-- with that said, i do want to point to the mixing zones in this proposal. i really strongly hope that mixing zones are like closer to the last horrah and turning into things that is not cool anymore. i realize there are issues with conduits that prevent us from building single units. i realize there are street widle that prevent us to building protected intersections and it's hard to do that in a short term project without putting concrete down because it often requires that. i think we really need to do that. i would urge you to make mixing zones the bastard step child of bikes as it should be. and build singlized or protected intersections all up and down townshend street and across our city. thank you. >> taylor all gren.

>> we'll assume he was in support with improvements. >> john long, jennifer wong. >> i bike to work everyday. my office is fifth and townshend. it gets real heck tike out there. i encourage you to complete this project post haste. i've seen quite a few accidents or people on bikes getting run over. there are cars that are pulling over quickly and people jumping out without looking. there's a lot of parking there and as the other speaker said, it's dangerous. you don't know if someone will pull out. it's bumpy. the safety is important for us to kind of get off the dependency of cars and use bikes to commute. it's fantastic. i think about my safety. i appreciate it. push it through. get it done bit end of next year. it would be so cool for me. i really appreciate you being here and listening to us and

hearing our concerns. let's get this thing done together. happy voting day. >> thank you for coming down. >> jennifer wong, herbert wiener. >> hell oh i'm jennifer wong, i'm a member of the bike coalition, league of women voters and i also participate in the community groups san franciscans for sunshine. i just wanted voice my support for the improvements to the townshend corridor and also thank the board and commission for working on this together. i bike everyday on townshend getting to work along with john on the way to envoy where we both work. and what i see is extremely dangerous everyday. i see ubers and lyfts. many people are passengers of the cars, they get out and don't see us or they're pulled over in the beak lane and there's nowhere for us to go. we're forced into the lanes of traffic where there's just two lanes and so these cars are also forced over. so everything is extremely dangerous as a biker there and

so i just wanted to voice my support for this project and excitement about the improvements, especially to the bike lanes and then to the pavement as well. thank you. >> thank you, ms. wong. next speaker, please. >> herbert wiener is the last person. >> please spell me name weiner on the board there. thank you. ok. all my enemies call me wiener, by the way. anyway, one question i have, i hate to cut and run, because i have other things to do this afternoon, is what will be the impact -- i didn't catch that. >> i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i'm partially deaf so that relieves me of the agony. anyway, what is the impact on

automobiles and automobile traffic and congestion i would like to know how this proposal impacts on that because so far, all deals have been thrown under the bus so to speak. there's so much congestion from the removal of parking spaces and you really have a traffic problem. i don't use my car that often. i try to avoid it. i mainly take muni transportation that's why i'm critical of muni and i get after you guys. that's what this board is for

and why it's called a municipal transit agency, right. you have to take this into consideration and this. >> i'm sorry you can't stay on the report because it does address what impact. >> give us your name for the record, please. >> mark grewberg. i can't looked at this and i can't speak to the decisions of the arrangements but i have to say that the bicyclist definitely need to protected lane on this street and it --

something needs to be done at that place. in terms of enforcement so thank you. >> was that it for public comment? >> anymore public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i will give try to keep it brief. i will echo what he has said or

emphasize it. we are, as an agency, trying to do things to support our taxi industry. we have the red stripe ability. we have taxi zone ability. it's two of the few tools that we have to deal with this. we've certainly heard of the impact of the t.n.c.'s on this area. whatever we can do to clear up that taxi zone and encourage the taxi to come use it and service our cal train riders to or from the station station, it should a priority given the proposals we passed using our other tools to achieve different goals. >> thank you. any comments or questions? >> i just have a question about the point that someone raised related to signals and marking of intersections along the way and what we're doing in that regard. >> so there's a mix of signalized intersections and unsignallized intersections so the one at fourth street will be a signal separated bike phase.

the mixing zones and striping through the intersection at seventh street, we are getting them in the ground quickly. we're also looking to explore the signalization of that intersection to allow bike phasing across on townshend. there's bike markings in the intersection proposed and it's two-stage left turn boxes to get people to and from townshend to seventh and seventh is also a bike route. there's also a lot of markings already in that intersection directing traffic. we didn't add anymore beyond that at this point. >> townshend circle? >> and the eighth street townshend division traffic circle. that i is an intersection that e have looked at in our group and we've done just an initial

planning effort on what is happening there and collecting kind of data. it was initially considered as part of the townshend project when townshend was a bigger street scape project. pivoting toward near term elements we didn't take it on at this time. >> in the future you will assist further. >> it might happen in the future. >> i didn't know, i think supervisor kim brought up the use of the go bike station which i didn't realize was so heavy. there was suggestions around, i mean do we need to expand there? >> we're working closely with the operators over at pure system ask caltrain. one of the stations is on caltrain right-of-way and one is our public right-of-way. with this proposal we'll move them both on the caltrain right-of-way. cal train is vacated there bike locker area. they've removed their bike lockers and so we're looking to repurpose that to have bike and

it's a much bigger area and it will be right adjacent to the newly proposed bike way so it will be larger and more documents and we're looking to see how motivate can access that station for their loading needs or valet needs and it's all happening underway. >> yeah. >> great, thank you. >> thank you, director borden. >> i want to thank the staff and the public commenters for how many years have i ridden my bike downtown and the sidewalk here y is there no so it's about time and i agree and i did want to hear some comments on whether you weighed the idea of some sort of enhanced protection for psyche lists through the intersections. i have i know the data better than i do but i premier most accidents occur at the

intersection not along the street. so it seems like the intersection is the most important place to focus these kinds of improvements. >> yeah, and we are the fourth street intersection especially is where we are proposing to do some bike rain markings through that intersection. as you know, central subway has their rails through that intersection so there's still a lot happening. we're widening the crosswalks at that intersection to better allow space for all the 3,000 pedestrians that are trying to cross the street. so giving space and marking that space is what we're looking at. >> there are other intersections along the corridor, right? so those are not getting improvements? >> right now they're not any markings proposed at this time. >> can you just speak to why not? is that just a width constraints or a design constraint? >> it's more a -- thought processes and one of the ideas is intersections are kind of open and the spaces where

everyone is on guard. the more contact they're having with each other and not to land a false sense of security then it doesn't lend to that or it may impact that a little bit more. >> as someone who is currently riding my 10-year-old daughter to caltrain to get her on the bay area and use transit i would love to have protected bike lanes towards our transit stations to truly reach this all ages and acts goal. i think that we have. >> great. >> thank you. do i have anymore comments. >> that's your neighborhood. >> so i did have a question about one of the commenters was asking if you pick up a bike at the caltrain station and you head westbound, could you address that point. it seems that there's a lot going on at that intersection and so what we expecting psyche lists tbicyclist to do?

>> i think the most common thing people do is look for a gap. they're trying to cross the street and look for a gap and cross their bike mid-block. either way, you can walk to either intersection and cross if you are pulling out a bike but we see all activity happening there to take the opportunity to get in your bike lane to make your move. >> the idea is the biking and go to the nearest intersection which is fourth or fifth. >> correct. >> i had a question about pedestrians getting off caltrain moving to the transit boarding island and so what does that crossing the back pathway look like. there's a lot of pedestrian traffic there and i'm just curious about that. >> i sidewalk island will have a

ramp down to street level. it will be right at the transit station or right at the transit stop on the island and that will connect to a ramp on calltrain. a new ram not on the caltrain plaza side. the bike way will stay at street level and it will ramp down and we'll have the crosswalk in the bike way for that crossing. >> cool. and then ok. >> thank you. so i have a motion to approve. do i have a second. >> before i take a vote, i want to say good work and i think this isn't the first time but it is one of the few times where we've not heard the only complaints we heard is that we're not going far enough. so you are having your work cut out for you. and i'll second director eakin that we need to take a deeper look at the intersections. the mixing zones i find

problematic as well. it would be nice if we had a way to really slow the cars down before they hit the mixing zones and if we can geo sense the ubers and lyfts it would account for 97% of the congestion increase. it's unacceptable and we need to let them know that we need to geo fence them away especially out of the taxi sands and that's reprehensible that they're doing that and thank you. and all in favor say aye. >> any opposed. it's approved. thank you all very much. >> item 13, presentations, discussions regarding the tnc and congestion report. >> good afternoon. chairman brinkman, members of the board, i'm chief-of-staff and the street division and i'm

really please today introduce my colleague drew cooper from the san francisco transportation authority to share with you the findings of the tnc and congestion report they published recently. i wanted to appreciate all the work that sftca did to figure out some of the causes of the congestion that we're experiencing in the city so dre- >> thank you, very much. mr. cooper, good to see you. >> good afternoon. i'm excited to be here to talk to all of you today. i'm here on behalf of a full time i'd like to a acknowledge. my boss, the project manager. my colleague who develops a vision and you heard referred to and i'll talk about it a little bit later. we also had an academic research team from university of kentucky that lended a lot -- >> does that microphone go a little higher.

that podium level is awkward. i just want to make sure sf gov can get you. >> is that better? >> thank you. >> it keeps falling down a little bit. >> so we had this academic team we worked with that kind of ensured the academic rigger of what we did. and those were greg airhart from the university of kentucky, his colleague may chen and their grad students alex and senay roy. this is their project as well. so this report is the second in a series of reports. the first one to be released last year called tnc today. just for background, we heard from folks like yourselves and others. it seems like there are a lot of t.n.c.s out there, wouldn't it be nice if we can say something about that at all? at the time, we couldn't.

both companies report data to the cpuc but that data isn't available to any other agencies including m.t.a. or ours. until we really didn't have the resources in terms of data that we needed to answer those questions. so we formed a research partnership with some researchers from the university of -- north eastern university who developed a method to scrape data from uber and lyft a.p.i. which we estimate inservice and out of service develops on city streets as well as pick up and drop off locations. from that report, we learned there were a lot of t.n.c. trips happening on a daily basis. that data was collected between november and december of 2016. and during that time, we estimate that there were 170,000 trips, vehicle trips everyday on san francisco city streets. surely that number has

increased. we weren't able to say with that report, is what the relationship is between those trips and congestion. there are a lot of theories that go around that say that they may improve congestion and there are alternate theories that say they contribute to congestion. that is the question that this report seeks to answer. what exactly is that relationship? so i will talk to you today about what measures we used to define congestion. i'll talk about the data and methods that we used. and then i'll tell you about the results of what we found. so, the ones we used were delay which is basically the extra time that you spend traveling because there are other cars getting in your way on the street. another one is v.m.t. which is a typical metric that we use for all kinds of transportation

project analysis. and then finally, the most legible to the public. so, i'm going to talk briefly a little bit more about those hypothesis about how t.n.c. may interact with congestion. there are several theories about how they could improve congestion. these include that they may have higher vehicle occupancies and so you need fewer cars to transport the same number of people and you may see a decrease in the number of cars on the road and that may help things. alternatively, they may be supportive of transit by providing first and last mile connection that's make it easier to access the transit system. and finally, the available of t.n.c.s may help people feel more comfortable owning fewer cars so they may sell off one of their household vehicles or chose to own no vehicles at all.

so these are some of the reasons that have been floated that t.n.c.s may improve congestion. on the other hand, they may make things worse. the reasons for this are that they, similar to taxis -- [ please stand by ]

>> so what did we find? we found that t.n.c., along all the metrics that we looked at contributed substantially to increased congestion.

around 50% of each of these metrics is attributable to t.n.c. kick, delay is around 50% , meaning that had there been no t.n.c., the increase in delay would be half as much as we actually witnessed. similarly, about half of the increase in vmt, city wide was attributable to t.n.c. and again , half of the decline in speeds was attributable to t.n.c. when you look at this information, broken down over time of day, there is an diverse face. there is a substantial amount of variation. these impacts are not constant across the city in space or time what we are looking at here is delay by five times a day. these times of day correspond with the day. that we use in our model.

and you should note that they're not all all of the same length. the mid-day. , the one in the middle of the chart and the evening. , the one on the end are longer than the other ones. in general, there was a greater increase in congestion in the. in total and more of it was attributable to t.n.c. his. the places where we saw the greatest total increase of congestion are in the mid-day and the evening. this is, not surprising because these time periods are longer so they capture a greater amount of travel. if you look at speeds, you get a similar story. there was a decrease in speeds across all times of day periods and roughly half of it, between

44 and 60% for most of these time of day periods was attributable to t.n.c. his. this is higher in the evening. about 75% of this. >> i am sorry to wake everybody. what did this cost? this report? >> i don't have that number of the top of my head. >> thank you. >> please go on. thank you. >> thanks. so roughly three quarters of the delay in the evening that we see according to the study is attributable to t.n.c. his. we can also look at the differences and the effects of t.n.c. his across different areas of the city. district six, which is soma and midmarket, it also includes treasure island.

it seems the greatest increase in delay. and nearly half of that is attributable to t.n.c.s. by contrast, district -- district three sees about half the magnitude of an increase in delay but much more of it is attributable to t.n.c.s. nearly 73%. where as, population and employment had a substantial effect on congestion in the soma area and it didn't really affect things in district three which is the north beach area. and then there are other parts of the city that saw very little effects in terms of delay like district four. they saw very little effect. due to t.n.c.s or any other reason. looking at vehicle miles travelled, the story here is similar but with a few differences. again, district six jumps out

here with the greatest increase in miles travelled. district ten, which is a less congested, not uncongested but less conducted -- congested network does not show up as much when we look at delay because of the lowered congestion but you do see it here when looking at v.m.t. which simply measures the amount of travel that is happening. but in this case, it is only contributing about a third of the total. most of what you are seeing here is due to changes in population, housing and network changes. with that, in the interest of transparency and engaging with stakeholders like yourselves and with the public, we developed an interactive online visualization tool that will allow you to

drill down to the street segment level on all of the metrics that are driving this analysis. and you can download the data set that lies under it if you are a researcher or an employee. as i mentioned at the beginning, this is a second of a series of reports. our agency will be working next on a report looking at t.n.c.s and transit ridership and equity we are also working with the sfmta who is working on studies including ones looking at street safety and curb access and disabled access. >> thank you so much mr cooper. that is fascinating to look at. he really lets us know that when we hear from people, all they see our t.n.c.s. in certain neighbourhoods of the increase in traffic they see is really greatly attributable to

the t.n.c. it kind of brings it all in to show that the impact is different across the city but where it looks not so bad in one neighbourhood, it's very disproportionate, and people are seeing a horrible impact. i find it frustrating because i know there is so little that we here can do. but the point of these reports, to the question that director torres asked about the cooperative -- the cost of them, the point of the report is to inform other state agencies about what is going on and help take action. >> that's right. there are a few things that we hope will happen. one, we have been commentating with the cpuc who is going through a rule-making process, encouraging them to use the data that they have and share it with local planning officials.

we also just hope that getting this information out there will help people understand decision-makers, most importantly, understand that this is a real issue that needs to be taken seriously. so our agency was just bored, who also happens to be the board of supervisors, has brought up the idea of going to the state and requesting additional authorities to regulate. >> there are some aspects of t.n.c.s that can be addressed at the local level already. most directly, the curb management. >> it points out how important that is. do i have questions? >> great. thank you for this report. i was reading through it and trying to get to the bottom and looking for recommendations. sort of like he put out all this interesting information and here we are, policymakers, looking at

what we should do. there is no section on policy recommendations in the port -- in the report but i wanted to hear your thoughts. i also heard you say you'll be doing t.n.c.s and transit ridership as the next study. but we have to imagine a 50% increase is affecting our service transit vehicles in a negative way and they wonder if you can folk -- comment on a pulmonary way on the impacts on transit of t.n.c.s. >> sure. thank you for those questions. with regards to recommendations, we were very intentional about not putting them in this report. we wanted this to be, again, grounded in facts, objective, and neutral. and what we hope is that policy makers can take what we have put out there and use it to develop reactions. with support from staff, of course. but we see that as a next step.

with regards to the effects of t.n.c.s on transit, again, we have forthcoming work on this subject. there has been a growing body of literature that shows that t.n.c.s tend to take people off of transit. and this report shows that they had to add to congestion to the extent that buses and trains, particularly those operating on the street, are subject to congestion. it affects them as well. >> i know you said this wasn't about recommendations at this point, but i was wondering if the t.a. was reexploring or talking about the issue of congestion pricing. i know it is a study goshen area we looked at before before we had the traffic and congestion issues we had today given the limitations of the state level and what we can do. it is something that we could do

is not something that is being contemplated are considered particularly when you talk about district three, which is downtown. it had a huge rise in congestion >> yes. our board has directed us to look at congestion pricing and we are working on developing a scope for that project now. >> so what is the timeline on something like that? >> i am not prepared to say. >> ok. [laughter] >> thank you. >> any more questions or comments before i go to public comment? >> one more thing if no one else wants to speak, other cities have looked at a fee on the transportation network companies , but mostly my understanding is that it is compensate for a bit of the loss in transit revenues as opposed to a congestion management approach on the t.n.c.s. given the recent bill that was passed this year that will authorize a t.n.c. fee in san francisco with vote approval. is there something you would be looking into general pricing?

which you look at a congestion based t.n.c. fee to address these congestion impact issues? >> with regards to that, i believe that all options are currently on the table. [laughter] >> thank you, very much. we appreciate the presentation and the work and now we will go to public comments. >> two minutes, please. >> thank you. i did want to -- this is a very welcome reports. it is reflecting things that many of us taxi drivers have been saying for years. and we kinda felt like like we were voices in the wilderness because every time the t.n.c.s would go to the cpuc or go off to sacramento, they would be touting their credentials and people were accepting this at

face value. now we have not just this report , with several others that put the lie to that. it is welcome in that sense. it does note that other key questions including transit ridership and safety are not covered and i wanted to talk specifically to the question of safety because it just happens that in the last week or two there was an article in forbes, which is, you know, basically business publication, the headline which is uber and lift may increase road deaths study. claims, in the study has not yet been published, but the preliminary information about an academic study, you know, comes to the conclusion that there have been more fatalities on the roadways owing to write share

companies. which may be a result simply of increased traffic. but other hypotheses such as, again, anecdotally, what we see every day on the streets. the driving habits of t.n.c.s drivers may very well be a contributing cause. so when you are looking at these issues, it is not just congestion. it is safety and other issues. certainly the city must have the power to deal with this and deal with their own city streets. thank you. >> thank you. good reminder how important it is to have the data. >> hello. i'm with the south of market community action network. we are happy this report is out because it confirms everybody -- something everybody already knew and where we as an organization had been saying since buber was dumped on our streets and that

is that t.n.c.s dramatically increase congestion in san francisco. especially in the south of market and especially in district six. further, the report shows that t.n.c.s greatly increase the total number of vehicle miles travelled which is another significant indicator of automobile usage. this is all hugely significant for a number of reasons. traffic and congestion have tremendous negative impacts. the increase in cars directly increases global warming as does the increase in v.m.t. and idling that occurs. aside from the obvious and immediate environmental impacts, the huge increase in congestion due to t.n.c.s as lasting negative impacts on the physical and mental health of residents, workers and community members, including families and children. it is completely unacceptable that streets are clogged with these ridesharing companies that exacerbate the neighbourhood his

existing pedestrian safety issues and this is an issue that is really about community health and healthy communities. about children, families, seniors and people with disabilities and some of our city his most vulnerable's residence. this study must be a wake-up call to the city. regarding the text sharing economy, t.n.c.s and the need for aggressive regulation. the unregulated nature of t.n.c.s in san francisco has led to an unprecedented level of congestion with the south of market shouldering a disproportionate burden of this reality. in addition to the fact that an entire taxi industry has been decimated by companies such as uber. that city and sfmta must address these out-of-control t.n.c.s. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you. the report that the c.t.a. did

has led to a ballot measure that peskin is putting together for the tax congestion tax on uber and lift. it will raise $30 million a year projected but based on 70 million rise. is 40 cents a ride. can be passed on to the passengers. and spokespeople are very happy with that solution. but i don't think it goes to address the root problems that t.n.c.s are causing. the traffic congestion. this will not get better. pollution, unfair business practices, rampant insurance fraud, a.d.a. violations, deterioration of all workers' income. you look at the business model that cooper has, they are using venture capital to create a monopoly to destroy legitimate competitors. i applaud taxi companies for having filed an antitrust lawsuit a couple of years ago against uber technologies. and interestingly, three days

ago, a writer, -- a writer says the inside story of how uber got into business with the saudi arabian government, saudi arabia royal family now owns ten% of uber. the same people who murdered a journalist, apparently. there are bright spots that have been shown elsewhere. he has worked well over the years with the taxi industry. we are challenging on you to be the best and the brightest and find a way to get half of these uber his off the street. there will be so much less traffic to get places faster. at the same time, you will be able to help people. you need to keep the taxi industry healthy and cut back on the insurance logic -- fraud. there is rampant insurance fraud i have run out of time. thank you. >> thank you. do i have any more public comment on this item?

seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you, again. is very valuable information and we look forward to the next report. thank you. >> thank you. welcome. >> good afternoon. although i think we are approaching good evening. i will keep my remarks very short. i am the acting director of transit. with me i have janet, our v.p. program manager and monique, who is our director -- deputy of capital finance. they have been tremendous partners with the agent we are bringing to you today.

i will start with the bad news first. the bad news is that this is old and they're getting old. as they get older, they are becoming increasingly hard to maintain. harder to get parts. we are having to do reverse engineering because we don't even have a parts pipeline. and as you know, a major breakdown in the subway can create a bad day for an entire system of customers. the silver lining, the good news is that the program has delivered on all of our expectations and promises. it is a reliable vehicle.

it has the advanced customer information systems that we have an innate high transit using city. and that was not by accident. that was through the leadership and a really strong procurement process. so what we have before you today is an information item to let you know that although there is a lot of things that have to

happen between now and then, it is our recommendation that we look to expedite the replacement of the fleet. so that we are on track and exceeding our timeline for the first 68 vehicles, which are expansion vehicles. they are desperately needed for our crowding and for our customers. and we are now looking for opportunities to bring the replacement portion of the contract quicker and also to shortage in its overall timeline that will reduce the amount of time we spend with a mixed fleet , which in and of itself, is a complication in terms of maintenance and it will really expedite getting an excellent service product to our customers i know you guys have had the presentation, i think i covered a lot of the highlights.

this is the current timeline. as you can see, we are talking about the hundred 51 replacement of the current. at a stretch over a an extremely long. for financial reasons when we bought these, we did not have enough money to buy it in a short duration. so that got stretched out. but there are a lot of trade-offs with that. and most immediately, not having the new vehicle sooner. the vehicles themselves, we are getting tremendous amount of positive feedback from our customers. they are more spacious and more energy efficient and quieter. they have advanced accessibility features. we are getting some negative feedback related to the interior design on the seating. the great news -- >> i'm not alone. >> you are not alone. the great news is 151 as an

opportunity for us to internalize and respond to the feedback. so that is part of this process. is in addition to some smaller mechanical fixes that we need to make based on how the vehicles are performing and some of the feedback we are getting from mechanics, we are also looking at this seating issue is one of the primary things that we want to address. our main ask today is to build on the momentum that we have. to take advantage of what is already an institutional knowledge, both on our side and on siemens, which could be lost by an extending gap in the procurement and in the process. i think that the document that we shared with you kind of documents some of the financial

positives as well as the negatives. some of the costs are associated with the financing of purchasing the vehicle sooner. but there is a lot of financial benefits that we anticipate, including not having to pour a lot of money. we will have to pour some money, because we still need them, but not having to pour a lot of money into expensive capital campaigns, as well as just the fact that the new vehicles, because they had a lot of input from maintenance staff in their design, they are easier to maintain. easier to do preventative maintenance. more efficient for staff resources. so our two key benefits are we are not spending money to maintain old equipment and we are getting benefits to customers sooner. >> yes. >> two things. first of all i think it would not be fair to her on her last day here to not point out that

one of the reasons that finance costs for this will be so low is because she has done such a good job maintaining our credit rating and that sort of thing. is a finance cost but it could be worse if we were in different streets. this is a great presentation. i'm supportive of what you are doing. the one question i have from a customer service standpoint is this. as i envision this, the idea of a mixed fleet, going forward meant a bigger fleet and meant that perhaps the use of three, perhaps even four car trains where we really need them. take for example, the klm rolling through castro, already full. and expanded shuttle service. my understanding is the goal is still to give as much life as we can out of the old lrp and have the biggest fleet possible. but it is just when a vehicle is -- there is a point where it is better to take a vehicle out of

service because it is likely to hold up the entire tunnel and we are managing that. is that the correct analysis of this? >> if i could, what we are aiming to do is speed up the acceleration. or to accelerate the replacement of the vehicles. not to -- we would still have, at the end of next year, before we will have 68 more vehicles than we had 20 years ago in service. we will be at that level until we potentially exercise the option. at the back end of this, for an additional 45 vehicles. what we change during the time is the mix of the different vehicles and we want to accelerate changing over from the vehicles. we will still have the 200 and something vehicles in service and we want to retire the old ones faster by replacing them. not just parking them, but by replacing them with new siemens cars. to the extent that we have

vehicles that we can't make it perform reliably. they are because we need to make but the real purpose and what we are proposing is not just to put cars aside, it is to replace them with new vehicles spewing to the extent that we have a new vehicle and an old vehicle that both work, will keep them both rolling and not just replace for the sake of replacing. >> correct. the 68 are all expansion. it is keeping everything we have in service and adding, which is a very significant increase in the fleet. >> that is the key point. thank you for clarifying that. >> go ahead. >> the seating -- >> there were so many complaints about the seating. >> that is just from malcolm. [laughter] >> he hasn't returned my calls. are you kidding me? >> we owe the board and we will be coming back to the board with

a summary of what we are hearing some feedback, the process and some options to consider that we would be able to potentially pilot within the existing fleet and have resolved before we go into production. >> that is what i have been hearing from people. [please stand b

session. directors item 17, it would be appropriate for either a motion to disclose or not did i see close. >> motion to not disclose. >> second. >> there's a motion and a second. all in favor? >> madam director, that concludes the business before the m.t.a. today. >> okay. meeting is adjourned. go vote.

>> hi. my name is carmen chiu, san francisco's aelectricitied assessor. today, i want to share with you a property tax savings programs for families called proposition 58. prop 58 was passed in 1986 and it was helped parents pass on their lower property tax base to their children. so how does this work? under california's prop 13 law, the value we use to calculate your property tax is limited to 2% growth peryear. but when ownership changes, prop 13 requires that we reassess properties to market value. if parents want to pass on their home or other property to their children, it would be

considered a change in ownership. assuming the market value of your property has gone up, your children, the new owners, would pay taxes starting at that new higher level. that's where prop 58 comes in. prop 58 recognizes the transfer between parents and children so that instead of taxing your children at that new higher level, they get to keep your lower prop 13 value. remember, prop 58 only applies to transfers between parents and children. here's how the law twines an eligible child. a biological child, a step child, child adopted before the age of 18, and a son-in-law or daughter-in-law. to benefit from this tax saving program, remember, you just have to apply. download the prop 58 form from our website and submit it to our office. now you may ask, is there a cap how much you can pass on.

well, first, your principal residence can be excluded. other than that, the total tap of properties that can use this exclusion cannot exceed $1 million. this means for example if you have two other properties, each valued at $500,000, you can exclude both because they both fit under the $1 million cap. now what happens hwhen the totl value you want to pass on exceeds $1 million. let's say you have four properties. three with current taxable value of $300,000 and one at $200,000, totaling $1.1 million in value. assuming that you decide to pass on properties one, two, and three, we would apply the exclusions on a first come, first served basis. you would deduct properties one, two, and three, and you would still have $100,000 left to pass on. what happens when you pass on the last property? this property, house four, has been existing value of 2 -- has an existing value of $200,000,

and its existing property value is actually higher, $700,000. as i said, the value left in your cap is $100,000. when we first figure out your portion, we figure out the portion that can be excluded. we do that by dividing the exclusion value over the assessed value. in this case, it's 50%. this means 50% of the property will remain at its existing value. meanwhile, the rest will be reassessed at market value. so the new taxable value for this property will be 50% of the existing value, which is 200,000, equaling 100,000, plus the portion reassessed to market value, which is 50% times $700,000, in other words, 350,000, with a total coming out to $450,000. a similar program is also available for prepping transfers fl interest r from

grandparents to grandchildren. if you're interested in learning more visit our website or gay/lesbi. >> thank you. good afternoon, everyone. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the november 28, 2018 meeting of the rule committee. my name is ahsha safai, and i am the chair of the committee. today our clerk is victor young. i'd also like to thank maya hernandez and matthew ignau from sfgovtv for staffing this