>> the market doesn't, you know, we have a shortage in those the special tilt -- specialty areas which is where a lot of those vacancies are, we have recruitment challenges which is why we have a lot of vacancies. we also have, you know, more people that will come in and take the per diem because they are already working in another hospital. so we try to recruit by hiring per dm to give them an opportunity to see how they like the trauma center, and then in

hopes to give them the transition into a permanent solution. >> how many of those have transitioned into permanent positions. >> we have, most of the hiring that we do, we hire in the med surge, so we higher up in the med surge and train them in the specialty areas, and then when those training programs open, we are able to hire our per diem his her -- from the met -- med surge into the training program. it carries about six eight trainees per program and those are every six months. twice a year we have training programs in those specialties. >> and then the per diem, so they go into a per diem program, and then they transition into our regular system? >> they start off as per dm, and then they train in the areas of the specialty of interest, and then we tried to get them to the areas where we have recruitment challenges, like critical care and e.d., but it takes more

training and experience that is required to go into those training programs. >> how successful are we transitioning these people from per diem positions into permanent positions? >> i feel we can improve more, but again, we have a shortage, so we can't increase our training program and a larger amount of up to eight that we have every six months because it takes a one-on-one perception to train. >> so it would be six-8 that you train every six months. how many transfer from per diem to permanent? >> those are actually training positions, so when they go for per diem into a training program , they go from a per diem to a 23-20 training trainee. >> and then they become permanent nurses in our system? >> the training program is

permanent. they have to resign from their per diem in order to go into the training program, and then they have to successfully passed predation -- probation if they want dual appointment. >> that is where you have your most manageable hours? >> yes. >> okay. any questions? so i think that we have seen off of here that there has been an increase in your overtime. >> sorry, can you over -- can you repeat? >> and increasing overtime, and is it particularly the cause of this? >> this is in the plan and unplanned absences, there is an increase in that, as well, and while we try to manage our discretionary leaves, we can't control, so we have to manage them. >> okay. thank you very much. any other questions? seeing none, thank you very much excuse me, but may i ask some

questions of the controller's office, just for explanation of this last chartier. the last -- the last chart here. >> the last chart i am seeing, the maximum allowed annual overtime, so depending on -- tell me what i am looking at. i see general services that may interest you as a city administrator, employees of a default limit. those are 15 employees that have worked over 25% of their regularly scheduled hours. the employees exempt -- zero exempted to d.h.r. >> yes none exempted through d.h.r. they did not even request. >> they did not even request. so the average over time as percentage of regular hours, are you telling me it is 30% of these individual's hours?

or the whole department's hours? >> so of the individuals who exceeded the 25%, on average they had 30% over time relative to their regular hours, and i would just point out, one of the reasons we report this is you can look at police, there at 20 7%, but that means they may have had -- they are at 27%, with that means they may have had -- they did not exceed. as opposed to sheriffs, where they exceeded it by a lot. >> yeah, these percentages, you know, when i look at them, actually if we -- what we can really look at is it is really adding 30% more hours onto the workload. would you interpret it as that? >> relative to what they are allowed to work, the 520 hours

in a year, it has made -- it is maybe not that much. an extra five -- extra 5%. i am bad at math, but maybe that is 100 hours. >> i'm super bad at math. so, okay when i look at this chart, what is it telling me? give me an analysis of what this chart is telling us today. >> i think it is telling you that there is a lot of people who are working a lot of overtime. we probably didn't need the chart to tell us that, but we have the chart anyway. >> and without permission. >> and that is the second thing. without permission. >> exactly. so we are seeing a lot of people working a lot of overtime. we are seeing a lot of people working overtime without authorization, exemptions.

>> correct. >> so we are seeing, perhaps all these people working overtime or doing it to make ends meet. a lot of it is mandatory, i am hearing a lot of it is voluntary would that be your reception? >> that would be an assumption,. >> thank you very much. supervisor stefani? >> in looking at this chart, i'm just wondering, i know the library is the highest at 40 6%, and i'm wondering why. >> there's only two of them. >> i did not specifically look, but since there is only two, it did see randomness there. >> i am bad at math as well. >> yeah, but i would say m.t.a. is a little -- i mean, 84 employees, that is huge. it would be interesting to see what that breakdown is of employees that have -- and what classifications they are. >> i don't have it here, and to

know how these numbers relate to the overall number of these employees in the departments, as in, like 1,000 -- how many city employees? 25,000 or something like that? >> 30,000. >> but i imagine the sheriff is pretty -- [laughter]. >> he has been sitting over time , he is an expert in overtime. >> this is large for the sheriff 's department. >> we have huge amounts of overtime, and i'm grateful for all these people who want to work overtime, because there are a lot of people who have kids, families, who don't want to be working overtime on christmas day, and if one of these people who works a lot of overtime wants to do it, i think more power to them. thank goodness that they are there. really we do need to reduce overtime. we need to work into the budget a way to stuff more people into

our training pipeline so we can replace overtime hours to a full-time hours. but in the meantime, it is -- it is a mixed bag, but it is really helpful to have people who like to work a lot of overtime, and again, i apologize we didn't apply for an exemption for 17-18 , but we have a good record of applying for exemptions. >> sure. i think the exemption still don't bother me as much. the human toll is what bothers me, the toll it takes only person to be working so much overtime. i get it that we have a really high cost of living, and the idea that we have these volunteers that are willing to go and work holidays in order to survive here in san francisco, or feed their children, have a livelihood, i think it is so disturbing. i don't see this as being so much -- somewhat sustainable, even though it has been mentioned that this is not

really a budgetary issue, because actually, we are saving money and overtime work, so we are not hiring full-time employees. i actually think there was a toll, there was something else that we are also missing, and i think that is the human element here, is that we want to retain our employees. we want there to -- we want them to be as healthy as possible. we have responsibility as an employer to actually assist them in being as healthy as they can be. i mean, while they are serving the city and county of san francisco, but also while they are with their families, too, and i think we have a moral responsibility to try to have a way forward that has a good morale, that likes to come to work today and look forward to it, and feels as though they are being supported emotionally, mentally, and also physically in our work environment. we have this level of mandatory overtime where that people have

to work these overtime hours, i just think it is not sustainable for human beings, but quite frankly, for even having a personal relationship or a family life. thank you very much. i appreciated. i know you have worked really hard on it. i know we always jack you up over it, thank you for being able to answer all those questions. colleagues, any comments, questions? i want to thank the controller and every department that was here. i think that we have a deeper understanding about the overtime level and the overtime needs, and thank you mr. controller, thank you for coming today and giving a report, and thank you to all the departments for answering our questions, and forgiving as a deeper understanding, and also seeing, i guess, revealing what we as legislators may need to be doing i would like to take public comment on this now. are there any members of the public would like to comment on the budget impact of overtime spending? seeing none, public comment is

closed. i would like to make a motion to file this item, please. could i have a second? seconded by supervisor madwoman. if we could take that without objection, thank you very much. madame clerk, please call item number 3. >> an ordinance amending the ministration of code to establish the affordable housing production and preservation fees appropriated and revenue augmentation fund. revenues received by the city by the purpose of funding and production of 100 affordable housing and acquisition and preservation of existing housing to make that housing permanently available. >> thank you very much. colleagues, i would like to make a motion to continue this item until the next meeting of the full budget and finance committee. but first, i would like to take public comment. are there any members of the public would like to speak on item number 3? >> this is a bit blurry.

shoot. so the darker spots are the leaks of the pipes. >> please speak into the microphone. >> the darker specs are the pipe that was pretty much laid in 1880. those are the areas where you can see the leaking. the other spots are from about 1935 or 1910. the pipe that is leaking, and from what i understand, it would take about 17.5 years to replace the 20% of pipe in the worst condition, and i believe the rate you are being charged me be -- being charged may be a different rate. assuming that there are 265

linear feet per block and you are doing 16 blocks a month, 16 blocks being one linear mile at a rate of $45 per foot, which would cost about $190,000 per mile, but i thank you are paying something like to $.4 million per mile. in a separate issue, the porta parties, the pitstop toilets you guys are spending about $6 million over a 30 year period for those instead of just using construction site style toilets that people could use 24 hours a day, and save yourself some money of cleaning the streets the following mornings because they are soiled despite the exorbitant cost of the pitstop program.

>> thank you. any other members of the public? seeing none, public comment is closed. i have made a motion to continue this item, item number 3 until the next budget and finance committee. could i have a second, please? we can take that without objection. thank you. madame clerk, do you have any items before us today? thank you very much. this meeting is adjourned.

>> [inaudible] i'm a illustrator by day and a [inaudible] composition teacher. right now i'm practice by transscribing [inaudible] that is what i have been doing the past couple years, teaching myself. california college of the arts, illustration there has really great teachers. robert hunt, vance story taught me a lot. what i'm working on is a portfolio [inaudible] riding a donkey unicorn in the process. >> my name is dawn richardson and musician, drummer and drum teacher. i guess i would say i started my professional path quh i started playing in bands and teaching drum lesson when

i was in college. they were definitely not that many women that would do what is doing. in 198 8 i graduated from cal state los ang and studied mostly classical percussion and music education but at the same time i was in hollywood so played at night in rock bands so was doing two different things. >> the reason i'm [inaudible] the people. there is a extremely vibrant art community especially arounds the red poppy art house [inaudible] as a artist in the past 2 or 3 years there is a event called the [inaudible] every 3 months a free art music festival that i usually play at and just met so many people. >> i was teaching a little bit

and doing odd jobs like waitressing and going at night and playing in bands and meeting a lot of people. i chss in ban that had cool break jz get parts on tv shows or things like that. a friend of mine, we had mutual friends that got signed to a record deal in san francisco called 4 nonblaunds and i addition frd the bands and moved to the bay area. i think things are different now than 30 years ago, the world evolved a lot. it could be a challenge but have to know how to negotiate everything and sometimeatize is [inaudible] it was great to get to a point where i was just treated like another one of the people, a musician not a female musician and that is always what [inaudible]

>> you don't hear stuff on the radio [inaudible] i need to write music [inaudible] be more conscious in their decisions and somehow make that poetic so they will be convinced. i think i will do that. [singing in backgrounds] drawing and writing music since i was a really little kid and fortunate enough to have a good education in art and parentss who supported me. i hope my life will continue to allow me to do both. >> for me now having all male, female girls, boys students it shows the world has changed a lot and people areope toon open to a lot more than they were in the past. you can get a deep satisfaction from responding a lot of year practicing in one thing

and becoming really good at something. sometimes i think that it is better to get lost. you have to practice and become good at what you do, so if you have everything together then go out in the world and do what you do and then i think people weal accept that.

>> please stand by for closed captioning. >> good morning and welcome to the san francisco county transportation authority meeting for today, tuesday may 14th, 2019. our clerk is mr. alberto quintanilla. can you please call the roll? [roll call]

>> thank you mr. quintanilla. colleagues, i received the unfortunate news that commissioner ronen has taken ill and commissioner brown will be 15 minutes late. can we have a motion to excuse commissioner ronen and temporarily excuse commissioner brown. motion made by commissioner stefani and seconded by commissioner haney and we will take that without objection. commissioner yee, do you want to say something? >> i believe commissioner walton -- >> i have not heard from commissioner walton, but if you have, i am happy for you to excuse commissioner walton as well. we'll take that without objection, and next item please. >> item 2, citizens advisory

committee report. >> mr. larson, good morning. >> good morning commissioners, i'm john larson and i'm here to report on the april 23rd meeting. the c.a.c. recommended approval of item 5 on your agenda, the allocation of funds for two neighborhood transportation improvement programs or capital project requests. both the intersection immater l improvement and bikeway is an example of the projects that the funds were to facilitate. as per the update, c.a.c. members reiterated concern about business impacts along the construction zone and we're frustrated with the lack of performance data regarding the programs targeting it. a request was made for the

office of economic work and development come and brief c.a.c. during their future meetings of the effectiveness of mitigation efforts. we also heard about the progress of the subway and the plan bay area updates, where the issue of equity within the context of the upcoming pricing study was highlighted by the c.a.c. the bulk of the meeting was taken from an update on the issue of the light rail vehicle procurement. the issues that have come to light since the c.a.c. recommended approval in march of accelerated acquisitions of the vehicles. c.a.c. members wanted to know how long single cars will be in service with issues of coupling and they were also concerned that the signs alerting people that the back doors would be closed as precautions for getting hands stuck was not visible enough. in general, seat redesign and

timelines for retro fits, and ensuring safety for the vehicles was of a paramount interest to the c.a.c. and the public commenters. they were unsettled that known incidents impacting safety was not performed. objects or people getting caught in the doors did not meet a reportable standard and was not shared and was not satisfactory. they reported to the c.a.c. that after your last t.a. board meeting, a search of their central control log found up to eight possible incidents, three of which involved injuries to passengers. a full report of incidents for stakeholders and decision makers is needed moving forward and that completes my report. thank you. >> thank you mr. larson and i can see mr. ramos is paying

close attention to everything that the c.a.c. just said from everything ranging from the central subway to the l.r.v.4 matter, so thank you for that thorough report. is there any public comment on the c.a.c. report? mr. decosta. >> commissioners, i'm glad to hear a report from the c.a.c. after hearing what was discussed by this commission, i think what is paramount issue to san francisco is safety. the new light rail trains, brand

new trains are giving us a lot of problems. one of the issues was about the sittings, they're now getting to the train and it's more or less like the bus sittings. that adversely impacts many of the seniors. i wanted to bring this to your attention. also in the c. a.c. report, you can see missing is technical expertise. in the past, we had those sitting on the c.a.c., who had a lot of experience with transportation issues. that's what we have to aim at getting into the c.a.c. is the expertise. then the tendency is just for the c.a.c. to speak in

generalities, and that's not what san franciscans want. we need to -- in our outreach, try to get people on the c.a.c. that have qualified experience on transport management and more that side of operations. thank you very much. >> thank you, are there any other members of the public for this item? seeing none. public comment is closed. mr. quintanilla, next item please. >> action item -- i apologize, item 3 approve the minutes for the april 23rd meeting, next item. >> all right, are there any public comments on the minutes from last meeting? closed.

is there a motion. on that motion, a roll call please. [roll call] >> we have approval. >> next item. >> item 4, state and federal legislation update is the action item. >> mr. watts, it's getting towards the end of may, what do you have to report? >> we do have several bills we're recommending for you. i want to point out that when i conclude my portion of this legislative update, that amber crab will be providing an update on federal items as well. let me just jump into this. there are three measures we're propossessing for consideration that would be ab by mr. muller

that deals with smart city grants, we're recommending ab326, which deals with motorized carrying devices and finally an oppose on ab112 by ms. freeman that deals with shared mobility devices. >> sponsored by bird. >> yes. so i thought it would be better to take the two mobility device bills at the same time. they're similar in content and approach, but the bird bill is much broader and deeper. on ab326, the staff is proposing unless amended, and the amendment would restore the authority that the bill would seek to eliminate over localities in california to

develop their own regulatory structure in addition to the state's regulatory structure. we already initiated in sacramento. i reached out and told them this was the likely measure to be considered by the full board, to give them a heads-up. the bill is on suspense, which will be considered this week, in the assemblies appropriations committee and ab-1112 by ms. freeman was amended and expanded. it deals, really it's the local authority, with respect to a host of, a wide range of mobility devices. the san francisco m.t.a. is on record, in opposition to the bill and their staff is in discussion about possible amendments and consequently, i think we would like to be able to be part of that negotiating

effort to restore or insure that the city and county of san francisco has the authority that they are dually permitted currently. the next measure is ab-659. this bill is the smart city challenge grant. frankly, it is a structure of a grant program. it is at this point lacking a funding source and actually lacking any specific types of innovative, creative proposals that they're expecting. instead the bill would delegate to the state transportation committee via workshop, guidelines and development process, those kinds of details. the bill is on assembly, appropriation suspense file because it has no funding source identified at this point in time. so that's frequently would be the result of the bill.

so we'll see its fate later this week, but in the meantime, we're proposing to endorse that in the event the bill con -- continues to move forward. one watch bill we're looking at, and this is the housing alliance for the bay area program, which is part of m.t.c., and the casa program here attempting to jump start housing development in this region. the measure provides structure for a regional tax measure and authori authorizes a series and duties for the entity if it's enacted,

however there has been a hold up in the development of the governance structure for the haba. in the previous verse, they had mtc providing staff and governance, and now the bill was amended to take that out. so it's a bill without a driver in the driver's seat. i assume, and i have checked, there are deep negotiations to fill that in. a couple of bills on the second table in your packet, table two that are of interest, and we followed the first one, ab-147, that's been approved by the governor. that bill was the state's reaction to the way fair supreme court decision dealing with use tax, collection, and it is anticipated by virtue of the approval of this bill that sale tax measures, when this new bill

takes in effect, and i think that's the fall, you'll start to see an increase in the revenues and staff is working to identify how much that is going to be and when that will come online. so the other bill i want to update you on is ab-1605. this is the reservation system bill. it cleared the assembly, it is in the senate, it's ready to be assigned and we anticipate it to be assigned, but we're waiting for the actual designation so i can meet with the right folks and start discussions on the senate side. also, the measure you followed previously, the revision to the active transportation program. it too is on appropriations suspense file in the senate.

it has some issues, he's trying to restore what he thought he had, he and chairman frazier had enacted in a company meant with sb-1 originally. he's really pushing hard to reallocate money within the a.t.p. program, which would result in m.p.o.s receiving direct allocations based on population share, which is a little bit different than the current law. at this point, it's not clear how it's going to fair in the assembly, now that the bill is probably going to come out of suspense. the folks that have been, i guess i'll put it this way, self help folks counties are divided on the issue, so we don't know who will come out in opposition. those are the updates on the bills, between staff and myself, that we thought were key to

bring to your attention. in terms of other things going on in sacramento, they may revise, as you're well aware from your city county responsibilities, in the area of transportation, very little new or different, or major modifications to transportation law. i'm happy to say they're adhering to the elements in sb-1 that they approved in 2017. with that, it concludes my presentation. >> thank you mr. watts, before we hear from ms. crab, colleagues, any questions to mr. watts relative to the bills he discussed? all right, we'll take that resolution up after we hear from ms. crab. the floor is yourself. >> good morning, amber crab, public policy manager with the authority. so in april, tilly chang

traveled to the advocacy trip. it focused on a few different areas, which are consistent with our ongoing advocacy, as well as the board adopted transportation authority federal advocacy program. first of all, as you heard in the news, there's been a bipartisan announcement about potentially $2 trillion infrastructure bill, which would include funding for transportation, however that is completely dependent on the sources that the administration decides to fund the bill. every year we're crossing or fingers but not holding our breath that it will move forward. what is moving forward is work on the reauthorization of the federal transportation bill. this is the fixing america transportation bill, so work is picking up this year.

the advocacy that director chang pursued in d.c. and other regional state and federal partners are working with us. we're seeking continuation of the bill grant, it's a federal discussionary grant program. so we like to see that program continue. we also like to see increased funding for federal transit funding, in particular, the capital investment grant program which currently supports the electrification process, and we have identified as a source we like to support future san francisco parties, such as the transit, better market street, and the downtown extension. to pay for all of that, we need congress to act to deal with

issues of solvency that the highway trust fund is experiencing, through raising the gas tax or potentially exploring a vehicle miles traveled fee. with that i'm happy to take any questions and we'll keep at the work. >> any questions from the member? seeing none, is there public comment on this item? mr. decosta. >> commissioners, i'm shocked that when you hear this report from the consultants, i think they're consultants, one represents the bills in the state and the other telling us about the feds. >> ms. crab is an employee of the transportation authority. >> well, i stand corrected. so, while they give us this report, they're getting no feedback from our representativ

representatives. so on some issues like say the crooked street, we need some sense of how san franciscans feel why our visitors have to pay to go down this street. you travel all over the world, there's always something that we like to go and see. the tourists pay, so we like to get some feedback. it's very surprising that this impetus come from the state and not from you supervisors. so, i would like y'all to look into that. while the first gentleman was talking about one of the bills, and how you know they're trying to get rid of the metropolitan transportation commission from giving their input, we have to

be very cognisant of the fact that we have to have precise facts and empirical data and people representing. that's too much of these bills being introduced. some of them, as you heard, one or two of them, with no funding. we san franciscans have to know how this board of supervisors, which is the city and county of san francisco is giving input on this, so that we are a place of what really is going on in sacramento. thank you very much. >> are there any other members of the public that like to testify on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a resolution adopting the positions described by mr. watts as it relates to assembly bills 326, 659, and

1112? motion made by commissioner yee, seconded by commissioner brown and we have a different house roll call please. [roll call] >> we have first approval. >> next item please. >> item 5, allocate $663,500 in prop k funds. this is an action item. >> good morning commissioners. i'm presenting to you two requests today from the san francisco municipal transportation agency and these are for neighborhood

transportation improvement projects for districts 5 and 6. the first question is for divisadero intersection improvements between turk street. daylighting willing installed, pedestrian safety zones, as you can see in the photos. longer crossing times, and larger signal lenses, which is the material that covers the signal lights so they will be shining brighter. we will be doing outreach between now and november, including door-to-door outreach, and the majority of construction will be done in january and completed by september. the next request is for the howard street project, and this is for district 6, a portion of

the funding is coming from the neighborhood transportation improvement program and it is to install or create a continuous protected bikeway from 11th street and western south market area, connecting to the embarcadero. it should be completed by march of 2021. with this, i'm open to answer any questions. >> commissioner haney. >> thank you chair peskin. i'm of course very supportive of the funds for the design and build out of the howard street embarcadero to third. it seems like a long time to me, that's two years for this to happen. i know we moved very quickly on third to fifth in part because we had designs done. why is this going to take so

long? i think it's concerning to me that we're not going to have the rest of this street built out, now especially since we done a good job on the other part of it, a lot of people will continue to use that, to use that network, that street as part of their commute, and to have part of it for the next two years continue to be so incredibly dangerous is a concern to me. >> that's a great question, let me invite mike, the project manager, to answer it. >> hello, good morning commissioners, acting program manager with the m.t.a. it's great to have your support on this project, it's definitely something we want to move forward, continuing to improve howard street, especially in light of the fatality that occurred earlier this year. i think there was an error in the power point. the actual application and our

request says the project will be open for use in 2020, mid year. so, our goal is really to have it built in the first half of 2020. the application -- or the request says july, august, or september 2020, open for use. so, sorry. that's our goal. the first half of 2020. we have a number of quick build pr projects on our agenda now to finish by the end of the year and we're going to work at this at the same time. >> so it sounds like we just got a year cut off the timeline. very good. >> you're welcome. >> that is the answer to my question, sometimes it's that easy. so the expectation is that it will be completed early to mid year next year 2020, not early

to mid year 2021. >> yes, that's our goal. so in the request, we said july through september, but really we want to get it done there the first half. >> okay, in terms of the quick build and things, a lot of people are saying what can we do right now in that stretch? are there certain things you have planned in the interim while the design and buildout of the full protected lane is being designed and put in place? >> honestly we don't. this is really a quick build for us, it will be paint and post, traffic delineaters that we implement, and we don't have a design at this point. so as we work on other projects, as well as this one, we're going to get them out there as quickly as we can. there are a lot -- it's a busy area, obviously, a lot of demands for a lot of different uses being downtown.

so, there is just a lot of design and engineering work that we need to do to get that work done. >> i get that it's complicated and there's a lot to figure out. i would say for a lot of people, including for me, a year to put what we're defining as a quick build doesn't sound that quick. it sounds like a long amount of time if it's fairly simple in terms of what the construction is. do we ever do things that we know are immediate, simple solutions, maybe even on parts of that. i know that some of the blocks are a bit more complicated for a variety of reasons, but is there a way as we determine well, you know, this block is part of the early stages of design, fairly simple. can we do something and fix it? is that block or something like that, or do we have to wait a

year for anything to change? >> sure, i think we can definitely look at that as we implement it. i think -- yeah, i think we can look at that as we work on the design and see what we can do quicker that doesn't require a longer legislative process at the n.t.a. board. yes. >> yeah, i would really appreciate that if there were blocks we could get done or simple safety improvements that we could do and whatever we can do to expedite the full completion, but i understand there is a lot to figure out for the whole thing to gets worked out, but you know, one year or longer is a long time to wait for this street that's heavily used. >> agreed. >> thank you for your work on this. i appreciate it. >> are there any other questions from commissioners? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item?

please come forward. >> good morning commissioners, senior organizer on staff at the san francisco bicycle coalition. of course we're incredibly supportive here, but as commissioner haney mentioned, the timeline is an issue here. when we're talking about timelines for these urgent probabli projects, we know that howard is a dangerous street for people bicycling in san francisco. so 72 hours, plus or minus, there was a very temporary bike lane on one block and another 6 week, by april 18th, we had a row bebust quick builds to thir the presentation was a bit off, but even a year seems excessive for this project that we know is so crucial to our bicycle network and the safety of people

riding. what we're asking back then and continuing to ask for is this project to be completed by the end of year. we think that's attainable. we have commissioner haney pushing hard on the timeline here. if we can't do it on howard faster than a year, i wonder where we can do it, so we look forward to continuing to work with you all and the m.t.a. to push this and other projects forward. thank you. >> are there any other members of the public on this item? mr. decosta, the floor is yours. >> the supervisors, it's tragic that someone has to die, for you to realize about transportation issues. this project can easily be completed in six months.

the thing is that y'all have no orientation. no project manager has spoken to you all on what goes into this. what happens in some of the city departments is that they kicked the can down the street and y'all look the other way, and y'all think it's funny. it's not funny when somebody dies. so what the gentleman said, he knows what he's talking about. this can be done in six months. now let me go to san bruno avenue, some jack ass has come down there, dug up the streets, and people are falling down, breaking their arms, they don't call the balancambulance, they have no money to pay. they're bleeding. on howard street, that can be done in six months.

in any other country, it could be done in two months. none of y'all have the balls to go and tell these people to go and do it. how many people are going to be dead or why should we put people in harm's way? who's the representative here who really has the guts? now one of your supervisors having a side bar talk there, that shows in general that you supervisors, if you really care about life and death. thank you very much. >> seeing no other members of the public for public comment, public comment is closed. do we have a motion with regard to this item made by commissioner haney, seconded by commissioner mandelman, and we have the same house, same call. the item is approved on first

read. next item please. >> item 6, prioritizing safety over traffic flow and parking when designing for street improvements. this is an action item. commissioner yee. >> thank you chair peskin. thank you commissioner haney for raising the question. this is perfect in terms of what i am going to say. this item is really a resolution to support the expedited delivery of the projects. i feel like a broken record at times, except for the fact that last week when i spoke at the board of supervisors, introducing the resolution to aggressively daylight intersections, that at that meeting, we talked about 12 people who had been killed on

our street, and now within a week, we're up to 13, another senior was hit and killed while walking in an intersection that's part of the high injury network. 13 people killed in the first five months of the year, and if our stats remain constant as they have in the past, 500 people will be severely injured by the end of the year. this is a crisis and we must do everything in our power to stop these injuries and fatalities, which are 100% preventable. we must support investments and engineering, education, and enforcement. we want to support s.f.m.t.a. as the implementing target to fast track safety projects. we must do everything in our power, such as the resolution supporting specific strategies, such as daylighting, which by

the way you will be voting on this afternoon. this resolution goes beyond just day lighting because sfmta to prioritize safety over traffic flow. if 13 people die in our street this is year, from gun violence, there would be rallies every day, media frienenzy and demandr more action. the crisis of traffic violence and residents killed by walking across the street or biking to work is hardly noticed. i refuse to accept that being killed or injured while walking, biking, or commuting is simply part of the urban living. colleagues, i refuse to pass on this resolution and commit to being aggressive in our actions and strategies to get to vision

zero. i would like to call up tom mcguire, if he would like to make any comments. >> mr. mcguire, good morning. >> good morning commissioners, tom mcguire at the mta. thank you for the invitation to speak commissioner yee and your support on our resolution efforts. we are looking to advance to quickly build projects in our high injury network. we have 10 projects we worked through with our own board, including projects like townsend street, california street. we are trying a new