we also wanted to hold ourselves to measurable outcomes. that is one of the key things that i will report on today. we wanted to get our service delivery up to 90 6%, would ultimately, this number has to be 100%. that is critical to reliable service. we also wanted to reduce gaps on both the rapid bus lines and the metro lines. you guys will hear me start talking a lot about managing service gaps. what i am talking about is reducing the amount of unexpected wait time that somebody might have on the bus service. if you expect the bus to come every ten minutes, does it come every ten minutes, the reason for that is that san francisco has a lot of unpredictable congestion and delays. so i'm not that confident, for example, on the eight bayshore that i can say, on any given day , it will take this amount of time to get through the 101 freeway.

but what i can say is all of the vehicles are experiencing the same delay. if we are very closely watching the spacing of those vehicles from our customer perspective, it will be a seamless experience on the left -- less frequent routes, we are focusing on on-time performance, because of a bus comes every 20 or 30 minutes, somebody is more inclined to look at a scheduled and on a 38 gary, which somebody is more likely to walk out and take. and then our last metric was around reducing preventable collisions. the safety continues to be our highest priority. i'm really pleased that this is one of the areas that we -- that were most effective during the last 90 days. so the first place that we really focused was putting service on the street. over the 90 days, we accomplished a tremendous amount

we familiarized all of our l r.v. operators on the new siemens vehicles which is allowing us to get more of these vehicles in service and really get these amenities and customers more quickly. we also increase the size of our rail classes and we are now delivering 100% of the rail service. that is important because almost a quarter of our ridership is on the rail system, and those are our highest capacity vehicles. we also converted part-time operators to full-time which helped with our hiring, but hiring continues to be -- hiring new operators continues to be our biggest challenge. we are looking at a whole range of things, including partnerships with the city, potentially on helping people get their b. license, which makes them great candidates for our program, and reaching out to untapped areas of the workforce.

the next area we focused on was enhancing service reliability. again, consistency for wait times, and on-time performance on the lease frequent routes. we started using new tools in the transportation management centre that allows us to know how evenly the vehicles are spaced, and also how many people are in the vehicle. if i have two vehicles and i need to decide, okay, which one will i slow down, or which one will i light maybe turnaround, i can choose the one that has very few people on its. we have real -- realtime ridership information on the bus side right now. we also replaced some of our most vulnerable infrastructure that was creating major subway delays. i noted out a little bit on this but we do anticipate as a result of having better switches to exit certain areas that we will

have fewer subway breakdowns. and we delivered on a major transit priority project completing the gary rapid early improvements. what i am most excited about as we look forward to the next 90 days is moving the rail system over to our modern transportation management centre we are just wrapping up the final installation pieces of the radio on the rail system, that will allow us to introduce these more modern management tools on the rail system. and the third area i wanted to highlight for you today is safety. here i think the investment i am most excited about is an effort that the safety department ledge across the agency to try and reduce sideswipe his.

the streets in san francisco are very narrow and these are our largest source of collisions. we have looked at everything from how we train operators, how we stop at a stop that has a double parked car, because one of the things that we were finding was that by trying to sneak in to get as close to the curb, you were leaving the corner of the bus out, which was making it very vulnerable to sideswipe his. we also looked at the back of the vehicle itself and added some reflective tape to make it more visible to motorists. we saw almost a 20% reduction year-over-year in sideswipe his. that contributed to us needing this reduction and collision goal. >> these are our results.

the service delivery, we are near meeting our target. we are at about 90 5%. we did have a new operator class graduate. we were there to welcome our newest members to this family and i was really wonderful. we are going to continue to do everything we can to increase operator hiring sideswipe process. as well as got very close to meeting our goal on the outer rail system. we will -- now our focus is on sustaining this work. we did not meet our own time performance targets on the circulator routes. the routes that take people from hilltop and bring them down into our core system. the owl routes which are infrequent -- infrequent. we did focus heavily on making sure that service was on those routes, and that we weren't missing service, but we continue

to need to look at new ways to enhance on-time performance. and then finally, as i discussed ,, we reduced our preventable collisions by 5% and we will continue to focus on collision reduction. moving forward, i plan to take the month of december to reflect on our progress and learn. we will also invite more feedback from the folks closest to the work. i often think that they really have the best ideas, and we also have some actions that we didn't complete. they will roll forward with the idea that the next cycle would begin in january and carious through march -- and carry us through march. in that period, we will be doing a two month closure of the tee line. the scale of that construction is smaller than twin peaks, but

we are very actively taking the lessons from twin peaks and making sure we apply them to the project so we really minimize systemwide impacts while still providing really excellent service for our tee line customers. in the next 90 days, i think our biggest challenges are going to, as i discussed at the last meeting, be greater reliability. really reducing subway delays, and focusing on operator hiring. those will be what i put out to staff as i challenge them to identify actions and strategies to continue to improve muni service moving forward. thank you. >> thank you so much for the presentation. directors, questions, comments, concerns,. >> i have a question.

is it possible to employ this strategy that you did for this 90 day plan in a more long-term fashion so we can continue -- continually -- put the spotlight in the way that we did in a finite period of time, i ultimately think it takes that level of scrutiny and teamwork and priority to achieve these things for the long term. >> that is what we recommend. >> absolutely. i think it has been a very effective process and tool. this is really what the mayor has challenged us to do. and i think when we talked about it here, the board seconded that so this continued enhanced focus on service delivery his. absolutely it is something that while we did not hit all of our marks for the first 90 days, we think the process was effective and it is something we will carry forward. >> can we get this report every 90 days or something? it would be helpful for us, even

if it is not here, at least every 90 days to get an update on how we are performing in these areas. i think also, it will help us when there are problems to head them off more quickly. >> sure. it is a good idea. >> yes, director class payment door. >> this is very helpful and very helpful. it feels like the real wildcard is the operator shortage in what we will do long-term to address that. i feel like that is happening in a lot of arenas where staffing is a challenge including with teachers, for example,. is a big issue in our local public schools. i'm wondering if we can talk about more of what we think could be jonah long-term in terms of addressing that issue. i feel like if we got everything out there but nobody to drive the buses, it will be an issue. >> yeah. what i would say since julie is in charge of hiring operators, she is in charge of putting them

into service. so we have been thinking a lot about this. it has been quite a while since we've had a challenging hiring folks to work part time, but now , recently even to find folks who want to work full-time is becoming more challenging, as the unemployment right mac gets down to zero, it is getting more difficult. as julie said, we are partnering with the city of office diversity office of economic and workforce development to explore ways we may be able to work with folks ahead of time to get them more ready to get more people ready to be operators such as licensing requirements or other work readiness skills. we are looking hard at the way we are making people aware of the opportunities going far beyond just posting it up on our website, or even sending it out to c.b.o. who do employment support and looking at many

different ways to make sure that people are aware of the opportunities. so there is a lot of thinking that we are doing and steps we are taking to try and broaden the pool to increase the number of folks who apply to actually follow through in the process. what we have found in the last time, for example, we had a pretty good return in terms of people applying for the job, but when we called them in for the next step, a lot of them were not interested. we are also looking at looking how to speed up the process. you are right. this is our single biggest challenge. it is being felt right now most acutely with regards to transit operators. but we are looking at areas of maintenance, particularly skilled crafts. we are having difficulties. we have had some calls for positions when we have not been able to get anybody. for certain types of technical positions. this is something that i know

other city agencies and schools and others are having. it is a challenge given the economic dynamic of our region right now in our city, but we are very focused. i did discuss this with the mayor, and she gave some support and direction for working with the economic development folks here. that partnership will be helpful but this is something that will take a lot of focus in order to bring in the staffing that we will need to provide the service thank you. >> i love the report. i love the idea of breaking down the rapid bus lines being measured by gas, because we know gas is incredibly frustrating for passengers, versus looking at on-time performance for the low-frequency routes, i know all of us were forwarded the article about on-time performance and what that means, and what that measure, how that measure is

implemented. i think that is a really good way to look at it, your example of the nine, if the buses are coming every ten minutes and they're all stuck in the same traffic, you will be only waiting ten minutes for that bus whereas on the low-frequency routes, although a lot of people are using their next muni on their cell phones are on their devices, it is still having that best not show up on time is kind of a bigger issue. to speak to the hiring, i was fortunate enough to go to the training department and they let me try to drive a bus. it was amusing for everybody. they do such a good job out there. i know that -- it struck me that the last couple of classes, the graduations i went to, we do not get a lot of women making it through the classes. i am sure it is a combination of we don't get as many women

applying, but i wonder if it is worthwhile looking into doing, i don't know. a women only class. i do wonder, i know i felt intimidated with the idea of driving a bus. i do wonder if women are not applying to drive the buses because they do feel that it is just an overwhelming idea to drive that big of a bus. i wonder if there is some way we can widen our hiring pool by making that job appear more approachable to people and particularly women. that is not something that i expect an answer from. just an idea. the last flute just a few classes did not have a lot of women graduating. they do say that women are later on the equipment then the men. [laughter] >> maybe that is something to look into. thank you so much. i know that this has been a big focus. i know it's been a lot of work. i know with all the other challenges that are going on,

that this took extra time. i think it is really showing results and i love the idea of since we are going to continue to look at this in 90 day cycles , let's go ahead and have a brief presentation back to the board after the end or close to the end of each 90 day cycles so we can look at what is working and we can acknowledge -- speak knowledgeably to all of these situations. that will be super helpful. we will get a chance to watch the progress until you good good job when you come back. shows good progress like you have done with this one. do i have any other comments before i go to public comment,. >> i have to support the idea about a women cohorts. it could be a really interesting report.

>> a lot of people have done that as a way to encourage more women to join and it is something, i don't know how difficult it is, but if we could do something like that, it could be very good thing that he doesn't have to be a woman only class with some sort of feedback from the drivers to show other women out there that you can do it. i do it. we had a number of women at the award to have been driving in the city for decades. it could be good. doesn't have to be -- and eat we need to show women out there. >> many of our trainers are women. many of the team leaders of the classes are women. even the managers of the training department. i think you're onto something here. we will explore. >> that does remind me of one more thing. after going through that class, i did say to the trainers and i said it to the operator, that from now on, now that i understand how hard it really is to drive a bus, and in particular the idea of pulling into the bus stop to get your front door within 12 inches in your backdoor within 18, you

have to take the front corner of that bus over the curb. the curb where everyone is standing with their toes hanging right on the curb. you can't really do it when your passengers are so anxious to get to the bus. i did pledge that now every time a project comes to us, one of my questions will be, how does this make this easier, and safer for our operators to do their job? that is my pledge. if i don't do it, everybody hold me to it that i will ask that question. >> did you drive a bus class. >> i did. it was terrifying. the trainers were so good. >> not on the road where there were real people. >> just in the parking lot. i believe we do have -- thank you so much. we look forward to continued improvements on this character we have any members of the public while. >> yes. >> yes, mr weiner? >> i realized that this is a

formidable task, and i appreciate the 90 day accountability. i have some suggestions. the one thing, the turnarounds are a nightmare. some transportation managers throughout the country will say this is america and it is apple pie. but it leaves a bitter taste in passengers' amounts. this happens on the one california line of presidio and california street, there are so many turnarounds that have been, and people are really inconvenienced. also, there is a city of vehicles on sampson and market street where you have to weighed a long time for the two to come in. and the three jackson sits there waiting for passengers. also, accuracy in the transportation panel. you can walk away from the bus

stop thinking the bus will come 20 minutes later, and three minutes later, it comes and you have to run back to the bus stop and there is a lack of a travel panel operating. thirty-second and gary street is a major transit point in the city. that panel has been not operating for years. it should be. it is also -- a statement was made that transportation has to be woven into the fabric of the community. that is a very accurate statement. but you will have to walk a quarter of a mile to the bus stop and that is making it difficult for people. especially the seniors on the disabled. i'm wondering if it isn't a violation of the american disability act. in conclusion, i want to say you provide one very important service. some senior citizens cannot drive --

>> thank you." time is up. >> that is at. >> thank you very much. do we have any more public comment? c. and none, public comment is closed, and i believe that concludes the business before you today. >> remind us, do we have another meeting class. >> there is another meeting december 18th. >> don't forget your jacket. thank you all very much.

>> chair peskin: good morning and welcome to the san francisco transportation authority for today, tuesday, december 4, 2018. our clerk is mr. albert quintanilla. mr. quintanilla, could you please call the roll. [roll call] >> clerk: we have quorum. >> chair peskin: thank you. and colleagues, i just left a project labor agreement meeting with commissioner safai, so if we could have a motion to excuse commissioner safai, made

by commissioner ronen, seconded by commissioner stefani, and we will do that without objection. [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: item 2, citizen's invoicesory committee report. this is an action item. >> chair peskin: mr. tennen. >> peter tennen, vice chair of the c.a.c. all of the action items were unanimously approved, and i'd just like to pass along a few comments on two of the items. the first is your item six, to direct a motion of support to direct staff to advance the work and seek adjustment for pras stu pras -- project study update.

motorized vehicles would be charged, but scooters and bicycles would likely not be charged. and how would network transport companies be charged, and staff replied that since t.n.c.'s were not a factor in 2010 when the last study was done, there'll be more study on this topic. and then, someone raised the issue that what would be done in areas of high housing population and seniors, especially along laguna street that would be affected by congestion pricing. and staff responded that accommodation would be made for this population living along the affected corridors. and then, your second item was item nine, and one member congratulated the transportation authority for

implementing social responsibility within the investment policy and also for their high bond rating. and another member expressed their support for strict investment policies. so that concludes my report. >> chair peskin: thank you, mr. tannen. are there any questions for the c.a.c.? seeing none, is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: mr. clerk, call the next item, please. [agenda item read] >> chair peskin: is there any public comment on the minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: is there a motion on that item? made by commissioner stefani, seconded by supervisor kim. on that item, roll call, please. [roll call]

>> clerk: we have first approval. >> chair peskin: i think it's finally approved. >> clerk: no. >> chair peskin: we do the minutes twice. >> clerk: no, i'm sorry. final approval. >> chair peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: item four, appoint two members to the citizen advisory committee. this is an action item. >> chair peskin: thank you. the other mr. quintanilla. >> thank you. to qualify for appointment, applicants must be san francisco residents, and must appear before the board at least once to speak to their interests and qualifications. attachment two in the packet is a list of applicants, and the

enclosure has details on each applicants. the applicants are due to t the -- [inaudible] >> chair peskin: okay. are there any applicants for the citizens advisory committee that would like to testify. all right. seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: commissioner kim? >> supervisor kim: i juthank . i just wanted to share a statement from commissioner hogue. the reason i missed meetings is i had a bad hip, and in october, i had seven hours of hip replacement surgery.

if reappointed, i will be at the january c.a.c. meeting because i won't have to deal with my hip. i just wanted to let you know a little bit about becky, before living on treasure island, she has been a very passionate and active member of our citizens advisory the committee. she is someone who is very committed to serving our city and if not for the medical issue, would have attended the meeting. i would ask the board to consider appointing her to the board. she has committed to attending once her medical issue is resolved, however if this continues to be an ongoing issue with the next board, she'll work with the supervisor elect to find another member to replace her. >> chair peskin: can i consider that a motion, commissioner kim? >> supervisor kim: yes, chair

peskin, i'd like to make a motion. >> chair peskin: motion to rea-appoint commissioner hogue, seconded by commissioner yee. commissioners, can we take that same house, same call? [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: can we have a motion to continue the district ten seat, made by commissioner mandelman, seconded by commissioner yee, and we'll do that without objection. [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: item five, allocate approximately 25 million in proprop k funding for tax requests. this is an action item. >> chair peskin: mr. quintanilla. >> today, we are before you for a request for about $25.8 million. these funds were identifies

during the prop k strategic plan update, and along with two additional fund exchanges will direct 21 million to help backfill the regional improvement funding gap that we have now, the rest of this gap is going to be split by sfmta and m.t.c. in this allocation request, we're also reflecting the delays caused by the mining in the chinatown station. >> chair peskin: that's not. clerk: s, i just wa -- that's news, just to inform my colleagues. [inaudible] >> -- this facility services

approximately 165 trolley coaches. this project will improve workers safety and productivity, security, safety, and fleet reliability. construction is expected to be completed by december 2020. the long-term plan for sfcta for this facility is for a full rebuild by 2021. they will try and relocate these lifts to either this facility or other sfmta facilities. the next request is for $24.1 million for el taraval light and rail enhancement projects. this project -- this allocation request is foes from west portal street to sunset boulevard. construction is coordinated

with sewer, water, and street resurface to minute mice disruption to the public. construction is anticipated to start in spring 2019 and go through spring 2021. this is one of the fund exchanges that will help backfill the central subway gap. this money will be subject to a separate allocation request in fiscal year 19-20. the next request, also from sfmta for $5.6 million to -- [inaudible] >> -- between church and utah. this is part of the 16th street transit enhancement projects which similar to the ones before is a larger set of transition and public improvements. and construction is anticipated to begin spring 2019 and go through the end of 2020.

the next request from s.f. public works is to fund the design of the great highway terminus narrowing which would narrow from four lane to see two lanes. this project will allow a separate prop k funded project to begin, and together both projects will provide protected pathway and offer safe working for access to the beach. the sign is expected to be completed by 2019, and construction funding for this project is still to be determined, but public works and m.t.a. is working with the ocean beach association to identify funding. the next project is from public works to fund public works portion of the taraval project to pave 26 blocks between west postial station and sunset

boulevard. project includes new sidewalk construction and curb ramps. again, this contract is coordinated with the el taraval transit enhancements project. the next request is to fund the repaving of allemeny boulevard. it would include new sidewalk construction and curb ramps. prop k is leveraging 1.75 million in sb-1 program partnership funds. construction is anticipated to start spring 2019 and be open by full 2019. the last request is for sfmta for the market to sansome neighbor bicycle project that will provide safe and

attractive bicycle alternative. no loss of parking or travel lanes is anticipated. outreach for this project has been conducted as part of the embarcadero bike week, and it's anticipated to be open for use in summer 2019, and with that, we'll take questions. >> chair peskin: and are there any questions from members? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? please come forward. >> good morning, chair peskin, commissioners. charles nefarge, senior community organizer at the san francisco bicycle coalition. pleased to be here to speak to the bicycle and sansome bicycle projects. in light of the killing of kevin manning, we know more

than ever that we need safe bicycle routes through the northeast of sansome and battery. supervisor peskin. thank you for kick starting this process with your ntip money. we appreciate you leading the way. can i have the overhead. >> chair peskin: overhead, please. let's try that overhead one more time. do you have that up? [inaudible] >> chair peskin: we have to turn that off and on, is that what staff is saying? >> excellent.

i want to say that this is really only a start to making last week, the examiner, they referred this the safe alternative to the deadly embarcadero. that's great, but what we can see from the scope here, those streets only extend to broadway, so i wouldn't call this a safe alternative quite yet. the 200,000 today, it's a great kick start to this project, but we want to make sure that we continue to push and get these bike lanes all the way to market so that they create a connection in the bicycle network. so thank you again, commissioner peskin, sfmta staff. we're excited to get this project in the ground but also expand in the success and get it all the way to market, which is a bigger lift, but a crucial

one. >> chair peskin: thank you for those comments. if there is any further public comment, please come forward. >> by now, i hope the value of bike lanes so those who bike is clear, so i want to spend my time talking about the value to the community at large. more bike lanes mean a cleaner city. we know the single largest offender to our greenhouse gas emissions in san francisco is vehicle transit. we need to make it more attractive to bike, walk, and use mobility options in our neighborhood. we also know we need stronger bicycle corridors. in north beach, the vacancy rate has more than doubled in

the last three years alone. transport london found that those who use nonauto modes of transit spent 40% moreover a four-month period. i hope this does not block our commitment to very important other projects, the first being the embarcadero enhancements, and the second being the long-missing plan for construction of a true bicycle connection from north beach through to downtown. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. is there any additional public comment? mr. tannen? >> yeah, peter tannen. i just wanted to second the comments of the bicycle coalition. when this was presented to the c.a.c., i noticed that the

bicycle routes didn't connect to other bicycle -- official bicycle routes south of broadway. i think the bicycle lanes with a great idea, but i also think it would be great to look at extending them further with market street. thank you. >> chair peskin: we agree. seeing no additional public comment, is there a motion on item number five? made by commissioner brown, seconded by commissioner mandelman. we have the same house, same call. [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: that item is adopted on first reading. mr. quintanilla, next item, please. [agenda item read] >> chair peskin: mr. dentalpost? >> thank you. good morning, commissioners. so as you'll recall, back in october, we presented

information on the 2010 mobility access and pricing study, which looked at how we could implement a conjepgestio management program to better manage congestion in the city, and we came up in that study to look at a northeast core don to manage congestion in the most congested areas of the city as well as a multimodal project. your directive to us was to get a new study and directive. so we've been working on putting together a proposed scope. today we have an outlined version of that to share with you, and we're asking basically if we're on the right track with that and to get your confirmation, hopefully, that we are, and if we are then we'll come back early next year with a prop k request to get started as soon as we can.

so the proposed console before you involves developing a more confined set of scenarios than we developed last time to try to stream line this effort, and we'll be basing or including in those scenarios a fresh look at what should be included in and how we should target pricing in terms of exactly where we should be pricing as we move forward with this, as well as what appropriate fees and times and things would be to manage congestion as best we can, things to make the program more fair and also to encourage people to use sustainable modes of transportation. and lastly, we would include in those scenarios a package of proposed multimodal improvements that would include

things like transit improvements. we heard the importance of including major bike improvements and pedestrians improvements as well as things like repaving and streetscape improvements, and so those would help manage congestion and make the system work better. we'd be developing those scenarios based on a few things. first of all a substantial community based effort. we will then take the scenarios, we will evaluate them and how they stack up against the goals of the program, and then, we would develop a new set of recommendations and form this analysis and also ways that we could speed up delivery of those improvements. as i mentioned, there would be

a substantial community out yaech and engagement effort as part of this, and that would include two major rounds of outreach. the first we're anticipating spring to summer of next year, how congestion affects them, as well as program elements that we should include. a second round of outreach would be in early 2020, where we'd be sharing the results of our performance evaluation and asking for input on what the implications are for what scenarios people support and what our proposed recommendations will be. it will include key stakeholders, transit operating agencies, regional partners,

and caltrans and so forth, and a committee that would include a wide range of stakeholders like those that are concerned about the wide range of the transportation system, neighborhood associations, network and environmental advocates, and to really get all those folks at the table so that they can provide in-depth input as we go through the entire study. we'll also continue our work partnering with pier cities where they also have implements or are considering congestion pricing so we can keep learning from what they're doing. so we're looking at starting this as soon as we can early next year and wrapping up by mid2020, and we estimate the costs to be 1.6 million, and we'd fund that through a combination of sources. and what we're looking at is prop k, where there's already

500,000 programmed in td 41. if you endorse this scope moving forward, then we'll be returning early next year with a request to appropriate those funds. we also know there's programs fees that are programmed for pricing and intensive work, so we're seeking those funds, and then, we're also looking at other grant sources, such as regional funds that we can use to get this started and moving along. so with that, happy to take questions and look forward to your direction. >> chair peskin: thank you for coming back at the t.a.'s direction. are there any questions or comments? commissioner brown. >> can you tell me, how will the members of the policy committee be chosen?

>> that's a great question. i think we would want to make sure we have a wide range of seats representing different interest groups, and it's likely to be a large group, and i think we'd also want input from commissioners' offices as we do that so that we're representing all the different viewpoints all the way along the process. >> chair peskin: any further questions, commissioner brown? are there any further members of the public who would like to comment on this earth shattering ordinance? mr. r adulovic?

>> tom radulovic. we're here to support the ordinance. you should definitely charimplt congestion charging. the goal is really to move more people. this is a diagram that shows you that private automobiles, half of the city's and state's co 2 emissions a co2 emissions. if you can get people to shift the modes of transportation they use, you can shift more

people. all the data that we have shows that parking is an incredible effective tool of mode shifting. another way of doing this is making walking, cycling and transit more tractive. we'd love to see you create more bold moves. a lot of people in apartments won't say this to you but will say this to us. they don't know how supportive you are to take roads and use them to support modes.

>> chair peskin: mr. chawa. >> thank you, commissioners. the best part of following tom is he says everything that i was going to say, and then, i have to makeup new stuff. thank you so much. i'm on the board of san francisco league of conservation voters, as well as san francisco bicycle coalition, but i'm speaking for the league of conservation voters. i'm thrill as a commission that you are taking up this important move, and i just want to highlight that this provides a real opportunity to bring together many of our goals that we've fought for and we've all believed in for so long, whether it's a transportation first policy, whether it's improving muni, whether it's improving our vision zero outcomes and street safety as well as and obviously our carbon emissions goals. this is one of those things that you as sitting commissioners and supervisors get a chance to nail, right?

we can pull all of these things together by making this kind of dramatic step forward, and this is a real opportunity to lead. it's an opportunity to lead within san francisco because there will be resistance, but the data and the evidence is clear that this is the right thing to do, and our needs are clear that it's the right thing, but it's also an opportunity to lead nationally. we've done this in europe, we've talked about it in other cities, but here is a chance for san francisco to take one of those real steps that show that we as californiians and we as people on this planet really care about what this world looks like. as you all know, we are the last generation that has a chance to get this right, so i really hope you keep that in mind as you make this decision. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you, and i noticed our b.a.r.t. board member elect ms. lee. congratulations. you now occupy the b.a.r.t.

board seat once occupied by mr. radulovic. >> i'm the executive director of walk san francisco. i'm here to express walk san francisco's strong support of this body's propose jolly for congestion pricing study here in san francisco. as a vision zero city with the goal of eliminating all severe and fatal crashes by 2024, we need to be exploring all possibilities and resources to get to this goal, and congestion pricing is one of those tools in our tool box to reduce the number of car trips and eliminate traffic collisions. sadly, we have had more deaths this year on our streets than last year, so our great efforts

to redesign our streets simply is not enough, and we need to be more bold and innovative in our approach to reach vision zero. as tom did mention, studies have shown that everyone benefits from congestion pricing. cities that are trying it are now seeing that this benefits transit riders the most. what i like to remind people is transit riders and muni pedestrians are people. we need to be providing them with the resources and ability to move more people around our see more effectively and efficiently. walk san francisco asks that you support sfcta's pricing study, give them the funds to do so, and explore this untapped potential. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you, jodi. ms. lee, thank you.

>> thank you. i'm speaking as executive director of the san francisco executive director. listen, i know that congestion pricing can be difficult to think about additional fees on our streets, but the truth is for every single muni rider, we already have a fee. it's called our transit faires and how much we use or streets and what are the costs. we need to be make sure that we are fighting every revenue possible so we can be investing in oall of our streets, so we can keep the city moving as it grows. the study that was done a long time ago was done, i mean, before tilly was executive director, liz bryson was still at the t.a. it needs an update especially because this city has changed so many in different ways.

i hope this moves forward and san francisco can be advancing the best policies for transportation and be once again leading the way. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. are there any other members of the public on this item? seeing none, i would actually love to make the motion, but i won't do it. but as the district three supervisor, that is the area that would i think most be affected and to the good. is there a motion to advance the proposed scope of work for the congestion pricing study in made by commissioner kim, seconded by commissioner brown. we have a different house. roll call, please. [roll call] >> clerk: we have approval.

>> chair peskin: thank you, mr. quintanilla. next item, please. [agenda item read] >> chair peskin: ms. laford. >> ana laford, director of policy and authority at the transportation authority. the metropolitan transportation authority in 2015 established the state assistance county block programs. f.t.a. funds are generated from the diesel sales tax. previously, the funds were distributed over the last ten years via regional paratransit program, a regional lifeline program that funded projects that improve mobility for low-income communities and the transportation authority as congestion management agency did five cycles of calls for projects over the last ten years for that program, and

then, also, there was a north county small transit operator share that we did not receive any funds from. m.t.c. has revisited this allocation methodology and has now put together a new block grant that allows counties to determine how to use the funds, and we are required to submit an annual distribution policy to the m.t.c., and that is the item that is before the board today for consideration and for action. so over these two fiscal years, we are expected to receive $7.6 million, and that's the amount that san francisco would have received under the former regional programs. 40% of the funds to the sfmta's paratransit progr paratransit program, and this would have made the program whole. we're also recommending 60% of the funds go to a new s.f.

lifeline transportation program. the first cycle would cover these two fiscal years, and the program would be administered by the transportation authority. so the eligibility for s.t.a. funds, you have to meet the state's eligibility guidelines. the intent of our program is to support projects that improve mobility for low-income residents. this is keep in the spirit of the former regional program and continuing it with the san francisco flavor, if you will. we're requiring a 10% local match to the project, so once these projects are screened for eligibility, what we would do is evaluate the projects based on the prioritization that are in your materials and packet as an attachment to the memo, attachment one. we are proposing to give highest priority to transit service projects that benefit

communities of concern. f.t.a. funds are very few sources that we as the t.a. can prioritize for operations, so -- and we also expect to see -- it provides an opportunity for broad distribution geographically of benefits to communities of concern, and this is where high populations of low-income communities live. the priority would be given to projects that have emerged. you'll hear about the district ten ntip program that has recommendations as an example that are very focused on engagement particularly the low-income populations. we will prioritize projects that are ready to go, as well as geographic diversity. so once the board adopts the framework for this program, and again, we're recommending a percentage split as opposed to an impact dollar amount because

the exact dollar amount we'll receive each year is based on the final rozon sailiation. we would -- final reconciliation. with that, i can take any questions. >> chair peskin: are there any questions from miss la fort. is there any public comment? seeing no public comment, thank you for that presentation. is there a motion to approve the grant framework? made by commissioner yee, seconded by commissioner kim, and we have the same house, same call [ gavel ]. >> chair peskin: the item is approved on first reading. next item, please. [agenda item read] >> chair peskin: miss hyatt. >> rachel hyatt, district planner. this is the district ten ntip planner. we looked for