells your and ocean avenue, and

visitation valley, hopefully i mentioned all of them. and there are five licenses that were up for issuance in an application process and drawing that happened late last year. again, this is the fourth of those five to come forward for a certification of the completion of preapplication outreach. so this is before the consideration of the full liquor license application by the a.b.c. and the potential applicant who is selected from that drawing process has to send a mailing 14 days in advance of a community meeting to residents within 500 feet of the proposed business location. and then 14 days hold that community meeting and then submit evidence of the completion of that meeting to the board and for this committee. i attended the meeting last month and i believe that all of the relevant documents are in your packet and i think that maybe it's time to invite up colin o'malley, one of the

partners from la puesta del sol cantina to talk about that outreach. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. >> hello, i'm colin o'malley and my partner is john brendan. we have applied and we're lucky enough to be selected to obtain one of these new licenses in the city. all three of us met on the sunset and i'm about four blocks away and i cover ortega and we wanted to have something in the neighborhood. we do own bars in downtown san francisco and we have about 50 years of experience between the three of us. we have been doing this for quite a long time. we decided to open up la puesta del sol cantina and it's something to bring to the neighborhood to activate some more family vibes in the area. it's a family restaurant that will serve food, cocktails, yeah, we just want to do something new to the neighborhood and bring it up a little bit. so any questions for me? >> supervisor mandelman: it does not appear that we have questions but thank you very much.

>> thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues, is there a motion or -- >> i'd be happy to make a motion to send this forward with positive recommendation. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, vice-chair ronen. take that without objection. all right, good. mr. clerk, call the next item. oh, i believe that we're taking item 4 before item 3. so call item 4. >> clerk: senior pedestrian injuries and fatalities and targeted implementation of vision zero improvements. >> hearing on pedestrian injuries and fatalities affecting seniors and how data on collisions is analyzed to make specific improvements, targeted enforcement, implementation of vision zero improvements, education outreac to communities and monolingual communities.

>> supervisor mandelman: supervisor yee you requested this hearing. >> supervisor yee: thank you very much, chair mandelman. >> good morning. in 2014 i co-authored the city's vision zero policy that goes with the vision zero to get to zero traffic fatalities by the year 2024. through engineering, enforcement and education we have made some significant strides. last year was the least number of traffic deaths ever recorded in san francisco. this is an accomplishment and it should be recognized for that. but, still, there were 20 people that passed away and so it feels like we have made strides and we need to do more. i call this hearing because back in april we had two fatalities

of seniors being hit -- being hit by vehicles nearly back-to-back in my district. each of these crashes were preventable and leave a lifetime of pain for their family and friends. i'd like to note that i'm wearing the colors of families for safe streets who actually had impacts when their family members or friends or relatives either are killed in a traffic collision or seriously injured. you know, i would say that it's really interesting to me because when i started noticing it more and more i checked the data and it wasn't just people across all age groups equally getting

killed by these collisions. in fact, what we found is that the majority of the fatalities are pedestrians and nearly 80% of them are people over 50 years old. i mention fatalities but this hearing is also about those seriously injured. we will hear data from the department of public health. but injuries from crashes pick up more of their trauma and more than anything else at the hospital. in 2016, 75% of the seniors killed in crashes were in my district, district 7. in 2017, three of the eight fatal collisions involving seniors were in my district. while i hope that there isn't another death anywhere on the

streets of san francisco, but this year 40% of them have actually been mo in my district. and it's not just my district that i'm concerned about and this 40% and 60% are happening somewhere else. since april since i called this hearing six more people were killed on the streets. two of them were seniors, dimetry scottman was killed on 36th and slope just this last thursday. and these stats are striking. but we shouldn't call them stats, these are real people that we're talking about, residents and our neighbors and their families and friends continue to grieve. these deaths are unacceptable and absolutely preventable. i call on the departments to hear specific data analysis from the crashes impacting seniors. as a city we must not be solely reactive, we must be proactive

in preventing injuries and fatalities. there are three main pillars of vision zero, engineering, enforcement and education. when there is a crash what is being done to ensure that there isn't another? how are the city strategies and data being shared, analyzed and leveraged towards prevention and in this case the prevention of crashes and fatalities involving seniors. so today we are going to hear from the san francisco police department, the san francisco m.t.a., and the department of public health, and the d.a.'s office. colleagues, i also want to note that there are representatives from the transportation authority here, the public works and cal transwho are here to answer questions if we have any. i'd like to now bring up hava

cronenberg, the program from the smtda who will start with a brief overview and go ahead and introduce the speakers as they come in from the -- in order of the presentation. >> thank you all, and thank you, supervisor yee for calling this hearing. we as a city, as a team of vision zero staff we really appreciate the opportunity to talk about the work we're doing and to give a real showcase to the efforts that we're making as well as to sort of highlight the critical issues that you have just raised. i'm go through quickly through my overview because i felt that you did an excellent job, speaking to all of my slides. so i'll be fairly quick. so some of you are new on this board so i'll do a refresher. which is in 2014, the city along with agents and our board of supervisors and mayor lee adopted vision zero as a policy to end the traffic fatalities in san francisco and to reduce our

severe injuries. this is a picture of ninth and division, our new protected intersection. but supervisor yee has pointed out that this is a public health crisis. and just like any other public health crisis that we talk about, it has severe impact on lives all over san francisco. that's not just those who die, on average 30 per year, but those who are severely injured. they have lot a loss of abilityd loss of jobs and real impact to their families. we see that in a role cost at s.f. general. so it was a cost born by the taxpayers of san francisco but there's a larger social cost that we have estimated at more than $500 million annually to the injuries and fatalities that we see on the streets. it is about saving lives and we're going to talk a lot about statistics. and i don't want to lose sight that these are real people, real

neighbors, real friends. these are the names of the folks that we have lost just this year. i am not going to read them all out loud and i hope that we can all keep them in our thoughts as we make our way through this presentation. so overall, san francisco sees 30 traffic deaths per year. last year we had 20 recorded traffic deaths which was our lowest on average ever, recorded in san francisco history. and those are still 20 people who didn't make it home. so, you know, there's no opportunity for congratulations here and we still have to focus on getting to zero. and in san francisco seniors represent a disproportionate number of those deaths. so those are trends that are not necessarily true all over the country or in different cities so it's really important for us to think of the context here in san francisco and what we're doing to address things.

so we do see about 50% of the people 65 or older who are represented in those fatalities and that's because when someone like me is hit by a car the odds of me living are pretty good. you know, i'm young and robust. the older we get the less likely to survive a collision with a car. what is important to think about is that often as someone who works on vision zero daily i get a comment, well, maybe someone was looking at their phone and not paying attention. but the reality is, and this is represented in the people that we see on that list of names, these are older people who are crossing the street and they're paying attention and things went wrong. and i want us to think about that person instead of sort of the young kid with his cellphone out. so what is exciting and encouraging about vision zero is that we have a huge commitment

to addressing vision year in a collaborative approach. i think that you will see that as we have presenter comes up. and what i recognized when i looked at this hearing room is that we have broad support from the community. so it's not just city agencies doing individual work day-to-day, but we are so fortunate as a group to have, you know, people out there on the street, community members, who are working with neighbors and talking about what it means for all of us to be safe on our streets. and that is a privilege that i have. so i'm going to talk very briefly about who is coming to talk today and so we will first have up commander tracy yuin from the police department who does our traffic enforcement. and additionally we'll have megan weir, my vision zero task force co-chair from the department of public health to talk about a lot of their work, including their data collection at s.f. general which is nationally leading work.

my colleagues from sfmta who are doing work specifically to address reducing speeds around areas where seniors are most likely to be and our broad communications efforts that you have seen everywhere i hope and additionally we have been joined by the district attorney office and i noted on my commute in their banner is everywhere so i'excited to hear about their programs. so i am going to introduce commander yuin and talk about our enforcement program. so, thank you. >> hello, supervisors, how are you. so i'm going to talk about really this year's fatalities. i understand that 2014 to 2018 is what you're looking for. we will work with vision zero to have that for next week for the t.a. hearing. so the overall -- i have been here for about a year, 2017, i looked at and 2018, and, you

know, a lot of the causes of the collisions are turning and speed. i understand that you want information in regards to where people are heading to and coming from. that is definitely something that we will look into. because i know that senior centers are definitely one of the subjects that we want to look at as far as the path to that location. so the four seniors that were fatalities this year, one at rice and san jose was a pedestrian crossing in a crosswalk. and it was a pedestrian crossing and struck by a right-turning vehicle. and there was another a cabdriver going straight. and then slow pedestrian crossing and struck in a crosswalk. what we have put in place that is new to our unit is a 72-hour -- 72 hours after the collision that we have a conference call with all of our stakeholders so

we can understand what occurred prior and then the cause that we know at that time. so there's a large investigation to be done, and finding video and witnesses and so on so that we can build that case. and i'll get into more of our enforcement in the next presentation. i have some slides that i can share with you. next up is ricardo alia that is going to speak about responding to fatalities. unless you have any questions. i'm sorry. >> supervisor mandelman: looks like -- do we? >> supervisor yee: i'll hold off my questions until all of the presentations are completed so we have flow. >> thank you. >> hi, supervisors, thank you for calling this hearing. i am the city traffic with the transportation agency. and i'll be speaking a little bit more about what we're doing to follow-up on some of the fatalities that the commander

described. in november of last year mayor lee issued a directive to our department to set up a rapid response unit to formalize the agency's response after fatalities. something that we had already been doing but this established a kind of a structure. the way that the process works right now is that as noted the police department informs our department immediately about fatalities. we get as much details as we can from the police department as the events are happening. our management has been informed that a fatality has happened. and we assign staff, myself included, to go out into the field and to investigate hopefully within 24 hours, sometimes as the crash investigation is happening. and if it's not possible we'll try to go in a normal time frame and to investigate the location

and to ask questions to the police department later about the details of what happened. within five days or so we have been having conference calls with the captain of the -- the captain who has been very helpful in providing us with information which we need as engineers to figure out in what direction the vehicles were traveling, what were some of the conditions that police noted at the crash site, things that will make us kind of think critically about what were the crash details. and what were the vehicles doing. what were the pedestrians doing. exactly where the crash happened which is sometimes not always clear, was it on the west crosswalk or the north crosswalk. those details are given to us within a week. once we have combined the office study with the field study and the information that we get from the police department we'll make recommendations whether they be short term quick fixes such as fixing things that need to be

repaired or adjusting things that may need a little bit more work. and all the way down to long-term capital projects that may require finding funding or finding additional resources to execute. we also work with other agencies. a couple of the fatalities that we'll talk about are right-of-way and so we work with the state department and caltrans, and sometimes there's lighting issues and issues that they help us with. so it's collaborative and very coordinated and making sure this gets the highest attention from all relevant parties. the first crash that i wanted to mention was the crash that happened at rice and san jose on a state route. this is a short highway that is on the caltrans restriction though it's a city street. this is the site of the crash. the monday after the fatality happened, an uncontrolled crosswalk, marked, but not having anything in terms of

requiring vehicles to stop. so the plan right now at this intersection thanks to a caltrans project is to have a beacon to require the vehicles to stop and this will be done on the rest of the corridor here. there's a number of other locations that are uncontrolled. in that project it was on design when this fatality happened, unfortunately, but it will soon be under construction. and here's the actual diagram of the infrastructure that will be added to this corridor. and another fatality was at ocean and victoria and on chester and santam. vulnerable population and bicyclers and a petty cabdrivers, unfortunately, was killed by a motorist that was traveling in the area. for ocean avenue, sometimes just looking at one intersection in isolation is not the right approach so what our staff did at m.t.a. in the case of ocean avenue is that because of the

similarity between these intersections we decided to take a global look and to make changes to all of the intersections that required changes. and by changes i mean things such as signal timing and striking changes, things that we can do quickly. so we're adding a feature where pedestrians get to walk before the vehicles which can help prevent crashes when vehicles particularly are turning right. we're changing the signals to provide a longer crossing time which is particularly important for seniors. and our current crossing time that we provide in terms of the walking speed we assume is 3.5 feet per second, but due to a change that we're doing city-wide in response to requests from the senior and stable communities we will go to three feet per second which is on the lowered end of what's required. so those changes will be gradually be done throughout the city but in this case we decided to accelerate the implementation

on ocean avenue. we're changing yellow and all red timing. the all red is a pause between the time that the light turns yellow for one direction and green for the opposite direction which sometimes can address vehicle crashes. and also updating as i said the crosswalk markings and the stop bars to make sure that the vehicles stop and don't encroach into the pedestrian right-of-way. >> supervisor yee: excuse me, i have a burning question so i have to ask it right now. for this particular intersection, what you're suggesting is -- the suggestions that you're making in terms of changes are really good. in this case i don't know all of the details but part of the problem with that particular -- and we have several like that -- are these big old -- what do you call these things -- >> monuments... >> supervisor yee: yeah. and i believe that the driver couldn't see and i don't know

whether it was -- because you can turn right now on a red light. so one could be in a crosswalk or not and the person wouldn't be able to see any major turn. so to me what's missing in your solution is no righthand turns on red. and that's pretty simple to put a thing up there. a sign. is there any reason why we wouldn't want to do that? >> that's something that we did discuss, without going into the crash details which i don't have the actual crash report, but we did not think that it was the fact that the column was there that caused the crash. we believe that the motor i was was doing something that led to the crash and it was not the obstruction itself that caused the crash. in terms of no turn on red, that is something that can be done at times. we looked at the corridor and we did not see a pattern of that

being an issue. we can take a look at it again based on your request. the main issue is that when we add regulations at some of these intersections that there may be a problem with people following them, compliance issues. so we tried to tailor the measures to what we feel are the kind of common or likely process of these type of severe or fatal crashes. but we'll take a look again at that to see if it's -- o if it's needed. but the column itself we don't believe was the cause in this case. >> supervisor yee: i would appreciate it if you look at it again because right after that i sort of went and made a conscious effort to make that turn there and we have several in the neighborhood, even in westley park. and if you think that you saw

that it was clear from one angle and you started proceeding to make the turn right there, and somebody happens to walk into the intersection and -- most people as you know when they make the turn they don't necessarily look at where they're turning because they already did that. what they want to do is to make sure that somebody on the lefthand side driving is not going to hit them because they care about themselves. so that's the problem that i saw when i did my own testing what i would do when i was making that turn. >> i -- i do want to share with the board that no turn on red are part of the regulations that we considered and, in fact, one of the fatals received a no turn on red treatment on 19th avenue. on the area here, staff is looking at the intersection for specifically short-term changes.

but as the board knows there's also a wider study of the protected cycle tracks which would have helped this this case. however, if a more involved capital project in the sense that it would require infrastructure changes, changes to the roadway, that are currently being looked at and there's been discussions as part of this incident and previous concerns with safety to kind of accelerate the look of the enhancement project. >> supervisor mandelman: supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: excuse me. you just mentioned this was really not about the righthand turns, but you said that you are extending the length of time for people to cross the intersections which i think is great. but i'm asking, wondering, if you are evaluating specific intersections. for example, the institute on aging which is all seniors, i mean you just mentioned that, i believe that th