members. miss haney? >> >> supervisor haney: thanks, chair peskin, for all of that. there was some comments i was going to make around the businesses there in particular. that's an area that already has a lot of challenges, with a lot of vacant storefronts, a lot of public safety issues there. and i would really love to see with some more specificity on what the plans are. i mean, you mentioned some of the things that are being thought about in terms of ambassadors and other types of support. i also really want to recommend that you include sfpd as part of this. there are a lot of foot beats on market street, particularly in that area. and as you're thinking about some of the impacts, if some of the stores there that are already or vacant areas that are already having a lot of challenges in terms of safety issues are impacted, then, you know, we want to make sure that they're included. i appreciate what chair peskin said. if there's a way for us to have a bit more detailed plan, not

just for the 5th to 8th segment, which is most immediate. but more broadly i think this is -- if we can get as far ahead of this as possible, i think it will be hugely helpful, especially in light of what we've seen in light of the other large projects, central subway, van ness in particular to have a plan in place to have that outreach and to be able to -- because this is going on for years. so this -- and this is right in the heart, obviously core of our city. it couldn't be more important to get this right. but thank you for your work. >> chair peskin: thank you. seeing no other questions from members, are there members of the public who would like to testify on this item? please come up. if you'd line up to your right, your left. first speaker, please. >> first and foremost, let's take the central subway, started with $600 million. and now it's about $2 billion. take the van ness corridor. you don't give a damn how many

businesses left the city and county of san francisco. and you don't give a damn that many of those businesses were there for 25, 30 years. now we were there and the chair has made a statement about he knows and he saw what transpired when the first time around they worked on market street. and at that time the department of transportation paid the businesses some money. they did not do this with 3rd street. now back to market street. go on market street and go on -- going in the area of union square and see how many businesses now are closed. it doesn't even feel like christmas. in union square there are businesses that are closed.

now i believe in needs assessment from engineers. not having some people forming committees and let's talk about this, that and the other. [bell dings] engineers -- we are so stupid on van ness, that for every one day we work, three days we do not work. and it took somebody one and a half years to find out, oh, how to mix this problem. so mohamed was there, holland was there. ed was there and, guess what, a good man like ed raskin, you ganged up on him and he had to leave. and now you've got a clown -- you expect this clown to do some justice. [bell dings] stop the talk, but don't walk the walk. we need engineers. engineers who understand transportation and can do needs assessment. thank you such.

>> chair peskin: next speaker. ms. lee. >> hello. good morning, commissioners. my name is janice lee with the san francisco bicycle coalition. i'm going to keep this really short. come on, you know to vote yes on this. but what i will say this is phase 1a. i didn't know you had to split phases into letters, which means a lot of phases coming before you over the coming years to fund this project. and i really think that that is where you as commissioners can weigh in and hold the city accountable to those timelines. so i look forward to that. it does not escape me that the two commissioners, chair peskin, commissioner haney, market street splits -- to be vocal on this. it says a lot in terms of making sure the construction, the timelines are met. there's assistance for the small businesses. i think the bike coalition is extremely supportive of that. i think we've learned we have to be part of this conversation during the planning phase, too.

but thank you so much for your consideration. vote yes. this is a no-brainer. let's fix market street. thank you. >> chair peskin: next speaker. >> i'm bob. i'm president of save muni. i had an illuminating conversation with a driver on the number 5 recently. you know, the number 5, it's the fulton that goes up past golden gate park. and the longest part of that route, in time-wise, he said it's on market street. once it gets off market street, you can move pretty quick. so i said to him, well, are you looking forward to the new market street plan, that will get the cars off. he said not really because we get held up more by bicycles than we get held up by cars. now what i'm saying to you, i urge you in approving this measure, to include a

representative from the transit workers' union, who can speak to the concerns of the muni drivers, as you're reconstructing market street. we don't want to impede the buses. we want to have bike lanes. but let's be sensible and include the drivers from the very beginning. and, of course, save muni will be happy to participate as well. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, commissioners. jody, walk san francisco. i do want to echo janice's comments in terms of we do hope that this is a no-brainer and this money is passed for the better market street project. walk san francisco has been part of the c.a.c. and has also been asking for what these mitigations are and have offered our services. so anything we can do to be part of that, in terms of talking to businesses and helping, we know that this kind of project is going to enliven businesses on market street. we have to keep that in mind when we're talking about more foot traffic, more people on

bikes, more ability to stop and shop. so let's keep that in our heads when we do hopefully pass this. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you. are there any other other members. public wanting to speak on item number 5? seeing none -- maybe we can hear from staff at our december 17th meeting with some recommendations, relative to the policy concerns that -- again i think i said this at the beginning. this is not about the project. this is about how we mitigate in a meaningful and real way, impacts from the project. and we've all experienced this, whether it's commissioner yee in west portal. we've all this these problems and it's time at the dawn of the 21st century for the city to wrap our arms around that. with that, is there a motion for item 5, made by commissioner mandelman, seconded by

commissioner yee. and on that item, we have a different house. roll call please. >> commissioner brown? >> aye. >> commissioner fewer? >> aye. >> commissioner haney? >> aye. >> commissioner mandelman? >> aye. >> commissioner mar? >> aye. >> commissioner peskin? >> aye. >> commissioner ronen? >> aye. >> commissioner stefani? >> aye. >> commissioner walton? >> aye. >> commissioner yee? >> aye. >> clerk: we have first approval. >> chair peskin: next item, please. >> item number 6, allocate approximately $1.5 million with conditions and appropriate $110,000 in president obama sales tax funds for three requests. this is an action item. >> mr. pickford, good morning. >> good morning. so, yeah, our first request is for design of a new castro street elevator and provide a redundant elevator.

the $1.5 million in prop k requested would leverage an additional 1.4 million in sfmta funds. the project includes an emphasis on community outreach and the design team will coordinate with local groups that are proposing to redesign harvey milk plaza. the project being connected is part of a broader rehab, replacement project building new elevators at muni stations around the city. this elevator is expected to be open for use in june 2022. we have a little diagram that shows you where in the station the new elevator would be located. our next request is for the realignment study. it comes at the request of commissioner ronen. it will duct preliminary engineering and traffic analysis for realigning the boulevard near the farmers' market. the goals are to make it safer, neighborhood friendly roadway and reduce the amount of land that's occupied by the interchange. the transportation authority will lead the study and sfmta will provide technical support and will review the work. we're already looking at

different alternatives for realign alemana. the request today would move forward the best alternative into preliminary engineering, to complement this study, district 9 has also supported public outreach by s.f. plan and some engineering work by public works. we're expecting some draft analysis in early 2020 and a final report in october 2020. the idea of the realignment would be to push alemany into that grassy area, away from the farmers' market. our final request is for the district 10, 15 third bus study. the study would respond to long-standing community concerns about the light-rail service and the desire to return bus service to 3rd street. so a lie-level feasibility analysis and we'll evaluate office for muni bus service and

assess the benefits, costs and risks of each. currently proposals to address the community concerns, which include delays, switchbacks, trains being taken out of service at muni metro east. but they have long timelines, so this study would like at returning bus service to the corridor in advance of one central subway opens. outreach will include participation in existing community events and additional small meetings, -- as needed. the study will inform future outreach efforts. the transportation authority will lead the study and the final report we expect completed in march 2020. with that, i can take any questions. we have project managers and our other agencies as well. >> chair peskin: thank you, mr. pickford. are there any member who have questions for staff. seeing none, is there any members from the public -- ms. lee. please come forward. >> hi, again, janice lee.

san francisco bicycle coalition. i'm missing my mandatory like central harassment training for this. you know, i have to make sure i'm really speaking out. anyway. >> chair peskin: you have until the end of year. >> i know. i know. i'm working on it. so i want to give thanks to commissioner ronen on her request for alemany. i know that you have talked about this, also for the hairball as well, the realignment. these are very, very long-term plans. we just saw, you know, better market street i think the first round of that public planning began in 2011. so sometimes things do take a long time. we're really supportive of that prop k allocation, particularly for alemany. so thanks for your leadership there. >> chair peskin: thank you. madam bart director. seeing no other members of the public, is there a motion to move this forward. made by commissioner walton, seconded by commissioner ronen. we'll take the same house, same

call. it is approved on the first reading. mr. clerk, could you please read the next item. >> reporter: approve the participatory budgeting program and the projects identified through the bayview community based transportation plainnesses. >> chair peskin: commissioner walton, the floor is yours. >> supervisor walton: before the presentation, i want to make some brief comments. we recently participated in a regional participatory budgeting pilot, which actually started before my election to this body. and i want to thank m.t.c. for awarding $600,000 and, of course, i wish it could be more. and lifeline transportation program funds to fund priorities from the bayview community-based transportation plan. participatory budgeting process. i would also like to thank everyone that advanced this effort, including the sfmta, the steering committee, the technical advisory committee, be

magic, the transportation authority, m.t.c. and, of course, our bayview residents for engaging in this process by attending workshops, submitting project ideas, and voting on the priorities that are important to the community. through this process, sfmta is able to fund the top scoring project, which is increased service on the 44 o'shaughnessey, with other funds, to use lifeline funds to improve transit safety and accessibility and creates safer streets in the bayview, which is a top priority for many areas in the community. the projects will benefit transportation in the bayview, and i'm happy to support this recommendation. and just want to note that we're also working on other ways to increase equity in transportation in the bayview, a 15 third study to provide better transit down the corridor, signal priority for the "t," increased access to transportation hubs, downtown

commercial corridors and rail stations, and ending switchbacks. >> chair peskin: ms. smith. >> good morning. april smith. your transportation planner with the transportation authority. happy to present this item today. so for background, the lifeline transportation program focuses on projects that serve communities of concern. and that address transportation gaps and barriers. in july of 2018, m.t.c. approved $600,000 of a $1 million set-aside for l.t.p. projects identified through a participatory budgeting pilot as part of the bayview or community-based plan. assess components that applicable and scalable at a regional level. only transit operators are eligible to apply through the 20% local match requirement. and the total budget was $750,000. as a congestion management agency, the transportation authority is responsible for

approving the final program of projects. the board was based on the bayview c.t.p. and the participatory budgeting efforts in october, as part of the supmental prop k. to fund the larger ctpt investment plans, $2.5 million in traffic fund was in fiscal '20, and '21 and '22. as required by m.t.c. guideline, sfmta established a steering committee, which developed and adopted a participatory budgeting rule book, which is attachment one to thementalo in your pocket. also specify that 85% of the funding be used for operating projects and 20% be used for capital projects. beginning in summer of 2018, sfmta collected project ideas from bayview residents and stakeholders, through

multi-lingual outreach. staff received over 250 ideas which were screened for eligibility and feasibility. sfmta then worked with the steering committee to develop project proposals and selected the projects to be included on the final ballot, which is shown in attachment 2. to the memo in your packet. the community voted over seven-week period, beginning in july of 2019. ballots were made available in spanish, english and chinese at 19 locations in the bayview, as well as online. and they received 375 ballots in response. the operating project that received the most votes was to increase service on the 44 oshaughnessy. after close coordination with commissioner walton, the sfmta was able to identify an alternative source of funds for the project, which allowed the l.t.p. funds to be made available to the next highest scoring project, the bayview

transit assistance. they commissioner walton is supportive of the project, as you heard earlier. as you see here, sfmta has identified 170,000 in local match funds to fully fund the recommended project of programs, which exceeds the 20% required local match. attachment five to the memo conveneses detailed information on the seven projects recommended for funding. for more on the projects, transit assistance will be hired from the bayview for three years to ride on the 29 sunset, the 44 o'shaughnessey and the lines within or immediately adjacent to the bayview, to provide a safety present. that will be from july 2020 through june 2023. the capital projects serving as the local match will improve access to transit and lighter safety. the funds would be used to construct four crosswalk safety and access improvements and two bus shelters, expected to be

open for use by september 2022. pending board approval, the m.t.c. commission will consider the program of projects for approval and consider allocating $100,000 in funds in early 2020. we anticipate the sfmta will request additional prop k funds for a portion of the local match. m.t.c. will release its findings from the san francisco pilots in 2020. with that, i can take any questions. >> chair: are there any questions for ms. smith in commissioner walton, i think you said your piece. are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item number 7. ms. lee. or no. you're just walking around. it is. you are a frequent flyer today. >> i promise i'll stop after -- >> chair: public comment, we welcome and encourage. >> thank you, chair peskin.

this is another community-based transportation effort. this is, you know, bayview sort of falls on the heels of western addition, which was a great way to really put the time and energy it takes. and i think learning a lot from commissioner yee and the success that you've had doing participatory budgeting in district 7, bringing dollars to actual pedestrian safety improvements in your district, as driven by the community. it goes such a long way. i think a lot of times people participate in community-based transportation planning or community-based planning and you don't really know where it goes, those efforts sort of sit on a shelf. i can name many sfmta studies where that happened. this is really exciting that people can put real dollars behind this. i really encourage you to approve this. and i think generally with community-based planning, we're realizing it takes a lot of staff resources and takes a lot of time. but when we do it right, we'll see real improvements and hope that, you know, sfcta, this

board, this commission supports such efforts. so thank you. >> chair: thank you. next speaker. >> first and foremost, i think if somebody is sponsoring or involved with this agenda, they should pay attention. so right off the bat, you know that some people don't give a damn. so let's get real. if you look at the 3rd street rail, it starts at 4th and king and ends in the middle of nowhere visitation alley. now commissioners should know that that 3rd street rail was never, ever planned for 3rd street. it was suppose to go on gerry boulevard. once in a while you'll find the speakers talk about that. it was dumped upon us. and when it was dumped upon us, unlike market street, where the

department of transportation gave money to the businesses, nobody gave money to our businesses on 3rd street. 80% of the businesses closed down and left. now when you're talking about these people who are suppose to have some sort of safety on the buses, they're nowhere to be found. you call them yellow jackets. now i think they changed the color of their uniform. they're found at mcdonald's, they're found at coffee shops. they are not found on the buses. they help the muni drivers. that's why we need union members from muni to be present here for this discussions. and we get some people who are paid to say some nice things about the priority. oh, give them money. it's not about giving municipal. it's about service. when our people get assaulted on the buses, when our people get

killed, it's about service. and so we should take this so-called meetings seriously, very seriously. [bell dings] it's not about giving somebody money to dole out. this is not about some gangsters, you know, who sell drugs and dole out and bring that mentality into the chambers. this is about serving the people. and we are very far left, the last of the mohegans. very far apart. this is about serving the people and serving our elders. our elders are traumatized on the buses, every single day. and nobody does anything about it. and do you know what, ask the muni drivers. they'll tell you, you know, we are told not to call the police. so do you think it's mickey mouse ambassadors are going to do something, when we have

gangsters on the bus, armed with guns and knives. thank you very much. >> chair: thank you. next speaker. >> bob from save muni. we very much support the number 15 bus. it's an important bus. it should actually have been studyied and revamped a lot sooner than this. but i'm glad to see that you're going to put some money into it. as i remember, the number 15 actually crossed market street and went up current, isn't that correct. and went up toward telegraph hill. i don't know if the study that you're anticipating only concerns the part of the route and the bayview or whether you're going to study the entire route, because we've heard that the old number 15 that went up

kerhy is very much needed as well. we hope it comes to a quick resolution. thanks. >> chair: thank you. seeing no other members of the public -- going once. are you coming up, sir? no. all right. in that case, is there a motion on item number 7, made by commissioner walton. seconded by commissioner safai. we have the same house. same call. >> we have a new one. new house. commissioner safai came in. >> so he did. we do not have the same house. mr. >> clerk: , roll call, please. on item number 7, commissioner brown? >> aye. >> clerk: ray fewer? >> aye. >> commissioner mandelman? >> aye. >> commissioner mar? >> aye. >> commissioner peskin? >> aye. >> commissioner ronen? >> aye. >> commissioner safai? >> aye.

>> commissioner stefani? >> aye. >> commissioner walton? >> aye. >> commissioner yee? >> aye. >> clerk: we have first approval. >> chair: next item, please. >> item number 8. approve the 2019 san francisco congestion management program. this is an action item. >> chair: mr. sanna. >> good morning, commissioners. >> chair: before we start, i just -- commissioner fewer has to leave, you're excused. commissioner safai is making a motion to excuse supervisor fewer for the rest of the meeting, seconded by commissioner ronen. we'll take that without objection. [gavel] sorry, mr. sanna, the floor is yours. >> with the transportation authority and i'm here to provide an update on our congestion management program, or c.p.m. as a congestion management agency, the transportation authority monitors and reports various performance measures on c.m.p. network every two years.

the c.m.p. network includes 230 miles of major arterials and freeways. requirements include monitoring level of service,. however, we are unique in a way that we -- in addition to automobiles. as san francisco continues to experience significant growth in jobs and population, auto speeds have declined further. there have been 1% to 5% drops across the different facility types and peak periods, compared to the last monitoring cycle in 2017. these charts show the long-term trends in both auto and transit or bus speeds. note that there's a discontinuity in 2017, because the data provider had updated the data product.

but longtime trends show that auto speeds have been declining continuously over the past decade. a greener economy and population, combined with increasing number of ride-hail vehicles on the streets, are contributing factors. on the other hand, transit or bus speeds are holding itself steady, and this is likely due to the transit investments that are being made. however, the transit speeds in the downtown core are still pretty slow, just about at about 6 miles an hour. we have other metrics that we also track continuously. auto transit speed ratio is the ratio of auto speed to transit speed. this indicates how competitive transit is relative to auto. the closest the values are to one or the better. we found that transit competitiveness is increasing steadily over the past decade.

transit reliability is also measured as a fraction of the average speed that the bus might deviate on a given day. higher values indicate higher availability and, hence, less reliability. transit reliability has worsened slightly from over 15% to about 20% between 2017 and 2019. during the last cycle, we developed and released an interactive map of the "t" congestion metrics. this significantly improved access to data and provides a means for public to explore changes in transportation system performance over time. this year we have updated this with our latest data, congestion data from 2019. in addition, we have also released another website with bike and pedestrian collision information.

in addition to system performance metrics, other elements that are reported in c.m.p. include updates to the traffic condemned management, study initiatives, improvements to our travel forecasting model, and also updates on fund programming activities and project delivery progress. with that, i'll be happy to take any questions. >> chair: are there any questions for mr. sanna? seeing none -- oh, commissioner yee. >> supervisor yee: just curiosity in terms of looking at the transit. the bus speeds. did you break it down into -- the difference between bus speeds before we had those red lanes? did it actually increase it that

much, when we put the red lanes in -- as a factor? >> i think we did the last cycle we looked at how the red lanes might have impacted transit speeds, especially on mission. and we found that there seems to be improvement. however, the frequency that we monitor this is once every two years. and there are a lot of changes happening over those two years, especially with land use and population, in addition to transportation changes. so there are a bunch of factors that go into these changes. but we did find evidence that the lanes are improving transportation speeds -- of transit speeds on mission. >> supervisor yee:s that the percentage improvement any different from -- of different

lines that didn't have the red sort of lanes? >> most of the lines have just remained steady. that's what our average speed shows. and improvement is always better than just being steady. >> supervisor yee: well, i mean, that would be really interesting to know, because we're making investments in these lanes. and i assume that it will -- this study should show that it's having some marked improvements in terms of the speed of the buses itself. an idea to look into more carefully. >> gentleman. we have the ability to look at transit speeds during specific periods, before and after an intervention. and we just have to drill down the data to be able to make that

assessment. for the condition management program itself, we have a fixed monitoring period in spring and we do that every two years. >> if i might just add, too, commissioner, the m.t.a. has documented benefits to the red lanes. we'd be happy to bring in information update to you or send you information. in fact, the muni reliability working group, the performance working group that several of us are working on together with m.t.a. and the mayor's office, that's reporting out one of those findings that was of interest as well to that reliability working group. i'll just mention that when bark mentions 8 miles an hour. if you look at under slide 4, muni bus speeds have been basically flat over the past several cycles from 2011 to 2019. and we we do attribute that to the muni forward and the transit priority treatments, including the red lanes. in order to maintain even a flat

speed on average city wide, we have to do those types of projects in face of all of the growth that otherwise is affecting the car speeds, which you see next to that, which had been slowing down. so just even maintaining a flat speed is kind of a win, that we do attribute to the benefit of the red carpet lanes and other muni-forward treatments. >> supervisor yee: thank you. i think we need to continue highlighting that to the public, not just me. because people are asking why are we making these investments if nothing is really improving. we just have to keep it in their sights. >> yes. thank you. >> chair: thank you. commissioner haney. >> supervisor haney: thank you for this report. so would it be accurate to say the biggest driver of congestion in the last i'd say eight or

nine years would be t.n.c.s? >> well, we have completed a more in-depth study of what's driving these changes. and we call that t.n.c.s and congestion study. and in that we found that t.n.c.s have contributed about 50% of the increase in congestion. population and jobs make up the other 50%. >> employment growth is 23%, and t.n.c. growth is 51%. and i see that there was a study that the looked at 2010 to 2018 in terms of t.n.c. growth and the impact on congestion. is there any updates in terms of what we've seen over the last few years or any other further

analysis of t.n.c.s or growth of t.n.c.s since then? it would seem to me, since 2016 through the end of 2019, we're probably seeing a lot more growth and impact on the situation on our roads. >> right. for 2016, we were able to complete the study, because we got t.n.c. trips data set from their a.p.i.s. >> what's a.p.i.s? >> it's the application programming interface, that the cell phones use to communicate with uber and lyft systems, to connect with drivers. >> so they gave the data set in 2016 to us, but haven't given us any more data since then? >> well, they did not give us the data. we were able to paint the

a.p.i.s and get that with the help of research. >> if i might also add to this answer, commissioner, yes, in 2016 we did the study and we were able to gather the data independently from the two companies. subsequent to that, they themselves have reported their trip data and it's for the more recent two years. it's an even higher amount of trip-making. they're estimating 13.2% of the m.t. or vehicle miles traveled in the city being with thed for by lyft and uber trips. that's a higher percentage than we even estimated in 2019 and the two additional years of growth, as well as they've included all trips, including regional trips. whereas our study only studied trips that happened within san francisco. so your answer, yes, trip growth within the last two years, released by the t.n.c. companies themselves. >> is there a plan to do -- i know there was the t.n.c. and

congestion follow-up report. and one in 2017 and 2018, seems to look at data through 2016. is there a plan to do a further in-depth analysis? it seems like there's been a lot more of growth and a deeper impact on congestion i'd imagine. and maybe not that much that we've done to address it. other than obviously the great -- you know, some small but important fee that we put on these trips, through prop d. >> right. that has been one of the recommendations coming out, was to do -- looking at a per-trip fee, looking at congestion pricing in general. looking at curb management. so the sfmta is taking a lead on that last item, curb management. and those are the types of responses that cities are doing. in addition to just dedicating more and more street space to

the efficient modes, whether that's transit, whether that's bike-share and micromobility scooters and what not. that's sort of the tool kit, the congestion tool kit. if you'd like, we could come back with more proposals for how we might study the t.n.c. issue in particular. but i do think it's a broad economy-wide issue as well. again it's probably both the t.n.c.s and the general continued strength of the economy. >> yeah. i mean, it seems like the report with the analysis that was done in 2018, it looked at through 2016. and then it would be great to know what happened since then, what sort of follow-up. >> right. >> what more data are we collecting on an ongoing basis, how are we seeing that. how are we using that in our decisions. >> right. so this study that you're seeing here today takes us to the data set, as recently as 2016. >> right. >> okay. that's the limitations of our sources. >> we collaborated with m.t.c.

recently to do the data. we have an sample of t.n.c. users. the data has just come in. we'll be able to report more on t.n.c., an update to mode share at the very least, using that data set. >> okay. >> i hear you. i think we're hearing that you'd like us to continue to update and refresh that congestion analysis, with respect to t.n.c.s and in general. >> yeah. i mean, i think it's pretty clear that at least through 2016, i mean, as compared to any other factor, t.n.c. growth was over, you know, the majority -- by far the number one driver of congestion. so if we're looking at congestion on an ongoing basis, particularly in my district, and supervisor peskin's district, you know, this is sort of the key driving issue here. it seems to me we need to have much more of a handle on it and what we're doing about it.

>> chair: certainly what a heat map would indicate. are there any other questions from members? seeing none, why don't we open this up to public comment. mr. finebalm. and ms. lee, you are welcome to testify again. >> thank you, bob finebalm from save muni. we all agree i think that one way to mitigate congestion is to get more people on to public transit. and for years our organization, as well as others, has favored a regional bus system, because it's widely recognized that if you can offer people a one-seat ride, so that they don't have to transfer, it's much more likely that they will take public transit. so m.t.c. is now onboard with a regional bus system. however, i think san francisco

could play its part as well. one of the things that, at least i have explored with a.c. transit, is the possibility of running some a.c. buses, not only to the transbay termal, but to selected destinations in san francisco. i understand there's some obstacles to that. they did that to civic center a.c. transit, used to run to civic center a while ago. they've abandoned that. so i would ask that in your study of congestion, or updating the congestion plan, you consider allowing both a.c. transit and other transit agencies to operate more fully on the streets of san francisco. [bell dings] so that they can offer passengers from not only the

east bay, from from marin and the peninsula a one-seat ride to san francisco. and in that connection, i would hope that when you're studying market street, you would also consider allowing sam traps and golden gate, at least, to run some buses on market street, because that would be very helpful for their service. thanks. >> chair: thank you, mr. fine balm. next speaker, please. >> once again, you know, when we take public transportation and we've been here like for 35 years or 40 years, in the last five years, sometimes we get stuck on one block for 45 minutes. so what the gentleman is saying is he's talking about uber and lyft and these are companies that we don't have to trust. we've trusted them because we

gave them tax breaks, but they've got nothing. and now they are capable of giving us sick information. you may all laugh at it or think that it's a little bit whatever. but uber and lyft is not where we have to go. it's not holistic. now nowhere in the discussion has the gentleman spoken about construction. construction on many of the thoroughfares impedes. i heard the chair say heat and nobody paid attention. okay. that's that red light that tells you where there's traffic and we have it from our media, our networks. we do not have the ability to do again a needs assessment. we gave $100,000, $200,000 to a

consultant and he gives us whatever we want to and makes us happy. i even saw somebody tried to intercept once or twice. no. [bell dings] san francisco is the worst city when it comes to congestion. this is a known fact. so what the hell do you have to say about that? what the hell do you have to say about making it easier for the seniors and those to take public transportation. nothing. so we have to wake up with our heart in the right place, so go to the right place. thank you very much. >> chair: seeing no other members of the public for this item. we'll close public comment. is there a motion to approve the

congestion management program, made by commissioner yee, seconded by commissioner mandelman. we have a different house. roll call, please. >> clerk: on item 8, commissioner brown? >> aye. >> commissioner haney? >> aye. >> commissioner mandelman? >> aye. >> commissioner mar? >> mar. >> commissioner peskin? >> aye. >> commissioner ronen? >> aye. >> commissioner safai? >> aye. >> commissioner stefani? >> aye. >> commissioner walton? >> aye. >> commissioner yee? >> aye. >> we have first approval. >> chair: thank you, mr. clerk. could you please items 9 and 10 together. >> item 9, accept the audit report for the fiscal year ended june 30th, 2019. action item. item number 10, approve the revised debt policy and ratifying the investment policy. also an action item. >> chair: ms. fong. >> deputy direct for finance and administration. i'm happy today to bring before

this commission the results for the fiscal year 2019 financial audit. and the results from the single audit of the interchange project and bridge structure project. i'm going to call up the auditor in charge. here we have the audit partner. >> chair: thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. thank you for having me. this is the comprehensive annual financial report, the scope of the audit is to ensure the financial statements are fairly stated, it's a process in which we test the controls and confirm the balances reported on the financial statements. we confirm your sales tax, we confirm your cash and we perform tests of controls, that's to the manner that you process contracting, payroll, various items within the financial statements. we have a clear opinion on the

financial statements, they're fairly stated. the agency also undergoes a single audit for a compliance audit, has the unique requirements and they passed and they did not have any significant deficiencies or material weakness. i want to thank management for helping us through the confirmation process and through the audit process. it was an easy process and we expect that the financial statements will receive that in the upcoming year. with that, i'll be more than happy to take any questions. >> chair: thank you. are there any questions from members. ms. fong, anything you would like to add to either item? >> i just wanted to thank the finance and administration staff. each year it takes many numerous hours and weeks to prepare this financial audit. i'd like to thank the entire division. we worked much smarter than we have in the past years. just i would also like to open up any questions to the changes to the debt policy and investment policies.

we had public finance, our financial advisers review them and had squire boggs, our disclosure counsel, review these items as well. >> chair: thank you, ms. fong. i also want to thank you for the private briefings that you give me in my capacity as chair, that i imagine you give to other commissioners that wish to avail themselves. and i want to thank you for once again keeping our financial house in the best of order. you have been a great chief financial officer and we appreciate your work. are there any members of the public who wants to comment on items 9 and/or 10? >> i would like to thank the chief financial officer, is that your title? >> chair: that is the title. >> for -- i watched her for many years. and she's very astute, has the tenacity and the fortitude and i

want to thank you on behalf of all of the citizens of san francisco. >> chair: thank you. that was lovely. and actually her real title is deputy director for finance and administration. but with that, we will close public comment. is there a motion to approve items 9 and 10? made by commissioner mar. seconded by commissioner brown. and we still have the same house, same call. [gavel] those items are approved on first read. we will now go to introduction of new items. and we will start with commissioner mar, who has an important request, as it relates to a bill in the california state legislature, senate bill 50. commissioner mar, the floor is yours. mar thank you, chair peskin. colleagues, as you know, in april, the board of supervisors passed a resolution opposing

senate bill 50, unless amended to address seriouserns -- serious concerns about the affordability crisis. last week the board further amended that resolution to clarify the changes san francisco needs in order to support it. and through all of this focus on transit-oriented development, i wanted to ensure that we take stock of the transit side of that conversation and look at the potential negative impact of s.b.-50. it raised the concern that by tieing zoning standards to transit service and infrastructure, it could create an incentive for jurisdictions throughout the state to suspend transit service enhancements or avoid planning for increased all together. sfmta and sfcta raised another concern, not identified by planning. that many of the transit lines and stations targeted by sb-50 in our city are already

overcrowded or are deficient in their state of repair. upzoneing creates more demand or impact on the already inadequate transit services and infrastructure. to be clear, we want equitable transit-oriented development. in order for housing density to be a step forward for equitable development, instead of backwards, with he need to invest in transit service improvements alongside new housing development. transportation authorities need to have a say on real estate development bills, impacting and tied directly to their work. so today i'm requesting that the san francisco county transportation authority draft and present to us a resolution on the transit impacts of sb-50, with mid gages options to expand transit service in conjunction with new developments through incentives and creative multi-source funding strategies. we need to plan for complete communities. and i look forward to continuing

this conversation and ensuring that transit isn't forgotten in transit-oriented development. thank you. >> chair: thank you, commissioner mar. and seeing no other requests for introduction of new items, i would like to adjourn this meeting. i'd like to commend our outgoing colleague, commissioner vallie brown, who i have served with in so many different capacities under various colleagues and then as a colleague. but on behalf of the staff and this body, ms. chang would like to say some words and present you with our highest honor. ms. chang, the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair peskin. commissioner brown, it was such a pleasure to work with you and your office. we want to thank you and express our sincere appreciation for your leadership on transportation, your years on the transportation authority. as well as your years supporting

your boss', previously on the authority. your work this past few years has been very reflective of your commitment to sustainable transportation and safe streets. not only in your district, but citywide. we have a nice sort of framed graphic here, that captures you working with kids on safe streets and safe routes to school. i think it was walk to school day and we have a bike to work railroad day photo with many of your colleagues at city hall. you were always very enthusiastic and strong advocate and continue to be. including most recently in the neighborhood around hayes alley and octavia boulevard for these types of improvements, as well as the graphic down here that celebrates. we really want to express our appreciation to you for the hard work of you and your staff to improve transportation in the city. in particular it's been a pleasure working with derek from your staff as well as the whole office. so best wishes to you and thank you again. [applause]

>> supervisor brown: thank you. thank you, chair peskin. thank you. thank you. it's so sweet. i just want to say thank you to the t.a. staff. i mean, we really ask a lot of you. and we want to see it faster than, you know, a lot of times it gets done. but i'm always amazed at how professional you are and your staff. and how you work to get it done on a timeline that makes us happy. and i have to say in the 16 months that i've been supervisor, i have asked for a lot. i have asked for traffic studies, for market octavia, i have asked for protected bike lanes on page and octavia. we actually had a ribbon-cutting yesterday on octavia boulevard for closed streets. and no cars and bicycle,

pedestrian-only around the green, which is such an amazing thing to do. and it happened really fast. i have to tell you that. it happened very fast. the community was behind it. we took away parking, as is always the scary thing, taking away parking. people go a little sideways. i think once everyone saw that it was, you know, the cars were gone, people could walk through there, they absolutely thought this was the right thing to do. so i just want to thank you. i know it's been years. i have worked with you on all kinds of things. the wiggle. i remember when we first started working on the wiggle. yeah, 12 years ago, 13 years ago. so i just want to say thank you for everything that you do for this city. and i know a lot of times you guys, all of you get a little beat up by community and us. but you really do an amazing job. and i'm so proud to be part of this city and have you represent us. thank you very much.

>> chair: thank you, commissioner brown. are there any members of the public who would like to make general public comment? seeing none -- come on up, sir. all right. first in time, first in right. >> okay. so i have spoken before about san bruno avenue. and it took us 16 years to get a traffic light. but there's one traffic light on san bruno and now it's causing congestion. whereas many as nine muni buses back up during peak hours. so there again you need somebody who knows about traffic management. it took somebody like three weeks not to paint the crosswalks and then i had to come here a couple of times, say whatever i have to say, and that was fixed. but the most important thing is all of you geniuses, how can you

take away 46% of the parking, without having no outreach, no meaningful meetings and even our supervisor was asleep at the cockpit. but now she's woken up, writing some letters, thinking thinkinge can do some miracles and hopefully she can. but this is my point. when you have seniors and they have nobody but their car, and they want to do shopping, they go to san bruno. and if you look at your empirical data, that is if you have it, from the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, when we had a spiraling of the economy, these shoppers kept san bruno alive. we should take that into account. [bell dings] our seniors -- don't treat our seniors like whatever. please. and i want to see some ratification about this stupid

46% and what -- what are the reasons they want to remove the parking and have removed the parking without informing people. then, you know, you talk about the bicycles. they put some bicycle racks and nobody uses them. [bell dings] nobody uses them, you have to remove those racks and maybe take them somewhere else that they can use them. thank you very much. it's not very easy to speak in two minutes. but i thank you, gentleman, who is controlling that thing that you've given me a few more seconds. thank you very much. >> chair: all right. bob finebalm again. >> two quick questions. number one, i'm a member of the tcpa c.a.c. at our last meeting in november, we heard lewis. and lewis said that in december, this board was going to consider an $11 million request for

engineering for phase 2. you have one more meeting. so i'm asking the chair and tilley whether that will be on the agenda for december 17th? >> chair: mr. finebalm, the way this works is we actually don't, pursuant to the law, answer questions. but ms. chang will approach you, as soon as this gavel goes down and answer your question. >> good. i have one more thing. and i remember at the beginning of the year, chair peskin asked for a report about the siemens l.r.v.s. and the defects. >> chair: we'll be having that early in the new year. >> oh, that will be coming shortly. thank you very much. >> chair: seeing no other members of the public, public comment is closed. the sfcta is