controller's report that was issued on december 16th. we are very happy with it. the controller's -- office confirms all the approaches to save jobs here at the agency. reducing costs and working really hard to secure additional funding. the controllers office points out over the last couple of weeks we've been very successful in closing our financial gap. thanks to the help of commissioner hillary ronen as well as others. we are getting an extra $30 million in funds from the metropolitan transportation commission. unexpectedly, the general fund and very importantly, the city's pension fund, performed enter the -- better than expected

which buy us the necessary time in order to close structural deficit. we are utterly delighted by this report. it confirms all of our financial planning to date and basically says that yes, the sfmta has a deep and growing structural deficit. we hopefully have enough time to actually deal with it. in the meanwhile time, we can keep up the same pace of hiring right up through the november election and if we're successful in getting new additional ongoing revenue in november, we can keep and sustain that hiring place through full recovery. the report also confirms that it

is really currently our high vacancy rate that remains only to restoring transit service. all that very good news for us. the next topic is central subway. we started automatic chrome testing and real testing and we're now working on finalizing all of the elevators and escalators. they are all functioning. ticket vending machines have been installed and testing is expected to be completed in july. that said, we have continued to find various punch list items that we need the contractors to fix before we can start up revenue service. we're expecting that the central

subway will open for revenue service in the summer or fall of 2022. it's the strangest fiscal year this agency experienced. the annual report summarizes key accomplishments like the number of times we adjusted the muni system in order to address the

ever-changing travel demand pattern that result of covid and protecting health of our workforce and saving the agency from layoffs despite our financial crises. we also completed major capital projects like the 16th street improvement projects, first two sections of the improvement project. we implemented the city's first neighborhood wise 20 miles an hour zone in the tenderloin. all of this is detailed online at sfmta.com/annual. by the way, i want to announce once again this year, the sfmta will be offering free transit on

new year's eve starting at 8:00 p.m. on new year's eve and ending at 5:00 a.m. on new year's day. we want to encourage everyone to celebrate in the manner of their choosing and to do it safely on the new year. riding transit is the safest way to do that. we are happy to provide this free transit service as part of our ongoing commitment to vision zero. thank you so much. >> director hinze: i have a quick question about shared spaces. we heard the businesses have more time to comply with moving to accommodate bus stops, etcetera.

>> director tumlin: streets director tom mcguire will let us know if it's delayed at the bus stops. his team is working hard with every single individual business owner to do what we can to accommodate the shared spaces and bringing back transit service to every former stop. >> that's right. thank you for the question. it is our goal that every bus stop that is impacted in some way by shared space will be restored in time for the schedule that director laid out earlier. there are one or two locations where we are considering moving a bus stop short distance to allow the shared space to

continue to operate. that's exception not the rule. >> director yekutiel: it was -- more notice should have been given to local businesses to prepare for full street closure in the events of an important holiday.

i don't know we need to go through the whole history of it. my question that now it's done, are there changes that we are making in the way we coordinate with the commission and hopefully future large scale events to make sure it goes little bit more smoothly. >> director tumlin: yes. streets director tom mcguire can speak to lessons learned. >> thank you for the question director yekutiel. the major event definitely did not go off without a hitch. the major lesson learned what the extent of the impact of the event on muni riders, traffic and parking. i think we -- we don't do lot of

-- [ indiscernible ] our special events teamfuls scrambling along with the event sponsor to deal with the magnitude of changes. we were able to get event producer to bring in very experienced site manager who was able to turn a few things around, open up more parking for the businesses. my lesson learned is the standard we have for things like block parties and parades where we give tons of advance notice

and much more aggressive about parking changes and traffic changes, that needs to apply to events like this. >> director yekutiel: i hope it can be implemented a lot. i do feel it's great for our city, it's great for the economy. it's good for tourism. it's this question of how to make sure we're all ready for it. i hope that gets put to more use. >> chair borden: director heminger. >> director heminger: i read the controller's report with lot of interest. we have a budget workshop coming up? >> director tumlin: that's right. that's the question we have. i was hoping that the budget workshop would be in person so we can present all the information and answer all your questions with the relevant

staff. we're struggling with omicron variant and when we'll be allowed to come together in person in order to have that workshop relative to the need to get our budget approved. we're scrambling to figure out new approaches for that budget workshop. to stay tuned. >> director heminger: however we do it, one suggestion, i think would be worth considering is repeat performance from ben rosenfield. i thought his ability, question him directlifuls really helpful. secondly, i sort wanted to take advantage of the fact that we got a number of forecast that have been running around. we've got the work that jonathan has been showing us on a regular basis. we've now got the controller with a different set of

forecast. i think it might be useful for the board just to see all of those things laid out in the end. we can get a better sense of what the range of motion is. no one is going to get the forecast right. it does seem to me there's a pretty significant degree of variation. i expect because, we're all trying to forecast a once in a lifetime event. i would hope that we could include something like that in the presentation so we get a sense of how many forecasts there are and where we ought to be trying to land as we get our budget together for the next few years. >> director tumlin: absolutely. i believe it's actually a requirement that the controller report to us at your budget workshop. secondly, i want to emphasize that we always coordinate our

forecasts with the controller's office. the projections that the controller office produced were perfectly in sync with ours. where there is uncertainty is where there are major varrables, there's a broad range in the probably -- projections. what is the return rate to downtown office commute. we have consistently been over ambitious with the expectation of return to the office commute. that has negatively impacted our performance with regard to our projections for parking and transit revenue. other revenue sources did better than expected. particularly the general fund

and pension fund. >> director heminger: i think it's helpful to board members, some of us like me are pessimist, some are optimist. if we had a range, we would have some variables and some factual faces for exercising our prejudices about how the future will go. >> director tumlin: we will be presenting ranges. one of the challenges we got is the budget it need to be a finite number. we can also discuss where we set the budget and then how we manage to our actuals. which is something that we have done consistently this last year. >> director heminger: my own take on that, it's usually better to end with a surplus than a deficit. pessimism not a bad place to start. >> chair borden: director eaken? >> vice chair eaken: thank you.

two questions on the director's report. the first thing, do we show any data any indication whether we are seeing improved safety outcomes from the 20 miles an hour tenderloin? even the change we made earlier this year? is it too early to say anything? >> director tumlin: tom mcguire, can you speak to our -- evaluation process >> i think it's too early to say. it is too soon to say. once we hit the one-year anniversary, i would love to bring that information back.

>> vice chair eaken: that would be great. the next question on vision zero, as you head to the end of the year, 2021, i'm curious have we gotten the regular update from you director tumlin on where we are landing? >> director tumlin: we're at 25 fatalities now. we've been running about 30 over the last couple of years. this is the time of year when -- i'm got doing make any predictions. i think what's really to think about, the pattern have changed consistent throughout covid. we and other cities it are

seeing more motorcycle fatalities, single occupancy fatalities, extreme speeding events. it's nice that there are fewer pedestrians versus people crashing, the high speed crashes are contributing more to our numbers than in years past. >> vice chair eaken: thank you. >> chair borden: looks like everyone had questions asked. at this point we will open up for public comment. this is item number 7. everything from the what happened with human resources update to our ongoing activities. if you like to speak on this item specifically, press 1, 0.

are there callers on the line? >> caller: hi, good afternoon. i heard a lot about lack of staff resources is a key constraint growing out vision zero projects. we heard a lot this year by using limited transit resources wisely. i'm concerned that same vue is not applied to staff time. we have incredible staff that does so much and so little. yet we spend countless hours on projects that go nowhere. we have staff spending evenings and weekends getting yelled at hosting outreach events. we have staff spending months deciding whether town do this board's decision like on lake street.

i want to encourage this board to move faster on streets project next year. you showed us the rapid change that's possible with slow streets. yet we seem to be reversing back to the old slow way of working. the board of supervisors declared vision zero emergency, yet instead of emergency response, you give us survey after survey second guessing yourself asking if it's okay to act. we can also see that's a choice if we wanted to. we could be building on successes. i hope we can get whack to that

-- get back to fast action next year. happy holidays. >> chair borden: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: thank you. i'm appreciative doing better with finances. i still feel like we have to have a explainer with the running deficit. the city owns it system. the city will be obligated to pay for this system. obviously, they'll pay for something you can get -- [ indiscernible ] if run a deficit in my house, active make it -- i have to make it up to my bank account. the city owns the system.

i'm encouraged it's getting better. i hope you can hire for people and we can take great pride that we are a transit system, 100% vaccinated workforce. i got my covid booster shot in a supermarket. i feel ready to go forward. i like to have in person meetings so i can ask my staff questions so i can see you. you can get do see what i look like. overall, it's a good report. i think we're going to bring the system back. i ask that you be optimistic

about it. other systems are recovering, we got to look at the playbook. thank you. >> chair borden: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is steve alexander, i'm a parent of two kids. i've been working with the leadership team. i wanted to thank director tumlin and the m.t.a. staff who has been overseeing that project in particular. i'm calling to express my deep concern that i'm small vocal minority rigging the process getting ahead of outreach for community members about the new survey that's due on the 15th. many folks took the survey. the first survey thought the process was a done deal.

i'm concerned about controlling the narrative on next door and we're taking that as the gospel. really concerned what is playing out in district 1 and district 2. i will be in touch with the board of directors. especially directors who live off of lake. thank you very much sock and happy holidays. >> chair borden: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: hi, this is eric rozell i'm calling in regards to the tenderloin. traffic safety task force. i wanted to really encourage the board to speed up along with the creation of the action strategy plan throughout the city but in particular the tenderloin where all the streets are part of the

network. i want to also encourage the m.t.a. to speed up their evaluation process of the 20 miles per hour speed limit. see how that is going. very curious to' the impacts. thank you for the efforts you have been making. happy holidays. >> chair borden: thank you. next speaker. with that, we'll close public comment. we can move on to our next item. >> clerk: item 8, citizens advisory council report. no report is expected. item 9, general public comment. >> chair borden: this is the time you can address the board that's related to sfmta and not on this agenda. nothing that has been previously

discussed or slated to be discussed later in the day. if you like to speak to general -- general public comment issues you may press 1, 0. are there any callers on the line? >> caller: thank you. i like to speak generally. i was in the area a few weeks ago. i used muni a few times. it was okay. i met a very nice, helpful -- i road the m line. it was okay. i'm concerned about light rail

stops. i have trouble finding light rail stops over at 9th and irvin on the m line. there's some shared spaces and parklets, restaurant enclosures. i ended up walking and missed a train. at least i got to 44 to take me over to glenn park. that's another option. i continue to work for -- [ indiscernible ] muni is increasing. i want a muni for everybody. muni that's ready to address issues, i'm particular about my transportation services i use. i like to out services that give me a firm idea what i'm going to pay. i'm concerned about long haul.

i feel that everybody should be able to enjoy muni equally. [please stand by]

>> we feel like there should be a couple representatives that have foreclosed. i got off on the phone with one guy the other night. he was in such a state of depression that he put all of his family's earnings and college funded into this taxi medallion. it was either pay this or commit suicide. i spoke with another driver who said he was going to have to declare bankruptcy. what is going on with you? is as far as the guys talking about long hauling, we cannot

long haul. i want you out of my cab so i can go onto the next fare. that's the great come back --

>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have 11 questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> yes. my name is spanky woods. i'm a san francisco cab driver, and i feel that the city of san francisco, not to mention the m.t.a., bears responsibility for the situation that the medallion holders are in, and that they should have a moratorium until the pandemic is over as far as the crisis that they're going through, and that's all i have to say. >> clerk: thank you for calling. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have ten

questions remaining. >> clerk: next speaker, please. hello? okay. you're really -- you sound very distant, speaker. [indiscernible]. >> we can barely hear you.

[indiscernible]. >> >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have nine questions remaining. >> hi. my name is michael murphy. i'm a san francisco native born resident and taxi cab driver. i've been with the cab industry for over 27 years, but as of recently, i left the recently because i'm one of the medallion owners who had to foreclose on his medallion. i really feel that the city of

san francisco and m.t.a., you really hoodwinked us. you were allowing uber and lyft, but at the same time, your own employees were taking uber and lyft and telling the cab industry how they should do things. at this point, i'm lucky that i left the industry and am a stage hand with the union, but i still have this loan over me for $200,000 that i had to declare bankruptcy of. it was either pay the loan or

support my family. luckily, i was able to walk away, but i've got brothers and sisters in their 70s and 80s, and this is what they do. they're struggling to make ends meet, and sfmta needs to take share of this problem that occurred and cab drivers that are fighting to make the payments and cab drivers that foreclosed on. you need to take responsibility for it and take back the loans and give us our money. thank you very much. that's what should happen. god bless you, and merry

christmas. >> thank you. next speaker. next speaker, please? >> operator: you have nine speakers? >> i just had to unmute my phone. i'm a disabled veteran and grandmother in district 10. due to your war on cars, i've accumulated several parking tickets. sfmta uses the federal standards for what qualifies as low-income, and the people at the office said the reason is due to you guys receiving some federal money. i ask that you do something to address what is the second

highest cost of living in the nation, and for us to use federal standards on income in a city that is extreme poverty level, that is huge. also, we had a speaker come to the bayview about getting more bike lanes. there is a survey that said 500 people that are not white come to work in the bayview district, and i challenge that. i challenge you to find even 50 people that aren't white riding a bike to work.

also, people who live in d-10 can't ride the trains home. we need to work on people who aren't white being able to attend games. you first, transit first, you need to work on that. thank you. >> thank you so much for taking the time to call in. i'm sure that staff will take time to follow up. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have seven

questions remaining. >> as you're aware, there were about 720 medallions sold. about 300 have been closed thus far. that's over 40%, so these people believed in this program. they followed the rules. they just couldn't make the payments due to the competition from uber and lyft, and finally, the nail in the coffin was covid-19. they need to be considered, as well, and as well as those who have paid a portion of the loan. not every taxi driver is able to manage the remote meetings, and you do need to be aware that they have other ways of speaking, as well. sometimes they speak with their taxi horns. when drivers showed up on

december 7 for two or three hours, the circle around city hall and the circle around m.t.a., that was really speaking loud and clear. so you do need to consider a way to eliminate this failed program and return to something that's more fair and equitable to everyone. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have seven questions remaining. >> clerk: next speaker? >> hi. my name is victor pogachar, purchase medallion owner. i don't know if you guys can

hear me or not. >> clerk: we can. we can. >> okay. great. i'm at work right now. i'm a cab dispatcher, and i'm at work. i don't have a prepared speech or anything. any ways, i do have show up and say, i waited on the medallion list for 17 years, i was about near the top, 15. you guys had a pilot program where you'd give one to the list, one free, and one you sold. that's what michael harris told me, and, you know, i didn't get the free one. i got to the top of the list, and you don't me, either buy the medallion or go away, and after investing all this time in the industry, i made the leap and bought the medallion, and it's the worst thing that ever happened to me -- or maybe

not. i get to call you and talk to you like in a democracy. you have the economic resources to fix this, and it's a crying shame that you're squeezing the most vulnerable and weakest people in your society. when you look at the streets of san francisco, people are openly doing drugs and leaving feces on the streets. i'm a san francisco native. to the right thing, do the right thing or the people will democratically one day take this city back and clean it up. have a nice day. >> clerk: thank you.

next speaker, please. >> operator: you have six questions remaining. >> clerk: yes. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is michael sachs. i'm actually not a taxi driver. i called in for parking, but i realized after hearing the taxi drivers speak, i realized it affects them, as well. taxi drivers are well trained people. they don't drink and drive, they don't text and drive, and i think we can support them by eliminating all free parking. furthermore, the business for the city, why have something for free when you can

incentivize for? we're the second most dense city in the country, and the fact that we're incentivizing people to drive on the weekend -- i take public transit that costs me money, or i could drive for free. when you think about an economic standpoint, it's ludicrous to have any free parking in this city, and it

will make taxis and public transit more ready. >> my name is brett dawson. i'm a medallion 1557 purchase medallion holder. in the same situation as victor, where he called earlier. i was on the list for 19 years and had the rug taken out from under me. i was told i had to purchase a medallion to get my name off the list or being on the lease

forever. there's no way that the jury who decided that the m.t.a. -- how are they not responsible for anything? as a cab driver being in the industry the whole time, watching everything happen, it's ludicrous you weren't liable. it's time to use some of the

1.8, $1.7 billion just given by the federal government. please consider the situation. thank you for listening today, all the other callers coming up, let's keep the heat on. thank you very much. merry christmas, and happy holidays. >> clerk: thank you very much. you, too. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have four questions remaining. >> clerk: next speaker. >> hi, good afternoon. this is barry toronto.

>> clerk: hi, barry. >> hi. yes, my colleagues spoke before me. tell a true story. i don't know why kay [indiscernible] seems to think that everything is hunky-dory, and we can keep yanking medallions and everything is fine. we are asking for a new trial because somehow the jury form was finagled by the city attorney's office, and the fact that they couldn't admit certain evidence was also preventing it from presenting its case properly. i'm not saying that the credit union is an angel in this whole

thing, i'm just saying that these guys work hard. they spend money hours at the airport, and to take cabs off the streets are making them not available for people because the whole system has changed. drivers now work all day in the cabs. there's very little double shifting in the cabs day drivers and night drivers, and drivers don't want to go out there because you've got people who don't want to pay the fare. what's up with that?

at chase center, we're supposed to have access to rides, and the [indiscernible] tell us that we don't have access. you screwed up our business even more. >> clerk: thank you very much. your time is up. >> thank you very much. happy new year. >> clerk: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> operator: you questions remaining. >> hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can. >> hi. my name is marcelophone --

marcelo fonseca. your meetings are not physically open to the public. neither are your staff meetings, so why is it that your taxi drivers are exposing themselves to covid?

[indiscernible] thank you for your time. i wish you happy holidays. >> thank you. you, too. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> hello? >> yes. my name is [indiscernible] and i purchase medallion, and i'm asking for the cities to just wake up and doing for our business. we don't need the medallion,

and we're asking you to take it

back. there is [indiscernible]. >> thank you. you, too. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can, mr. pillpel. >> as the previous speaker said, it takes about ten seconds for the phone to unmute. i think the 2022 muni sign-up dates are as follows. the changes that julie announced are march 15.

the june changes are june 11, and the august changes i think would be august 20. i'm hoping to see a rail service plan sometime in the next few months that we can discuss publicly. a lot to discuss. as was pointed out, the budget instructions came out from the mayor's office last week with no projected deficit. m.t.a. should have its full baseline and perhaps less pension contributions and less of a health care cost increase from employees compared to previous years, so much better news on the operating budget, i

agree. i hear that ian trout is leaving the m.t.a. he's done a great job on projects like market street, and i can't reach deanna desatus. i contact her and she doesn't get back to me. i see her on this meeting, so perhaps she can get back to me. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. pillpel. moderator, do we have any other callers on the line? >> operator: you have one question remaining.

>> hi. mary, and i'm a taxi driver. i just wanted to follow up on what marcelo said about the driving requirements being reinstated. i've spoken last month about that and how i feel it's a little premature, and now we're seeing these cases climb. i think i read this morning we have 150 new cases of omicron variant nationally. at this time, i think we should go back and prorate the driving requirement. the public is really out there. i have been driving, and people are really ready. they've taken off their masks, and they're ready to party. it's frightening to go to work

because it's 70% more contagious than the original variant. so i wish you would consider that and maybe doing a 70% prorating of the driving rate in june. we can pick this back up then and hopefully it's over. thank you. >> thank you. moderator, are there any additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> thank you. we'll go onto the next item. >> clerk: thank you. the next item is item 10, the consent calendar. item 10.1, requesting the controller to allot funds and

to draw warrants against such funds available or will be available in payment of the following claims against the sfmta: rob anderson versus ccsf, san francisco 050805, filed on 7-25-2005 for $50,000. 10.2, amendmenting transportation code, division 2, section 801, to implement parking restrictions except for city owned san francisco police department vehicles displaying sfmta permits along santiago street between 22 and 24 avenues, and approving the following parking

modifications. 10.3, authorizing the director or designee to establish a special event rate retroactive to november 26, 2021 for up to 36 days not to exceed two hours, with a floor of $0 per hour where the agency has determined that on street parking was significantly reduced in the immediate vicinity due to a public safety response, which currently included the sutter stockton garage, the ellis o'fairly garage, and the union square garage. -- ellis owe farrell garage, and the union square garage. >> directors, are there any of you who wish to sever any items? director eaken?

>> yes, i'd like to sever 10.1. >> director heminger, you'd like to sever 10.1, as well? >> yes. >> okay. we're going to have to continue that to a new date, so let's go to public comment. >> operator: you have three questions remaining. >> hi. my name is brad [indiscernible] the report says that the police response has reduced on street

parking spaces. i imagine many of us have read the high cost of free parking and now just how harmful the policies could be. i saw it yesterday when i tried to ride a bike to union square yesterday and it was dangerous, to say the least. obviously, it's done is done at this point, but i think it's important for this board to send a message going forward that the voter first transit policy matters by rejecting this item. i'd also just like to echo the words of the taxi drivers and hope that the city can finally do right by them. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have four questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> thank you, director. alita dupree, she and her.

i'm not understanding 10.3. i'm not understanding, why one of the busiest shopping times of our holiday season, why we're giving free parking. i use the r.t.c. in las vegas to go to the strip, and in new york city, they have a transit system called a subway. i'm sure some of you have probably seen it, and so we can use that money and parking revenue to help build a better transit system which i depend on as a disabled individual who does not own an automobile, so

i think this is going to add a greater number of accidents [indiscernible]. >> mr. dupree, are you finished? >> yes, thank you, i'm done. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> our next speaker? >> yes, hello. my name is james regan. i was signed up for item number

9, and i was never gotten to, and i'd just like to speak to that. i was a medallion holder, and i drove a taxi for 44 years in san francisco. i had a medallion, and i saw it as a pension. any way, that's all blown up. my medallion has been foreclosed on, and i'm just asking you all to do what i think you know is the right thing to do, and give some relief to the medallion holders, and yeah, that's all. i'll keep it short and sweet, but give some relief to the medallion holders. i think you know it would be the right thing to do. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> you're welcome. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker? >> hello. hi. my name is alison

[indiscernible] and i'm a d-4 resident call in about 10.3. i understand this is sort of an accomplished fact, but i would urge the board to not approve this. as a transit first city, i do not see the benefit of encouraging free parking in a transit first city, so i encourage you to please reject this statement. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> hey, good afternoon again. this is barry, calling in again about 10.3. i think it's the right move, considering what i see at

night, starting at 7:00 until 6:00 in the morning, the police have got the place locked down like a fortress, and there's hardly any parking on any of those streets. i think you're doing the right thing by doing this, but at the same time, the officers are not listening to the instructions of their hi-up command and letting taxis in. -- higher-up command and letting taxis in. let someone, one of the higher ups, mr. tumlin or someone, let

us in. the message is not getting out to boots on the ground that taxis are allowed to be in the area. someone way trying to pick up someone at don's grill and he could not get in to pick them up at don's grill. last thing, happy new year's, merry christmas, and i'll see you in 2022. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. toronto. you take care. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> yeah, i wanted to apologize talking about the union square

parking earlier. i joined this meeting late. i work full time, and it's hard for me to listen to these few things. i want to reiterate that the union square free parking thing is ludicrous, and i just want to point out there are countless people that can't call out because they're working. to be frank, it's just a matter of time until there's no parking downtown by design because eventually it'll be obvious and eventually urban planners will be listened to. the sooner we do it, the best. free parking is just a silly step in the wrong direction. having private drivers in urban areas is offensive because rich

people can drive an s.u.v. when your average joe takes public transit. you guys should get moving on congestion pricing, as well. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> hi. my name is calvin, and i'm a district 5 resident. i'm just calling in about 10.3 and just want to reiterate what a few people before me have said. i don't think this item -- i know it's largely procedural at this point, but i would urge the board to vote against it --

and we, you know, that it boggles the mind. i would urge you strongly to reject this and send a strong signal to the mayor that we should not be giving free

parking to people in commercial districts in, you know, a congested area like downtown area regardless of whether the sfmta is or is not going to get reimbursed for this. thank you very much for your time, and please vote against 10.3. >> thank you. moderator, are there any additional callers on the line? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> okay. with that, we will close public comment on our consent calendar, and it looks like director eaken has a question, a clarifying question? >> okay. i guess the deputy city attorney can tell us when we should go ahead and sever 10.3

because i'm going to have several questions on that. should we go ahead and sever that or can i just ask the questions? >> thank you, director eaken. i think chair borden has already asked if there were any items to be severed and we've taken public comment, so we should ask questions at this point. if she wants to take another -- take a vote at the end of this, she can do that. >> okay. [indiscernible] i think there

were some important questions raised around who we're subsiziding and what we're subsidizing? first, was there any equity analysis done on this decision [indiscernible]. >> so first of all, director eaken, i was to emphasize that this was not a proposal that came from the sfmta nor will be funded by the sfmta. we had a request and an offer by the mayor's office to effectively validate two hours

of parking in an effort to parking that was removed by the san francisco police department in response to retail thefts. there was no analysis. it happened extremely quickly. >> and understanding the staff report makes clear that those will not be impacts that the sfmta -- >> i'm not certain of the source of the funds, just that we'll be compensated with the sfmta budget. >> okay.

and can you remind me what are the hourly rates for those first two hours that we're subsidizing? >> i can get the detail for you in a second unless streets director tom mcguire has it on hand or interim c.f.o. jonathan [indiscernible] has it from his analysis. tom? >> thank you. directors, the rates are based on what time of day you park in the garage. most time of day, the rate is $5 an hour. i can tell you it is $5 an hour between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. and $4 an hour some other times. we have some 12 and 24-hour monthly rates.

the vast majority of customers are paying $5 an hour parking. >> okay. i understand that this is a -- sort of an emergency measure that i am interested, and so the equity position, it's 600 or $700,000 that we're talking about. the income of drivers tend to be higher than the typical income of transit riders. it's an equity decision. if we're going to choose [indiscernible] thank you, madam chair. >> again, i want to emphasize the sfmta is not spending this money. >> director hinze? >> just real quick as kind of a

follow on. this is another question that you may or may not have offhand, but i'm sort of curious. how many or, on average, how many patrons of the garages stay beyond the two hours? i'd be curious. >> yes. director mcguire, do you have preliminary data? i know it is something that the parking team has been looking at closely? >> i don't have preliminary data i can look at and share here, but i'd be happy to come back with a written report to the board, if that's okay. >> great. are there any other additional questions? i know for many of us, this was

a difficult decision, although that wasn't really our decision. i understand the reasons that it was made and want to support the sales tax revenue hopefully being generated by people being downtown. that's the only thing that could be the silver lining. i will say, on sunday, i was downtown, and the garage looked like bonkers, so i'm hoping that people are spending more than two hours and we are making money off that, that people are going into the garage and staying instead of trying to park elsewhere. i think this is a special situation that has already been happening, and with the funds that were guaranteed, this is not a message of supporting free parking by this board, how i would say, so i just want to

put that on the record for the public. director lai? >> thank you, chair borden. how many on street or off street parking spaces are being removed through the closure? >> streets director tom mcguire, do you have those numbers at your fingertips? >> there are over 100 parking spaces that are impacted kbauz of the closure. there are -- and furthermore, there are spaces that are not necessarily being blocked off but are extremely hard to reach because of where the closure will be located. >> got it. and then, are loading trucks able to use the drauj parking -- the garage parking because i think the entry is really

low. >> they're not able to use it. >> okay. i really appreciate chair borden's comments. i, too, feel similarly, and i'd like to highlight the fact that a lot of our small businesses, like chinatown, have experienced a lot of smash and grabs. this is a very unique situation where the city is choosing to close the streets. it's not happening in all neighborhoods. i'm going to invite director tumlin to remind us again what the [indiscernible] are around the holidays. >> it is new year's eve from the evening starting at -- i believe i said 8:00 p.m. until

5:00 a.m. on new year's day. >> okay. so it doesn't just overlap on these days. i guess it's just one day. on the transit side. i think this jibes with what director eaken was alluding to, which is not overincentivizing car usage over transit usage. this is one of those times i would like us to dig deeper in our pockets to see if we can provide additional subsidies for transit, basically, like free transit. i do feel that we need to make other options much more attract

tiff going into this part of town. -- attractive going into this part of town. to me, i think that's something we should do. perhaps there are some bus lines that we could explore that would not be open to the rail. i guess i wanted to share those conflicting sentiments, but thank you, chair. >> thank you. i did want to ask two issues about that that mr. toronto brought up.

[please stand by] . >> so with that, directors, is there a motion on our consent calendar? i think we should probably first take the motion to continue item 10.1.

>> i'll motion to continue it. >> is there a second? >> second. >> secretary [indiscernible], can you please call the roll. >> clerk: yes. on the motion to continue the item -- [roll call] >> clerk: the motion passes. thank you. >> now is there a motion on our consent calendar? if people want to sever something, feel free, if not, we can vote on it. >> chair borden, can i just ask one more question after director lai? >> sure. >> [indiscernible] just to

understand the policy decision we're making here, how many spaces, then, and all of those garages are we then making for the first two hours? is it a range of the 100 spaces that were lost or is it significantly more? >> it is significantly more, director eaken. there are approximately 1,500 spaces across the three garages. >> okay. so that was one justification that -- just to be very clear, we're talking about -- this is sort of a larger decision related to supporting local businesses. this goes beyond the police activity [indiscernible] is

that [indiscernible]. >> we've seen a way that we can effectuate that immediately in time for black friday. >> i understand. i just really wanted to understand the [indiscernible] here. thank you. >> great. so another question, director yekutiel, or director lai, do you have another one? >> thank you, chair borden. i don't need to ask a question, just weigh-in for a moment. this is a really delicate time in our city. they've been hit harder than almost any other area? they've gone through multiple rounds, and i think we all understand if big box stores start closing in union square,

that is going to have a cass indicating effect not just on small businesses in the area but frankly across the city? our tourism industry, our cable cars, and i think this is a good faith effort on our behalf to try to work with other departments and the city as a whole to make it as easy for people to want to shop in our business district as possible. i understand it's a good thing to do, and i think it is the right thing to do at this particular moment in my opinion. >> great. so do i either have a motion to take the consent calendar item together or motion to sever the items and vote on them separate? >> so i would move to take the items together, to not sever

10.2. >> second. >> there is a motion to approve items 10.2 and 10.3 as 10.1 was severed. can i please have a roll call vote. >> clerk: on the motion to approve items 10.2 and 10.3 -- [roll call] >> clerk: thank you. the consent calendar is approved. >> let's move onto our regular calendar. >> directors, that places you on item 11. presentation and discussion regarding the transportation sales tax reauthorization. >> wonderful, and i know that mr. [indiscernible] is going to kick us off and get us going. >> good afternoon, directors. [indiscernible]. this is an opportunity for you

to hear from our colleagues at the san francisco transportation authority. the first measure is moving forward, general obligation bond. another measure on the ballot that is proposed is the extension and reauthorization of the existing transportation sales tax here in san francisco, so again, i want to make very clear this is reauthorization of the tax that currently exists. as part of that reauthorization, the transportation authority staff are working with an expenditure plan advisory committee to develop a new expenditure plan. that will be taken forward to the transportation authority board, also known as the san francisco board of supervisors, to be placed on a ballot sometime in the future,

likely -- i will let michelle and maria talk about that, but likely no later than november 2022. they have generously agreed to come before you today. i highly encourage you to take this opportunity to be very open and honest about what your priorities are as a board, how the dollars are being allocated over the 30-year expenditure plan, and to drive any cams to the transportation authority board staff as this moves forward. i think their plan is to come to conclusion on this around february. this is an opportunity for the m.t.a. board to provide staff with an opinion around this. i know chair borden you have participated with this in the past, so you are quite familiar with how this works. with that, i will turn it over to michelle. >> great. welcome. >> thanks, jonathan.

hello, chair borden and board members. thanks for having us here to talk about this program that we're working on. i do want to note that maria lombardo, our chief deputy director, is with us today. i'm going to do a quick overview of our existing sales tax expenditure plan, which i know you all are familiar with. thank you to director borden to serve on our prop k expenditure advisory committee. i'll tell you why we're working on a new plan now, what we're looking at, and what our next steps will be. sfmta is the biggest recipient of sales tax funds and allow us to deliver the existing voter approved expenditure plan, and

i want to thank the many, many staff who have been supported the development of this expenditure plan to date. in 2003, san francisco voters approved proposition k, which approved a 30-year expenditure plan and approved a half-cent sales tax to fund this plan. it tells you who can receive the fund, and how the funds will be expended. there are really four major categories with many projects and programs nested within those categories, and this is really just some examples, not the full exhaustive list, and i do want to highlight the vast majority is capital

improvements. i also want to note that one extension is in the top right corner, 8.6%, the paratransit programs, and we wants to highlight a few of the projects that the sales tax has helped support over the years. it's helped the sfmta replace the entire fleet of transit and rider vehicles. the sales tax funds have helped b.a.r.t. connect its [indiscernible] with the new muni platform and paid for improved signage in the area. [indiscernible] i also mentioned that there is an important source of funding for paratransit operations, but the sales tax has also helped

rebuild the presidio approach to the golden gate bridge and new traffic lights and signs in every district in the city. as i mentioned, it is primarily capital projects, and i wanted to highlight that it can funds -- fund both the long-term projects and [indiscernible] and establish a new set of programs and projects for the use of funds over the next 30 years. since the prop k expenditure plan does last through fiscal year 33-34, you may wonder why we're doing this now, and

there's a number of reasons. all but one of these projects are either complete or under construction, and many of the programs are anticipated to run out of funds in the next few years, so that includes muni vehicle repair and replacement, traffic calming, and by developing a new expenditure plan, it allows us to replenish the funding and maintain critical new and existing jobs. [indiscernible] a quick word about how this relates to connect s.f. and other on going planning. we are currently working on the transportation authority's update to the county wide

transportation plan, which is the san francisco transportation plan 2050, and that provides a long range investment strategy for all of the modes of transportation in san francisco, all of the local and regional transit operators, and then, many, many plans that provide input to that plan. the muni capital plans as well as vision and action plans, so this is the place where we really try to tie all of that together and come up with a list of transportation improvements and investment plans for the next 30 years with all of the funds that we plan so -- to have available to us. the transportation plan has much greater need than there

are funds available. the sftp 2050 includes a vision to know what we could do with new revenues and to help advocate for those new revenues. so for sales tax reauthorization, [indiscernible] for on going transportation programs, where we're proposing to continue the programs in the half-cent sales tax and using a portion of those funds to advance planning and project development work for projects that we'll really need new funding from new project measures. i just want to highlight our approach to this new expenditure plan. we started with a really strong focus on equity, so that includes a robust engagement plan for this work, but the

real focus is on residents with low-incomes and communities of color. we acknowledge that the sales tax has aggressive aspects, but it's a large and reliable funding source, and we can use the project to [indiscernible] we did an he can pit analysis to kick off this project, and if you're interested, that is available on our website. we also want to build on the successes of prop k with this new expenditure plan. we're maintaining programming for on going funding, but we know that the need for the programs such as pedestrian safety, upgrading facilities, those have not gone away. we're drawing on outreach that has been done for other efforts, as well, such as the

connect s.f. plan and other transportation plans, as well. and for this work, we've conducted some one-on-one interviews with particular organizations, particularly in low-income and [indiscernible] we're making presentations to community groups, as well, and, you know, we're hearing a lot of different things. there's various needs and desires from various communities based on different parts of the city, and part of the process that we're doing, as jonathan mentioned, is working with our expenditure plan advisory committee. it's a really great group of really engaged folks, and

they're going to help us get this project over the finish line. to aid this work, we've provided them with a preliminary draft expenditure plan, and that's what i'm going to be reviewing with you today, the epac. this is a really early draft, and we do expect things to change from what you'll be seeing. i do want to briefly talk about the relationship between this plan and the prop k expenditure plan. this is a 30-year plan, and we are currently in year 18. we want to bring to the voters a new plan that would supersede prop k rather than following the prop k plan. so we can replenish the programs that are running out

of funds right away and that aren't eligible under prop k, but it also needs we need to carry forward some of the commitments from the prop k program, and one of those is the reimbursement of prop k grants. as you can see on the slide, that totals about $440 million, and a large part of that is the muni vehicle replacement and rehab projects. [indiscernible] one of the ways we do this is we can keep financing costs low. many projects take multiple

years to deliver. [indiscernible] and other tire projects. so the other commitments to carry forward are also the repayment of the bond that we took out in 2017, and then making new commitments such as new allocations that are board approved before april 1, 2023, which is a tentative operating date. and then, any additional debt that we may need to take on in that time graham. our total revenue forecast is $2.9 billion. we really have about 2.4 billion for this new expenditure plan.

and what i just shares with you is a -- shared with you is a more conservative forecast, but we also have a more progressive long range forecast. we also have three different forecasts in prop k. we have priority one, priority two, and priority three. the prop k [indiscernible] and forecast revenues in excess of that initial priority one revenue forecast, and i should add that actual prop k revenues are about 40% of the priority one forecast, and that was the

case even before the pandemic. we are talking to the expenditure plan advisory committee to help guide the use of those funds. so the draft plan was put together to help the city address the different needs across the city that we hear from different communities, and these will provide better transit, less emissions, and less congestion. i'll go through the proposed programs over a couple of slides. a lot of what's being

recommended would continue on going programs. i do want to note that the totals do not come to 100. that's really because this is a preliminary working draft. the final plan will total 100 as we have a more refined revenue forecast, as well. put put together this revenue plan just to understand what is changing. this is our best guess based on past experience. i'll talk about where we're anticipating a reduced cash

flow. on the streets maintenance, the gas tax, that's helping to pay for street resurfacing. so going through some of the programs to make transit safer and more reliable, we're proposing new funding for muni, b.a.r.t., and caltrain, and it's important that we invest in this infrastructure to prevent breakdowns and delays.

then, there are some bigger transit improvement investments in the draft plan, which are really designed to ease crowding, improve reliability, and increase reliability and rider capacity on muni, on b.a.r.t., and on caltrain. this includes the downtown caltrain extension, it include muni forward projects, and b.a.r.t., and transit first projects, as well.

this also includes funding for vision zero ramps, which is something that we've partners with the sfmta on for phase one in soma, which really identified this need for improvements where the free has touched down on city streets, and we also see the need for further investments in other parts of the city. for staying on streets and highways, there are a number of recommendations, including

looking at major intersections and replanning city streets, as well, that can help undo past harm and connect other area that's have been harmed by this infrastructure. i talked about paratransit. i do want to note that we've also been boosting paratransit funding from our transportation authority nod to the sales tax

funding. projects that we've seen come out of those types of plans typically address street safety as well as improvements to accessing transit, encouraging walking and biking. there'll also be funding to help fund for transportation improvements that support new housing development, especially in the priority development areas of the city that are slated for growth. so these are places that are already near robust public transit but are places for new

homes. this is not a comprehensive list of all of the projects. you do have the attachment in the meeting materials, and i will end with this slide which has some references, so people who might be interested in learning more about our

process, you can go to our website. we'll be posting information about an upcoming town hall, and we regularly provide updates to our advisory committee and town hall, and anyone is free to e-mail us, as well. so that concludes my presentation, and i'm happy to answer questions, as well. >> okay. i know we have a number of questions. i think the first is doctor director heminger. >> thank you, director chair. i've got three questions. the first one is about raising taxes, and i wonder if you've committed to raising taxes,

specifically in alameda sales -- alameda. they had a fixed-term sales tax, and they added another one on top of it. how fixed are you committed to be? >> thank you for the question. at this point, we're committed to just the half-cent sales tax. i think it's a difficult time for sales taxes, but it's something we'll be looking at.

>> i must have missed it, but where's our transit operator subsidy money? >> thank you for the question. we know that we need more revenues for transit operations, but, you know, the proposed expenditure plan is really focused on continuing successful capital programs, and the biggest chunk of funding is operations, and it's providing programs that people rely on in the city.

>> yeah, and look, i used to give the same speech because the fact is operating money, you know, i draw that money off every year, and it really reduces your ability to sell that and to buy more capital stuff. we're going to have to pay for the operation somehow, and i do think we ought to give more consideration for subsidizing

transit. so my next question has to do with freeways. are you going to tear down more freeways, and what are you going to do about that? >> well, the first one is about vision zero ramp, and safety around those locations. the second program is about planning and community engagement, so it might be things like looking at the

allemany maze, and the third one is about managed lanes. it's about supporting planning and project development if that's the direction that the praj runs -- project runs through. it is the smallest amount of funding in the expenditure

plan, even though it's the freeway section. >> i'm sure you're aware of the bipartisan infrastructure bill that i think is in some way a reparation program for the damage that this infrastructure caused. would that fit into any of our plans at all? >> yeah. i think the street redesign program that i mentioned is really meant to be the feed funding to queue up a capital project that might be able to take advantage of that program. >> okay. thanks for answering the questions, and do give your muni more consideration than you're giving us now. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, director heminger. well said. director hinze?

>> and to clarify through the chair, are we asking clarifying questions about this and then discussing later orcan we all do it now? >> i think we can do it now since we're not taking any action on this. >> i'll tag onto director heminger's question about the clean streets category. it's sort of lumped into one category. can you sort of break out the anticipated revenues and percentages, which is kind of the -- basically that's kind of more long range type of freeway

project and this kind of more immediate sort of quick build sort of streets improvement and funding program that maybe you have proposed? >> sure, yeah. so if i may, thanks for the question. i'm going to switch to this attachment which is in the packet. within the streets and freeways section, we have this. curb ramps, this is where we help fund the public works spot improvement. we know that a lot of curb ramps actually get implemented through other streets projects, so this is really for the spot

improvements that are separate from those other street repaving or street redesign projects. and then, tree planting. safer streets is definitely a larger piece of the pie, and there's a lot of things in there. one of the things in there is signals, so new signals and signal maintenance is in there. i've spoken with m.t.a. staff, and we're talking with staff about creating a set aside within this program, and then, traffic calming, bike, and pedestrian safety improvements would all be eligible for this

funding. it's a 30-year plan, and it's hard to say what we're going to need in ten years, let alone 30 years. >> yeah. i think at this moment, we're going to move forward with this. >> yeah. i don't know how much you listen to our conversations, but i think we support things such as vision zero projects

that need to get done there and are really trying to do everything we can to increase funding for those type of short-term various things on the streets, so that's something to consider, sort of a more immediate street improvements, if you will, which is kind of the -- in my thought, the longer wait-type stuff, so that's sort of in one area. the other thing that i wanted to touch on sort of briefly is paratransit. i know that, i think the allocation that they have from the -- this measure is about

40% of their budget, and as we know, the cost of paratransit goes up every year, so clearly, continuing that rate for the entirety of the expenditure plan duration would, i think, be essential. is it guarantees essential for the entire thing or is it just a portion of it? >> thank you for that question. so the proposal right now is to fund the same prs of the expenditure plan. we have heard from different

parties. you're right. the costs are continuing to grow faster than the sales tax revenues are growing, and that's true across the board, and it's why we know we need a new source of funding in addition to the existing. >> and the last one is a bit more of a technical clarifying question. [indiscernible] that you have to pay the bill on, so to speak? and i see you've gone back to

that slide. >> we can't hear you if you're trying to speak. >> sorry about that. i muted myself. >> no problem. >> okay. that's a really good question. i know that's complicated. the priority one table that i was just sharing is just the 2.4 billion wedge on this slide. we have kind of taken off the top and set aside the 550 million from our total revenue forecast, and that is to payback those existing grant balances and other potential commitments, so the total revenue is an additional 220

million on top of that 2.4 billion. >> would this be a little bit of funding left overfor new priority one projects leftover after the existing priority grants, etc., paid off, so to speak? >> yeah. so we have -- after those existing commitments, we have the 2.4 billion for new additional projects, exactly. >> okay. perfect. thank you for your presentation and for your work. >> thank you. >> thank you, colleagues. >> thank you, director hinze. director eaken. >> okay. thank you, manager, thank you, staff, for your presentation. i just really have two questions, comments. one is just to echo director heminger. i think we all know transit

operation funds are harder to come by than capital funds, so i wonder if you could speak a little bit to sort of the barriers that you faced in centering operating funding more in this measure. are they legal barriers or political barriers or otherwise? and is that something that you thought about and intentionally decided not to include more of? if you could share some of the challenges that you faced, that would be helpful. >> sure, thanks a lot for that question. as i mentioned, we're really working within an existing framework, and our priority was to continue a lot of the on going capital programs because we've seen what will happen if we don't invest in things like

maintaining our safety programs, things like that. we have planning and environmental that can be difficult to fund any of the other projects. there are required match percentages on everything from the replacement vehicles for muni to the streets projects from the federal government. the state funding, competitive funding like to see a match. it makes you more competitive to see that funding, so we think that that can continue to serve a really essential piece in the public in that way, and that's why we have made this decision to focus on the

capital program, again, keeping that essential paratransit operations because we do know that that is particularly important for equity reasons, as -- and it is also difficult to find dedicated funding for that. >> okay. i believe we discussed the go bonds that we had -- more significant challenges because there had to be kind of a 15-year useful life of the assess, so capital projects were preferred [indiscernible] just so we all understand, we face that same challenge from this particular funding source or from this operating source that we use for operating -- funding source that we use for operating funding? >> yeah.

this operating funding would be used for transportation. >> okay. and my second to last question is i heard programs and projects, i just wanted to then understand once you do get into the project-by-project specific need, how will you then prioritize any number of projects that might be eligible for a particular program, and then, who will be the decision maker? >> yeah, that's a great question. so every five years, we do what's called a five-year project prioritization process where we work with our project sponsors. each of the projects may have one or multiple project sponsors that are eligible for that funding to solicit project ideas and to come up with the program of projects for the next five years of revenues for the expenditure plan.

we have a public process, we bring it to our community advisory committee, and our board is the one that ultimately approves the five-year program of projects. each of those have to go through an allocation request process, and that is also approved by our board, so it's multiple times that people are seeing this and having an opportunity to weigh-in on the actual project that might come in, for example, during that program. >> okay. thank you. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. director lai? >> thank you, chair. couple of specific questions. could you explain a little further the category that is listed -- i think you phrased it as next generation investments? are there specific projects that you are already contemplating that this pot of

money would be used for? for example, would it be applicable to all the fare payment systems? autonomous, i don't know what kind of projects that you're thinking about. >> sure. the next generation transit investments program is one that we intend that to sustain early sustained phase project planning development work for the next big transit capital expansion projects, so it would be things -- there's a lot of things coming out of the connect s.f. transit strategy, so the things like the connection subway or the 12 and geary rail, b.a.r.t. capital corridor leading. however, i should note that we do have funding -- it's very

under, but it's transportation management program i think would be eligible for funding there. >> okay. got it. and then what about resiliency issues? what bucket would that fall under? >> sure. so we know that there are resilience needs for existing infrastructure, and we are specifically making those eligible for transit programs, and if resilience needs need to be built in, that would be eligible for funding there. >> i'm sorry. under which -- oh. >> so there's -- muni was a muni authority's vehicles and guidelines, and it would be eligible there. >> okay. 118 million, which doesn't get us very far, but could you talk

a little bit about -- do you have, like, an early stage thinking around the bonding plan, like, the pace of the tranches of bonding? >> sure. that's a great question. i'm going to see if maria lombardo is available to answer that. >> maria lombardo, transportation authority. we come up with these five-year project lists. we do that every five years at the same time as we update our strategic plan, which is basically our financial tool for the 30-year planning revenues. it looks at our expenditures on a project-by-project

allocations. >> let me add one thing to what

maria is saying, and i kind of want to address director eaken's question, as well. the m.t.a. does get a say in how the sales tax is allocated because what we do is the revenue forecast that we get from the transportation authority we include in our c.i.p., which you will be getting in the coming months. we'll allocate our anticipated uses of the sales tax, which is what maria was saying, how much cash flow or debt maria was talking about we'll have to anticipate. our matches are just going up and up every cycle, so we can plan that out in advance. also on streets projects, where we have very more complicated

high dollar grant projects, we will through that in the upcoming 5ypp. so the staff decided to allocate out and ask the transportation authority through -- for the funds through the five-year c.i.p. process. >> okay. thank you. my last question i think is tagging through all the requests from my colleagues on the operating funds. our current pilot for the free muni for use, which basically ends 2022, and i think anecdotally, we haven't heard

anything about that. we don't have long-term funding sources for that, and it's not something we can fund through our g.o. bond efforts. is that something that's been discussed on the t.a. side at all? >> thank you. so, you know, we definitely considered what was proposed in this expenditure plan, and i think we came out as a priority for this particular source of funding would be to continue these on going capital programs and maintain the advisory

program. >> >> i think what the t.a. has done very well is funding the paratransit needs, so i would encourage us to think around that a little bit. >> thank you, chair. >> thank you. i'm going to go to director yekutiel, but i had a question definitely around the question of operating funds. would you consider emergency operating funds. this is a pandemic, and unfortunately, the pandemic is not ending any time soon, but is it possible to have access to emergency funds that we would have access to for operations? >> i think as maria mentioned it's something we can consider. we can look at it and see if there's a way to make that work. i think there's a lot of things to take back from this conversation, to look at. >> and i will add one thing

that we have talked to the transportation authority staff about. so the way that sales tax dollars come to the m.t.a. operating budget is through paratransit. that is the pure operating source, operating budget. the transportation covers the costs. i think the transportation authority has been very supportive, even with the growth of the program sustaining a 40% share of that cost. i think if i remember, michelle and maria, it's 20 years of the expenditure plan that we'll be able to sustain that level of operating support, which is a priority, and look, we're reauthorizing it, like, year 18 now, so at least knowing for 20 years that we'll be stable is good. to get to your question, chair borden, if we were in a financial pinch, i think we might ask the transportation

authority for more to offset our own contribution for additional needs, so if they wanted to provide us additional funds for transportation and paratransit support, that's an example if it's needed. maybe the share is 50% or 60% for one or two years only to kind of offset issues we might have with other sources. so those are tools that we can exercise with the transportation authority if we need to. >> great. and then, director yekutiel. >> thank you, chair borden. i'll make my comments short as my illustrious colleagues have

covered my points. i think our core work is getting people around sfrichk. we're dealing -- san francisco. we're dealing with -- we have one of the slowest recoveries in terms of riders back to our system, so operating dollars in order to meet the needs of the public to get around the city even with reduced demand is really important right now. i looked at those percentages, and i thought gosh, i wish there could be more money going directly into our system. i just had a couple quick questions. one was, if i'm reading it properly, $8.6% -- oh, sorry. 6.8% in the new expenditure is for transportation system

development and management. i'm not good at math, but i think that comes to $168 million over the period? it just seems like $170 million over a 30-year period. that's 7% of 2.4 billion. it seems like a lot to think about what the future should look like, so can you help me understand why -- like, we can do a lot with $170 million. why is 170 million going to system development? >> sure, and that's something that we can maybe reconsider. some of programs in that are not program funding planning and system development, but also the implementation of the ideas of, the recommendations from that -- from that planning work. so, for example, our neighborhood transportation program, this funds 100,000

every five years for planning, and it also provides $600,000 every five years to implement recommendations from planning. so that whole 170 million is not just for planning system development but it's also to implement other ideas. and the other part of that is the transportation demand management, which is really intended to fund lower cost improvements that can help shift people, their modes, or the time of day to improve the capacity on our transit system and to get people using sustainable modes. >> i understand. i hear you -- i hear what you just said. that does not -- that translated to a tiny fraction of $170 million, and i still don't get it. i still don't know.

i heard what you just said -- >> sure. >> yeah. >> if you see on the more detailed table, there's the neighborhood transportation program, the equity priority transportation program, and the development oriented transportation program. you can think of that as really one-seventh of that is for development, and 6/7 is to recommend the implementations of the plan. we see a lot of calls honestly on pedestrian safety and pedestrian access to transit-type improvements. and then, that transportation demand management is $30 million, and that's the lower-cost type improvements that are meant to shift folks off of peak travel plans. >> there's only 10 million that is for the system development that naming is just for. >> i see, i see. >> yeah. >> i'm just always a believer

that let's put into this thing and put as little money as possible into thinking about the thing because our thing needs as much money as it can get to work as it needs to. $620 million for paratransit and go -- $260 million for paratransit and go shuttle. you're basically reimbursing us to do the work that we're doing using this money. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> okay. thank you. and then, yeah, my last piece is just a question. i know in the recent infrastructure bill, the speaker was recently here. she did a press conference, and she said that california is set to receive $242 million from the federal high safety project for funding to reduce federal

traffic injuries. if we're getting 250 million, could we use some of that for safe streets and rejigger that into muni and transit? >> let me tell you, we regularly do that. we use the prop k funding for the funding match, and we will definitely use the sales tax, we will definitely leverage to bring more dollars in, so we usually try for major signal projects, p.c.s. and e.c.s.

>> this is a historic influx of cash into this program because of this bill, so are we thinking of applying for more? >> yes, we will exceed the size of our ask, yes. >> okay. great. thank you. much appreciated. >> and director heminger, did you have another question? >> yeah, i apologize for double dipping. you know, it just occurred to me, and i'm the regional guy, right? and, you know, san francisco in many respects is a very good regional citizen. you know, we've been paying -- we, san francisco, have been paying a b.a.r.t. tax for decades, and that helped build and helps operate the b.a.r.t. system that benefits san francisco surely, but it benefits a lot of other places, too. we just passed a caltrain sales tax, which san francisco residents will pay, and that

all goes to caltrain. so this sales tax is the place that muni has to score, and i think the question that many of my colleagues are raising, and i raise it with them, are we scoring enough in the draft expenditure plan that's before us, especially on this question of operating support, and i hope you will carry back -- i know you will, in fact -- on what you're hearing. this opportunity doesn't come along every day, and you indicated this is a pretty tough environment for passing tax measures, and i think you're right. i think it's worth considering whether now is the right time for this tax measure, and if not, you've got a perpetual tax

measure in place right now. i wonder if we sort of undershoot and put something on the ballot to the voters and it doesn't include any operating support and it doesn't include sufficient funds for muni then we've lost a pretty big opportunity, and i'll leave it at that. >> at this point, our directors have concluded their questions, and i'm now opening it up to public comment. if you're on the line to discuss item number 11, the san francisco sales tax reauthorization. madam clerk, are there callers on the line?

>> operator: you have three questions remaining. >> this is herbert weiner. now, one of the things about community outreach, to date, it's been dog-and-pony shows. basically, they listen and they do whatever they want to do, and this has really got to stop. also, another concern, will there be an addition of vehicles to the muni fleet to address the growing population and needs of this city? the fleet has to increase, and has not really happened to date. also, muni forward has really been very destructive. people are walking a long distance to get buses that pass them by, and it has a negative impact on seniors and the

disabled. also, i'm not going to vote for the bond issue. i think it's a big issue that doesn't include anything, and we've seen the negative results of that today. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have three questions remaining.

>> next speaker. >> hello. this is anastasia iovannopoulos. we have the controller's report saying we're in the black, and then, the joint report by senator feinstein and padilla released yesterday after a federal judge restored california's access to federal transit grants, as much as $12 billion in much needed funding for california's transit agencies could have been left on the table without today's ruling. now, what's with san francisco? why don't you apply for some of this money and get -- get to projects and sustain good paying jobs instead of seeing all this fluff that was just presented to us in the form of a sales tax? and i agree, i'm not going to

pay for vote for this because it's not going to take care of the problems that really confront muni. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. edward mason. in this project, we talk about expansion of the transit system. my opinion is the transportation sustainability fee is inadequate to fund the required transportation expansion need. so growth is not funding growth. the other issue is street trees. we never have a discussion on street trees. leave it to locate the concession as to whether you're

going to plant the street trees. do you want street trees or do you want to fund muni to operate properly with that? we've had significant members of the community, such as the chamber of commerce, not attend the meetings. showed up once. they sent a replacement to

stand by. the same thing with s.p.u.r., and now s.p.u.r. has now redesignated a person to attend. so i think i'm really kind of disappointed the way the epac has been functioning. we're doing the best we can, we're taking it on, but i think there should be allocation for transit expansion. it should be part of the transit expansion sustainability fee and the m.t.c.s plan 2050. and again, street trees -- >> thank you. your time is up. >> thank you, mr. mason. next speaker, please? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> it's time for -- >> mr. pillpel. >> there you go. you win the prize. so it seems that upcoming

transportation ballot measures are becoming a little more clear now, so my list includes the june 2022 likely general obligation bond. this sales tax reauthorization, which i think is now targeted for november 2022, a 2024 regional measure that's either faster bay area or m.t.c.s and jim wonderman's new version of that or a 2022 m.t.a. specific operating measure. i anticipate opposition to this sales tax measure and other measures for those who are unhappy with m.t.a. it's unclear to me if the unhappy people total 34%, which is the magic number to kill something that requires two thirds to pass. if, as i've said before, if

m.t.a. doesn't build or rebuild trust with the public, then passing any of these measures is going to be extremely tough, in my opinion, because, you know, the haters hate, and there are a number of people that don't like m.t.a. for all types of reasons. and finally, to director heminger's point, it might be better to reorder that list if capital money is available. operating funds are what's most valuable then perhaps you want to make the case for now operating funds before the

operating fiscal cliff happens and whether that's done on a regional basis or m.t.a. specific as to operating revenues is up to you all and the staff to figure out. but those are my thoughts on transportation funding at this time. thanks for listening. >> thank you, mr. pillpel. moderator, are there any additional callers? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> so with that, we will close public comment. directors, are there any final questions or comments? i was looking at the expense committee. it looks like we need to make sure we have our allies on that committee supporting some of the issues that we care about. director eaken. >> thank you, madam chair. just two more comments for the group. i really like your suggestion,

madam chair, to think about how we can make operations eligible, given the fact that we're looking at programs, not projects. how can we at least make operations eligible as a way of sort of ensuring that this measure is resilient, and so i was just looking at the different categories, which category might make the most sense to add operations as a potential eligible use, but it seems to me as if we've got a category on transit and maintenance, that might make sense to add transportation as a potential eligible use. not a carveout. that's one thought. the second i wanted to offer is we did just recently adopt the

vision zero action strategy, and staff made quite clear to us that our vision zero action strategy is currently unfunded: just want to make sure that this program that's focused on capital uses is doing everything it can to accelerate our city's achievements of vision zero, so want to make sure that's a top priority for muni staff. thank you. >> directors, are there any other final questions or comments for c.t.a. staff?

i think this presentation has been helpful. i think you've seen a lot of questions from the committee, and i think we'll pay a lot of attention who's on that expenditure committee and we can get some support for our operations. i want to thank you for continuing the conversation and supporting this measure whenever it does go forward. thank you. >> thank you, chair. thank you, everybody. >> thank you. >> let's close this item, and we can move onto our next item. >> clerk: that places you on item 12, discussion and vote pursuant to administrative code section 67.10-d as to whether to invoke the attorney-client privilege and conduct a closed session conference with legal counsel. >> i guess i'll see if we have any comment before. is there any public comment on

our going into closed session? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> go ahead, speaker. >> david pillpel, last item for the year, i believe. so this item includes a proposed settlement that i've referred to at the last meeting related to georgia gus vardakastanis, the loss to his family. i don't know where this settlement goes financially. it certainlycan't replace him. nothing can, and i hope that sfmta has made some changes

particularly in the product management area so that there's no further tragic loss of life as occurred here. as all of you know, gus was a much-loved figure on haight street and throughout the city. that was all of my thoughts from me. thank you. >> thank you, mr. pillpel. so at this time, i will entertain a motion to go into closed session. >> so moved. >> i would like to give the floor to fiona hinze to say what she'd like to say. >> i'll move to go into closed session. >> all right. second? is there a second? >> second. >> can you please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion -- [roll call]

>> clerk: the motion passes. the board will now go into can you call the next item. >> clerk: yes. item 13. announcement of closed session. and to settle both matters. places you on item 14, motion to disclose or not disclose the information discussed in closed session. >> i would like to motion, not disclose -- >> what a move. a motion to the outcome. >> i'm actually just giving up is what i'm doing. >> i will move to not disclose.

can i get a second? can you please call the roll on the motion not to disclose. >> clerk: [roll call] the motion passes. and concludes the business before you today and this year. >> happy holidays everybody. it was a great 2021 and i hope 2022 is the best year ever. >> happy holidays everyone. thank you, secretary silva.

>> mr. chair, we are now in open session for tonight's redistricting task force meeting. mr. chair, your microphone is not muted so we are not hearing you now.