secretary sata, welcome to your first meeting at the helm. would you please call the roll. [roll call]

>> clerk: madam chair, you have a quorum. >> wonderful. >> clerk: item 3, announcement of prohibition of sound producing devices during the meeting. it's clear we're using sound producing devicing duries duri meeting, so we won't announce this. item 4, approval of minutes of the november 3, 2020 meeting. >> directors, is there anyone who wishes to make any comment? okay. seeing none, are there any members of the public who wish to make public comment this item on the agenda? >> you have zero questions remaining. >> okay. with that, i'll turn it back over to the directors. directors, do i have a motion?

>> motion to approve. >> second. >> okay. secretary silva, would you please call the roll. [roll call] . >> clerk: madam chair, you have five votes to approve the minutes. you are on item five, communications. >> due to the covid-19 health emergency, this meeting is being held virtually, and all members of the staff and the public are attending via teleconference. this will ensure the safety of the sfmta board of directors, the sfmta, and the members of the public. for all comments received in advance of the meeting, we received and appreciate thesement coulds. please note, if you -- these

comments. please note, if you left the comments today, we may not have received them. we encourage you to write to the board at mtaboard@sfmta.com or call us at 415-554-6670. while technology allows us to hold these meetings virtually, please know we are doing our very best and ask for your patience and understanding. if we lose connection during a meeting, we will pause the meeting until the connection is reestablished. lastly, i want to thank all the people who have made -- who have worked hard to make this meeting happen. there are many people involved on the line, many more that have been involv

have -- more than have been involved in an in-person meeting, and i want to welcome our new secretary, secretary silva. >> clerk: thank you. if you are watching via sfgovtv, and you wish to comment on an item, please call the phone line when the item is called. for members of the public who wish to make public comment on the agenda, the number is 888-809-6628. the access code is 196-6624. if you're live streaming the meet avia sfgovtv, please mute the sound. this is reduce any reremembereration so the board can hear you. at times, the chair will ask that the lines be opened for comment. the auto prompt will say that callers are entering

question-and-answer time, but there is a public comment time. you will be queued up in had the order in which you pretty one and zero. there will be an automated voice that will tell you it's your turn to speak. i will start your two minutes when you begin talking, and i will say 30 seconds when you have 30 seconds remaining, and when your time is up, i will say next caller, please. at that point, the moderator will put your microphone back on mute. we are presently on item six, introduction of new or unfinished business by board members. >> board members, are there any items that you would like to have addressed? director lai? >> in honor of director tumlin's presentation, i'd like

staff to give us an update to the board of supervisors' request to provide us an update within 60 days of their resolution last week with regards to codifying and -- the implementation for proactively reducing the speed limits, but perhaps jeff might be covering this later, so i'll just maybe leave this open. thank you. >> thank you. director heminger? >> thank you, madam chair. i had two. the first, we've received quite a lot of e-mail traffic, and it's been in the press, as well, about the status of the great highway portion of our slow street network, and as you all know, that network came into being in the emergency orders that we're all living order, and presumably that emergency is not going to be completed any time soon, unfortunately, which raises the

question, like the great highway, what significant changes are contemplated for one of those segments in the network? is that something that the board should be involved in, i think given the significance of the changes that at least are being discussed publicly to the great highway, i would recommend we are, and so maybe i could just ask for some clarification on that point, either now or in the director's report or in an item that would be presented to the board so we have an understanding of what the procedure will be to deal with this network as it exists and consider changes to it or extensions to it when we reach the end of the emergency. so sorry about that was a little long winded, but that's the first item. the second was to check on the

status of a previously requested item. i think many meetings ago, i had asked for an update on our parking responsibility. i don't think, at least in my necessity, that we have dealt with much at all, but i would like to know when we can get to that item. >> thank you, director heminger. unfortunately, as you know, these items have to be agendized to officially discuss them, so you'll have to get them in the agenda ahead of time. any directors have questions or comments -- okay. thank you. with that, we'll close that item. we have -- we can open it up to public comment to see if there's anybody who has a comment on director tumlin's or director lai's questions.

moderator, is there anyone on the line? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> okay. with that, we will close public comment and move onto item number eight. >> clerk: actually, item number seven. >> oh, sorry. ju jumped right over jeff's report. sorry about that. director tumlin? >> greetings. so at our last board of directors meeting, one of the things that we talked about was how eagerly we were awaiting the results of the november election. some of the results were excited, but arguably, the results for the future of the sfmta remains in the balance, which is the balance of the senate. all of that is contingent in the senate race in georgia, which is whether we'll have to be able to -- we'll be able to

maintain our services or whether we'll have to cutback significantly. one of the things that we've learned this week is that the news continues to worsen for the san francisco general fund. most of the city's sources of revenue are tracking at or below the worse case scenario projections, so we were told we need to accommodate another $34 million in reductions in the sfmta budget. the voters successfully passed the measure rr, the caltrain one cent sales tax in all three counties. that will start to bring in new revenue to caltrain, to the tune of about $100 million per year starting in the fall of

2021. we in san francisco contribute significantly to caltrain, including we're currently programmed to contribute $8 million in operating support from the sfmta plus an additional $7.5 million paid by the sfcta. we're now in discussions with caltrain about to what agree caltrans' new revenue can supplant our current and future reductions. citypassed prop i, which is an increase in the real estate transfer tax. that will increase general fund revenues by about $11 million in fiscal year 2021. that is good news. the city also passed prop l, the executive pay related business tax. it generates a significant

amount of money starting in july of 2022. that money goes to the general fund, and the sfmta slice of that would be about 9%. the big tax measure, however, failed to pass, and that is prop 15, the split roll reconfiguration of prop 13. and again, emphasizes that even back in january, in our peak economic times, most of our revenue sources were in decline relative to expenses and certainly relevant to cost of living. as you know, the general fund's tax base is largely property tax related, and property taxes increase at less than the pace of inflation, while city government expenses increase at the cost of laboring because our expenses are driven by the fact that our work is driven by labor, and we need to pay our workforce a living wage even as the cost of living here in the

san francisco bay area continues to skyrocket. so as i said, we'll be digging into the implications of all of this news, most of it very bad, at our december 1 board workshop, including strategies on how to address the ever-widening shortfall and ways to minimize the possible layoffs to the largest extent possible. we are preparing to issue fair enforcement citations again starting december 1. it is critical that we move forward with collecting muni fares since it is the revenue source that we have the most control over and most directly relates to our service delivery needs. but i also want to reiterate, as is detailed in our blog back in september and in previous board reports, that we have

completely changed our approach to fair enforcement to focus primarily on compliance, on educating our customers about our services, about delivering discount program cards to our customers who need it, distributing masks, and at promoting civil behavior on our vehicles. in addition, our fare enforcement officers were deployed as disaster service workers early this year and, as a part of that received significant training, suicide prevention, mobile crisis response, human trafficking, mobile service, and deescalation training. they've also gotten new uniforms in order to look more like the civilian service operators that they are and less like police enforcement. this is all very important to ensuring, again, that our efforts at enforcement are

really about our customers -- getting our customers to pay their fair share and avoid massive service cuts that will come unless we start collecting fares again. you've also of course heard that we've gotten more detail on central subway. the central subway work for substantial completion will be delayed into spring of this coming year because of problems mostly associated with covid. work has slowed down, social distancing, there was a cluster of positive cases, including changes that have affected just about everywhere in the united states at this time. service will then start-up approximately a year later, in the spring of 2022. these delays, of course, impact budget, but we're still at about a 15% cost overrun

overall. next topic is twin peaks boulevard. as you also know, the san francisco police department locked the gates to twin peaks early in shelter in place in order to reduce crowding at the top of the hill. since the closure of the roadway, twin peaks park, a 67 acre park in the middle of san francisco, has attracted far more users than likely ever before, attracting about at least 800 people every weekday and well over 1,000 on the weekend days, just on the portola side. that said, closing off the gates posed significant concerns. the only way to get up to the top of twin peaks would be to heft yourself up on your own steam, and so for a lot of san franciscans, that's not possible. so in order to restore the lookout point to all san

franciscans while maintaining this spectacular 67 acre park in the middle of the city, we conducted a significant amount of public outreach for a couple of weeks, looking for guidance from san franciscans about how best to make the park work for everyone. we got a tremendous amount of feedback, over 7500 responses as of november 9, and the responses looked at several different alternatives as well as the reason why people would choose those alternatives, and the consensus pretty much across all demographic groups and geographies was a preference to keep the north gate open up to the parking lot while keeping the southern gate, the portola gate closed, in order to maximize the amount of parking that's available safely for people on foot and bicycles and other modes while allowing people to drive up to

the lot to the shortest point, which is known as christmas tree lot. so we are going to be talking to the frisk police department, the p.u.c., the reservoir up there, san francisco travel, and the tour bus industry, about whether -- like, how to make this work, and so we will be coming back to you in december or january for a public hearing with our recommendations. finally, i do want to note that there has been a lot of conversation happening about great highway, another street that was closed early in the pandemic and left closed, and perhaps the street that has resulted in attracting by far the greatest number of people to it, we have more people using great highway on foot and skate board and bike and wheelchairs than we had people using it in cars before covid. that said, the street's closure has resulted in a high level of

complaints from residents of the outer sunset complaining about poor unsafe motorists' behavior, speeding, ignoring stop signs on various streets in the outer sunset. so we've been working closely with supervisor mar and the district four office in order to address those concerns, implement traffic calming and some turn restrictions, make sure that folks know that there is plenty of capacity available on sunset boulevard, and we'll be working with the department of public works over the next four weeks to install a variety of traffic calming devices in the neighborhood in order to try to mitigate those problems, and again, we'll be coming back to this board as well as collaborating with other agencies in order to come to some recommendations about what the post covid configuration should be for great highway after we've made some attempts at getting the unintended

negativeness cou negative consequences, and that is what i have for my director's report. thank you. >> okay. thank you. directors, i know you have questions because we have a lot of topics that we're dealing with. obviously, there's a lot of bad news there in terms of the funding there. directors, do we have specific questions for director tumlin at this time? no? okay. with that, we'll move to public comment, opening it up to the public who may have questions -- or rather comments to director tumlin's report. madam clerk, is the line bridged? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> first caller, please. >> hi. thanks for the time. my name is chris arvin, and i'm a san francisco resident and transit rider. i want to comment specifically on the fare vision enforcement portion of the report. i want to say that we should not be resuming any type of

fare enforcement during the pandemic. i don't think we should be using this time to handing out $100 or more fines when we have record unemployment and people might be needing to get to places when they're getting back on their feet. the other thing is that will involve more interaction between people in close proximity in an indoor space like a bus, and i think that's just an increased risk during a time when we have covid, and we don't need to be doing that. that's entirely my comment. thank you. >> thank you. moderator, are there additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, yes, chair and directors, my name is kate richardson, and i'm the chair

and director of legal inc.. since our founding in 2015, we have trained more than 1800 staff as san francisco's leading front lines organizations. we have more than [inaudible] and we've seen the issues that are most problem at particular for low-income housing and unhoused residents in our community. wh now is not the time to cite people again. there are 50,000 san franciscans that live under the poverty line or under $1,000 a month, and for many, muni is their own option to get to necessary medical appointments, service appointments, or job interviews. many people ride muni because they can't afford anything else. this criminalization is poverty

is unacceptable, especially as we enter the winter of a pandemic. the sfmta has done so much work to create racial and social equity by [inaudible] below we're a see commitmented to term -- city committed to

justice and racial and economic justice. thank you so much. >> thank you, and i thank you for your comments. we'll take those under advisement. moderator, are there any additional commenters on the line? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, i want to address the great highway issue, mainly in the context of supervisor mar's letter on november 10. yeah, my name is john elliott. >> clerk: thank you. >> i'm a resident of the outer richmond, and i love the great highway, and for anyone who is really dorky and uses the straza app, i am the local resident of the great highway, which means i've spent a lot of time down there.

supervisor mar's comment mentions opening the great highway back up to traffic specifically mentions the sfmta, and he says none of his efforts to engage the sfmta and this has proven successful, so i just want to draw to your attention the importance of addressing this because that space, as director tumlin said, it has become a transformative public space for the city during this time, and not just during an emergency. it's something that we need to think about permanently, and the problem is not the creation of the space, the problem is irresponsible and reckless people driving cars. that needs to be addressed, that is the problem, and that's all i have to say. thank you. >> thank you very much. moderator, are there any additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining.

>> thank you, with that, we'll close public comments, and i'll move back to directors. director heminger. >> thank you, madam chair, jeff, you mentioned another delay on the central subway, and as you know, it's not the first one. every time we set a deadline and miss it, we take another hit on our credibility. as with that, i wanted to ask you, how did we put this latest packet commission together, and are we as optimistic about the rest of the challenges still remaining? you mentioned covid quarantines, and we presumably may not have been through our last one of those on this

project, so have we factored enough lithings like that in s we can meet? >> that's a good question. project scheduling is a risk assessment game, and i think in many cases, we have guessed wrong, and the vanness project is a prime example. on the vanness project, the engineers thought that the project utilities would be where they were actually mapped. they were not where they were mapped, and there was massive unexpected delays as the crews dug around in the dirt to figure out where it was. we've had numerous understanding of what is nine meters underneath the surface? we assumed one type of dirt we were digging in.

we were wrong. so for this round of prognostication about schedule, we are facing all sorts of risks before we would bring this project home. we keep being walloped by unexpected conditions like a quarantine or when a contractor cannot get the materials that are needed for their one-week slot, when they're expected to insert something, and no one else can get to work until that one subcontractor is able to get the supplies that they need. so i know it is not in my interest to overpromise and underdeliver. it is very much in my interest to tell the truth. that said, i also don't want to be extremely pessimistic and

finish six weeks early orsix months early, so i -- so that's -- that's not really quite an answer, but that's the truth about how we schedule. it's a risk assessment game. >> well, and i understand that if you're too loose with the schedule, if you're too pessimistic, then you're really not giving not getting to crack the wub whip with the contractor because he's saying, i've got three months. >> right, and costs rise if you drag out too long. >> i think one thing that might be helpful for the board in the future because we're talking about substantial completion next spring, and then, another spring until we can actually get in the train and ride it. and what happens in that period is probably a mystery to all of the people, but all the system testing and the experience that

we've seen in the bay area, i know the b.a.r.t. extension to san jose, where system testing ended up being the hardest thing we did. so i think it would be good for us to get a briefing and some insight on that when we get closer to that point because that will be the sole focus of our effort for the better part of the year. >> i agree, and one of the things that i've been trying to schedule is a tour of the central subway for yourself. you go into the ventilation system, to understand how fire suppression works, to understand how the switches work, and how minor defects can cause major cascading problems that then take a significant amount of time to fix. many of those problems could still be under warranty but could still cause significant delay. if the city ever comes back to

a covid level that would allow us to bring you down into the tunnel, i think it would be quite instructive to understand how all of the forces that need to come into perfect alignment in order to be able to deliver the project and run it. >> thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. and i will say that director tumlin and i did a tour of the central subway about a year ago now [inaudible] so i understand from what we have knowledge of and what's real is very, very different. i guess the question, how are we comparing to other cities with similar projects with these sort of challenges around supply chain and covid? are we managing it the same? are we managing it better? >> from what we can tell, the impacts on our project are significantly less than other projects that we're seeing around the city. and while the delays and cost

overruns on central subway are significant and in some ways completely unacceptable, they're also much less than average for megaprojects in the united states. we're currently running overbudget by 15%. that said, it's a very expensive project, and a 15% cost overrun on a billion-dollar project is a lot of money. one of the things that we were talking about at the board of supervisors earlier today is how do we institutionalize the lessons learned? so i keep hoping that the immediate crises will settle down enough for us to, for example, bring in people with deep experience in very successful complex large project delivery to do a complete audit of our capitol projects and construction edition and provide technical

assistance and help for us to make sure that in every single one of the ways in which delay and added risk are factors into our procedures, that we have a way of fixing that, and that starts with -- that starts with the way we, you know, write r.f.p.s, our entire procurement and contracting processes are not designed to minimize risk, they're designed to minimize up front cost rather than minimize risk or deliver best value project. similarly, we have plenty of opportunities for having stronger project management procedures as well as procedures for involving, for example, our maintenance crews early on in project design and project construction delivery, so that maintenance thinking is built into the capital project itself so we don't have challenges then receiving the project once it's done. so we're -- we started that

process particularly with our subway task force, and i'm really, really proud of the interdisciplinary effort that's being done on the twin peaks portion. we want to take that and effectively add that to all of our capital project, planning, construction, and receiving. >> great. so i'm sure we'd love to hear some early feedback about how that is going in december and some sort of discernible action items related to what you've learned. director eaken. >> thank you, chair borden, and thank you, director tumlin for the updates, especially on great highway, and i want to thank you and staff for working to address the behaviors you said we're hearing about. and i'm glad it sounds like we're not jumping to the conclusion that unsafe behaviors on certain streets

leads to a conclusion to reopen great highway to vehicle traffic because i would envision if we did that, we'd receive reports of unsafe driving behavior on great highway. i know a friend who was injured in a horrible accident with a very aggressive driver on the great highway not too long ago. i just wanted to acknowledge the effort that staff was taken, i think that's a really good direction to go, and i look forward to seeing that resolution of that work in december. thank you. >> thank you. director lai? >> yes, hi, thank you. following up on director heminger's comments about the central subway construction, i want to make again encourage the staff to, you know, in light of the delays, to continue to look at ways where we can minimize the on-stree n

encroachment so that during this extended delay, we can, as much as possible, reopen part of the right-of-way for businesses and activity to occur. and i know that staff has worked hard in trying to maximize and optimize that, but let's make extra effort to see if there's anything else we can do to minimize that impact to the community. and then, the other thing i wanted to ask is in the next budget update, which i think is probably going to be presented in the next hearing -- >> yes. >> -- if staff could be prepared to speak to how fares will have an impact on our budget, whether we -- under the scenario that if we were to consider extending the moratorium on not enforcing fees versus enforcing fares, excuse me, what that would look like, that would be really

helpful. thank you. >> yes, that will absolutely be included. not enforcing fares would result in significant service cuts beyond what we would have to already cut, and we can detail that out on december 1. >> thank you. >> i have a question related to that. how are we enforcing that on the parking side? i feel like we get a lot of complaints, and maybe this is a little off-topic, but a lot of people feel like we aren't enforcing parking violations, and i feel like maybe at the next meeting, you can talk about that enforcement and ramp that up just like what we're doing on the transit side because people are getting annoyed with people overparking in neighborhoods and other things that's a consequence of the leniency that we've shown, that would be great. so seeing no other comments from directors, let's move onto our next item. >> clerk: item eight,

citizens' advisory council report. >> and i understand that neal is here, and he'll give us his report. >> that's correct. thank you, chair borden. >> hello. >> sorry. slightly just unprepared here. just pulling it up. so good afternoon, directors. hope you're all doing well on this rainy tuesday afternoon. earlier this month, the c.a.c. heard from the black and african american afinishity gr about hiring employees and disciplinary actions. we also received a presentation on the racial equity action plan, which is on today's agenda for your meeting today. so the c.a.c. passed the following motion as a result of our discussion. the sfmta c.a.c. encouraged the sfmta board to direct staff to resolve clear issues in hiring

and inequity and discipline. [inaudible] the latinx afinity group, and it will require everyone to work together and support one another, and seeing this mutual support from the afinity groups banding together is really something that ought to be encouraged, and it's an encouraging trend. so on another subject, i look forward to engaging with the agency in the outreach and serving to historically underserved neighborhoods, including the neighborhood that i live in, the ingleside. it will be surely a good opportunity for the agency to gather some valuable feedback about how folks are getting around the whole city and what

it is that historically underserved neighborhoods need right now in terms of transportation. and i appreciated hearing, during the last item, from the two public commenters who spoke out against resuming fare collection. i share those views, but i absolutely recognize the varying factors at play here, so i will be requesting a presentation on fare collection so that the -- i can hopefully present the view of the entire c.a.c. on that important matter. so that concludes my report today. unless there's any questions or comments, i will wish you a good rest of your meeting. >> thank you for that, mr. ballard. directors, are there any comments for mr. ballard? seeing none, i will move into public comment. moderator, are there commenters on the line who'd like to speak on the citizens advisory council report? >> operator: you have three questions remaining. >> wonderful.

our first speaker, please. >> hi. i'm calling as a resident of soma directly impacted by the fourth street subway. i live on fourth street, and i'm -- i wanted to address some of the traffic impacts that have been going on here, and while we haven't -- we don't have the luck -- a luck of a supervisor advocating for us, like gordon mar and the great highway, the street traffic impacts right between brannan and bryant and those streets have been known by the sfmta since the project started, and we haven't seen any progress or any work to address those. the biggest issues right now are zoe street having increased traffic and being too narrow for what it is. it's designated as three lanes, two lanes of traffic, which are

two way, one lane of parking, and it is only 21-feet wide. this often results on cars and trucks going up on residential sidewalks to avoid other cars. another issue is coming out right at fourth and bryant -- >> clerk: excuse me. your item is an item before the board which is a citizens' advisory report, and it sounds like you have general public comment. >> oh, i'm sorry. the director had talked about the sfmta, the fourth street project, so that's what i had tagged in for. >> i see that. i mean, we'll let you complete your comments, but just so you know, that was item number seven, and we're on item number eight, but we'll let you finish your comments. >> my bad. that's when i pressed the button, so i apologize for that. >> yeah. >> yeah, the other big issue is

right when the exit tunnel, i believe it's fourth and bryant, we constantly get illegal left turns from the right-hand lane crossing over the tracks and in through the left lane, which living here -- living in the building on fourth street, you know, it's kind of scary sometimes getting hit by cars suddenly shooting in front of you. it would be great if that -- it would be great to get enforcement there, so thank you. >> thank you. moderator, are there any additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have three questions remaining. >> next speaker, please. next speaker?

hello? i hear somebody on the phone. i'm not sure if you're there. maybe we can move onto the next speaker, caller? i don't know how the queue works. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> hi. can you hear me? >> yes. >> okay, great. yeah, i actually want to address equity issues, particularly the towing of vehicles and the -- >> clerk: i'm sorry for the interruption. may i get your name, please? >> oh, i'm sorry. i am sloane kelly from the coalition on homelessness, yeah. so these equity issues are really important? i know there's -- and i ride the bus a lot, so i see people

getting on and not paying, and them looking very fearful that somebody's going to figure this out because they just don't have the money to be able to pay, and, yeah, they need to get to their doctor's appointments or get to work. so i'm -- i'm hoping that you'll consider ending the -- the fare for people that are really poverty stricken. and also regarding towing of vehicles, i have gone out and spoken to many people who are living in their vehicles or who need their vehicle to be able to drive to work every day, sometimes for many miles, and if those vehicles are towed,

they have such little money that they typically cannot get their vehicle back. so if they're living in it, then they're on the street. if they need it for work, they may lose their job or, you know, have to figure out another job which would prevent them from being on time. okay. so thank you. >> thank you. >> i'm finished, mm-hmm. >> thank you very much. is there another -- next caller? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can, mr. pilpell. >> i am. i'm right here, and i'm not on the bus, but never mind. just on one point that neal raced at the end. -- raised at the end, there is a presentation on fare

enforcement as a c.a.c. subcommittee, so perhaps they will make observations or a recommendation that will then go to a full c.a.c., and you may have that infobefore you ie future. so the comments that i heard earlier today about fare enforcement and equity and all of that, perhaps the c.a.c. can weigh-in on all of that. thanks very much. >> thank you, mr. pilpell. moderator, are there any additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> hi. it's steven miller. just quickly, on fare enforcement, wanted to say that, one, as a [inaudible] bring it back, and two, i pulled the data through public records request, and the lines that actually have the most tickets for riders are the

actually higher income express lines, such as the 30 express, the 38 geary, 38-r, so it's not necessarily that people are being disproportionately targeted. i do support the addition of new fare initiatives, though, such as waiving p.i.p. tickets for lifeline -- people who sign up for lifeline or for any of the muni programs. and if we wanted to extend free muni for homeless and youth, that would be -- or all homeless and youth, that would be good, but that was eliminated in the last budget. that would have been one of the ways to address this, but unfortunately, that's not going to happen. >> thank you. is that all your comments? >> yeah, that's all on this item. >> okay. thank you.

moderator, are there any additional commenters on the line? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> okay. so with that, we will will close public comment and move onto our next item. >> clerk: that puts us on item number nine, public comment. this is an opportunity for members of the public to address the board on matters within the board's jurisdiction but not on today's agenda. if the moderator could please open the line for general public comment. >> yeah, and that's a reminder that it's anything that's relevant to this board but not having a hearing on it today. >> operator: you have five questions remaining. >> wonderful. first speaker, please. >> hello, can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> hi. so i meant to speak on agenda nine, but i still want to give public comment, so hello, chair and directors. my name is [inaudible] and i'm with the community housing partnership, and the reason

that the sfmta is issuing surveys and citations really is deeply troubling me. as more and more san franciscans are falling into poverty due to the pandemic and the recession, this is really the worst time to cite people again. many people ride muni without paying a fare simply because they cannot afford it, and for most of those people, muni is the only way they can get to where they need to go, to medical appointments, appointments with social service providers, and to get to work or school. so the sfmta has done so much important work with [inaudible] citations during the shelter in place period, and i'm really grateful for these bold steps. and i'm here to say today, on behalf of the community housing partnership residents, to ask you to build on these actions and to do the following four

things. firstly, please extent the moratorium on fare citations until the pandemic has ended. now is not the time to reinstate these tickets and to criminalize people for being poor and who are simply struggling. second, make the access path available to san franciscans in poverty who live in supportive housing. these folks are just getting back on their feet, so these passes will ensure that they're movi staying shelters and moving forward in their lives [inaudible] and finally, we hope that sfmta makes muni free for people who live below the poverty line and on less than $1,000 a month. if we are a city committed to transit justice as well as racial and economic justice, we will make this commitment to

our most vulnerable residents. thank you. i have no further comments. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 12 questions remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. hello. my name is richard rothman, and i'm calling about fulton street again. on october 20, a 75-year-old lady crossing fulton street in the crosswalk was hit by a car, and i don't know why the director didn't report that. she had to go to the hospital. i don't think it was too serious, but still, why is -- is m.t.a. going to do anything about it? and a couple of years ago, another 75-year-old lady was hit near the senior center and, as such, sfmta did nothing about it, and cars just speed

along fulton street, and that idea of slowing down on geary, where the seniors live to -- from 30 to 25 miles per hour, well, i live right near the senior center on fulton street where they put that lower speed limit, and i can tell you that cars do not speed down. you need to set a speed limit of 25 miles an hour or 20 miles an hour. just do it, and let the state sue the city or let the city sue the state. and also, i want to talk about stop signs. i live near 38 and balboa, which is a dangerous intersection in a commercial district, and i don't know why staff won't put a stop sign in. they put stop signs in on 28 and balboa, and all along ocean avenue where there's no traffic, yet where there's

traffic and a dangerous intersection, i -- it's so dangerous, i won't even drive going north on 38. i have to go on cabrillo, which now is a slow street to get up to geary. maybe somebody can explain why they're not taking any action. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 14 questions remaining. >> hello. my name is mark gruberg. i'm a san francisco taxi driver, drive for green cab. i hold a proposition k medallion, and i'm a board member of the san francisco taxi workers alliance, and i want to comment on a new rule, which is due to go into effect on december 1, which will ban k

medallions from picking up at s.f.o., and this is in addition to a ban that went into effect the year before, banning t medallions and restricting k medallions. right now, the only ones that will be able to pick up at s.f.o. are p medallions, the ones that purchased their medalians. all other medallions will be prohibited from picking up at s.f.o. first, i want to point out that this is not a legal action. the san francisco transportation code is very specific. it says the director of transportation can restrict pick ups as s.f.o. for the purpose of alleviating congestion. congestion is not a problem at s.f.o. the actual reason given for this in the memo that the board

received is that the ban is for the purpose of supporting the purchased medallion holders, and that's not the -- the transportation code, and it's only going to make things worse. those cabs will spend more time at the airport. other drivers will stop driving. it'll be worse service in the city, and really, we have a broken medallion system, and that's what needs to be fixed. so -- [inaudible] not the answer. thank you. >> thank you, mr. gruberg. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 16 questions remaining. >> hello. hayden miller, calling you guys again about how unsafe the buses are right now. i received the report or the

letter asking the san francisco health department to lower the distancing to 3 feet, and in there, it sites that trimet in oregon are operating at 3 feet, they only have 19 people, opposed to the 26 people that you proposed to have once the distancing goes into effect. i don't know if it already has been. i mean, in practice, it has been, but i don't know what the actual rules are right now because it's so unclear. trimet is also providing masks and sanitizer to all their patrons, so that's also something muni is not doing. in terms of ambassadors and proof of payment, they're still on their phones. i sent you some videos and pictures of ambassadors parked in red zones, on their phones.

one was yelling at a lady to open the window the other day when it was raining when they were not enforcing the fares, and they're not enforcing the of cour masks. they're just yelling at us when it's raining. the way that muni is enforcing safety is by making less space. there's not enough service. every meeting, i hear oh, we're working on bringing more trolley lines back, we're working on more l.r.t., but in practice, no additional service is getting out there, and it's ridiculous. there's so many signs out there, thank you for getting on the electronic screens that say bus full, but now, every bus says bus full, driving around with that sign. we're leaving people at the curb, the essential workers, and it's really disturbing.

we need a service increase as soon as possible. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 14 questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> hello, chair and directors. my name is wesley saber, and i am the policy manager for glide. at glide, we have worked for decades to break cycles of poverty and marginalization for low-income san franciscans, and as such, addressing issues of inequity is crucial for glide's community. now sfmta has taken some bold steps during the covid-19 pandem-i think to address racial inequity, and your leadership is to be commended. this includes placing a moratorium on public safety tomes, but we'd like to see more. however, if this body is truly working towards doing its part to cement real equity in san francisco, already a number of

things that must be addressed. with the news that the sfmta resume issuing fare citations by the end of the year, this has raised significant concerns from our clients and staff at glide. we know people [inaudible] not by punishment, with more and more san franciscans experiencing the economic conkwebss of the pandemic acon of the pandemic -- and they're arriving to access critical programs such as our free meals and health care. we cannot allow transit barriers or associated punitive consequences to be a deterrent for our most vulnerable san franciscos to meet their basic -- san franciscans to meet their basic needs. we cannot criminalize people for their poverty. so in this, i'd like you to

take further action please. extend the moratorium in place until the shelter is lifted. if someone signs up for an access pass or muni lifeline pass, clearly avoid any fare tickets -- >> thank you. i'm sorry, but everyone gets the same amount of time, so i must cut you off. >> appreciate it. thank you. >> but i hope you have submitted that letter, and i think we will definitely be talking about this soon. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 13 questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> good afternoon. i wanted to call in today to voice my support for waiving the downtown moratorium on construction. as many people were you can at thatting about, we're in the middle of an economic crisis, and building back will take time once the pandemic end.

we should allow the construction allowing in the downtown corridor. i urge the sfmta to consider waiving this moratorium. thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 12 questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> hi. my name is eric arguello, and i'm the community engagement manager with glide, and we want to address the 27 bryant that's used by many seniors, low-income residents, low-income workers, and people with glide. this is a low-income transportation, and far moneweo restore the 27 and to make it a high priority. thank you. >> thank you, mr. arguello. next speakertious please.

>> >> operator: you have 13 questions remaining. >> hi, this is joe madical. i'm with teamsters local 665. i'm here today, speaking on behalf of our principal officer, tony dilorio, who's unable to end at that. i'd like to reiterate what was sent in a letter by mr. diloria to mr. tumlin regarding the extension of the shared scooter program. we are asking that the expansion of the program be postponed until the completion of the november 30 hearing that was scheduled by supervisor safai, and also until a review of the program is fully explored by members of the board of supervisors. that's all i have. thank you for your time, and thank you very much for your consideration of our position. >> thank you very much.

next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 13 questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> yes. this is david elliott louis with the tenderloin people's congress. i'm a long time tenderloin resident, and i've been severely impacted by the loss of both the muni 27 and muni 31 bus lines. those are the only two lines that go through the tenderloin, and we've lost them both. it's a severe impact. the 27 is especially critical to getting up the hill to st. francis hospital at hyde and california. we've lot the ability to get there, from shopping at trader joe's to access to hardware stores up there. it's an unfair loss, and i think it seems to be a problem of neighborhood inequity.

muni did resotore the 45, whic serves pacific heights and nob hill. i've heard discusses about how you -- excuses about how you don't have the buses or the drivers because you don't have lines running, but you still manage to restore 45. why not 27? this seems really unfair to the tenderloin residents. everyone is severely impacted. there's nobody supporting this continuing loss of service, so i hope you'll look at that, as well as i hope you'll restore the subway as soon as possible. i don't understand why you restarted it in august and then stopped the subway again because of relays, relays that were working just fine the prior year. i wonder if we've been told the entire story about the subway.

i look forward to hearing more about that. david elliott louis, tenderloin people's congress. thank you. >> thank you, mr. louis. >> operator: you have 13 questions remaining. >> yes, good afternoon. this is barry toronto. i first want to welcome christine silva to the job. she has some very big shoes to fill, and i'm hoping that roberta will give her the support she needs so she can do a fast learning curve, to welcome. i also want to give a shoutout again to philip for creating the cap stand, and i want to thank him again because it's where we can get a lot of our business. the next thing, about prop k that mark gruberg was talking

about. i looked at the statistics, and the statistics do not indicate this was a smart move. the statistics do not show that there'll be an increase in income. the drivers that were driving ks will just switch to ps, and then, you'll have more ps, and the wait will be long. the statistics will not bear that out. short fares are at least a third of the fares leaving the airport, and two, the t.n.c.s have increased tremendously from july to september. it increased 28,000 drop offs and pick ups at the airport, from 197,000 to 1 -- from 97,000 to 125,000 [inaudible] so i want to let you know that this is a very, very stupid move because the goal you're

trying to do is not going to happen. the waits are already gone for the p's -- p-cab any way when i switched to a p-cab, so i beg you, reexamine the numbers and look at this again before you put this into effect, please. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. toronto. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 13 questions remaining. >> hello, chair and directors. my name's curtis wu, and we're with [inaudible] and we are a nonprofit that helps individuals apply to the housing lottery. a lot of people -- when we heard about the news that fare

revision may resume, a lot of people were worried. to receive a $125 fare evasion citation is a humiliating experience. we're grateful for bold steps, but we are here today to ask you to build on these actions and do important things. one, extend the moratorium on fare evasion citations until the shelter in place has ended. now is not the time to reinstate these tickets when so many people are struggling. two, make the access pass available to folks who are homeless and in supportive housing. the access pass will help ensure that they stay housed and moving forward in their lives by making it easier for them to get to where they need to go. if someone signs up for an

access pass or muni, clear any fare evasion ticket that they receive, and third, we hope that the sfmta makes muni for all people who live below the poverty line or less than $1,000 a month. if we are as a city committed to racial and equitable justice, we will make this affordable for all residents. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 12 questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> hi. my name is robin cutner. >> hi. >> hi. i'd like to thank director tumlin for making a report on sfmta policies. during his tenure, he has repeatedly assured [inaudible] and block crosswalks, be they marked or unmarked. california vehicle code contains clear language about

the illegality of these actions. there are thousands of reports you can find in 311s records telling me information. if approximate a p.c.o. comes out and decides that a pedestrian can squeeze by a car's trunk that's sticking out across the sidewalk, the p.c.o. will not issue a citation. meanwhile, my significant other cannot crutch his way pass the car, so he crutches out into the street and prays that he will not be hit by a car until he gets on the sidewalk.

this discretion on parking violations creates hostile pedestrian environments and is incredibly ablist. meanwhile, m.t.a. budgets continue to be flushed. i implore your agency to enforce sidewalk parking violations. it will be a gold mine that you cannot believe. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 11 questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> hi. my name is javier, and i'm a district nine resident, and i'd like to comment on the idea and -- that the sfmta's floating around resuming fare citations for transit, and i think that that's completely unacceptable. just because, like the

transportation in san francisco is becoming less and less for low-income and homeless folks, but that doesn't make it less important. they have to get to the doctor, they have to get their kids to school, they have to use other social services, and the fees and the fares keep going up, and the punishment for evading the fares keeping going up and might be coming back, but we're not thinking creatively on how to make transit more accessible. we need to stop treating our city's residents as disgruntled customers because we're not. we're your constituents, and we deserve a liveable transit system even if we're not rich. san francisco needs to own up to the fact that currently its transit system is a death trap for low-income residents.

we need to stop the criminalization of our low-income riders, and like it's been said already and i would like to echo the folks that have already been on this call, that we need to extend the moratorium on -- on fair evasion tickets, we need to make the access pass accessible for folks in supportsive housing -- supportive housing when they sign up and to eventually make muni accessible for all and especially for those below the poverty line. so thank you very much, and have a good afternoon. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have ten questions remaining. >> hello? my name is [inaudible] i'm with the san francisco taxi workers alliance, and we're an organization that represents drivers and -- taxi drivers in san francisco, p me dollidalli

holders, k medallion holders, and nonmedallion holders. i'm here to talk about the p medallion holders at the airport, but i want to ask you about what's your plan to help the medallion holders. this is not going to help them. as of now, most medallion holders have an outstanding loan at the credit union, and the credit union is demanding payments for this loan. the armt, you know, if -- the airport, you know, if there are 40 cabs at the airport with no demand, it is a long, long wait. how do you think you're going to help 400 purchase medallion holders with this inadequate plan, which is so insufficient and is a slap in the face to

these people who bought their medallion in good faith. this is a terrible time for muni, and a terrible time for transportation and the city budget, but you owe it to them to come up with a plan that's going to relieve them of their debt which is strangling them. when they lose their home, they lose the 12,000, 15,000, 25,000 they put down. some of them have their houses tied to this, and i think you have an ethical duty to return the money you made off this program. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have nine questions remaining. >> my name is herbert winer, and i wish to convey some concern about the lack of outreach on the part of muni

management. there are calls to save mouny and the extended merced -- muni and the extended merced line, which i'm a rider of, and there are requests to meet them, and they this had clined to do -- and they had declined to do so. you cannot refuse to meet with one group over another. i think mr. tumlin has a responsibility despite the heavy duty he has with the pandemic to meet with concerned groups. so these are my concerns, plus, the closed captioning is not working on the sfgovtv channel. thank you. >> thank. >> next caller, please. >> you have eight questions remaining. >> yes, i am marge gerry. i am a resident.

two things. bring back the 27. agree with the other two callers, absolutely. by the way, how about the folsom and the number 47, all buses that are heading out from downtown going to 15th are not running. i have to walk the entire time. the number 8 goes on the free wait at sixth street or fifth street. they are getting their transportation, but all of us who need the 27, the folsom, 47, we are not getting anything. lastly, this might not be your category. the subway problem. the portal that is on fourth street between harrison and bryan is full of graffiti. i have been complaining about this for a while. you might say just call central subway. that is not working. we live in a neighborhood here. we have to walk around and look at that disgusting portal of the

graffiti now getting worse and worse. nobody is cleaning it or taking care of it. no one is taking care of any of it. you put the portal down for the central subway underground and you have this graffiti accumulating and no one is taking care of it. 27 bring it back. bring the folsom, the 47. make sure you access people that go out of town going away from downtown and would you please get busy or cleaning the pore p. give those bus drivers a raise. they are doing an incredible job. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> you have seven questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> hi, i am mohammed.

i want to bring up some concerning information about scooters. i have heard that permit issued is being transferred without a hearing or anything. they have demonstrated they do not follow the rules. it is bad policy for the m.t.a. to reward bad behavior like this. i just have to ask that the m.t.a. board of directors look into the transfer and bring it to the public's attention. >> you have six questions remaining. >> how is it going? i am calling in regards to the great walkway. i urge the m.t.a. to get this right according to supervisor mar's office. they are taking heat and families and friends use the

great highway on a regular basis. just tired of the back and forth between public agencies during the public health crisis. this should be a slam-dunk, but it turned into a quagmire. let's get this right. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> you have five questions remaining. >> good afternoon. i am cynthia. i am with the housing rights committee of san francisco. it is an organization that supports renters in city and through the clinic we serve thousands every year half of which are extremely low income. more and more of san francisco is falling into this as a result of covid-19 and the economic recession. now is not the time to site people again. we are very concerned to hear

that s.f.m.t.a. may resume issuing citations by the end of the year. for the 50,000 who live below the poverty line or under $1,000 per month, muni is the way to get around here. i am very proud of the city for that. when i say like get around i mean medical appointment, social service, job interviews. the $50 a month is unaffordable for these folks. not being able to pay the fair shouldn't be criminalized. people have to get to appointments, and to get to this is just humiliating. i am here today to ask the chair and directors to do four things. first, extend the moratorium on

the fare citations until this is ended. second make the access path available to those in poverty who live in supportive housing especially for those just getting back on their feet after experiencing homelessness. third, if someone signs up for an access pass, clear and void any fare evasion tickets from the past. last, we hope sf will make it free for those below the poverty line. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have five questions remaining. >> good afternoon. this is senior disability action. i am here to comment on the 27 line. back in september 25th m.t.a.

approached us and did a presentation about a revised 27 line to hopefully be implemented soon. this was a proposal the same as proposed before the pandemic. this was proposal for a cost saving way to bring back the line. that was september 25th. since then we are getting a number of complaints from members and also support individuals of the necessary work, senior and disability action. basically wondering when the 27 comes in. if the m.t.a. is really into transit equity, it is time to bring that in. just too many people with disabilities and seniors are not getting the transportation. yes, they can go to access card,

but that costs $2.50. right now during this pandemic event, they can't afford that. if you believe in transit equity, bring back the 27. then we can work on what exact exactly. that new plan doesn't quite meet all of the categories of first one. we can work with you to make that more affordable and accessible for everybody. one more thing. waive enforcement. i don't think this is the time to do fare enforcement during this time. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have four questions remaining. >> good afternoon, directors. i am with the san francisco

transit riders. i want to support comments for returning the 27 and 31 to service. i understand muni is facing severe constraints and has to make difficult decisions. 27 and 31 are key routes that serve low income riders and seniors and disabled. frees free up resources. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have four questions remaining. >> thank you. for the record i am she and her. as i talk about muni today. first of all, we have to keep it on the front burner especially this relatively recently started program clipper start.

one way to make fares more affordable is to get clipper cards through clipper start to pay half fare on the single trips. the programming is there. it is no good unless it gets used. it is a safe registered way to pay the fare. we got to get away from scratchoff tickets. people lose them and you keep the money. it is not a fairway. every product should have away for redress if compromised. as far as the subway, we have to work on getting it open because in new york city they can fix the subway and run the subway at the same time. until recently they ran it 24/7. only closing it now for covid related cleaning between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. we have to learn from larger systems, especially systems

legendary such as new york city subway and grand central terminal where they take things to the next level because a world class city such as san francisco deserves world class transportation that is safe affordable and timely. thank you. >> thank you. >> first, great range of public comments today. this is why public comment is so important. please hear it all. >> is that everything. >> cta. >> nice try. very good. i made comments earlier at the

fscta board. i hope staff heard me. last friday the golden gate bridge district made a tough decision to begin layoffs there. that can happen here, too. bearing that in mind. beep sides finances and the subway we need real public engagement on the future of transit in the city. there are a range of views on that. we should start having meaningful online town halls on that. speaking of town halls or virtual open houses, i participated in the two in the last two weeks on better market street. unfortunately, i found many of the comments regarding the current proposed redesign to be overly angry, combative and entitled. that bugged me. i hope people try to engage better on policy issues here without resorting to those

approaches. the agenda language on page 2 of today's m.t.a. board agenda in the middle still refers to roberta boomer. that text should be updated. just to conclude on two points. i support the efforts to restore service on the 27 bryant and muni routes not operating now. i wonder out loud what impacts a real title six analysis would show on the muni routes that are not operating as to disproportionate impact. i will leave it at that. thanks. >> next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> hello, i am kim diamonds, at thenant of the tenderloin. i work with ihs as a mentor for

the disabled. not being in work is causing hardship. i am disabled. the 27 took me not only to the office one day each week, to the only branch of the bank that is available to me and shopping places. the fact there is no 27 i know for a fact there are people stuck inside getting sicker and sicker because they are not having the transportation they need to get to the doctor's appointment. i gave up physical therapy appointments because of cost, distance, unavailability of the transit from the tenderloin. it is no secret the inequality of the people being treated in the tenderloin for many reasons that i do not have time to go over. anyway. i am the person who lives this.

i am not calling to try to tell you what to do. i simply want to address you on your level of compassion and on the level of humanity that we do count here. we deserve as much equity as the people on the other side of town who have vehicles to get themselves around even if it is not recommendedded. we have nothing. we have people whose health is deteriorating. thank you for your time. >> thank you for calling. next speaker, please. >> you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker.

hello. >> can you hear me? >> yes. >> great. i am laura. senior citizen with a disability. i rely on the 27 bus every day. many senior citizens and people with disabilities rely on the 27 to go to the saint frantis hospital, to get groceries. i also live on a hill. i feel that the tenderloin has the second highest density of seniors and people with disabilities in san francisco. also, people that don't have cars and can't afford a car or

taxi rely on the bus solely. it is a real disadvantage to not have the bus. i am pretty serious right now -- pretty furious because i rely on the bus and so does so many people who are residents in the tenderloin. i demand and all of my fellow residents demand equitable distribution of buses in the tenderloin. bring back the 27 now. i implore you to do this. thank you. >> you have one question remaining. >> i am with the lawyers committee for civil right of the

san francisco bay area. we represent clients low income or experiencing homelessness. many are plagued by fines and fees like fare evasions that may be enforced by the s.f.m.t.a. i am here for public comment. 25% of the san franciscans filed for unemployment, 50,000 work below the poverty line, under $1,000 per month is not the time to site a 125 citations for fare evasion when most people cannot even pay the fare in the first place. for those living on $1,000 per month muni is the only option to get to the medical and social service pointments or job interviews. these residents are unable to afford a lifeline pass at $49 per month. i think we also have to take a look at the effectiveness of the

fare evasion program itself. what i have been hearing is the revenue is needed to reduce service cuts, but more than half of the estimated 50,000 tickets each year go unpaid. in fiscal year 2017-18 they cited almost $50,000 for fines only $22,000 of those tickets were paid, netting muni 2.58 million for the fare evasion program that costs $6 million per year. i say that there is so much innovation in san francisco. so many more effective ways to improve quality of service of s.f.m.t.a. and provide equitable transit for san francisco

residents. >> thank you. next >> clerk: acting secretary silva, please call the roll. >> secretary silva: (roll call) item 3 announcement of prohibition of sound producing devices during the meeting. this is usually when we are in room 400, since the meeting is remote, there is no announcement. approval of the minutes of the november 17th, 2020, regular

meeting. >> clerk: there are any changes to the minutes? at this time let's open the line to the members of the public. are there members of the public on the line that have amendments to the regular meeting amendments? moderator, can you check the phone line for us, please? >> you have zero questions remaining. >> clerk: we'll close public comment with that. directors? >> secretary silva: (roll call) it passes. item 5 communications.

>> clerk: secretary silva has gone out on maternity leave at this point. i'm going to make our regular covid-19 health emergency announcement identifying the meeting being held virtually with all members of staff and public participating via teleconference. we asked the public to provide feedback remotely by writing to the board and ask that you do so by monday at 5:00 p.m. for all comments received in advance of the meeting we have received and appreciate the comments and thank you for honoring our request. we encourage the public to continue writing to us or you may leave a voicemail message.

while this technology allows us to hold the meetings via teleconference there might be silences and gaps and weird sounds along the way, particularly transitioning between speakers. we're doing our very best and ask for your patience and understanding. if we lose the connection, we'll pause the meeting until it is reestablished. if you missed the public comment period, we will honor because you missed it later if necessary. lastly, i want to thank the village and all the people on the line that make this happen and secretary silva for standing in as well as our former secretary. secretary silva. >> secretary silva: this meeting is being televised by sfg tv. for those watching live stream, be aware there is a time lag

between the meeting and what members of the public are seeing. if you are watching and you wish to comment on an item, please call the phone line when the item is called. for members of the public who wish to make public comment, 888-808-6929. please make sure you are in a quiet location and turnoff any tvs, radios or live streaming the meeting, please mute the sound. this will reduce noises so the board can hear you. at the appropriate time, the chair will ask for the phone line to be open, if you want to comment, you will be prompted to press 1-0 to be added to the speaker line. you will be received in the

order which you pressed 1-0. there will be an automated voice to tell you when it is time to speak and then we'll say speak your name and ask you to comment. when your time is up, i will say thank you, next caller please. at that point, the moderator will put the speaker back on mute. i will repeat the instructions again as i am aware that some members of the public may join late and may not have heard this information. additional comment i have, the november 17th meeting, the board continued item 13 which was encouraging the metropolitan transportation commission to amend strategy en-7 and reiterating support for the plan

bay area guiding principles. that item is no longer required action as the mtc adopted an alternative strategy. any further items related to the plan bay area will be scheduled if or when appropriate. that concludes my comments for communications. item 6. >> clerk: board members, are there new items you would like to have addressed at this time under new or unfinished business. seeing none, moving on. >> secretary silva: item 7, the director's report. >> clerk: director tumlin. >> director tumlin: good afternoon everyone. i'm going to cover covid updates, transportation recovery plan and a little bit on our bond rating and how it sets up the discussion for the budget

conversation that's coming further. starting with covid, as most of you know, last week we had our first covid-related fatality in the sfmta family. we have expressed our deep sadness to the family who has asked for privacy and it is important to know, it is an employee who has been out on long-term leave since before covid began. that said, we have had another 102 covid positive cases throughout the agency that we need to take very seriously each and every one of them. as we said before but bears repeating, we have a very strict protocol of covid positive cases within the agency. we do as good or significantly better contract tracing for every one of the cases and quite conservative about putting people on quarantine who have had significant direct contact

with anyone who has tested positive within the time frame established by the department of public health and it is worth repeating that we sanitize all of our vehicles at least once a day. in fact, we send each of our operators back to base and we leave the yard in a fully sterilized vehicle. we require everyone throughout the agency to wear a face mask and we have ambassadors throughout the system handing out face coverings to the public or anyone who doesn't have one. we continue to social distance and skip spots when our vehicles are at capacity using the automated counters, they alert operators and they can skip stops. we have mandated the use of the operator barrier separating the operator from the rest of the passengers for all of our facilities. we have specific protocols for keeping the work force safe,

including hand sanitizer at the entrances of all buildings and require all front line customer facing staff to have access to masks and hand sanitizer and latex gloves and that everyone coming to work in person do daily self health and temperature screenings. for all of these reasons, we continue to have a lower covid positive test rate than the city as a whole and as you know, the city of san francisco has one of the lowest covid positive rates in the united states. we are proud of this work, but it is critical that all of our work force stay vigilant in following the rules, even though we are all exhausted and we know a vaccine is on the horizon. it is more important now than ever, particularly given the spike we are now experiencing in covid positive cases that we double down on protecting

ourselves and our colleagues and our families. happy to report there were no vision zero fatalities in the report period and that our work crews and dpw's work crews are making great progress on work-build projects, particularly building out a network of protected facilities throughout the grid. work is almost wrapped up for the bike way -- actually, let me bring up my screen. i'll show you pictures that just came in from staff. so we are busy building out a protected bike way network. here we are. that includes a concrete island and signal changes in order to make it easier to cross from

folsom and howard bike ways. all the way up to the ferry building. we're building a protected bike way that is nearly complete now from folsom to market street. there's a picture of it nearly complete. we're also making amazingly rapid process in filling in the remaining gaps on howard and folsom streets which will connect all the way from division to the crossing of south market. as you have probably heard in the news, we are making quick progress on -- trying to figure out a mitigation plan for the great highway. a town hall gathered about 400 participants and the supervisor's office and we are working together on a great highway mobility plan that is

collecting detailed data about utilization of the upper great highway as well as unintended negative consequences, particularly in the outer most avenues that have abundant traffic capacity but since the closure of the great highway have seen a rise in dangerous motorist behavior which we are working hard to mitigate. the sfmta has led the development of a short term traffic mitigation plan that we and dpw are working quickly to implement. this photo here is one of the recent speed tables installed two weeks ago. and we will be continuing to install a few more working to make sure that as motorists try to cut through the outer avenues, that they do so at a safe speed. and also developing some strategies to help take advantage of the great excess

capacity that we have on sunset boulevard. so that motorists will take advantage of that capacity and get northbound quickly through the district and including when the construction project on 19th avenue gets into full swing, this week. let me go back. here we go. continuing on, a couple more vision zero points. prop-k funding was approved to the tune of $500,000 to advance city-wide intersection day lighting. this work will start early in the new year and allows us to advance our work significantly. and finally, as you have probably seen, we have been working extensively on education campaigns, one of them focused on ways that motorists make

sloppy left turns and jeopardize pedestrians in the crosswalk. those physical interventions we have done in about 10 locations in the city have been tested and we are reviewing grant applications to continue the messaging, particularly in non-english speaking communities and communities of concern throughout san francisco. and we announced last week that we won an office of traffic safety grant to continue our motorcycle safety trainings in the spring. and we'll be partnering with the department of public health on additional multi lingual outreach and outreach to people with disabilities around vision zero education. next up, transportation recovery plan. a topic we are spending a lot of time on these days. as i hope you all realize, we have resumed fare enforcement on

muni starting today. we have invested significant time in doing right in order to make sure the muni service can get the revenue it needs to minimize layoff of bus operators and continuity of service but being cognizant of the economic impact of covid particularly on low income, disabled and homeless households throughout san francisco. our goal for fare enforcement is not to raise revenue through citation fines but to ensure compliance with fare pay. as you know our fare revenue is down 95% compared to pre-covid levels. in order to survive, everybody has to pay their fair sharon muni. without it, our service doesn't

work. we can't rely on the honor system to get people to pay. we need people to pay on muni and we need to introduce a stronger sense of civility as we have seen a rise of anti social behavior and assaults on transit officers. so returning to fair payment means retooling our entire enforcement program. we have focused the last six months of training on the officers first through the work of disaster service workers, getting them trained in social service offerings that the city offers as well as deescalation training and understanding the deep diversity of the people who ride muni. they have been trained in all of the different discount fair programs we offer and have been given handouts in order to make sure that riders know all of the

alternative ways that people can pay particularly for those with the lowest incomes. we have been surprised despite the fact that we market the program extensively, many of the riders are unaware that they're eligible for free or deeply discounted fares and we have changed a lot of the eligibility rules. simply being unemployed is now considered an eligibility option as well as anyone enrolled in any of the homeless service programs offered by the city. those folks are quickly given free muni passes. for those who may not qualify for the discount and free muni programs but have a hardship, they all have the right to perform community service or get their citation dismissed easily online and by mail. for customers who receive a transit citation and

successfully enroll in a low income fair program within 30 days, the citations are waived. we are trying to thread a challenging needle of making sure that we provide critical mobility for people who are struggling while at the same time, knowing that we need folks to pay their fair share in order to continue operating the service. it is not a situation i want to be in and yet, it is our reality. we've also of course been continuing with parking enforcement and we have been issuing citation for street cleaning since june, parking meters since july and parking permits since september. in order to be aware of the way in which people struggle, we have continued to suspend most towing programs, particularly for 72 hour rules. for parking in peak hour zones.

we do tow for people who park in transit only lines and abandoned vehicles. all of our services, while they're available in person for people who need to come in in person, all of our services are now available online. and finally, some bit of good news to prepare us for a bad news situation on the budget later in the agenda. i want to report that we were on subject to a detailed audit for our updated bond rating. we have been very proud as an agency to have an aa rating for a long time and expected a downgrade but it was simply to aa minus which is extraordinarily high with a transportation agency with as much financial risk as we are experiencing. we are incredibly proud of this work and i am particularly proud

of this work that our teams have done in order to strengthen the financial position of the agency. we knew the budget situation was coming and our budget and finance teams have done everything they could possibly do in order to stabilize the finances. we remain in a remarkably strong situation relative to our peers, partly due to our reserves but largely due to our quick action in preparing ourselves for the downturn that we are currently facing. s&p was also very positive and highlighted the strong public support we have received as an agency through these challenging times. our management and government structures, the transparency we have used in revealing all finances to the public and policy makers and low debt

burden. in these times what would normally be mildly bad news, i would consider to be extraordinarily good news. that is the end of my report. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. directors, are there any questions among you over the director's report? director lai i see. >> commissioner lai: i'm on mute multiple places. thank you for the report director tumlin and good job finance team for maintaining a relatively strong rating that will help with the available tools as we go into exploring further financial options that we have. i have two specific questions on your report. one is perhaps really more of a comment on related to the vision

zero work and glad to hear there's going to be further work on trying to reach out about the left turn safety situation which is great. really good to hear that staff is focused on providing translation for that type of education. i know i have pointed out to staff recently on some funny chinese translation i came across for vision zero and want to maybe reiterate the importance of cultural relevance in translation. i, myself am only able to read the chinese signs but i assume the cultural relation is very important in spanish transition to make that point again and encourage staff to really consider how we are approaching the translation. for a lot of the harder to reach

members of our public, the signage they see around town may be the only time they get this information and that's something i think we need to work harder on as an agency. the second question i have is really about the great highway work and thank you for providing the update. i was only able to attend part of the town hall that supervisor moore held. which was very impressive. i believe there were over 450 people in attendance. i'm curious on our side as an agency what we have done to reach out to the population that are less likely to attend such a virtual town hall, seniors or minorities with language barriers or people with limited access to devices. can director tumlin go over what we have done to reach out to

that population? >> director tumlin: in the case of great highway, the town hall organizing as well as the district 4 transportation study, we have been letting them take the lead on direct engagement and just like every other neighborhood, it is a neighborhood that is deeply diverse. and a significant share of the neighborhood are immigrants for whom their first language is not english and their first tendency is not to show up and argue in public. so we understand the necessity of allowing people to be able to engage in different formats. so, i can check in to -- with our counter parts in those agencies to find out exactly what it is that they are doing and make sure those formats are culturally appropriate and that they are held in languages that

people feel most comfortable being expressed. and i think it directly relates to your previous comment and i fully agree with you, given the nature of san francisco, we have to make sure we are reaching out to the full array of people who live here, particularly the people who are least likely to be connected to power and have often the fewest mobility choice. it is central to our equity work and an area we are not yet excelling. >> clerk: thank you. does that answer all your questions? >> commissioner lai: yes, thank you. >> clerk: thank you. director eaken. >> vice chair eaken: just one question -- can you hear me? okay. great. so i think you said that fare

revenue was down 90% across the board. i thought in reviewing the materials last night that the transit ridership was sort of stabilizing around 60-70% below normal. can you help explain that? >> director tumlin: that is the fact that we have not been enforcing fares for the a past eight months. our goal is to get our fare revenue from 95% below pre-covid levels to something closer to ridership levels which are about 70% below pre-covid models. that is lack of enforcement. our goal is not to raise revenue off of citations. i have no interest in citation revenue. i'm interested in the fare revenue we're using because we've been on the honor system

for eight months. >> clerk: thank you. any other directors? director heminger. >> commissioner heminger: thank you madam chair. i guess that answer provokes another question. so, jeff, that discussion ended up costing us 10s of millions of dollars, right? >> director tumlin: it did. >> commissioner heminger: can you roll back the tape on the thinking that went into that approach? >> director tumlin: a big part was directly related to protecting the health of our work force. this was the thinking that basically almost all transit operators in the country ended up with other than the transit agencies that could collect fares and enforce them without

direct customer interaction. for example, bart, you can have your card go through, it's sort of self enforcing. we don't have fare gates on muni, except for the rail system which we shut down. in order to minimize the interaction at the fare box that sits next to the bus operator, we needed to suspend cash payments and in suspending cash payments, we couldn't then require or enforce clipper payments because of city rules that say you always have to have a cash option. so we have been able to -- now that we understand covid much better and understand the risk factors, we cannot only find ways to protect the health and safety of operators while passengers use the fare box but very importantly, protect the

health and safety of our fare inspectors who are also -- who are essential workers and we need to protect. so it's a combination of technology has changed a bit, we have added some additional technology and we're much stronger now on the health science and how to protect people and understand masks and screens and other mitigation factors. >> commissioner heminger: yeah, i do think this would be a good little case study maybe for the next pandemic we go through about how to approach the question of collecting your revenue. i remember when we hit the earthquake, the first thing the governor did was swoop in and take the tolls off the bridges, for no good reason other than it

looked good. that's the time we needed the revenue more than ever. one thing that has troubled me from public comment about fare inspection and alike, it seems to confuse two questions. are fares set at the right level as to be affordable to our customers. the other should we enforce the fare policy we have. it seems you shouldn't achieve the first objective by using the second objective. you ought to decide what your fares are and then up ought to collect them. again, i don't want to belabor the point -- >> director tumlin: i am proud of the creativity revenue and

fare policy teams have done to do everything we can to achieve our equity objectives and bring in revenue. the revenue is also necessary to deliver service which is central to equity objectives. all the ways which they removed barriers for low income, disabled, senior or homeless or meet other categories, we have made it easier than ever for them to get the fare instruments. which previously were -- well, i will not repeat some of the negative comments that i've made pre-covid about the ways in which we put obstacles in the way of low income people being able to access discounts. having had a long personal history with the ways in which government gets in the way of people taking advantage of their discounts, i get a lily motionle

on that topic. so staff has basically revolutionized our approach during covid to expand our programs and make them a lot easier to access and to also integrate delivery of the programs as a central component of the enforcement program. rather than just giving somebody a citation, their first duty is to give them the application form in order to get the programs they're eligible for and like have the citation automatically voided if they enroll in the discount programs. very different approach. >> i have a follow up to that. what percentage in looking at the overall number of fare and citations, what percentage of people cannot pay? i know we have a lot of unpaid fare citations out there. i'm certain as to whether or not

there's not enough accountability or there's a lot of people who got citations who can't afford to pay them. maybe you can break that down about what percentage people should be enrolled in the programs. >> director tumlin: one of the things that has frustrated me is due to state restrictions but also our own ability to collect it, we have limited information about the demographics of people who receive citations. this is something we very much want to know about, not only for income equity reasons but also racial equity reasons and immigrant status equity reasons. this data is more difficult to collect than i had sort of thought in my own head. we would be happy to provide you

with a detailed report on what we know, what the obstacles are to knowing more and potential solutions for understanding the unintended consequences of fare enforcement better and correct for that. >> do we get identification from them? >> director tumlin: sometimes we do and many times we don't. my understanding and correct me if i'm wrong, the information open the person's id, we don't capture that. other than address. >> i just feel like that would be the easiest way to capture -- if we added a couple additional boxes on there, the gender, age

-- again, i think it's really important. what we hear a lot from the public and i'm sure when we open up to the public comment we'll hear more of, it's a policy focusing on lower income folks and without having the data it's hard to know and because so many tickets go unpaid, it is challenging. the other thing i will say, in the rest of the world of debt collection, people look on people's social media and facebook to get additional information about them. i'm not saying we have the resources to do that but that is another way to get graphics of people to understand who your demographics are. i don't know if that's something we have within our capacity to do that. it would be helpful to better understand the overall picture of our ridership and in particular, people getting the tickets. my concern about the enforcement without having data, it is disproportionately impacting low

income people and people of color and unfairly targeting them and putting them in the situation of whether or not they can't pay the fares and it's a waste of our time if that's indeed the case. so that's what i would just say on that topic. whatever we can do to facilitate getting more information back so we know it's being equitable done and applied and not targeting particular routes impacting certain communities. >> director tumlin: in our blog post on this topic, we talk about fare enforcement -- we had previously assigned folks based upon rates of non compliance that resulted in some inequity. and we are correcting for that

problem. we're making sure an affluent white rider is just as likely to have the issue. >> what happens if someone doesn't pay it. with a parking ticket, you can't register your car if you don't pay it. how does it impact people if they don't pay the tickets? >> director tumlin: that varies. i think all of this conversation is warranting a larger discussion with our whole team who deals with the fare program and citation program and protest procedure and follow up procedures as well as our collection of data around causes and demographics of interaction with our enforcement team. >> it sounds like if everybody else is okay with that, we have the team come back with more detailed data on the topic would

be great. any other questions among directors before opening it to public comment? seeing none, moderator, can you please check the line for members of the public. >> you have three questions remaining. >> chair borden: first caller, please. >> caller: i wanted to talk about the great highway. i live near there in the richmond district. when i drove by there, i didn't see any blue parking. i think you need to put that parking in there and second of all, staff has said alternative to use sunset boulevard, four lane sunset boulevard going north ends lincoln way and for the people who live in outer