>> good morning, and welcome to the san francisco county transportation authority for our meeting today, tuesday, october 22, 2019. our clerk is mr. quintanilla. could you call the roll. [ roll call ].

>> clerk: we have quorum. >> thank you. next item, please. >> clerk: item 2, chair's report. >> thank you. colleagues, this month we had the pleasure of receiving a delegation from the california state transportation agency led by the new secretary of transportation, david kim, and members of his team responsible for safety planning and innovative mobility. they oversee the transportation commission and our state d.ot. i want to thank our executive director and her team for organizing the round table as well as the sfmta acting director and the mtc deputy director for joining the meeting which i stayed for the entire time. the medium of the day was state and local partnerships and we

had much to discuss, beginning with the storied history of infrastructure projects that followed the earthquake that took place 30 years ago last week. it not only damaged the bridge but also frees and other structures in san francisco. we were allowed to rebuild the embarcadoro structure. these land grants were helpful allowing to make the terminal possible and we should acknowledge then-state senators quinnton cop and john burton. today our collaboration focuses on a new generation of partnerships, supporting affordable housing and climate goals with critical muni

investments and the endeavor to invest in cal train and high-speed services and eventually across the bay. initially the group was interested in how we work with different modes of transport. here we discuss the per-trip fee, congestion pricing studies, as well as the need for sfmta to regulate our streets and sidewalks effectively with permits and data. finally we discussed on partnering on clean ferries, autonomous shuttles for treasure island, and ensuring that next year's u.s. 101 deck replacement impacts that we heard about at our last meeting are well managed. secretary kim and his team were engaged on these issues and we

outlined many next steps. finally the secretary and i discussed the results of the legislative session as well as bills. i did express, commissioner stefani, our disappointment about two bills that were vetoed, assembly bill 1605 which was the bill authorizing a paid reservation system for lumbar street which we endorsed and supported, as well as senate bill 127 which was the bill to ensure cal trans includes street facilities. secretary kim expressed the administration's commitment to advancing complete street projects state-wide and pledged to work with us to find a solution to congested conditions on lumbar street. i think i nicely said to him that the proof would be in the pudding. i know our staff would be

following up on both fronts, and we will be looking forward to moving those forward with legislative offers. with that, i conclude the chair's comment. is there any public comment on the chair's comments? seeing none, public comment is closed. our acting executive director ms. lumbardo will give the executive director's report. >> the report should be on your desk. we'll do this briefly. building on the chair's remarks. it's the end of quite a legislative session and we can disappointed by several of the actions the governor took. we saw 1847 that establishes the bay area housing authority. this will allow a relationship

between the two commissions to put it ant ballot. it's suites of potential revenue measures, pretty much anything except sales tax. mostly we want to say a thank you to our delegation that has been helpful to getting the bills passed and to the governor's desk. we are going to ask your sack ca men toe advocate to come to the next meeting which is gearing up quickly. another example is we have a spot bill that we're talking about later on this agenda sb-278 which is proposed to be the vehicle for potential regional transportation measure. if that goes that would be acted on as soon as january. speaking about that regional transportation measure, i won't say a whole lot now because you will get a presentation under item 12. the two main ones that -- will

be presented. they will present -- i just want to emphasize for you and folks listening, nothing has been set yet. this is a great time to provide san francisco with the input whether we need a measure, have a measure, what should the expenditure plan look like and so forth. if you can't make the meeting, you can come wednesday, october 23. the c.a.c. will get the same presentation you're getting today. there is also a public workshop on october 24 from 6:00 to 8:00 in our offices if you want to get a little bit more into the weeds on the transportation measure. moving on to local issues, i wanted to welcome back commissioner haney and walton.

the challenge offered by mayor breed and officials from several other cities around the country that are interested in arranging a debrief and a presentation to the board. there is nothing like seeing the tour. that tour also included a focus on equity and affordability packages, what it took to build coalitions to make it work and some of the pitfalls. promises that happens with the pricing programs in those two countries. it has been on a different note a busy season for submitting grant applications, and the transportation authority has been submitting applications that would further our programs.

we have a fund that would fund potential user -- submit an application for a san francisco pricing and incentive demonstration pilot. this would be a little bit like bart perks, where we offered cash and prize incentives to bart riders to see if they would be willing to shift their trip a little bit off the commute time to make things a little bit more comfortable, and that was pretty effective. this would be a larger demonstration as well as a mock pricing program with debits and credits. it would be a soft way to test congestion study. this grant would be funded if we get it around december 2019,

which would coincide with the end of the study. there has seven applications submitted from the city for the cal trans program. one is related to transportation demand management. it's called a transportation demand community of progress. what this would do is work with developers, coordinators, and transportation management associations really to develop a set of references and bet practices for transportation management. we have an existing city-wide t.d.m. program adopted by the board of supervisors in 2017, but everyone is doing their own thing. this would help improve the process and make it more effective and see if there are opportunities for employers to pool the things they do so it's more cost-effective. the second application we did in coordination with commissioner mar's office. it was the school access plan,

both offed on medium to long distance trips for families. this would complement the other funding secured by commissioner mar to study school transportation issues. these cal trans grants are expected to be announced in spring 2020 and the projects, if awarded, would begin next fall. shifting to some outreach opportunities. we have been doing some treasure island outreach. we have one on thursday, october 24, on the island where we're working for non-profit and for-prompt businesses on the island to give us feedback about the pricing policies that we want to bring back to the tima board. if you want more information, there is more information on the website if you look up treasure island. outreach is coming out for

connect s.f. our long-range transportation program that we are working on with the planning department. this is the first big round of outreach after we presented the statement of needs, which was looking at existing and future conditions for san francisco and how close or how far we are from meeting our long-term vision from a sustainable and equitable transportation plan in the city. the first bit of outreach is going to be two focused workshops. one focused on youth which will be focused on the youth. and another on those who live and work in the sector. those will be public workshops same type of content in january. the focus will be what are the typical trips you make in the city, are they working well or not? what would it take to get you, your friends, your mom,

co-workers to switch to more sustainable modes such as transit, biking. one of the findings in the statement of needs is we need to shift a lot more of the trips to be from more sustainable modes. if you have questions on that, i'll flag that eric young will be bringing a contract amendment for the outreach consultant back to this board in november. we'll have that opportunity. lastly, a couple of project highlights from the sales tax program are delivering several sales tax projects. we have projects starting on the hairball interchange. one is for the commissioners from districts 9 and 10. d.p.w. is expecting to begin construction in the next week to improve the bike path that goes under the 101 freeway, including everything from regrading it so

you have more clearance between the freeway and the path and landscaping and a buffer. construction is expected to take about four months. we're very expected to see that moving forward. in district 3 we've seen under the -- sorry, a number of new bike lanes put in. some crosswalk improvements. there is more work and more related tweaks to these projects. one thing that is nice is this particular set of improvements came up through outreach that was connected for sfmta's embarcadero project. lastly yesterday mayor breed, chair peskin, the public works and the public utilities commission, and the transportation authority

attended a ribbon authority for the jefferson streetscape improvement project. this is quite a pedestrian safety project. it includes wider sidewalks, lighting, and improves safety for all users along jefferson street. this was another example of a project funded with a variety of sources from our end tip funds, and i wanted to flag $6.8 million from the city's competitive program. we will have funding coming up for that. >> are there any questions? is there any public comment on the executive director's report?

>> supervisors, maria touched on about 60 points, no mention of congeneration. how are you going to stop the congestion? what studies are being made to see how many vehicles come into the city and which areas are impacted. why are we not talking about the carbon footprint. the thing that happens in london is a far cry from what happens in san francisco because we have too many hills. we also have different values.

i'm not faulting the director's report. she's just trying to touch on certain topics, but here where everyday san franciscans have to deal with pollution, congestion, accidents, quality of life issues linked to our infants, children, youth, our elders is paramount. those are the things we need to touch upon. thank you very much. >> seeing no other members of the public for public comment, public comment is closed. mr. clerk, next item, please. >> clerk: items 4 to 7 consent agenda. they are being considered for final approval.

the remaining items are considered routine. if a member objects, any of the consent items may be removed and considered separately. >> is there any public comment on the minutes of october # 8, 2019? mr. goodman. >> goodday, chairman and members of the transit authority. we wanted just to highlight the comments that were made on the meeting minutes on the swit switchback policies and procedures. hopefully that will come out. there is some of the transportation and traffic issues come from the issues. if we don't have the links and loops in transit service. we need to start seeing your public transit agencies treated as such. get the loops made so we have a

network across the city. you have to provide those new systems. the other issue was the update on the u.s. 101 deck replacement. there was no mention of cumulative effect of construction. it was discussed a little bit about 19th avenue and side streets used for routeing of that traffic. that's a safety issue. also, why aren't we really planning for this way in advance to get a secondary system in place so that there is ways to cross the city or get to some of these construction sites. you're going to have contractors getting their labor materials and it has an impact on people when they're going to be using the side streets to get through the city. >> thank you for your comments. seeing no other members of the public for public comment, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to move the consent agenda, made by

commissioner walton, seconded by commissioner ronen. on that motion, a roll call, please. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have final approval. >> next item, ms. >> clerk: item 8, allocate $24.3 million and appropriate $49,724. this is an action item. >> anything you want to add? >> good morning, commissioners, i am the deputy director for policy and planning. as mentioned before governor

nusem vetoed this bill which would have allowed the board of supervisors to establish a paid system for managing auto congestion on the 1,000 block of lumbar street. we have withdrawn the lumbar street paid appropriation request as it was concontingent gent on that bill becoming law. that is reflected in your packet materials today. we are working with commissioner stefani to advance the program in light of the recent actions. >> commissioner stefani, anything you want to add? >> thank you, chair. i just want to make sure we have that money somewhat on hold to address the issue, that it does not going anywhere else any time soon. >> it is available as your neighborhood transportation funding to allocate to projects

of your priority. >> thank you. >> all right. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to move item number 8 made by commissioner fewer, seconded by commissioner yee. we have the same house, same call. the item is finally approved. next item. >> clerk: item 9, accept the downtown rail extension peer review panel's final report on governance, oversight, management and project delivery. this is an action item. >> thank you. we had a very robust hearing on this. >> good morning, chair peskin, commissioners. on october 8, members of the d.t.x. panel presented their findings and recommendation to this body. since that time, we have been meeting with partner agencies and other members of the public

and stakeholders. we have been advancing discussions about executing a memorandum of understanding so that we can implement most of the expert panel's recommendation. we're also providing funding on related projects. we hope to bring those to you next month for consideration. this will also be followed by a request for d.t.x. funding that will come to you in december. we also met with friends of the project, friends of d.t.x., and some of our other advocates. apparently there has been some confusion about whether that two-year program recommended by the panel includes the engineer. we want to confirm that, indeed,

it does. it is item 1.5 in the work program. they want to establish an initial operating segment to get transit service and accommodate the rail by a date certain which is now hoped to be 2028. so this will be with a budget supported by higher confidence and to move forward. so after that the project team will conduct the signing in accordance with whatever the project delivery method is selected. with us here today we have john fi fisher who is a member of the panel and answering any of your questions. >> mr. fisher, iing you would like to add? colleagues, we are in receipt of a statement from the tjpa.

is there anybody here from the tjpa who would like to say anything? okay. so i would like to respond to the statement before we open this up to public comment. the president of the tjpa board, mohamed nuru, shared his statement with me yesterday. i think he -- i don't want to put words in his mouth, but i think he appreciates the findings of this d.t.x. expert peer review. i think we all agree this project is of critical importance to the region, the megaregion, and the state. of the two points raised in his statement as we move forward together, i would like to echo and clarify what i believe is our intent at the transportation

authority. first, on the strategy and collaborative manner of work that the panel recommends, this one needs to be a truly regionalized process. we heard very clearly from the expert peer review panel that we need to reposition, reset the project, and confirm its business case. it will involve a hard look at the funding and phasing of d.t.x. to ensure its competitiveness for funding. we not only need to draw on the expertise of the stakeholder expertise and funding in major infrastructure project delivery, but most importantly to empower this group to work in a truly integrative way and not just as peer reviewers of tjpa staff. as funders, we will be looking to have the tjpa's staff cooperation and looking to work as an integrated project team

with us, the tjpa, and others. as to who will design and build phase 2 and retain the board of directors as the lead, my understanding is that the expert peer panel recommends that the integrated team work out the various project development roles and the decision of lead agency will come later in the two-year work program after we've confirmed a fundable project definition. at that point, the funding picture and institutional landscape for rail in this region may also change, for bart with a second crossing, capital corridor, cal train which we are having active governance discussions in this region which you will hear more from commissioner walton on, to the m.t.c. which recognizes this

need. finally, on the matter of retaining tjpa as the governing entity, we acknowledge that law allows them to stay as the head of the project, but we would be wise to partner with local agencies to run the project. whether we can achieve full concurrence or act as a group by majority or super majority, this will be an important principle to uphold because only by building trust and capacity together and by holding each other accountable for everyone to do their part will we get to a goal in a timely and cost-effective way. i hope you will join us in lending our full support to the tjpa approach and lending us leadership and full support. with that, is there any public

comment? i have a number of speaker cards. if you'll line up to my left, your right. >> peter strauss for the friends of d.p.x. i just want to thank staff for convening that discussion that you heard about with members of the expert panel last week that clarified the intention to continue the engineering at this stage up to the 30%. as you know, that was a pivotal issue for us in terms of making sure this project moves forward efficient efficiently.

thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for the opportunity. i really appreciate this report and i hope the board will approve the recommendation to transition. moving forward, i believe we need to transition from the peer review panel of the site to a quarterly management of it of kpmg or some other non-engineering firm. i also believe that we would gain a more regional identity by locating offices at m.t.c. not the authority. with regards to delivery model, i believe the cross rail is supervisor to the l.a. model.

in 2016, some key [ indiscernible ] -- moved on to deliver cross-rail system in sydney and toronto. the problems mentioned in the report about to back to 2008 when contracts were awarded. the contract was terminated and had to be rebid awarded to siemens in 2013, but the project never recovered from the five-year delay. there is the station that will not be open to the public primarily because it is redesigned by a team of 150

consultants at the same time the station was being constructed. thank you. >> thank you. mr. coffman. >> mr. chairman, members of the commission, i am gerald coffman, comany of founder and president of the bay area transportation working group. we sent in a statement on the 17 17th, which i believe was supposed to go into your packages. i'm not sure it did. i do have copies in case anybody needs it. mr. porcari on june 25 made one of the best statements on behalf of this project that i've seen come from anybody, that is he talked about us being not just an extension of san francisco, but also a major connectivity element that would help the west bay, the region, and even northern california. we supported that.

in fact, one of the comments we have and there is leadership. the leadership on this project has been missing for a long time. people's support has been a mile wide and an inch deep. we have proposed a make-up of that board and you can quibble about who's on there. the idea would be to make it have more political clout, bring in people who truly feel an ownership for that, and have the ability to express to others. to that is one of the most important things that could happen. otherwise, the chances of this one phase, a phase that's been defined since about 2004, will get swept into all these future deliberations that the consultant is talking about. that worries us. thank you.

>> good morning, chair peskin and supervisors. i am laura tolkoff and i am the regional policy director for spur. m.t.c.'s plan estimated that there are over $300 billion of transportation projects in the pipeline which means there is the potential for tens of billions of cost overruns. we think the bay area needs to look at how we can deliver these projects on time, cost-effectively and without defect. we support the integration of the teams and to move forward without delay. first we recommend that this integrated project team become a center of excellence that is available to manage other projects throughout the region or with m.t.c. with so in projects on the horizon, it is important that we develop expertise and transfer lessons learned from one project

to another. second, we want to elevate this to a project of national significance. this designation does come with some perks at the federal level, it also comes with a suite of tools from the state, such as up-front financing, a greater ability to act as a developer. with no less than five projects of regional significance ahead, we urge san francisco to work with the state and get the tools needed to deliver this project. third, we think that the integrated project management team to be a nimble organization with full-time staff and in-house expertise and the ability to make most of the day-to-day decisions. it would be a mistake to create another single-purpose entity with limited staff resources

with too many externalized work streams that are too complex to integrate. early steps would be a decision agenda. thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this important issue. >> thank you. mr. feinbaum. >> i'm president of save muni. i first got involved with the downtown expansion of cal trail in the 1980s. since the 1980s there have been dozens, perhaps as many as 100, different studies on this project. a lot of the work has been done and i would suggest that the integrated project team really take account of that work rather than reinventing the wheel. one of the encouraging things that me in this report is that

at the very end of the work plan there is a date of 2028 which is the date the trains are supposed to be coming into the sales force transit center. i would like to see this body and all other bodies that are party to the memorandum of understanding commit themselves fully, completely, and totally to that date. i would also like to see if you issue contracts for either consulting work or construction work, that you including penalties in those contracts for failure to deliver the project in 2028. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, chair peskin,

commissioners. i'm speaking in support of the recommendations in front of you today. i've been involved as a c.a.c. member and advocate of this project for the past seven years. i recognize the budget challenges and the impacts of the cracked beams. the rail project with regional and national phase positions us well for the next 100 to 150 years and brings to life the vision of the grand central station of the west. transitioning to this next phase or phases of this project with a price tag in somewhere of $6 billion range is the time to reposition and make any necessary adjustments while continuing to move forward

elements of the project which make it possible to continue the development phase at the earliest possible time. i believe the recommendations have it right, securing support from key elected officials, key changes to the oversight where appropriate, refreshing the approach to financing, establishing an initial financing phase. the two-year plan included in this recommendation keeps the project moving forward with a sense of urgency and the goal of delivering the initial operating phase by 2028. the success of this first phase will deliver on the stated proposition, ensuring continued funding for subsequent phases. thank you for the community to make this community. >> thank you.

next speaker, please. >> listening to the experts, i don't hear mention of the unions. in deliberations like this we need unions at the table. we also need astute citizens of san francisco, and there are many, so that we have a workshop, so that we meet this peer review and bring the points that have been mentioned here about timelines and goals. what we see again and again is giving a lot of leeway to a few people to do as they please without any checks and balances. thank you very much. >> are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to take action on item number 9 made by

commissioner -- oh, you want to say something, commissioner haney? >> i'll be quick. i wanted to thank you for requesting this work to the expert panel for their work. i really appreciate the focus, particularly in thinking about how we can more regionalize the leadership and shared commitment to this project. it's obviously going to have tremendous impacts not just for my district, where a lot of it will be located and coming into the transit center, but for the entire city, region, state. so taking that approach is going to help ensure its success. our vision for the transit center involves over a dozen transit somes coming together to provide excellent connectivity to transit riders. there will be benefits for congestion relief, greenhouse gas emissions, accessibility. it is going to require us

delivering the downtown rail extension. i think our regional and state pashs are going to help us not only fund this project, but to deliver it. as chair peskin has said, i'm taking the time to get this right and have the right strategy involvement with the right agencies, it will work off to have a stronger project plan. i don't think this will slow things down. when we get this right, we will save time and expedite the project's arrival. again, i want to thank everyone who's involved with this report. chair peskin, for your leadership, i'll make sure that we not only get this done, but get it done right in a way that shares the sponlt and leadership in a responsible way. >> thank you for that comments. i want to thank our staff and all of the members of the expert

panel for your very, very good work and very helpful recommendations. now let us cooperate and enter into that memorandum of agreement and hire our project director. thank you again to the staff of the t.a. and the individual experts that gave their time in this report. so do we have a motion to take action made by -- how about you, commissioner haney? motion by commissioner -- >> so moved. >> and seconded by commissioner brown. we have a different house roll call, please. [ roll call ].

>> clerk: we have first approval. >> item 10. >> clerk: this is hearing on traffic enforcement in support of vision zero. >> we actually had a presentation in the vision zero committee that chair of that committee, commissioner yee, called. so i'll start with commissioner yee and go to commissioner haney. as chair of the t.a., i thought it was important enough that we could have a similar hearing at the entire body. commissioner yee, opening comments? >> thank you. i just wanted to express my thanks i guess to know that this is important enough to have a

hearing of the whole body here. in the future, i would love it -- because i want to remind people that we do have a vision zero committee in which we hear these items pretty regularly and that in the case of just being mindful of staff's time that we don't continue duplicating these type of hearings. if there are things that are related to vision zero that you would like to have on the agenda, please let me know because we're always looking for items. >> thank you, chair peskin. thank you for allowing us to have this hearing here. i agree with commissioner yee that a lot of the follow-up and deeper work and follow-through should happen in the vision zero

committee. i thought it was important to have this broader conversation around enforcement here in front of your full commission ton able to provide some guidance and leadership around this challenge. we know that 2019, we are on track to have our deadly ieiestr since vision zero was implemented. the city wants to get to zero traffic deaths. i'm glad to see so much progress on the engineering part of vision zero. today's hearing is focused on the enforcement aspect, with a central question being what it is our enforcement to get us to zero traffic deaths and what do our agencies need to do to make this happen? every day i witness wreckless driving behavior in the

tenderlo tenderloin that endangers children and other pedestrians. i see flagrant disregard as people do everything they can to get on the freeway. i receive calls about blocking bike lanes, blocking the box. we know where the dangerous spots are and we've known for a long time, but we don't have the enforcement. there are questions that i've posed to the transportation agencies. the transportation policy director from the mayor's office was invited to come, but declined to participate. why are there only 13 red light cameras across the city. what is the focus on the five

and how does the agency work with sfpd. what are the barriers and what kind of accountability can we implement. i'm grateful to have folks from sfmta here and i will pass that on to you all. >> good morning, commissioners. thank you so much for having us. i'm sfmta's pedestrian program manager. i'm also the vision zero task force co-chair. i'm joined today by my colleagues from the police department. i'm going to spend a few moments giving context, before we answer the questions that commissioner haney has posed. we are always grateful for the opportunity to talk about traffic safety and what the city is doing to combat fatalities every day.

so in 2014 it was this -- it was the board of supervisors who adopted vision zero. we were the second city in the nation to do so. it is our commitment to end traffic fatalities and to reduce severe injuries on our streets. at least 20 people are killed every year here in san francisco on our city streets. we know that there is a huge cost, not just in monetary value but also in emotional value. to everyone who deals with these fatalities, this line deals with what our emergency practitioners have to deal with, whether an e.m.t. at the scene, the police department responding to the call, or our trauma surgeons who see a person with a traffic fatality injury every 17 hours at s.f. general. just to set the context, we've had varying levels of success in terms of our fatalities. the last two years, 2017 and

2018, were our least deadly and second least deadly in history. we've had a supreme challenge this year and i know all of us at the vision zero team take all the fatalities very seriously. our current number as of today is 24, with two under examination by the medical examiner. thank you to commissioner yee for your comment. we do report fairly frequently in a variety of formum, although we're appreciative of any forum. we additionally have a community and city task force that meets quarterly, where we can hear directly from our constituents about the issues they see. we -- commissioner haney discussed that we have a broad

engineering platform and work that we discussed extensively. i know this body has discussed the education work, but we are going to talk today specifically about the safe people arm of enforcing our traffic laws. in february of this year we released an action strategy that specifies the 58 strategies that this government is going to talk which is broad across sfmta, the police department, and many other agencies. i am not joined by key agencies, because they are in sacramento. some of the issues on the docket in that space is changing the 85th percentile law. additionally, automated enforcement which is a topic this body has been extreme lye supportive of. so those respect our

transformative policies that the city can't take any further action without work from the state. that action strategy is based on the best guidance that we get national and from extensive community input and work with city staff across every department in order to understand what actions were reasonable but also effective at really getting to zero. we're really proud of the actions we've committed to. but in light of the fatalities we've seen this year, we wanted to respond to the mayor and the community. thanks to this very specific body and your additional funding, we are able to expand our quick look program. through the $5 million commitment you have made, we are able to quadruple our commitment. additionally, we -- for some of our projects we've been able to

reduce the timeline by seven months. thank you for your support on that. we've expanded our bike lane commitment. we did 22 miles of bike lanes. we have the commitment to do that same amount in a two-year time span and not a seven-year time span. that is the demand to see these projects go into the ground quickly. we've also committed to intersection work. we often work on corridors, but intersections are extremely important. as of this weekend this year we turned on nine pedestrian scrambles in the tenderloin. we've had four fatalities in the tenderloin and those scrambles will make those safer. we're working with the community groups to make sure people understand how they work. we have people on the corners as i speak. we've done a massive signal

timing program that we've talked extensively about at the vision zero committee and looking at traffic calming treatments that places like new york have explored. with that, that's just a little bit of context. the goal of this hearing is to talk about enforcement. i'm going to turn this over to my colleague, but i'm happy to answer any questions when we're done. thank you so much. >> colleagues, any questions? all right. commander porreia. >> good morning. i'm the commander in san francisco police department assigned to m.t.a. so some of this information, as president yee mentioned, was presented previously. i'll try to get through it

directly. as an overview of our traffic company, 46 officers assigned to motorcycles. they're responsible for traffic enforcement city-wide, collision investigations, participation in community events, they facility traffic control and parades and marches, which we have many of in san francisco. our strategies related to vision zero including the creation of the vision zero team which is housed in the traffic company. we started off with four officers. under the leadership of mayor breed, that team was increased to nine officers. also in our strategy is to prioritize enforcement in high-injury corridors to increase our visible presence as a traffic violation deterrent

and change the behavior of those using the roads and streets. we're using data to drive enforcement. also we in our strategy -- this is a roll-out for every neighborhood, for every place within the city and country with regards to enforcement. looking at our first quarter, the statistics, we issued 10,929 cites, 4,494 of those were vision zero, with our department average 49%. in the second quarter we have an increase. the total cites for both quarters 21,931. 10,267 of those for foef on the five violations. our department average has h