corridor is. >> okay. thank you very much. and i held a hearing on the traffic unit with the san francisco unified -- san francisco police departments because my husband was part of the traffic unit for many years. and what we discovered at that time was on any given day in san francisco, there were eight of them. so clearly, not able to enforce. not this type of magnitude. the chief has just put an academy class with 15 more. still, all throughout san francisco, to have on average eight, was actually -- you can see how the enforcement is almost impossible. especially when we really want them along our high injury corridors in particular. thank you. this opens us up to public comments. any questions? >> thank you for holding this hearing. i know that from working with

sfmta on many issues that have to do with casino buses and so forth, our hands are often tied, or yours, really, because many of these companies or entities are regulated by the cpuc. it goes through -- there's a lot of heartache involved when you create these transit only lanes. i know you are creating another one in the sunset district and it is met with quite a bit of resistance. if they are created, we want to make sure they are being well utilized in serving the purpose for why they were created which is to help transit and our public move through traffic more quickly. i would, a supervisor if you are pointed out, josh i don't want to give myself more work, but it would be good for other folks to be able to see the data around how the other companies or operators are impacting muni buses, for example.

i go along the same lines of they should be the public type services that are able to operate fully within these lanes or else i don't know why they are there. you do have data on one of your slides that shows a snapshot of decrease in travel times for some of the muni buses. i guess there is a way you are measuring their effectiveness. in any case, i don't know what the data is behind it and whether you have measured over time the increase in different kinds of transit services that are occupying these lanes. anyway. may be you want to speak to that >> i would just say, those are snapshots of before implementation versus after. that would include if there is any other friction in the lanes and that those improvements are regardless of the friction. that would include any other shuttles or things like that in the lanes. we are still getting those types of improvements.

>> you touched upon the city attorney's office to figure out the legal issues around the cbc requiring the definition of what counts as -- let me flip to that page really quick. what counts as a bus according to the c.v.c. i don't know if you are able to share were able to make any progress on that front. or how you might try to redefine or create permitting programs and structures that really ensure the public services that get to move through more efficiently. >> we are in the process of working with the city attorney right now on changing that language. >> you are just in the process? >> yes. >> thanks. let's open up to public comments thank you mr kennedy. i have cards.

please line up to speak. i have request to allow speakers to speak for one minute. my apologies. there is a 4:00 pm hearing that is happening so we are in a time crunch. my apologies. every speaker, we have one minute. madam clerk, please set the clock. thank you very much. you can start. >> i will be throwing out numbers like a auctioneer here. i live near potrero avenue which has a red lane in front of the hospital. according to the m.t.a.'s appendix e. from the title vi of

the 1964 civil rights act, it gives us some numbers about the percentage of minority riders on the number 9, which is 77% people of color, low income, 75% , and then by contrast, the diversity reported by google, african-americans, two-point 5%, latin e. point 6%. this is apartheid. not to mention most of these writers are young and able-bodied his. unlike writers who are going to san francisco general hospital to the kaiser facility on geary to mission bay on 16th street to see pnc on van ness which will be served by red lanes. we are prioritizing young able-bodied people who are largely white over people who need these services. >> thank you. thank you for sharing that with us. >> you are being misled by m.t.a. by deft wording and

sloppy legislative drafting. seventeen months ago, a senior and disability action, i asked, specifically when we were being interviewed, can the wording be change in current legislation to say public transit and taxis only, rather than bus caught the staffer said we will look into its. we have heard zip since. this is before geary was approved. we asked for it to be perspective. when i say being misled, take a look at the permitted users page it says board of supervisors legislative transits, m.t.a. legislative transit. c.v.c. defines a bus. not all buses are transit. you don't need all these statistics. you could simply wear the legislation to say public transit and make a prospective -- make it prospective for all future red lanes. i live on the church street at redline. it could be better if there is enforcement. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon. my name is joyce. i am in supervisor -- district 11. i am with senior disability action. i am also with the 58% minorities and 50 1% poor. also, i am far more public buses and less privates because i go on the eight best. i go three stops and the poor people like me, i have arthritis they have to stand up. there are more frail people over 80 who have more difficulties sitting. they have to let them sit down. i am 71. on the 38, shoot, there is big bass, there is a cable car rides , they hold up the 38 bus going to the hospital. i go to kaiser. we need more public buses and less private buses. we want a city for all.

i have been here since 1948. i am a san franciscan. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello. i am the community engagement organizer. i work in the soma and take the number 8 bus every day to and from my home into excelsior. i am here about the red lane issue, because private transit companies are taking over our streets while public transport remains underfunded. in the years that i lived in san francisco from 2001-2009 and moved back last year, i was shocked at how buses were overcrowded and it has worsened from seniors writing, to chinatown and north beach, to workers and families riding the 14 and the eight mission excelsior, portola, and the buses are so overcrowded and the buses are late that people don't want to pay.

since the tax break, the number of tech companies in soma has increased -- thank you very much >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i work at some can market community action network. the red bus lanes were created for public transportation allowing private corporate transportation in these lanes only benefits the privileged few , while causing everyone else to struggle more. housing justice, economic justice and transit justice are all connected. transit justice means everyone's public transportation needs are being met while staying accountable to our communities. accountability means effective outreach that results in changes made by and for our communities. thank you. >> thank you.

>> hello. good afternoon. my name is winston parsons, speaking on behalf of the richard senior centre. the nonprofit centre between 26 and 27th avenue his. most of our clients rely almost exclusively on muni and paratransit for transportation. after careful discussion, the center is opposed to allowing private transit vehicles in the transit only lanes. given how little some providers are paying for permits or use a muni stops relative to their financial capacity, is unfair they get special treatment and potentially public transit. that said, we feel that paratransit, which is permitted to use the lanes, should be able to continue to use them. the population using paratransit faces countless barriers for mobility, employment and be looked beyond in making our transportation system more efficient and equitable, let's not make lives harder for those who face the most obstacles. similarly, taxis play a role in supporting those with mobility

needs. thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you. >> hello. thank you so much for having this hearing. allowing private transit vehicles in the red lanes defeats the entire purpose of having red lanes. we have a limited right of way space to board. if you allow shuttles which have a single unloading at the front and only hold a handful of people, they hold up the rest of the many lines which only serve six or so people holding up muni lines. you cannot have competing services within something that is meant for public transportation. muni does a great job serving everyone in the community including people with mobility issues, people in wheelchairs, school children, private issued buses do not do anything like that. they are there to inflate land values which is something they do very well. transportation they don't do very well. and the chariots which run a segregated jim crow of

for-profit service, they have no business on our red lanes and have taken us back on climate goals. the shuttle buses use diesel. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is kat. i am with the san francisco transit riders speaking for effective and reliable transit. the red lanes are showing their effectiveness as we just heard from the presentation. there are fewer accidents. the travel time is going down and delays are going down and ridership is up. buses are faster and more reliable. and i don't have to transfer to get to work in under 30 minutes. i have lived in the mission for over 30 -- 15 years and remember how bad they were before red lanes. my heart goes out to the merchant struggling to make it in san francisco and they are having challenges. there are many things the city could do to make it easier for them to thrive. however, red lanes can bring more customers to the commercial corridor than cars can. there something like a 10-1 ratio on mission street of transit riders to car drivers.

red lanes require a lot of political capital. we have to fight tooth and nail for the red lanes which is a cost-effective improvement for public transit and livability of san francisco for everyone. public transit is on a fixed route. private transit moves point-to-point and can go wherever it needs to. >> thank you very much. i would like to call some other names. did i not call your name, i'm so sorry.

just come up and speak. thanks. >> hello. my name is peter. i'm a different peter. i take the 49, 47, five and 38 regularly. i'm also a former tech worker. i have written on those buses and they should not be on red transit lanes. they should not be on red carpet lanes. there should be for public transit accessible to the entire public. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. okay. my name is sue and thank you for holding this hearing. so the sfmta has led the public to believe that for many years that the creation of transit only lanes has been just for a muni to make it more desirable to ride.

but since march 2008, the seven unelected members of the board of supervisors have been passing transit only legislation creating transit only lanes that permit nontransit buses to operate in transit only lanes. these are sometimes painted red, not always. they don't have the power to do that. this is regulated at the state level. we have a definition of a transit vehicle at the state level and a definition of a bus. they are not the same thing. we have a legislation that has been passed here by the board of supervisors in 2008. section 2.2 in the san francisco transportation code that makes it an infraction to operate a vehicle in a nontransit vehicle and a transit only lane. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is mary. i'm the transit justice organizer. we pride ourselves on being a transit first city against

associate we see sfmta bending over backwards to use and take up our public lanes. these buses get to coast along the red lane for as little as eight dollars per bus stop. the employees get to ride them for free while we pay the increased fares for the same late and crowded bus service. one hundred dollars a month for a bus pass is on top of the grilling amounts that it cost to live in the city. it is so backwards that the richest people of the city get to take their best for free while we working-class folks have to bear the fare increases. we work really hard and we bear the brunt at gentrification. we need to be reassured and affirmed that the city are committed in investing enough in our communities. you can do that by saying no to public transit. sfmta can do that by regulating. the only thing they just stated that they can regulate and by building with us rather than on top of communities. >> thank you very much good afternoon.

i am a tenant councillor. i utilize the 14 our daily between selma and daly city and allowing private transit entities do you seize red lanes will make it much worse. they have a red lanes but if sfmta improves private transit and taste does transportation they will slow down service and increase the travel times especially during peak hours and weekdays. it would worsen overcrowding not only in buses but on red lanes due to increased traffic. they are not moving forward but backwards. sfmta must prioritize the necessity to make service reliable rather than giving expensive privileges to private transportation entity. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am a student at usf as well as a worker at some can. the red lanes are to be used by public transit and the entire public should be able to benefit

from that, not just private does not private transit systems and i don't think they should be able to use those lanes for the low cost while working-class students and other low income families have to pay and to deal with those increasing rates. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the executive director of homey. i want to briefly say that we are completely opposed to having private companies use our lanes. we have many young people who use those buses and we all want quicker travel times. so we want to make sure that those lanes are used for the public. secondly, i want to say that red lanes themselves, they don't operate in a vacuum. transportation justice is also housing justice and economic and social justice for our communities and 40% -- there was

a survey done in our community and 40% of owners -- business owners have reduced because of red lanes. we have to look at the policy in general and see how we can help everyone involved, not just writers but also businesses, not profits that are on those transit corridors. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> hello. i want to say allowing public buses in the red lanes as is a subsidy to those who least need it. not only is it to her huge corporations, these corporations can then avoid their local responsibilities. and stunned organic local growth and -- instead, we should improve local transportation for all and prioritize the public over a select and privileged few they should benefit commuters within the city and nearby neighborhoods and not

corporations. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> giving private corporations accept -- access to transit only lanes as a ratification of privatization, loss of the commons and income inequality. we are seeing massive infrastructure work all over the city for the purpose of speeding up muni services. businesses had been shipped out have been shattered because of this buildout. neighborhoods have been disrupted for months and years to speed this up. allowing use of red lanes by private companies are patronized by people not using public transit is a quintessential bait and switch. san franciscans have supported measures to pay for filling potholes and improving our streets, only to see heavy buses and tour buses wear them down. what the public bills as infrastructure, these corporations see as a resource from which to extract profit. the community it is already suffering from a deep economic divide and can only suffer more as public resources are given away to profiteering companies. the public sphere needs to be

protected and not whittled away. let's improve it. it has been and should be a great equalizer where people of any income levels sit and stand together as part of the essential urban fabric. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hello. my name is dennis. i represent the inner sense at action community. i sent you a letter and it is in your pocket and i wanted to point out something else. essentially what this is as a privatization of public transit lanes and that is usually disguised as a public benefit, but it is common consequences are private investor interest crowd the public realm, official accountability is diminished and public access is restricted and/or reshaped. privatization is an extraction tantamount to mining the public sector. additionally, it amounts to an

outsourcing of public responsibility to the unaccountable private sector, and in this case, it is forward, tech giants, and assembly of companies that were on that document. i would urge you to reconsider this and hold a hearing that protects the public interest in this public process. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am a 25 year resident of san francisco. when people complain about public transit and say that the private sector would do better, they say its because public transit is too slow and too unreliable and obviously the transit only lanes would be a resolution to this. to allow private companies to interfere with that is kind of gaming the system, in my opinion as far as needing more data to show whether hundreds of extra

vehicles using those lanes are going to slow down transit is like saying that i need data to show one more -- one more beer will make me a little bit more drunk. [laughter] >> questionable. hello. next speaker. >> i am actually from chariots. popular subjects today. we have been permitted by the sfmta bite since april 2018 and we have been working closely with staff. as part of that program, we have to transit realtime g.p.s. data. we agreed to route criteria that in sheriffs just ensure his service as complementary. we cannot stop at muni stops at all. we also have training for our drivers to include specific training about you you go shielding to muni members as well. it doesn't appear to be a lot of data in terms of whether or not our usage slows down buses. in case that did come back and

it became an issue, i'm sure would be able to work with the agency to address those issues when they do arise. chariot agrees that the red lanes should benefit the public and we do believe that consideration should be given to the entities that participate in and are regulated by the sfmta or the city. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is john. i represent the teamsters 665 members that drive several of the private commuter services including chariots. our drivers are very trained and skilled and safely manipulate these private lanes. we do not interfere with the congestion that has been caused by some of these delays. we feel it is the best interest of our drivers and our passengers that these transit only lanes can allow for these larger capacity capacity that is regulated by the m.t.a.

and the main goal is to keep on reducing the one occupancy vehicles that people will tend to use and reduce the congestion thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is brandon and i am representing the executive board of the richmond district democratic club and we will see how fast i can read. transit is here to serve the most people for the greatest good with equitable access for all who need it. it is for this reason that we oppose the use of transit only lanes for all types of private transportation except for those directly regulated by clear justification that the city and county of san francisco which includes taxis and paratransit vehicles. the accessibility of private sector transit service is in question. does not partaking in certain industries without access to credit cards or the availability of smart phones are excluded from many of these providers. want to say that just because we oppose this, we don't want to

use this as an excuse to oppose the rapid transit. we are strong supporters of the bus rapid transit. want to ensure it remains public transit. thank you so much. >> thank you so much. >> good afternoon. i am with the san francisco taxi workers alliance figure like to make a distinction between taxis and private buses. they are an integral part of public transit and they have been since i have been driving a cab which started in 1983. we've always had access to the transit lanes. the city issues and unfortunately --dash and unfortunately sells taxi medallions. every aspect of taxi operations are a city regulated. every cab is city inspected. must perform to city requirements. we serve all areas including people without smart phones and access to e. hailing apps. we provide transportation to the disabled community through the

paratransit program. over 90 5% of taxis are hybrid vehicles. they exceeded the city's emission reduction targets for the fleet. they deserve the ability to continue to use to be transit lanes. >> thank you very much. >> hello. i am the board of the san francisco transit riders and we emphatically believe that the red lanes should be essentially muni only. most people in the city do not have access to subways. they their demand --dash depended on the surface bus system. it is dependent on red lanes in order to get around paratransit is a disappointedly i connect the dots operation. those dots are the bus stops in the new the redlines to freely access this bus stops and get between those f-stops. by contrast, private transit vehicles are a point-to-point service for the most part. they do not need to connect all of those dots. they can use other streets. even muni and operating express lines like the gary express does

not use gary street. it uses bush and pine. similarly, most private transit services do not need to operate on transit streets and should be discouraged from those streets and from the red lanes and red lanes should be muni only. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am from district age. i oppose the sfmta move to open transit only lanes to any vehicle that transports more than ten people. the plan documents how late red dedicated travel lanes to reduce unpredictable -- predictable delays and they state that the transit only lane as a travel lane dedicated for the exclusive use of transit vehicles and state law defines transit vehicles as those operated by or for public transportation agencies. the whole purpose of the plan would be defeated due to traffic congestion calculates, pollution that will inevitably result if

other buses would all compete with muni for lane space. a federal congestion mitigation and air quality grant a $16.5 million was granted to improve travel time. not for sfmta to open dedicated lanes to all matters of private for-profit vehicles. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is kevin with the san francisco democratic club and i sit on the eastern neighborhood see a.c. what the m.t.a. --dash the m.t.a. stated that 500 vehicles and 400 commuter shuttles equal up to those 500 vehicles per day times 10-50 riders per shuttle. as a lot of people who are not writing transit. leave it to the m.t.a. to classically shift the narrative about this being that those were at that ride public transit when this is about the privatization of red lanes to commuter shuttles and private shuttles. the red lanes were forced upon

us by m.t.a. without proper community engagement. they removed bus stops in the mission for seniors and disabled and took away half of the -- this should be for public vehicles only and not private companies that are only inducing gentrification and adding to the traffic congestion. paratransit vehicles are barred from using transit only lanes as they do not enter the california vehicle code definition of a transit bus. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is carlos and i am a member of united save the mission. a coalition that exists in the mission district. over the past several years, we have grown increasingly concerned of the board of directors transit first priorities have been instrumental to the public space to corporations and private interests. we are also concerned the core of the recent policy decisions are improperly rooted in the narrow lens of increasing efficiency of transit machinery rather than improving the quality of life for that most vulnerable residents. the citizens who showed where

the vast majority of writers on the transit system. we are concerned the porridge's and patients to expedite these services as quickly as possible has motivated them to abdicate the responsibility to private companies and corporations whose interest is profit and not people. and to create a system of community engagement that is disingenuous and something that only harms community residents and not creating a system of accountability that will ensure that they are the ones i received the greatest benefit from public transit. historically -- >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> edward mason. this will impede the travel for the 99%. morning time to purchase an evening times are major operational impacts. lacking a bus limit cap, delays will increase. shared muni zones have migrated to light stone's very precise morning time point departures result in approaching vehicles which is sometimes just

sometimes compounded with stragglers as potential darwin candidates to open the door for delaying departure. evening dwell times are longer than four muni with fewer passengers causing waiting vehicles to dangerously pass around. the commuter bus stop at 24th and church was moved to a curb stop. the reason single door or double door spiral staircases increases exit times. some passengers multitask with handheld devices or bicycles from the luggage department increasing dwell time. sixty commuter buses in our along valencia street create their own congestion. >> thank you, very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. animation resident who risa 1449 of the 12 every day. i would like to see spending more attention to address issues that folks in the mission have brought up with implementation of this program. a lot of us deeply believe in

transit priority lanes, were given the implementation and some of the struggles, i can't think of a worse thing we could do to undermine the confidence of people and the intent of the program and how it is applied than to move away from shifting our priorities to public transit and private transportation services. given the work we need to do to get this program and get these investments in place that will benefit folks, and the feeling of the folks in the community who have a lot of concerns about the way it has been implemented and the planning has been done, again, i would urge the board to send a strong message that the priority should be for public transportation for entering the planning and implementation meets the community needs today and to not prioritize pup public transit. >> afternoon. i am here with the housing community of san francisco. thank you for calling this hearing. i ride the 44 every day from my home in excelsior to the richmond and in the richmond i am served by the 31, the one as

the five. we are familiar with how lanes will be introduced into neighborhoods. in the richmond, we have been working on the ground, especially around thinking gary bart. public resources, public infrastructure should be used for the public good. while we work primarily to act to advocate for housing rights, we know transit justice is deeply connected to housing justice and improvements to the infrastructure should be accessible to all people especially the most marginalized and low income folks who are a majority of the riders. there were 12 affair hikes in 2017. there was one in january and one in july. we believe that riders are paying for these red carpet lanes and it should be used for the public instead of privatized services like that tech shuttle buses and chariots. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is taylor. i'm a member of the s.f. bike coalition and the latino democrat --dash democratic club.

i want to share two stories. i was a soccer coach at marshall elementary school for about 15 fifth and fourth graders. half of those children were moving by munimobile on a daily basis with their parents. these are children who should have plenty of time to study and pursue the things that they love in life and not waiting for the munimobile service. more riders means better service and better lines for our low income communities and my second point is that many of my neighbors have given up on the bus. they have said i can't take the bus because it's not serving me. so instead they have been using bicycles or their own scooters. and often having to deal with other issues dealing with that. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please.

>> hello, everyone. i am with the housing rights committee on the west side. i think that my main statement is regarding how often times the west side is painted a certain picture of single family homes but there are a good amount of renters and low income folks, especially youth and seniors that really do rely upon the public transit infrastructure on the west side. my main question is really regarding how do we prioritize the lives of our families and our seniors and our youth and renters over corporate interest. thank you? -- thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is wenda. i'm here on behalf of chinatown. a volunteer transportation advocacy group. chinatown has a severely low income community with a median household income of $19,000. 80% of residents do not own cars and must rely on walking, and taking transit to get around. it is critical that our transit lanes prioritize the needs of

the most vulnerable community members who have no option other than muni. i urge the committee and our city leaders to protect these lanes for public transit modes early -- only. this is critical. thank you for your time. >> thank you very much. >> hello, supervisors. my name is rosa and they work for the chinatown community development -- development centre. i work with a lot of youth. i always hear the youth complain about the public transportation not coming on time, being slow in them having to weighed all the time to get to school. youth attend school during peak hours as well and we want youth to get to school on time and we need to make transit more reliable. muni is our youth school buses and if they have to compete with private buses, transit only lanes, how are we getting youth to school on time and with enough sleep. our youth rely on public transportation to get to school and that is why these lanes

should prioritize one of the most vulnerable population needs and not those who ride privatized buses. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am a community organizer which chinatown c.v.c. and a member of chinatown trip. thank you for addressing the policy in place for red carpet rained justly loose it diffuse this. we hope you can change the policy and restricts these lanes for muni and taxis only. with increasing congestion in road traffic, it is vital that red carpet lanes remain a place for public terms of the public supports red carpet lanes because it is the toll that allows public transit to better serve our community and to the city. of red carpet lanes are shared with private transit and not only defeat the purpose of the red carpet lane, but they sent the wrong message to the community. we have seen continued abuse of red carpet lanes and the agency itself has acknowledged a citywide problem in enforcement of the lane. in order to ensure that the

public transit is prioritized and is seen as such in the eyes of the public, we must change our policies to reflect that. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i am with united to save the mission. there were several of our mission street business owners here today but they had to leave to get back to their businesses. and what they would tell you is that the red lanes were rolled out without a community process and they are suffering. businesses are closing every day , and many of them are merely about to close. and they are tired of being considered collateral damage and being told to suck it up for the better of the rate of transportation and to make the best is faster, and then only to see that our public transit and our red lanes are being sold out to corporate interest. and we need to make sure that more red lanes are implemented aren't implemented until these changes are made and that these

red lanes are only for public transit. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i'm with united to save the mission. research has found that a greater preference for urban amenities, retail, entertainment and service establishments as a main reason for the movement of the young college educated demographic into the central core cities like san francisco. these high income earners are more attracted to the proximity of amenities such as theaters, bars and other less sensitive to changes in housing prices. it only facilitates the travel to the amenities and the travel toward many of whom are not employed in the city. investment and private transportation encourages their proliferation and sensitive neighborhoods like the mission and so macaque it creates increases in housing prices that are small burdens for them, were devastating to low income communities and communities of color. we did have a rally this afternoon at 12:30 pm. i could talk for 20 minutes

about some of the impacts of the business owners have had as some of the secondary results of the mitt -- red lanes in the mission going forward, we demand a robust process. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i think one of the things we need to do is look at the impacts that they have had in the missing -- in the mission district. a lot of our businesses have suffered for quite some time. we have reports out on percentages of income that they have been using. we need to look at those things first before we move forward to try to allow private bus shuttles on these bus lanes. i think we need to look at the bigger picture and how business attracts transportation and it is not working for the folks who are riding the buses on mission street. it is hurting everyone. >> next speaker. >> hello. i'm glad you brought this hearing. i'm here and looking at the red

lanes for a long time. i wanted to make them faster. i did not like they were putting the red lanes in. but it was a 1% fighting against the neighbors picked the poor people and the colored people who ride the bus. it seems to be working but still hasn't addressed the businesses that are being affected. besides the businesses that have been affected in the mission district, we are looking at it as a whole and the red lanes that have been affected. let's get rid of that problem before we get into another problem with privatizing these bus lanes. thank you. >> thank you. >> overhead. >> thank you for this hearing. you had a great turnout. i'm sorry we only have one minute so i will try to speak fast.

if you have a hearing on any sfmta subjects, you will get this kind of a turnout because the public has given up on sfmta boards. the reason i brought this picture is about the red lanes that are coming to 16th street and the 22 fillmore project. the trees are in front of our building. it is our building. the historic red stone building. when i saw the notice that they were taking out a tree, i looked into it and i looked into why. and what i found was the 22 fillmore project is taking out 61 mature trees all along 16th . that will affect many businesses >> duly noted. thank you very much for bringing that to our attention. thank you. next speaker, please.

>> thank you supervisors. i am with the mission economic development agency. we really appreciate you holding this hearing today. we appreciate the sfmta has begun to address some of these trends that we have been raising with them. for the sake of time, i have just the facts we know them of great concern in this framework. the definition of transit as we are hearing does not include these private shuttles. there is no data to show that these will not have a detrimental effect on public transit. it is just another experiment on vulnerable communities. nor do we know what the effect is on incentivizing further corporate shuttle programs now that they can move faster than everybody else. speaking of speed, they keep saying the buses move faster, but the sfmta is proving that humans move faster. as we know, they move slower because they have longer walks and especially if you have mobility issues. we need to move from transit

first to transit -- >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> the m.b.a. claims that it is projects and programs that are data-driven. where is the data that verifies that red lanes even accomplish their goals while besides the red lanes, there are nonredlined transit only lanes which appear to have been -- have no demonstrated purpose or need than being part of the project. and where is the data on the unintended consequences of transit only lanes? what are the economic impact studies about the negative impacts on merchants and also on displacement and gentrification clock all this happens even though 25% of the m.t.a. budget is from the general fund, taxpayer's fund. it is not surprising that some san franciscans have come to perceive their tax dollars is being used against them. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon. thank you for holding this hearing. i sent a letter so i will only mention a couple of things. i believe everyone here is concerned with the privatization of our public space and the corporatization of our public process. so i am going to ask that the private enterprise is applying for preferential treatment on our public transit red lanes. they are attempting to compete with public transit entities and also at the san francisco airport and public curb spaces and sidewalks. we need to see the documentation that proves that they have the right to do this. the process is lacking and the public is totally annoyed by the whole process and does not trust it at all. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hello. my name is dylan. i am a student who commutes all

the way from the east bay. i ride muni five or seven days a week. in my experience, waiting at the station to travel half a mile to the campus on a crowded bus is unacceptable to me. that is why i think the redline should only be available to public transit and not for private. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> afternoon, supervisors. thank you for holding this meeting. i am with senior and disability action. we have heard a number of times how the red lanes are good for public transit and how private -- privatization defeats the purpose. i want to also emphasize the point of people who use public transit but cannot use munimobile due to their disabilities. it has the same effect. the red lanes for paratransit which is group transit and accessible vans and taxis.

these are for people who want to use public transit but cannot, with a red lanes help them. when you privatize them, as you know, we are already having a lot of issues with reliability where people wait up to an hour and a half or two hours just to get their vehicles to pick them up and drop them off. privatizing the lanes makes it even worse for them. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am here representing the mission emergent association. sfmta has failed to do an economic study of the impact of the red lanes on mission street. we did our own. we surveyed 357 businesses. 301 half reported that they have had a loss of revenue from the red lanes. thirty-three employees have been laid off due to the loss of revenue. fourteen businesses have closed due to the red lanes that have

been installed on mission street three current businesses are going out of business due to this impact that these red lanes have affected our neighborhood to. in addition to that, you have all of these no right hand turns that have been installed and been affecting us. as well as all the parking that has been taken away from mission street so we are here to ask you to pleas remove all the red lanes on mission street. >> thank you very much. any other public speakers? scene none, public comment is close. colleagues, supervisor? >> i just wanted to respond to one of the commenters regarding the trees or the treatise that would be removed. i think that is something that sfmta should look into. that particular building that

was shown, that is a historic building in the mission. i'm not exactly sure why mature trees need to be removed. i know that the same thing happens when an improvement project was done on potrero avenue. there were a significant number of large mature ficus trees that were removed. it changes the character and the composition of that street. one of the things that is beautiful in the mission are the large and mature ficus. i would say that whatever decisions are made to moving forward to, i can tell you right now, the supervisor does not support removing any trees. i am not sure what the justification would be for removing those trees along the path. >> thank you. i will look into it. it is not related to the transit scope. from what i understand, the water and sewer were. we will look into it and make sure that that doesn't happen.

>> i understand that. often times, you see a finger-pointing with departments with these larger infrastructure projects along the transit corridor is. people will come in and say this is being done because of this. this is being done because of that. i don't believe in a sewer replacement project and any justification to removing mature trees. the two are not mutually exclusive. they can coincide and be balanced out. in a process, there is environmental review that has to happen for your project. wherever it is, it has been brought up in the context of moving forward to. so we would like a report back to this body, particularly in my office to understand exactly how the two are correlated. i'm happy to follow up with d.p.w. as well. >> great. thank you. >> thank you very much. mr kennedy, i think what we heard today is people have a deep affection for the public transit system. as frustrated as they are about

rail liability, they realize the importance of public transportation and that the goal of public transit should be that public transportation is the main mode of transportation in san francisco. and that public transit is the people's transportation system. having said that, if there is interest in this board, myself, quite frankly to see a narrowing of the type of vehicles allowed on red carpet lanes, can you clarify the process for doing so , and whether or not that is within sfmta charge a jurisdiction. >> from my understanding, that is an empty a jurisdiction. so i think making a formal request of the m.t.a. to look into trees is the right process to go through. as far as i understand. the process going forward. >> sure. thank you for coming today. i would like to say that the intent behind transit only lanes is to increase the reliability

and i do think it is a time to really explore the responsibility to protect red lanes as a public infrastructure for publicly operated transits. so i would like to work with the community and sfmta. i think to revisit division i and division two of the transportation code so we are clarifying and protecting our red carpet lanes or transit and taxis and paratransit. lets have an agreement to work together on that and see what we can do. i want to thank everyone who came out today to give public testimony and also to voice your opinion and also your adoration or frustration with our wonderful -- wonderful system. thank you for using muni and thank you. thank you very much to my colleagues for allowing me to hold this hearing. i would like to make a motion to have this hearing be filed, please. >> okay. thank you for this hearing.

we well, without objection, filed file this hearing. all right. mr clerk, are there any announcements or any further action items? >> there is no further business. >> this meeting is adjourned. p

david lozar. oh, and -- i'm sorry -- oh, and