is closed. president bridges. >> thank you madam secretary hearing none we've gone through the full agenda at this time the meeting of the san francisco employees is now adjourned at 5:07 p.m. thanks to everyone. thank you very much. and have a nice evening. >> thank you. >> thank you. ♪ [ music ] ♪

>> thank you for your comments. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, thank you for your time and attention and leadership. i hope you and your families are safe and healthy. the testimony from business owners made my heart race. i am judy, on the board of directors. my comments are a bit of blast from the past. i grew up from san francisco's

japan town back in the designated western addition. mom and pop world war ii. my parents saved and borrowed money. they decided to retire and pass the business to my parents. my parents started. redevelopment demolished. the small businesses provided for all of our needs from doctors to dentists, shoe repairs, barbers, bookshops and so much more. mom and dad's restaurant had celebrities. i slept to the jazz greats. willie mays hung out. it was a small business on

special flavor, friendliness and character. back in the days small businesses and the people who loved community had a community that wases diverse. their hard work continued to value small business owners because corporations and big money did not have the heart of the community. we support and rescue small businesses, communities that may being san francisco unique and amazing place to live and visit. thank you so much. >> thank you for sharing. next caller, please. >> i don't have anything to say on the legislation, i would like to comment on the amendment. i understand that the amendments

are not substantial. it would have been better practice to have the amendment known to the general public before opening public comment so that the publico have been aware of the content of the amendment and commented on them should they so choose. that would allow for better transparency. thank you. >> if the speaker wishes to identify whoever the speaker is, i am happy to speak to them. they are non substantive. i am happy to reiterate that section 37c points to we are making it more clear, although it is abundantly clear in said

section this law applies to subtenants. in addition to that on page 6 i would insert the language that gives the proviso that payments made prior to the forbearance period cover commercial tenants in the first three tiers shall be applied to rents that come due during the forbearance period and unpaid rents that came due during the moratorium period, which is also clarification. they are truly nonsub tantive, was not worth talking about. the substantive amendments i will address later today. thank you for that point. if the speaker wishes to identify herself, i am happy to hear it. >> i believe there is one more speaker left in the list.

>> next speaker, please. >> yes, good afternoon. i am a small business owner in chinatown speaking on behalf of the president of the chinese chamber of commerce. thank you for your leadership. chinatown is a cultural icon. an important history of san francisco. it faced many difficult challenges and continues to be the oldest and most vibrant chinatown in the united states because of small businesses and the people who live there. the livelihood of chinatown. they are also the residents of

chinatown to make a living. the financial pressure caused by covid-19 gives them an opportunity to make a living. rent relief is crucial to chinatown small business. continue chinatown. the chinese chamber committee is to put th. [indiscernable] thank you for your time. >> thank you. mr. clerk, any other speakers in the queue? >> we have reached the end of the queue. >> i hear there are no further callers. >> public comment is closed. i would like to thank everybody who called in to comment on this legislation, particularly those

who called in t to support this legislation, those had had comments about potential amendments to the legislation, particularly that comment with regard to historic landmarks as well as those who called in to oppose this legislation. i want to thank everybody who has e-mailed the board. the overwhelming. i don't think i have seen any e-mails against it. we have huge petitions for it. i want to thank api legal outreach, mr. taylor, ms. matsuda for advocacy on behalf of the numerous tenants who are really struggling to make it through this pandemic. i particularly want to thank the co-sponsors. i mentioned my colleagues on this panel. that is chair preston and vice

chair safai and supervisors wall ton and mar. we don't have a new board president yet. as i mentioned to the second before last public commenter, i alluded to a number of amendments that i wanted to make which i just described on pages 3 and 4 and 37c.2 which is actually definition section of the ordinance. i think it has been included and this may beings it more clear that sub tent would ensure sub lessees are separately eligible for protections under the legislation and relatively the to repayment of deferred rent. i described that on page 6. on page 7 striking the language that gives which would be a a

rules and regulations for financial hardship of landlords for said waiver. on page 8 non substantive language to provide nothing shall provide legal or equitable defenses arising out of unpaid rent. i believe that language and thank you vice chair preston for asking that last week. i would like to move those amendments before duplicating the style and colleagues you are in receipt of that language and then i would like to make one

substantive amendment to the duplicated file and send the first file to the full board with recommendations. why don't we start. if there are any comments from colleagues, the floor is yours. i see supervisor preston nodding his head. he might want to say something, mr. vice-chairman. >> no. >> i am sorry. we don't have a new board president yet. vice chair safai. >> i appreciate all of the amendments you made today. this is important and timely. the only thing i heard over the time, and we talked about this when we did our eviction moratorium for tenants.

we certainly would never want to take away or disincentivize people from paying rent. this doesn't absolve people from the rent burden or the psychological and humane perspective of not wanting to be in debt. the incentive is that people want to pay rent and do right. these are people mainly mom and pop businesses as you so eloquently outlined. most of these are few member run operations. i just think it is an important piece of legislation. also hopeful. i mean we passed legislation to create a fun for tenants mainly living in an partment buildings. there will be stimulus money and this will help with new president in the white house to

recover and move the businesses back on track. i appreciate the timeliness of this. thanks. >> i apologize. it is that supervisor preston is the chief co-sponsor of this legislation. member preston. >> yes, thank you for the inadvertent promotion. temporary as it was there. you know, i want to thank you, chair. i won't repeat myself. for your leadership we have your staff that has worked on this. this is not simple to figure out how to within the law protect small businesses at a time when we had the data that you have set forth just around this unprecedented loss of revenue

and business closures. i think this ordinance as amended does that. i appreciate all of your work and leadership on that. i also want to thank and you mentioned some of these folks. so the public understands the role that you have mentioned taylor, diane and jackson, the role they have played in not only fighting to preserve business business in japantown and across the city but leading the fight in san francisco for all small businesses. being in constant contact with my office, chair peskin's office and other of my colleagues

offices but also advocating for the original commercial moratorium for extension at state level that chair peskin led efforts on and we were proud to support. the drivers, same list of folks who we have been thanking were at the forefront of fighting for the extension at the state level so we have the authorization to do this ordinance and for the advocacy for the ordinance and making sure that we got it right. obviously, japantown is in my district, absolutely essential and i will do everything in my power with the advocates to make sure we are not losing businesses that are the heart and soul of japan town and district five but this ordinance is a key part of saving these

businesses. for the commercial landlord i spoke to last week. everyone is going to take a hit. everyone has taken a hit in this pandemic. small businesses are losing venue. commercial landlords have to accept less than 100% of rent. the key is to figure out ways if they take a hit all folks emerge okay in the long run and businesses don't have to close and folks can continue to thrive in the city. i am proud to be a co-sponsor and appreciate your work, chair peskin on putting together such a strong ordinance. >> thank you. i think you just summed it up perfectly in addition to acknowledging everybody who has been important. my staff, in hepner, taylor, met

soda, low. this is one of the million pieces were it not for the governor's extension to marc march 31st we would be in a different position. we are all in it together. we are all going to have to share the pain. by the way, this wases all originally model from the legislation you did on the residential side and made us all realize the commercial side and what that means for employment in san francisco. with that i would like to make a motion to move the an for the py distributed amendments. mr. clerk on that motion a roll call, please. >> motion to amend is offered by chair peskin.

vice chair safai. >> aye. >> preston. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> there are three ayes. >> then i would like to make a motion with my authority to duplicate the amended file. >> duplication is made from the version just amended. >> thank you. >> then i would like to make a motion to send the first file with recommendation to the full board of supervisors as a committee report for tomorrow, november 10th. a roll call, please. >> on the motion the original ordinance be recommended as a committee report.

vice chair satisfy. >> aye. >> preston. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> then i would like to speak to the one substantive amendment which has also been circulated to you, mr. vice chair safai page 6 to clarify the right to tenants to terminate lease as follows in subsection c which would save tier 1 commercial tent unable to pay rent due to covid 19 and landlord fails to reach the payment for repayment. the tenant shall have 30-days

written notice to the landlord not witnotwithstanding lease te. to any rent. in addition if the tenant terminated the tenant shall not be liable for penalties out of the termination notwithstanding any lease to the contrary. i would like to make that amendment. >> on the motion to amend the duplicated file from the previously amended version. vice chair safai. >> aye. >> member preston. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> finally, i would like to make a motion to continue the duplicated file to our next meeting one week from today. >> on the motion to continue the

duplicated amendment file t to e november 16th regular land use and transportation committee meeting. vice chair safai. >> aye. >> member preston. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> thank you. then, mr. clerk, is president yee in attendance yet? >> i am. >> all right. then, mr. clerk, please call items 2 and 3 together. >> agenda 2 resolution to codify and implement proactive approach for reducing posted citied limits under existing authority and implement coordinated

traffic signal timing to reduce vehicle speeds. three is resolution calling for city-wide commitment to vision zero and urging mayor department of public health and vision zero partner agencies to advance the action strategy to end traffic fatalities by 2024 through a bold and strategic approach to improve street conditions and ad vance longer term policies for safer streets. members who wish to comment on these two resolutions is should call the number now. 415-655-0001. [please stand by]

>> president yee: thank you, chair peskin. he has been a partner with me from the time we passed the resolution when he first came in and as a supervisor, and in making sure that the -- at the transportation -- you know, i just want to say the state of our streets has been in crisis for some time now. while we have been pushing for vision zero since 2015, we are now slowly making progress. this year, we have seen close to 20 fatalities already, which is roughly the average of the past five years. the original goal was to end traffic deaths by 2024, and we

have to think differently about how we are going to get to zero by then. on sunday, san francisco will be joining the world remembrance day for traffic victims. it marks 25 years for the global anniversary, and locally, this will mark the sixth year that we've actually recognized it. behind stats our lives are forever changed. they are somebody's child, wife, mother, father, grandparent. someone is feeling pain and loss. i almost lost my life walking the streets of san francisco, so this is an issue very personal to me. this year, walk sf for families and safe streets will sponsor

an exhibit to commemorate all those lives we have lost. a few weeks ago, i heard a board of supervisors meeting discuss vision zero and saying that they needed to have a paradigm shift, and i could not agree more. today, i want to give to the m.t.a. an effort to present on their shifts in action strategies on vision zero. the first resolution calls on us to do everything, everything possible to reduce speeding

within the city. i know we have an unfinished fight at the state legislature to completely overhaul how to determine speed limits, but in the meantime, we need to be using everything to do what is possible around senior centers, around even child care centers or engineering the slow cars -- to slow cars down near dangerous crosswalks. the second is calling on san francisco to recommit to vision zero by evolving our approach and proposing some further ideas to get things done. the supervisors are often the first to hear about the state

of the streets, even when the authority does not fall on us. over the years, it has been such a slow process to see improvements in our neighborhoods. i used to have to fight to get anything done for a stop sign, strengthening, anything. i was always met with excuses and resistance in departments. this has started to change, but it really shows that we are not working collectively in a solutions-oriented approach. i hope with effort we can change and transform how we do thi things. i'd like to thank supervisors mar, haney, and mandelman and now peskin for their sponsorship. and i want to thank sfmta vision zero 2 for helping us in

this next days of the work. next, i'd like to thank walk safe sf, family safe streets for their endless hours of advocacy. i think one public commenter, a board member -- i think one public commenter, a board member of walk sf, dr. olivia gamboa, said it best. up to now, the city has been treating walking as an asset gone, whereas people being able to walk safely through their city is vital to the essential, economic, and vital health of san franciscans. everyone walks. this is not about special interest, this is about

building a city around human beings. we all need safer streets, and it is a moral confimperative fs to get this done right. now i'd like sfmta to make their presentation. sfmta also has other team members on the line if there are other questions. ryan, are you there? >> chair peskin: and mr. president, a couple of things. one is before we turn it over to miss reeves, i know that all of the members of the board are going to follow in your footsteps and continue to champion these policy matters, and i look forward to being at the top of that list. it is time for us literally to take our foot off of the gas in our cars but not off of the

food, and got to keep our pedal to the metal on this issue. so we're going to redouble our efforts and sincere reappreciate your leadership. before we turn it over to mr. reeves, i think one of the keys here is automated speed enforcement, and i hope that the sfpoa will aid us in our efforts to get that passed in the coming legislative session. i am hopeful that assembly member david chiu, who's championed this two weeks, will be bringing that back, whether it's a wider bill or a only bay area bill, i think this is a huge part of the solution, and i want to thank you for your leadership. mr. reeves?

>> president yee: miss reeves? >> chair peskin: i'm sorry. miss reeves? >> yeah. let me just pull up my slide here. okay. just confirming you can see my slides here. >> chair peskin: yes. >> so as you know, vision zero was adopted in san francisco in 2014 as a ski wide commitment to eliminate all traffic fatalities and reduce severe injuries. the concept of vision zero is built on a safe systems approach, and it moves away

from the idea that traffic deaths are inevitable and instead looks to design a system that prevents crashes and mistakes will happen, but no one should die from them. all work in san francisco -- [inaudible] >> our work in san francisco advanced the same system social security approach, and we work with our colleagues at the fire department, police department, and other areas across these three areas listed here. so we're looking to design a system that will build safer streets to anticipate error. our safe people work is looking to advance education around safe behaviors, and our safe vehicle work is looking to advance the idea that safe vehicle technology can be an important tool in our safe system. and across this work, we also have our data systems team, led

by public health, and our legislative and policy team led by our m.t.a. government affairs team. so through act act of this year, we have had 23 traffic fatalities, including nine people woalking, two people riding, and two people riding in vehicles. this is equivalent to the 2019 fatality, so we have a lot of work to do. our net visualizes where the majority of our fatalities and injuries occur, and we know in san francisco that 75% of all fatal injuries occur on our city streets, and half of our network is in communities of concern, which represents communities that have a higher population of low-income people, people of color, and

vulnerable communities. recent fatality data does continue to align with our high injury network. as mentioned, half of the fatalities have been on the high injury network, and 60% have occurred in the communities of concern. we also know that seniors are disproportionately burdened. 30% of our fatalities have been ages 60 or older, and 40% of all our pedestrian deaths are seniors. so with all of this data, we know who is impacted and where, and we can focus all of our resources accordingly. so slowing speed is the single most effective thing we can do to save lives, and that our transportation system should be designed for speeding that really protect the people, so

slowing speeds is woven into all of our work, and we have dozens of ways to slow speeds, including our education and outreach work. we have ways to target our resources to be the most impactful, and i'll highlight a few of those just briefly. so we know that through lane reductions, traffic calming, and predict tiive intersection to name a few, we can reduce speeds for all users. at our protected intersections, dru including here at 9th and division, it resulted in 30% of all people turning slower than the speed limit. we've shown turning speeds reduced by 50% and also helped yield to a pedestrian by 25%,

and using residential improved sight line [inaudible] in t >> -- including leading pedestrians intervals, which give the head start to pedestrians at a crosswalk and have been shown to reduce pedestrian-vehicle collisions by as much as 60%, as well as located bike lanes where we saw [inaudible] on valencia street. lastly, our boarding islands have been effective at reducing speeds including avoiding close calls as masonic and valencia. so next, i'll move through our

[inaudible] so our work has long been focused on the high injury network but has focused on capital improvement projects at locations such as vanness, geary, second, and sixth, and we know that these major capital projects are effective, but they are resource intensive, and they can take years to design and build and implement. we realized that we could pivot to deliver more quickly benefits, resources, in our different projects. fifth street cost just under $2 million, but second street was a $20 million major capital project. so our approach really evolves then to build an additional quick built project, shown here in blue, again, knowing that we can cover more ground for effective projects at less

cost. our quick build program represented over 50 miles low cost quick and effective improvements at about a tenth of the cost of our major capital projects. we have about $25 million in investment for this approach over the next five years. we've made significant progress to advance safety on our high injury network, and together with our capital project, we've completed more than 50 miles of corridor projects on the network with another 30 miles in planning or design. so again, with this focus on the high injury network, we know we can make the biggest impact with these resources. however, we know that we need more to connect the quarter level project on the high injury network, and we expect we can complete the entire improvements to the network for about $85 million, while it

would take about $2 million for improvements that have been used in approximate our previous approach. that said, we know that not every street can be redesigned, so there are a suite of programatic intersection based tools that we apply city tools. they're proven tools to save lives that focus on the areas that we want to focus on in vision zero. daylighting is a standard tool in our capital project in quick build, but we also have a program to implement this work citywide. about 500 intersections have been completed in the past year, and we have funding anticipated to complete another 500 in the next 18 months. we're going to be completing this work on a corridor basis, focused on a significant basis similar to the approach that we

used in the tenderloin as well as currently the work underway in d-4, and this is going to be funded with prop k to continue this citywide work. we also continue to advance updates to our continental crosswalks. they're updated on about 85% of our high injury network, and we've committed to completing the remaining intersection upgrades by 2024. the continental crosswalks that you see on the right really increase the visibility compared to the crosswalks that you see on the left. we also have a program to update our signals with lower walking speed, known as walk speed 3.0, and leading pedestrians intervals, which give the pedestrians more time to cross. both are about 70% completes on the high injury -- kplecompletn the high injury network, and we've committed to completing the work on the high injury

network. looking ahead, we will be continuing our program why the theic -- programatic work. we're planning to advance this work in the tenderloin? we're working with our partners there to conduct additional outreach. similarly, we're looking to advance a no turn on a red policy, where we know the highest concentration of our high injury streets are located, and this is work that we're looking to advancing in the spring? we're also going to be doing seen senior zones on certain streets, and then as mentioned earlier, we'll be doing our high injury daylighting work through prop k. just a few highlights on you are on safe people work. where engineering is where we fouk used most of our resources, we really depend on

our education to outreach to more residents and amplify our messages, especially when it comes to slowing speeds. we also have developed campaigns around top crash factors such as our safe speeds campaign and our it stops here campaigns, which address failure to speed. these campaigns are typically run each year. prior to covid, we had a dedicated street team with in-language ambassadors that would attend meetings in the community and address concerns over vision zero. looking ahead to safe people work, we have active transportation program funded campaign focused on left turns which launched two weeks ago, and a larger citywide outreach

program planned for early next week. we also have an office of traffic safety funded campaign for the motorcycle safety work, which we know that our motorcycle riders are one of our vulnerable road users for severe and fatal traffic crashes? and so that's providing hands-on safety skills training for motorcycle riders. all that being said, we do know that we need more to get to zero u and our transformative policies are where we see a lot of potential for the momentum that we need, so we continue to focus our resources on building safer streets. we have a lot of support for automated speeden derment and ticketing, and we're continuing to enforce these legislative

changes. we're changing speed limits. we're continuing to support the state's zero fatality speed task force. we've been working with other task force cities, including oakland, sacramento, san jose, los angeles, and others, to continue elevating this work and work for legislative opportunities around speed changes. we are exhausting our local authorities such with the 20 miles per hour speed limits and slower speed limits near senior zones. with automated speed enforcement, we are still in exploratory conversations. we've been participating in the

state -- excuse me, the usdots work to update their guidelines on speed safety cameras, and we're expecting those guidelines early next year. and lastly, our colleagues at the t.a. are continue to work on congestion pricing. several scenarios are being analyzed, and a plan is expected in the spring. so we also of course recognize that we need to achieve -- our needs to achieve other city commitments to reach vision zero. mode shifts, climate change, transit first policies. so for example, we continue to see challenges around safety for homeless population. i know that people living on the streets are inherently more vulnerable to traffic deaths. so we released our most recent action strategy last march, and

we plan to revisit the strategy in the spring with an updated plan released in the summer of next year. that concludes my presentation. >> chair peskin: thank you, miss reeves. i really appreciate that. president yee? president yee, you're on mute. >> president yee: are -- thank you, miss reeves, for the presentation can presentation. i'd like to ask some specific questions around the senior speed zones. i know that there's been one put up around the geary boulevard, there's a senior center around there, and the traffic is slowed down around there.

so the question is how many have we done? i mean, how many areas or -- or -- where you have actually slowed down the traffic at all for seniors? >> sure. i just want to pause to see if our city traffic engineer is on the line, ricardo celaya? all right. well, i can give an answer -- oh, did ricardo just join us. >> clerk: ricardo has been here, and the speakerphone is unmuted. >> being on. ricardo, do you mind answering the question around the slow senior zones? >> yes. the slow senior zones are something we can do under california vehicle code, and it's --

[inaudible] >> -- or to the facility, so it's relatively restrictive type of regulation that we can lower speed limits on. >> president yee: so my question is real specific. how many places have we identified, and how do you -- what -- what defines a senior center? ricardo, we can't hear you, if you're trying to answer. >> can you hear me now? >> president yee: yeah. >> the -- the definition of a senior center is not typically defined in the california vehicle code. it is something that we look at facilities that serve a large amount of seniors, so it's not a definition, like, an area, but a specific facility type,

so we've identified about eight or ten locations that we're going to be doing that as part of our first round of changes. >> chair peskin: and so do we have our own definition of what that consists of? >> we looked at possible definitions of what a senior center may be. unlike a school, there's a wide range of possible facilities that could qualify, but we were trying to keep it within the spirit of the regulation, which is typically a facility that is aimed at serving seniors and not a location that would attract a lot of seniors. so for example, not necessarily restaurants or hospitals or libraries, but more specifically facilities that were geared more towards seniors. [please stand by]

>> president yee: have you reached out and talked to them about helping you identify these facilities where they serve seniors. >> i'm not aware of the outreach we did. we used a list that was comprehensive as a starting point which had many facilities in it. we have worked off city list and i don't exactly how that -- who put input into those lists. >> can you get my office the list that you think you are being pretty signed by eight places by the end of the year. it seems like you should be able to do it faster than that and

also beyond the eight, what other centers have you identified. if you need help -- >> yes, we can get that list to you. >> if you need help to identify more than -- i think -- i know where my senior centers are in the district and i'm sure almost every supervisor knows where the senior programs are in the district so, it's something that easy to do and do you know why it's taking so long when we talked about i don't think it's a cost issue. the main limit issue is the street has to have a speed limit over 25 miles per hour. if the street already has a 25 miles per hour limit, which is most of the city, this particular regulation doesn't

apply and so it's to lower speed limits that are over 25 to 25 similar to done around schools. >> president yee: it's 15 miles per hour. what are you talking about? >> that is a different law that we're using. we're using a law that we can post 25 miles per hour people lid its an -- >> just on that point, my understanding is this is in in response to the fatality we had at goff and geary he joined me one of our walks through and our office was really trying to to

figure out how we push the envelope in light the state restrictions and before that discussion in resent months this provision was used at all so when you ask how many places has it been posted, to my understanding, the answer is zero and there's eight in the pipeline but it begs to question given that we have limits understate law, it seems imperative we look for all these things where we have local control and we are looking proactively and that's your solution is urging here and that we look proactively and we should have a list of, as you say, all the seniors centers and also to what extent can we push the definition of seniors centers and say appreciate the

question you are asking but it's something that we should have figured out how to move forward more proactively and this is the moment and i hope your resolution and it's the vehicle for, pared the word, for moving us forward more proactively and i'm not sure how the eight were select and i know goff and geary because of the death and the others because of injuries but hopefully we can be more proactive than reactive. >> supervisor preston and president yee, i think supervisor preston is absolutely right, which is to the extent that we have the ability to do things not pre-empted by the state we should be doing them. to mr. parks and and to the

director of transportation mr mr. tumland, you have a huge agency working against my will to reroute the 19 poll being and use that staff resource to do these kinds of things that will save people's lives and if they're raised that this board of supervisors can help we want to help. i'm speaking on all 11 members of the board of supervisors. we've got to bump that up in the priority and this is low-hanging fruit. it's not expensive fruit. this is pretty cheap stuff to save lives. so, i mean, i'm happy to have a conversation with docs and public-health and the city attorney's office and most importantly the sfmta and your sign shop and sign installers but this seems easy. you want to talk senior centers

or things that approximate eight seniors centers can produce for you any number of them by the close of business. >> i think this is why i'm doing this resolution to push these things. i need to -- maybe you could explain why does it happen 25 and why not 15? >> are you still there? >> is that a question? >> yeah. >> is there a reason why we can't drop it to 15 rather than what you are talking about which is the 25? >> yeah, the provision we're using is one that is the provision to drop it to 125. i don't know exactly what the rules are on dropping the speed limits further but we have to follow the state law on those

type of changes. >> can i -- can i have someone from mta look at the state law and see if we can't use the 15-mile -- i'm talking about school zones, where it's dropped to 15 miles per hour during school operations. let's look into whether or not we can aggressively use that. >> yes. wove done it before. >> i mentioned a possibility is looking at childcare centers

which is are we looking at those facilities also to drop it and maybe using the supervision as we use for schools. >> the state regulations limit us in terms of a defense we could not apply the school zone signage to it's not something i could do necessarily. >> chair peskin. i know you are going to move forward with automated speed enforcement resolutions i won't be around.

so, the force we ask the state to include, you know, early education facilities into their education codes since the state does fund early education through the department of education and if you look at san francisco, public schools, is the pre-k12 unified school system so it seems that the state might actually to redefine what it means by education. >> mr. president, you are not gone yet. you have two months left and

plenty of board meetings left. we have runway and pass a resolution urging our state delegation to per spew just that kind of public policy at the state level and i would be happy to join you in that and for some reason we run out of runway, i'm happy to do that come january 9th. but i think we have plenty of time do do it. we can have it on the reference calender of the full board. >> got you. thank you. >> i'll just maybe closing. >> he appreciate you urging us to advance your authority and we're having the list of locations we are going to be doing in front of seniors ends. the issue you speak to about expanding the type of locations that qualify is something we proposed in the state legislation that go beyond a narrow definition of senior ends and think about vulnerable populations like the locations

near homeless shelters and that sort of things. i think that's some additional information we can provide as well. >> thank you. i think to the sfmta what would be helpful is given what we believe are the state law constraints, what the universe of the possible is, right, so, we've come up with eight. i would like to know is that eight out of 20, is that eight out of 30. assuming you have to have a posted speed limit above 25 to come down to 25 for a sen why facility. i would love to see that relative to school zones, how many have we brought down to 125 and how many are we left to do. i'd love to see that. that would be a really helpful and informative data set and allow us to say hey, sfmta you

nailed eight out of eight or oh, this body whether it's division one or division two as well as the public. with that, if mr. president if it's ok, i'd like to open that items 2 and 3 up for public comment. >> ok. and i still a few more questions. i can come back. >> i want to ask about signal timing ough automatization and there's possibilities and i was close to creating a resolution to mandate it and the staff will

look into it and what i'm talking about are one-way streets in which we, as a city, can actually set the timing on those and so right now many of those one-way streets are set with the timing of either 25 or 30 miles per hour, i believe, and there's one or two where the snaps are set to and it's mta aggressively look at retiming and all are main one-way corridors to have signals and i'll name a few, franklin, pine,

bush, oak, fell, geary, goff, are many of the see slow down and. i'd like to get a report back and maybe it doesn't see that and and within our jurisdiction to do this and there's no state law that prohibits us from actually timing our single lights in a way that we can slow down traffic. is this possible. >> it's something we started implementing when we resigned the downtown area which includes south of market and the western edition and north of market including the tenderloin.

we retimed a lot of our traffic signals for 20 miles per hour including one-way streets and so, that is something that we're now monitoring with implemented last year and early this year. it's something that can be done by the city and we're hopeful that this kind of approach will improve safety while at the same time providing some quarterly movement of traffic and we have plans to gradually expand this to other streets as you mentioned, but we are in the process of trying to get those resources with grants and getting staff aligned to expand that and but for the three feet for second to add leading intervals or head starts and to improve the timing of yellow and all red faces. multiple signal timing changes

that we can do and where we're working on that. to answer an easterly year question on school speed limits, i'm pretty confident that we have lowered around schools speed limits as much as we can and we took a pretty comprehensive approach and lowered them where we could so it's primarily now those 50 miles per hour speed limits are where they're feasible. if there are locations we haven't done, we work with the public and fill those gaps. we did not leave any schools on the table and so that's reassuring supervisor peskin on that issue. >> thank you. >> president yee: and let me ask, one question around the resolution and on so, it's really i wanted to call this off

and we're asking the mayor to identify elite staff to help with there's a lot of committed staff members from different departments and who do we always need to hit and say can coordinate and sometimes we have to go to the public-health and police department and they're working all together. so what has the culmination been across department and vision zero and this is always that issue. i don't know, you want to.

>> it's the covid activation that many of our staff are on so for instance, public-health has been a key part of our work but they're really committed right now to curb it so they've been activated in that way so it's one current challenge that beer dealing with with our staffing resources. we do have systems in place to regularly coordinate and work across teams and i don't really feel there are silos we're up against in that sense. i'll maybe pause and see if jamie parks has anything to add?

>> >> jamie parks livable streets director with mta and i think it's a good summary, ryan, and i think that we do have systems in places ryan mentioned, for coordination across different city departments, resources are always a challenge and making sure that the resources are there to follow through is a challenge for individual agencies but we have had good inter departmental relationships throughout the program and it's one of fundamental principles ever our vision zero program is that it's not just for one department to implement. >> yeah, well, it's something to think about. certainly to really have that staff committed to just this one issue because many people from different departments and

sometimes as mrs. reese just said, staff members from old departments are being pulled away from other things right now as part of my motivation is to say can we have dedicated staff just for this and we will look into it. the other thing that i -- one last thing, sorry, chair peskin, is i want to ask about your approach to how you assess which places to work on in terms of improvement and i know in the past, what was done is mostly look and as did at the beginning of the presentation, pointing out here is the high injury corridors and these are the places we con is not straigh coi don't know if you are looking at whether you want to consider

taking into another type of approach which is strict, make a street unsafe, one who makes a street unsafe is those close calls and instances that neighbors react to on a daily basis and as something that maybe i constantly bring up over my eight years and say, you have to pay attention to this and this particular intersection because i've seen stuff and i know how the behavior of a driver and i know the behavior of people crossing and the first thing that they would say is oh, but you haven't anybody killed yet. so, that's not a -- i always -- someone is going to get killed here eventually. and secure why wait for someone to die?

and one city that sort of is doing this now is seattle and i don't know if you as staff members are beginning to talk about it or not. >> sure. thank you, we don't know that the high injury network is predictive so it's based on so many years of data that is really would encompass a lot of where people are sharing that they have these close call concerns and so with our limited resource we're focusing first on those areas and that being said, you know, there are other programs that we have so for instance our proactive traffic calming program is based on residential requests and so if there are areas that are not on our high injury network we have other ways that people can

request this additional work and we also have our 311s we're responsive to when people have close that they're concerned about. i'll see if jamie parks is our capital program manager for liberal streets so i'll see if he has anything he wants to add as well. >> i can add a little bit of context to that. so for the high injury network as ryan mentioned that's where 75% of fatal injuries occur that leaves 25% of injuries on other streets and so, we definitely need to have a balance and we can't invest 100% of our resources in the high injury network and leave out the 87% of city streets so while we are focused on the high injury network for some of our bigger capital investments we have programs that focus on all of our streets and so, at the highlight a couple of those are traffic calming programs including a proactive traffic

calming program that is in neighborhoods with high concentrations of seniors that the program where we spend about a half million dollars a year on traffic homing in those neighborhoods and and then they're basic schools for the city network if it's daylighting or signal timing for taking care of beds they have enough time to cross the street and traffic signals coming across the sidewalk those are all tools we're applying and we focus on the high injury network and wore doing those as sort of our basic practice when we touch an injury we're bringing them up to our current standards. >> >> i appreciate the response. i remember years ago when i

would bring up monterey boulevard or ocean avenue, it was early on and no it's not high injury and people die on monterey and on ocean avenue and exactly what i said was going to happen and why wait? i'm done. >> thank you, president yee. why wait? i totally agree with you. with that, let's open up public comment for items 2 and 3. >> mr. clerk,. >> clerk: thank you mr. chairman. we will check and see if we have any callers in the queue. please let us know if we have any callers are ready. for those who are conducted via phone press star by 3 to be added to the queue if you wish to speak for these items, 2 and 3. for those already on hold in the queue please continue to wait until your prompted to begin you

will hear a prompted informed line has been unmuted. for those who are watching our meeting right now on cable channel 26 or through sfgovtv if you wish to speak call in by following the instructions which are displaying on your screen and that would be by calling (415)655-0001. when prompted then enter into the meeting i.d. of 146 567 6907 and pressing the pound symbol twice while connected to the meeting so you can listen to that and following that express star to enter the queue to speak for these items agenda 2 and 3. could you connect us to our first caller, please? >> hello, my name is richard rothman and i live in the outer richmond and i live right near the senior center on foul ton and they did put the 25 lower

speed limit from 30 to 25 and i can guarantee you nobody she is down to 25 miles per hour on fulton street. you have to come up with another tool. fulton street is the international speed way and you have to find a way and the other streets should be 20 miles per hour. just do t let the city attorneys do the state or let the state do the city. we're under a state of emergency and just do it. the city attorney sue the state so we can lower the speed limit to 20 miles per hour in the city and when richmond district residents and safety improvements they don't do it, they don't listen to or it takes

them 10 years to do it and we should get the same service as everybody else and maybe you sneed to look at big picture. maybe sustainable streets need to be overhauled. you should have someone like ben rosenfield or harvey rose look at how mta operates and maybe they need to be reorganized. i think they need to be reorganized to serve the residents better and they have dedicated people that they have to use their assets more efficiently and it needs to be reobserved and maybe the board can pass a resolution asking them to or asking someone to do an ought i had. >> it shouldn't take 10 years. >> thank you. >> next caller, please.

>> good afternoon, chair peskin and commissioners my name is jody and i'm the executive director of walk san francisco and we will give strong support of these two important resolutions to make vision zero. i need to extend a special thank you for all the work you have done in the tenure on the board and the elimination of traffic related injuries and fatalities and he is our true vision hero. thank you so much for president yee. and these resolutions are being brought forward because on sunday on the steps of city hall families will be holding a memorial for the 186 traffic related fatalities since we adopted vision zero in 2014. we're already halfway through our 10-year goal and we have not reduced the number of fatalities and injuries and we know it causes these tragedies and it's not a mystery or rocket science

and we need to be doing all we can to save lives. included in these resolutions 100 makes sense they use the tools and also commit to working with state legislatives for local control for future legislation over speed management. and there's more i am practical and i want to highlight two. we hit a dashboard to show progress of vision zero understanding the universe of what needs to be done, what's been complete and what needs to be completed in the fex few years and the 160 miles per hour of the high injury network. and we also support the request for over stay and greater agency cooperation on vision zero progress and programs.

when it comes to saves lives there's no time to wait. walk san francisco asks that these resolutions move to the full board with a positive recommendation and all supervisors on this committee. thank you so much for signing on as sponsors of this resolution. >> thank you. that completes the queue. >> thank you. so, president yee let me conquer with the last speaker and if you have no further comments, i would like to send items 2 and 3 to the full board i will make a items to send them to the full board with a positive recommendation and i know you have amendments and then we'll call the roll. >> president yee: ok, thank you, very much, i hope you have patients. these amendments and you do have the amended copy of the resolution to read it into

record. >> yes, sir. >> president yee: this is for items 3. in terms of recommitment to vision zero. on page 1, items line 5 and in the title and updated and to and updated action strategies and online 17 add in 2015 after visions action strategy to clarify the initial date of the adoption. online 19 and 20, add whereas clauses to clarify the sfmta has moved beyond the three es approach and for the safe systems approach. and line 22 through 25, omit reference through the three es and replacing it with the safe

systems approach. on page 2, line 7 and 8, add a whereas clause acknowledging the proven effectiveness of slowing speeds and line 17 and 18 omit the three es replacing the word incorporating with elevating real-time evaluations and line 20, replace the term codified with adopt and implement and since we are not asking for a transportation quote change but for the mta to adopt a renew action strategy. line 22-24. correct the term high injury corridors with high injury network and include daylighting as another two to help with the immediate improvements. and page 3 line 2 to four, add

clarification languages and calling for sfmta to develop additional engagement tools to elevate and solicit input from residents to identify dangerous cross walks and intersections or corridors. line 7 through 9, add clarification and but that we are encouraging them to line to fall when the mayor to identify a dedicated staff lead person to work with the vision zero team to fast track projects on page

four, line 1-5 add a clause that sends a copy of this resolution to the office of mayor, the city administrator, the director of sfmta, board of directors, the director of the department of public woks and the san francisco health commission. those are the amendments for item 3 and before i close my remarks, i want to thank the staff. the throw that made statements today. jamie parks, ricardo olea and ryan reese for their dedication of vision zero. i know they work real hard and sometimes i get pushy around these issues and i know they're

behind the efforts to try to make us get to our goal of zero fatalities. >> thank you, president yee and we are in receipt of all of those amendments and i believe that supervisor safai are in the queue. >> thank you mr. chair. i just want to be add as a co-sponsor. thank you and i appreciate president yee this is a life or death issue and i appreciate you putting so much of your time, energy and effort and your own personal experience no this in using the best practices out in the field. thank you. >> president yee: thank you. >> commissioner preston. >> thank you and i also would like to be added as a co-sponsor to both these items and thank

you president yee for your on going advocacy. i did have additional question and comment. you everyoned earlier about the dough sire to have a bit of an inventory just around where could we be and what senior center schools or others are there that we could be extending the lower speed limits to. i heard the comment that with respect to schools they were already been done but i'm also interested as part of that in having a better understanding of the definition and the extent to which we could take a more expensive approach that we could include childcare centers when we talk about senior -- how

limited are we by those definitions and it would, because it would be very helpful to know where can we push the envelope and are there rulings that restrain us where jurisdiction has gone too far and something is a senior center or a school or something and someone has decided no it isn't. or are we all just assuming things mean what they mean. we have broad consensus that would make it to violate the law but push the limits of what we can legally do this is such a cheap and effective way to prevent serious injury and death and i think we should be, while we're fighting for state law changes pushing those definitions as broadly as we can and you know, and thank you for

the clarification and i want to recognize mta's work in the geary and those in the pipeline here and at least with respect to geary moving very quickly and when we did request doing everything possible there at a lower speed and to adopting that and moving forward on that. i appreciate that. the last thing is more of a question. just the one item we haven't really addressed that was in the presentation, is around the right-turn on red. and i just wanted to -- understand perhaps is just what's the status of -- that's something, my understanding is there's not a state law or anything that inter fierce with that but i'm curious and i want to make sure my assumption of

that is right but also understand is that a policy determination and is there some other barriers to moving forward as some other cities have done to ban right turn on red. >> ms. reeves. >> yes, i'm just making sure i'm muting myself. i can give an answer to that and if ricardo has anything to add. there's no state law prohibiting us on our work on the no turn on red policy. it's something we've had from walk sf and other community members. we are pursuing a no turn on red policy in the tenderloin and that is something that we're so the policy decision is advancing and i don't know ricardo if you have anything thaw want toad.

>> >> right now the turn is legal so each location has to be legislated. nothing prevents a city from legislating locations but, we've just wanted to make sure that when we post a sign it will be enforced and complied with and meets the current guidance for doing that and our research indicates when people turn the majority of the crashes are caused by people turning on a green light and the turn on red itself is not a major cause of injury crashes. we've been trying to focus on issues related to turning when the volkswagen have a green light being a bigger problem in terms of safety issues both right and left turns. like mentioned, wore going to focus on the tenderloin as our first area for basically having

the area, the no turn on red but until that area wide approach has been to do case by case based on field conditions and that is how california cities have approached this. >> thank you. supervisor safai, do you want to be a co-sponsor on both items 2 and 3? >> yes, sir. >> ok. with that clarification, on the amendments made by or offered by president yee, for item number 3, i would like to move those and on that motion mr. carole a roll call, please. >> clerk: on the motion to amend the resolution as agenda item number 3 offered by chair peski- [roll call vote]

you keep saying that, man. was that an aye. >> yes, sir. [roll call vote] there are throw ayes. >> i'd like to make a motion to send items 2 and 3 as amended with recommendations as committee reports on that motion a roll call, please. >> clerk: on the motion -- [roll call vote] >> mr. chair, there are three ayes again. >> that concludes the business before this committee, we are adjourned. thank you.