increased, parking requirements will have to be reduced. but it really would be a squandered opportunity if the region makes significant investments in a system, but then typical suburban land-use patterns continue to persist around many of these stations. thank you. >> chair: thank you for those comments. are there any other members of the public here for item number 6? seeing none, we will close public comment. thank you to caltrain staff for coming here today. i imagine you have to cun down to the santa clara county board of supervisors. so good luck getting down there, if you're on highway 101. if you take caltrain, i'm sure you'll get there in a second. with that we'll go to the executive director's report, ms. >> thank you so much. thank you, chair peskin and commissioners. that was such a thoughtful conversation and thank you for the thorough work again to our caltrain colleagues. today i'd like to give you a couple updates on the federal level. i was honored to travel to

washington, d.c. a couple weeks ago to testify before the house highways and transit subcommittee on the topic of pricing strategies. america's roads. this is the first hearing that the committee held to talk about the way to pay for infrastructure. not only did they discuss the gas tax, the traditional source, which is a declining source, but also explored per-mile tees, tolling and congestion pricing. so my testimony certainly emphasized the need for more long-term federal funding, in particularly raising the gas tax. but also to be exploring other innovative, diverse sources of revenue as well. on the federal fuel economy standards, as you've seen in the news, the e.p.a. and department of transportation announced new lower standards. there's a conflict, of course, with our california standards and our stricter requirements. and really pleased that the governor has, along with other 20 other states, filed a lawsuit -- attorney general has filed a lawsuit to overturn the new

rule. we're tracking that work. , not only because of the policy implications and meeting our climate goals, but also the project delivery implications for some of our projects that could be caught up in modifications to analysis and modeling related to the new standard. so in addition, i think we learned just late last night in a new development, the administration threatened the -- the white house threatened to withhold federal highway funds from california, pending updates of about 100 pollution control plans in california. it continues to be dynamic and we'll be tracking all of that together with our colleagues in the city and the region. planned bay area in our region kicked off officially. we've been doing advanced planning work with m.t.c., supporting that work through the horizon effort. however, plan barry has officially kicked off, as the portion of the process that will really contemplate the land use

distribution, as well as the transportation investments to support future growth. the agency's around the region will be seeking feedback together through a series of pop-up events, including here in san francisco, which we'll be publishing on the web site and getting the word out on social media. our role is to coordinate san francisco's input and to plan bay area, building off the local priorities that had been established in prior plans. and continuing through our connect assess effort. so we'll be probably bringing more updates to you through the winter and, anticipating approval of a fiscally constrained transportation investment package early next year. as chair mentioned, transit center in downtown extension work continues. resumption of the a.c. transit bus continued in august. and once again being enjoyed by the public. so we are also glad to report our preview final report is coming to you at the october 8th meeting. we look forward to presenting

that. we have been working hard to support the peer panel, as well as having thoughtful conversations with stakeholder agencies and their staff. we presented to the tgpa board and the c.a.c. a few times and met with vice chair gee to discuss some of the potential recommendations and findings. and we are also working with partners to discuss ways to potentially implement some of these recommendations in the near term, including through m.l.a., as well as potentially funding items here at the transportation authority, should the recommendations be accepted by the board in october. turning to some local issues. our pricing study has kicked off as well. we want to really appreciate the metropolitan transportation commission. thank you missioner ronen for serving on that, which approved $400,000 in regional funding to support our study. combined with our local t.a. funds, that's enabled to kick off with consultants and study partners. we've been working on community engagement plans and equity

analyses at directed by the body. we look forward to bringing you updates. treasure island outreach continues, particularly for the non-profit and for-profit business communities and their employees will be holding two collaborative workshops in october to talk about different ways to implement the treasure island policies, pertaining to service, transit, proposed toll and how we can balance the needs amongst the users of the system and the residents and the merchants. the m.t.a. board, of course, also recently approved central subways new schedule. and some budgeting increase to settle claims with the contractor, as chair mentioned, the new construction schedule is now slated to end in mid-2020. and with revenue testing would then allow for the opening of service to be in mid-2021. so just wanted to again share that update. we'll be tracking along with them what the different sources of funding are to cover the new

$31 million, as well as potentially increased costs as they continue to explore what it's going to take to deliver the total project. we have sort of committed all of our transportation authority funds here. so we understand that they are looking to their own surplus funds in their budget or financing from revenue bonds or reprioritizing capital projects on the m.t.a. capital plan. m.t.a. has done some great delivery work on the vehicle program in the fourth quarter of fiscal '19, ending just this past june. he they placed into a revenue service the very last motor coaches of the 424 total motor coaches, that they've procured with our support. all together supported $240 million of vehicle replacements from our prop k program. that includes the motor coaches, as well as new 40-foot trolley buses and paratransit vehicles. congratulations and thank you for getting those vehicles out on the street. m.t.a. will be providing an update on the replacement of the

bright to light vehicles later in today's meeting. finally, i'd like to welcome and introduce two new members of we have hugh, our new deputy director for planning here today, along with the assistant deputy director for capital projects. hugh joins us from planning and design firm alta, where he was principal vice president overseeing a group of 25 planners, designers and analysts to help deliver sustainable designs to clients across the bay area. and yana, working most recently on project delivery and sustainable and resilience planning and structures for europe. we're very pleased to have both of you on our team. >> chair: thank you. any members of the public who want to testify on the executive director's report? mr. finebalm, come on up. >> just a quick question for tilley. >> chair: bob, we can't actually do that.

but you can make a public comment and secretary talk to you offline. >> i'll take a public comment to the effect that i hope that the consultant's report, that's going to be presented on the 8th, will be fully available to the public, at least a week in advance. and i also would suggest that if you could have the supporting documents on the website as well, that would be very helpful. thank you. >> chair: thank you, mr. finebalm. seeing no other members of the public for this item, public comment is closed. [gavel] i want to apologize to folks who have been waiting patiently for the c.a.c. item we're going to blast through the consents agenda, which will just take a second and we'll go to item number 7. could you please read the consent agenda. >> clerk: item 5 approved at the september 10th board meeting. now being served the final approval. it's prepared to if, desired, a member objects and the consent items to be removed and considered separately.

>> chair: any members of the public that want to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to move the consent agenda, made by commissioner ronen, seconded by commissioner safai. >> a roll call please. commissioner brown? >> i. >> commissioner fewer? >> aye. >> commissioner haney? >> aye. >> commissioner peskin? >> aye. >> commissioner ronen? >> aye. >> commissioner safai? >> aye. >> commissioner stefani. >> aye. >> commissioner yee. >> aye. >> we have final approval. >> clerk: next item, please. item number 7. >> appoint one member to the citizens' advisory economy. this is an action item. >> chair: ms. smith. again thank you to the members of the prick for -- of the public for your patience. the transportation authority has an 11-member citizens' advisory committee, with each

member serving a two-year term. the board appoints individuals to fill any open seats nor the staff or the c.a.c. itself make recommendations on appointments. to qualify for appointment to the c.a.c., speed limits must be san francisco residents and must appear before the board at least once to speak to the interests and qualifications. with that i can take any questions. >> chair: seeing no questions, i'm just going to make one little suggestion to staff about c.a.c. appointments. this is one by way of saving paper and time, which is i think when there's a vacancy for a particular seat, it would just be great if you just sent out those applicants who actually are eligible for that particular

seat. so rather than having to go through applicants from 11 different districts, we can just read the handful who are eligible for the seat that's hope, for what it is worth to staff. a friendly suggestion. with that are there any individuals who would like to be a c.a.c. member, who come -- please come forward. and you'll have two minutes to tell us your interests and qualifications. >> good morning, everyone. my name is -- i'm interested to be part of the transportation agency citizens' advisory committee. i'm a resident of district 1 in the long mountain neighborhood. for the last five years. i think i have a unique fit to be part of this community and help enhance the ties between the agency and the public in general. i grew up in louisiana. ten years ago i moved to san francisco. the scale of the transportation

need and complexity in the city amazed a country boy like me. and also share a confusion from lack of understanding and context of the public works, just like every other transplant to the city. as a first-generation immigrant, i know personally too well it takes a lot of energy and learning just to understand how government works and how the public service work in general. aside from a unique perspective, i also have a strong ability to help relay and inform the message to the public. i regularly hold local meet-up and discussions for immigrants -- with topics focusing on public service. i help them such as adopt -- we successfully have a couple of people that are part of the drain. i cofounded an online publication that educates and fact checks about politics and political systems in the united states for chinese immigrants.

as i regularly have more than 20,000 readers, we have interviewed and reported by the new yorkers, "washington post," "the new york times" and other national agencies. [bell dings] my wife and i cofounded metoochina.org, a leading platform for provision education, recovering assistance and other legal help that we help more than 5,000 people so far. i think my background as a transplant and first-generation immigrant can help the agency have a better understanding of the needs for the two fast-growing demographics. [bell dings] and my ability to inform, educate both in online -- can help relay the message for the agency and reduce confusion and increase transparency and understanding between the two parties. >> chair: thank you. >> thank you. >> chair: are there any other potential applicants, if you would please come forward and we'll open it up to members of the public on this item.

>> good morning. my name is danielle so. i'm a district 6 resident. i walked here today and saw an example many of the issues on our streets, that supervisor haney has talked about a lot recently. so i'm very concerned and passionate and eager to join the c.a.c. a little bit about me professionally. i was trained as an urban planner and currently work as an affordable housing developer in alameda. i previously sat on caltrain's bicycle advisory committee. so it was great to hear the update today that things are still moving along. i think it's really important within our district to call attention to the recent injuries and deaths on the streets and both to get enforcement measures and other, you know, kind of quick projects in the ground. as well as the longer-term things that the transportation authority undertakes. vision zero is just a vision

unless we put the policy and the procedures and the money where it needs to go to make that happen. so i think to the c.a.c., i would bring a vision of ensuring that what we're funding really walks and talks the same thing that vision zero says and ensures that, you know, ten years from now, a project that's receiving funding today or next month or next year is implementing those goals on the ground. so i appreciate your consideration. >> chair: thank you so much. are there any other potential applicants? seeing none, are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this item number 7? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] commissioner haney. >> supervisor haney: thank you, chair peskin. i'm excited to be able to nominate danielle today for the seat on the c.a.c., representing district 6. i also want to take a moment to thank our outgoing

representative becky hoag, who is a treasure island resident. really a legendary leader in our city, who had to unfortunately step down from seat. i want to really thank becky for her service and her leadership. as you heard today, danielle has expressed to me a very strong desire to not only advocate for traffic calming, t.n.c. regulation, red light cameras and equity in transportation planning, but very relevant for this body, she brings an eye towards putting our money where our mouth is, regarding transportation planning. she has a background in planning herself. and i think we'll make sure that we're using our money most effectively. i also think it's wonderful. she's also a tenderloin resident and understands firsthand someone who walks and bikes on a regular basis the disproportionate challenges that our neighborhood faces with unsafe streets, speeding and

daily collisions. so i'm excited that she'll bring her perspective to the c.a.c. and i want to thank danielle and i want to make a motion to nominate her to the c.a.c. >> chair: motion made by commissioner haney. is there a second for that motion? seconded by commissioner ronen. and on that item, we have the same house, same call. the motion is passed. [gavel] next item, please. >> clerk: item 8. update on the san francisco municipal transportation agency's siemens light-rail. >> you got to hear all about caltrain. thank you for your patience. >> good morning. i'm julie kish balm, the

director of transit at sfmta. i appreciate the opportunity to brief you. this is part of a monthly briefings that we're done to add accountability and transparency to the l.r.v.4 process. i am pleased to be here with some good news. we have made significant progress over the last month. we have now delivered 67 of our 68 phase 1 vehicles. and the phase 1 vehicles are all expansion vehicles, which it means more training out in the system, less crowding and better connections for our customers. the last train we're going to deliver next week, if any board members are interested in having an opportunity to come and address the employees that have been building this equipment, we are really proud that these vehicles are being produced as part of our megaregion and creating more jobs and

opportunity within san francisco -- within california. we also have seen city performance improvements. and i'll walk through some of those. we still have some technical issues we're working out, primarily being the hydraulic power unit, which currently makes up about a third of our in-service breakdowns. we've worked through some of the technical issues, but are still having some software challenges. as part of our 90-day plan, we did identify a set of what we thought were ambitious but achievable performance targets. photo most part we did meet all of our goals. the first one was related to availability. we want these vehicles out in the system. we want customers enjoying them and experiencing them. we're at a low point of only 22 vehicles out in the system. we're now averaging over 35.

we also have -- are now able to couple and have two-car trains. we've had no follow-up issues with doors or with couplers since those retrofits were put in place. as i said we're just about at our 68th vehicle being delivered. that will happen next week. and our breakdowns have reduced significantly. and then the last piece is that we have made some good progress on addressing the flat wheels. as we discussed, one of the challenges we've been facing with this vehicle is that it has aspects of it that are different than the brayed. when you hit the emergency mushroom button on the l.r.v.s 4, the wheels flatten. so we've been working with the manufacturer to put on additional track brakes. this will allow the vehicle to

stop quickly, but will not put the same pressure on the vehicles. this will significantly improve our vehicle availability. as we typically have three to four vehicles on hold, so that we can round out the wheels and we have about five vehicles right now that we can't even use at all, because their wheels are too narrow. a question that i've gotten is why couldn't we just address this problem with training. so train folks to use the track, the t-stick when they're in the lrv4s and the mushroom when they're in the braydas. the best way to equate it, the vehicles are different enough in their braking system, it's almost like you're drive an american car one day and your steering wheel is on the right and your brakes are with your right foot. and then the next day you go to england and we're also expecting you to be able to stop on a

dime. but now the steering wheel is on the left side and your brakes are operated differently. so we believe that this standardization between the two vehicles, while we continue to operate this mixed fleet, is going to have a significant customer benefit and it's also something that we've been getting strong requests from our operators. i have invited our union chair from the green division to speak on this issue, if you have questions. this does -- this chart targets our availability. as i said, we've seen a steady climb. and we will continue particularly as we addressed the flat wheels, which is currently having the biggest impact on vehicle availability. and we are back on our reliability targets. we were at a low of almost no more than 3500 miles between breakdown. and this is a vehicle that is

intended to break down only about every six months, only 25,000 miles, once we make it through the reliability problem. so i'm really pleased that we more than doubled and heading closer to 8,000 miles between breakdowns. just as a point of reference, that's about 20 to 25% better than what we're seeing on the breed fleet currently. we're looking to get an order of magnitude different. that being said, i am not bringing any major decisions to this board today, because i would like additional time to be able to show that august isn't an anomaly. and that we're going to continue to have steady performance. so i'll continue to do these monthly updates. i anticipate coming back in the february, march timeframe, once we continue to see progress along that red line with the

vehicles. while doing that, i do plan to bring to the m.t.a. board two items that i think are important for the overall program. the first is to expand the track brake investment, to retrofit all of the phase 1 vehicles so we can see that near-term bump in availability. as well as to to get siemens started on the long lead time items that we need for the brayda replacements. i feel it's critical to start this work, so we don't lose the ability to compress the schedule. they'll be focusing on things like redesigning the car shell, in order to support the seat redesign. i believe we have strong support for seats that are lower, that face forward, that have the butt divots that we've heard a lot of strong requests for.

but that's a complicated change. and they definitely need time to do that engineering. also the way that they're expediting the schedule and compressing the braydas is by building the car shells off site. so this will also allow resources to represent the facility and begin preparing for the car shell construction. so in terms of next steps, solving the technical issues continues to be the highest priority. we're really down to at this point one or two major issues. , getting siemens working on addressing known problems in phase 1, as well as the long lead time in phase 2. continuing to do monthly reports, but i anticipate coming back for the larger allocation, that will really need for the breda replacements this spring.

i think that's all i've got. please let me know if you have any questions. >> chair: thank you. i do think we would like to hear from the representative from local 258, from the green division. but you anticipated the questions that i was going to ask. but, first, let me call on commissioner mar. >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair peskin. thanks so much for the update presentation, ms. kishbalm. i had a few questions. actually the first one around the reliability, or the reliability program slide. so, yeah, it's good to see, you know, the improvement that's happened over, you know, since the serious problem, reliability problem, you know, that cropped up in the spring. but just looking at the sort of target for increasing the reliability. it looks, as you mentioned, that's a significant goal to try

to reach by june 2020. and to go from -- it looks like we're about 8,000 miles per failure to 27 or 28,000, looking at the chart. i just wanted to ask if that's realistic. and yeah. i'm just asking now for my experience as a regular rider, i know that -- yeah. reliability is a problem for many years. and with the new siemens being brought online, you know, it really hasn't been any improvement so far. >> thank you for those questions. we're certainly all learning as we go. and we will make adjustments as we need to. the red line was a commitment that siemens made to us, based on what they think that they can deliver. i think it's based on the fact that we're still not seeing any issues with the core systems. it's primarily subsystems.

the hydraulic power unit alone, which we're very close to addressing is making up a third of our breakdowns. so as we begin to tick off the sources of breakdowns and delays, i am optimistic. this curve is based on what we see in a lot of new vehicles. the calgary vehicle that siemens prepared followed a similar trajectory. i think it's really too soon to say whether or not we're going to have to make some kind of adjustments as we go. but i am optimistic and i do plan to hold siemens accountable to this commitment. >> supervisor mar: thank you. that's good to hear that you're optimistic about making those aggressive targets. because that would be such a huge step forward for everyone that relies on the l.r.v.s to get around. then i just had a question

around the project schedule slide. and this sort of -- the phase 2l.r.v.s and the plan to have an accelerated schedule to bring those online. i think that sounds great to me. i just wanted to know how that aligns with our sort of workforce issues. and is that going to mean the need to expand the workforce of the l.r.v. operators and whether we're -- you know, we have a good plan for that. >> thank you for asking that question. you'll see in my next presentation, that operator staffing in the most acute issue that we face in the system. we've had with l.r.v. staffing, because we don't have a pipeline problem. we essentially train bus operators to become rail operators. this was an interesting

contract. it's very unusual. we had such a pent-up demand. phase 1 was the expansion and required additional operators and additional maintenanceer resources. phase 2 is replacement. with every new train that comes in, we'll help a breda train out the door. it's not a net increase in resources. but it will allow some overall enhancements to our system. >> supervisor mar: got it. thanks. thank you again for the update presentation. it's very helpful. >> chair: all right. why don't we hear from our representatives from local 258, the transit workers' union. >> thank you, commissioners, for having us here today. i'm the president of the t.w.u. local 258. as julie stated earlier, that is, indeed, good news when upper management and the union come together on a specific issue in

terms of finding feasible solutions. that is indeed, a step forward, a step in the right direction. it's one of the things that we're working on is the track brakes. and as soon as i fish, ramona is going to come up here, because she's the expert in that field. she's the one that's been driving them for quite some time. another issue that we're also trying to address is the mirrors. the lack thereof in terms of having them replaced. the track brakes, in terms of upgrading them and having them installed is not just a short-term solution, but a long-term solution by saving money in terms of keeping all of these vehicles from breaking down through the flat wheels. that's, indeed, good news. i'd like to break up ramona to give a little more in-depth explanation in regards to the track brakes. >> good morning, everyone. thank you for having me here

today. yes. the issue with the track brakes is something that we are pretty much concerned in terms of safety basically. the track -- basically we might defer in how we see through different lenses. we see track brakes like a secondary -- a secondary brake on the trains. currently the l.r.v.2s and 3s had track brakes in each tracking. and what this does basically is the next train is a fail-safe, just in case something happens in a dire situation, where we have to stop. we can apply the track brake and that will maximize the stopping distance. >> chair: thank you. just hearing from the operators, it's very helpful. how did you like ms. kishbalm's analogy about driving a car on the right side and the left side? did you agree with that?

i'm going to buy her a european car tomorrow. >> chair: thank you for that, roger been that why don't we open up -- >> may i, please? >> chair: i'm sorry. >> basically providing a track brake, it will minimize the impact on having to roll the -- there's certain things taking place right now on the l.r.v.4. whenever the brake is applied, that causes us to have an l. l.r.v.4 flat wheels. it basically removes one train from the riding public for extended periods of time, due to the fact that we don't have -- it's not repaired in 24 hours. so track brake is something that's a must. it's a must. it has to be. as julie stated before, basically they're really to retrofit the entire. and we are basically commanding that, because they understand the nature of having to operate

equipment on a city word. we have this. we must have all of the tools necessary to stop the train in a timely manner. thank you. >> chair: thank you, sir. i have a number of speaker cards on this item, starting with mr. finebalm, edward mason, eileen broken, robin' crop, yvette fernandez. if you'll line up in that order to your right, my left. first speaker, please. >> bob, president of save muni. when julie showed the metric of 35 vehicles per day in service, and then she tells us that they have 67 vehicles of the new l.r.v.4s, that's a rather pathetic statistic. what that seems to suggest is less than 50% of the vehicles

are in service at any one time. maybe that's a mistake. i suggest she increase the metric to having at least 50 vehicles in service at any one time. the second point that she made is the new l.r.v.s have a 20% to 25% better record on breakdowns than the bredas. well, the question that immediately occurs is are they starving the bredas of maintenance? if they are, then obviously any comparison will be favorable to the new l.r.v. 4s. pilled suggest that this board ask julie to present those statistics about maintenance on the breda system versus maintenance on the l.r.v. 4s. and then finally i'd like to suggest, and we are going to continue to follow this up with

julie, the decoupling of the system. we're talking about the in-rout coupling of the new l.r.v. 4s. we haven't received the satisfactory answer, as to whether that coupling has been tested and is possible. thank you. >> edward mason. we're looking at a 30-year time horizon and strongly recommend that we have an informational workshop on the procurement process that's going on. seating is an important topic. and there has never been a diagram provided, a top-down diagram to show what the seating arrangement is going to be. and now it's complicated by the fact that you have before and after with the see thing arrangement based on the production from siemens.

we procured a vehicle that's now 5 feet shorter and a standing capacity that is two additional people per square foot. this is the deal. the standing capacity on the bredas was four people per square yard. on the siemens it's six people per square meter. the difference between a yard and a meter is a 3-inch. basically in a square yard and o additional people. that was never really discussed or made resident. -- transparent. the specific physician makes a comment that i have to research for measures of men and women. i guess that refers to a mill standard. and how in the heck we got these trains to be up so high. now we're going to lower them, but you can't do it on the left

side because of the electronics box. [bell dings] so let's have a full disclosure of what the plan is for the seating arrangement for the comfort of people. we have sacrificed six hours of commute and events for people's comfort during the rest of the time that the trains are in operation for the additional 20 hours a day. thank you. >> chair: thank you, mr. mason. ms. boken. >> eileen boken, coalition for san francisco neighborhoods, here on my own behalf. earlier this month i was in toronto and ottawa specifically to ride their l.r.v.s. in toronto, i rode both generations by bombardier of caltrain and ottawa i rode alstom of france. both the bombardier and alstom l.r.v.s are significantly better in quality and the siemens l.r.v.

better in the quality of materials and the quality of workmanship. both the bombardier and alstom l.r.v.s are significantly better in design. neither have bench seating. both have individual seating, which is a combination of both transfers and longitudinal seats. like the bredalifes, most seats are transverse. in terms of materials, i would urge the board to review the specks. san diego has two generations of siemens l.r.v.s in service. both have better quality materials than the l.r.v. 4. in terms of workmanship, i would urge the board to recommend that siemens form a consortium. siemens and alstom were proposing to merge, but the european union denied the merger, due to concerns about anticompetitiveness. bombardier and alstom have formed a consortium to produce the montreal l.r.v.s.

thank you. >> chair: thank you, ms. crop. >> thank you, everyone. robbin crop with save muni. i want to address plans for the seeking the design for the next l.r.v.s, being that we're here and you want to speed up the procurement. first thing i want to say is weed like to see a diagram of all seating arrangements for any rail cars. second thing i'd like to say is we have a wider spectrum from people who are healthy to not healthy, people who are young and people who are old. and if we only put four to six single seats in the next 50 rail cars, they may probably fill up embarcadero station, comes to montgomery, nobody is able to get a chance for a seat at all, that includes disabled people and it includes the public that would like a more comfortable ride, especially if they're going to ride for an hour out to where they're going to go. so we have 24 to 28 transfer

cars in the breeds. my car exchange would be the one that's already in breda and muni right now, which is two transfer seats down one side for a total of 12. and four single transfer seats on the other side for a total of 16. and that creates a 4-foot aisle and people seem to stand up really well in that. that provides 16 transfer seats. that would be my preferred seat plan. but minimally to wait for the 101 cars, which are said to have eight to 12 transfer seats, i want to vote for the 12. eight on one side, four on the other. and it's a minimal ask, because that means that half the seats will be transferred and half the seats will be longitudinal. [bell dings] i think that's fair in terms of looking at what we need temperature still i would say a lot of regular public that would like a more comfortable seat will not be able to access their seats. and since i have a few more minutes, i want to remind you all that i did a 100-person survey last year, and 400-rider survey last spring. both times 50/50 in terms of liking the 68 new cars or not.

so i dealt with the side that didn't. and in the fall, it was three groups. [bell dings] okay. i guess that's it then. thank you. >> chair: thank you, ms. crop. next -- next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my yvette fernandez. when i saw the new trains, i was horrified. you're sitting sideways, like sardines, there's not enough room for people to sit, to pull up on the straps are so high for someone like me. if i'm bringing a lot of stuff, it's like where do i put it. i like the way the seating arrangement is now. i suffer from scoliosis and my kidneys. that kind of seating is so comfortable. i feel if it's not broke, why are we fixing it. i don't see how you're fitting more people. i thought there would be longer trains. and people like me need to sit

forward. and i don't know how many seating arrangements are you going to put there and like the previous speaker, if it's only going to be four or eight, those seats will be taken up on the first stop at embarcadero. so i appreciate if you would reconsider designing these trains to have more seating arrangements. thank you very much. >> chair: thank you, ms. fernandez. next speaker. >> supervisors, i often say that your supervisors who represent for -- orientation. so are we, the people, satisfied with our transportation? you need to ask this question. in fact, i want to know that while you are discussing about i think it's a very serious issue, we have to pay attention. we really have to pay attention to the issue at hand.

and it's very good and i suggested this some time ago, we get the union people here, so that they can speak truth to follow. there's a lot of b.s. happening in the board, because you waste the taxpayers' money. it's not your money. in fact, y'all get paid by the taxpayer, to represent. but you don't do your job. how can you possibly buy trains that do not satisfile neats of the people, especially -- satisfy the needs of our people, especially the elders. you have no empathy and compassion. i'm not saying all of you y'all. i know some of you do. most of you don't. and how much does it cost y'all to consult the union.

guys, what do you feel about this. [bell dings] we've had history in the past, the money is set aside for muni and the police department used it to buy brand-new cars. i can go on and on and on. that's for people who chronologically know the history of this city. your supervisors have to be orientated to know how to do your work properly. thank you very much. >> chair: see nothing other members of the public commenting, public comment is closed. ms. kishbalm, as you heard, let me start with, first of all, he appreciate the progress that you have made in 90 days. and i for one think that we do not want to wake up with all of the breda cars failing and we do need to continue to procure replacement vehicles. we have heard a lot, not open

doors, not over couplings, thankfully. not about flat wheels, but actually about the interior design. butt divots and numbers of human beings per square yard or square meter. would you like to expound on that to the board. because part of what you want to go forward with is really in the area of internal design. so i want to hand it back over to you. >> thank you. i think it's precisely because of that strong feedback on the seating, that we do want to proceed with the long lead time items, the seating being one of them. we are committed to both retrofitting the current vehicles, as well as the replacement vehicles with enhanced seating. that responds to the customer feedback, including forward-facing seats. so i -- i did hear the feedback to maximize the number of

forward-facing seats. we are doing that as much as possible and we'll keep the board briefed on that progress. >> chair: and just kind of a high-level comment, i know that we have more things on the agenda and we need to go to the board of supervisors meeting. but do you do focus groups or outreach prior to the first 68-vehicle procurement? >> thank you. we did do focus groups, as well as a large customer survey. but it was a survey that people opted into. when we did the survey, once the vehicles were here and we had some real-world experience, we did an intercept survey. so it was much more randomized. we got overwhelming support of the vehicles. and we even -- even on the seats, which is the area that's an opportunity for improvement, we still saw more than half of the folks satisfied with the

seats. but we think we can do better. that intercept survey was complemented by two focus groups, one for mono lingual chinese speakers, as well as one in english. and both with heavy representation from people with disabilities. so we do think we have a good path forward on the seats. but it is -- it's not insignificant work, which is why we need to get stated. >> chair: for what it's worth, involve community stakeholders as much as possible as you go through that design exercise. with that i want to thank you for your continued briefings. we look forward to our next briefing, hopefully in march. and you're staying on that steep curve. >> thank you. >> chair: with that, mr. clerk, could you please read item

number 9 and ms. stevenson, thank you for your patience. >> clerk: muni transit performance working group update. this is an information item. >> chair: ms. stevenson. who is starting? >> julie, did you say peg was going to start. >> chair: peg, the floor is yours. i do not want to truncate this, but as much as you can compress this item, we would appreciate it. and i will be there on the 27th from 10:00 until noon with you. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm peg stevenson. i'm the director of the performance unit in the city controller's office. we're providing staff support to the muni reliability working group, which you might have heard a little bit about convened supervisor peskin, supervisor mandelman and the mayor's office. there are members from a couple

of outside transit agencies, los angeles and a.c. transit. two experts in system leadership and people with sort of wide experience and managing systems and other parts of the country. two reps from t.w.u. and three reps from public interest organizations that work on transit. it's being chaired by gwyneth borden and ed harrington. we'll meet six time -- five times between july and december. meetings will be open to the public. we'll work very hard at transparency, sharing the information and analyses that are provided by m.t.a. and my staff on a website that's been set up for that purpose. we'll have smaller meeting in between where we're tapping the expertise of the individuals that are on the working group, to come provide some advice and assistance to people lower down in the m.t.a. structure. we have peer research under way. we've refreshed our analysis of

a benchmarking likeness scoring that was done to compare sfmta to transit agencies around the country, in terms of service design, rode share, density, demographics and some other things. so we're reaching out to them and looking at a couple of issues in sort of governance and span of control. and types of authority that they have over street management and system design and performance and other issues that will be of interest to the working group. the charge is on the working group website. it's sort of simple to try and use the opportunity access to these experts and stakeholder organizations. to look at muni reliability, identify areas where the agency needs support and provide document which is working advice and support to stakeholders. yellow jersey i'll stop there. happy to answer any questions. or make it short. >> chair: thank you,

ms. stevenson. i do want to note for the record, that commission safai has expressed to myself and the mayor, his interest in joining the work group. so please come on september 27th from 10:00 until noon. these are also open to the general public. to observe. so thank you for that, ms. kishbalm, anything you wanted to add. >> at the first meeting, i had an opportunity to lay out both the challenges that i think the system is facing, as well as some of the investments that we're making to address those. it's an incredibly helpful to have this panel as a sounding board. i think we're going to have some strong feedback out of that. but rather than taking the board's time to go through that presentation today, i think what we most wanted to do today is to have an opportunity to hear any

feedback from the larger board, as well as the public. we did a similar hearing at the m.t.a. board, where folks had an opportunity to give input. but the -- the muni system is incredible. and it's important. it's what drives our economy and it's what kicks communities. but it doesn't happen by accident, it happens through thoughtful investments and thoughtful guidance. so i appreciate the sponsors taking the time at this moment to really reflect on what's working well and what we ought to do differently. and i plan to take that feedback very seriously, as we kind of lay out what our three- to five-year agenda is for the system. >> chair: thank you,

ms. occasion kishbalm. are there members of the public who would like to testify on this information item? miscellaneous crop, please come forward. mr. finebalm, please come forward. if there are other individuals, you'll follow these two. >> hi, robbin crop again. i'm actually not sure if my question is pertinent to the item. but i'll ask it anyway. it's regarding the muni buses. i can't access the buses. they don't have any transfer seats in the boarding area. i can't stand, no access for me. and so i would like to ask that all of the buses get a couple transfer seats put in them. the other half have them. it's like two, three, four, five or more. so i think it wouldn't be a bad thing to put in a couple transfer seats in all of the buses, so those of us who need a transfer seat can sit in one. if i need to get >> -- my back is already out goinged to chiropractorrer.

i-- out going to the chiropractor. that's really not a good way to ride oop. i don't have a seat. and i would really like to have a couple transfer seats put in all of the buses, so we can access them. thank you. >> chair: thank you, ms. crop. and i can see sfmta staff listening to your comments and suggestions. mr. finebalm. >> i'm bob finebalm, president of save muni. for those who haven't heard of us, i'm president of save muni. we are a transportation advocacy organization. we've been working for better muni service for the part of a decade. we are a transportation think tank. we've been working on policy issues for much of that time. we're mystified as to why our

organization has been excluded from membership on this task force. i'm not clear who exactly has appointed the task force. but we have asked both supervisors peskin and mandelman, as well as the mayor's office for inclusion on this group. we have members who have decades of experience in working with muni and in working with policy issues. we continue to be mystified as to why we were excluded. this is not a task force, as i understand that has mandateed members. and it's not a task force that has a designated number of members. we continue to ask for representation on the task force. so that, unlike the public, who

are constrainted from speaking, we will be able to have a voice and offer our valuable suggestions to improving muni service. [bell dings] thank you. >> chair: thank you. next speaker. >> give you some history about the light rail that serves 3rd street. and you see here that we do have astute constituent from the sunset and other areas who come here and speak. but at one time the light rail, that was suppose to go on gilroy street. and your supervisors, especially the new ones, have no clue as to why why the light rail was put on 3rd street, from 4th and king to the middle of nowhere

visitation valley. and if anybody knows anything about transportation systems, this is a mickey mouse way of addressing the situation. mickey mouse way. we have the stop -- and i told julie from day one, she was with san francisco -- with your organization, maria, you know, the director. i remember that. and then she jumped to muni. and that's fine. but chronologically certain areas are suffering. and we have no representation. we have no representation whatsoever. it's a joke. try to ride the 3rd street light rail. it's a joke. [bell dings] guns, knives, dirtiness,

rowdiness. what about safety. what about quality of life issues. you can talk ad nauseam about this, that and the other, what about quality of life issues. i like to be told the truth. but you have to speak truth to power. thank you very much. >> chair: seeing no other members of the public on this item, public comment is closed. [gavel] thank you for that brief, compressed update. is there any introduction of new items? i'm sorry, commissioner mandelman. >> i was going to express appreciation for chilly chang and ben rosenfield, who had done so much work to pull the group together. we have only had one meeting of the full group, but subgroups meeting. i thought the first meeting, it give me a little bit of hope that, you know, if you put smart folks in the room and start getting feedback from people from other systems, that we may

figure some things out and get sort of path forward that is helpful. i felt really good about the first meeting. i want to thank everyone in the mayor's office as well for their help in pulling it all together. >> chair: thank you for that closing comment on this ongoing item that we will hear more about. is there any introduction of new items? seeing none. any -- commissioner walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you, chair peskin. moving pretty fast today, huh. >> well, it's been two hours. >> supervisor walton: just briefly. we've been hearing a lot from our constituents lately. and i've definitely personally experienced as recently as this past weekend, inadequate and inconsistent transit service, we're experiencing on the t-third light rail. the mission bay platform construction, with the bus substitutions and the shuttles, more frequent and reliable, in addition to