>> chair borden: regular meetings of the transportation municipal board of directors. please call the roll. >> clerk: on the roll. [ roll call ] we have no announcements. we are in a virtual meeting. item number 4, approval of

minutes for the february 15, 2022 regular meeting. directors in response to public comment, i have corrected the meeting minutes to indicate after february 15 meeting i reported that the board has not approved the settlement. thus took no action on item b. >> chair borden: is there a motion to make this -- >> director hinze: i'll move the amendment. >> chair borden: with that we will open for public comment. for those on the line who like to speak. give them a number. >> clerk: for members of the public who wish to make public comment, phone number is -- >> chair borden: are there any callers in the queue to address

approval of minutes from february 15th? >> caller: this is david pilpel. i had to jump from the ballot simplification meeting to come visit you on the minutes. i forget the page number but hold on a second, i will find it here one moment on the minutes. page 3, the director tumlin paragraph. i would spell out general obligation bond for g.o. bond. i would say the van ness project ribbon project groundbreaking.

i believe the closed session item b was incorrect. city attorney reported that she had no reason to believe that it was incorrect. but it was incorrect. it will be useful for the city attorney to check that case numbers are correctly reported. that was the whole point of that

disclosure requirement is so that members of the public can find reference to court cases there. if i see anything further, i will report it to board secretary christine fuller who did fantastic job with the minutes. >> chair borden: thank you. are there any additional callers on the line? with that we'll close public comment. directors are there additional amendments that we should accept in the record? some of the spelling out of things, we should put in parenthesis. they weren't actually said that way. i think for clarification -- may be city attorney you can opine on two things. is it necessary in the minutes to spell out things that necessarily spelled out in the original. two in terms of that case number for the case, is that -- do we need to update it?

>> i think you chair borden, you can certainly add to the minutes explanation of acronyms or other things for clarification for the public. i agree, ethey should go in parenthesis to indicate they were not actually said in that way. i will work with the board secretary to correct the case number that is incorrect and going forward, i will make sure that all of the case numbers on the agenda are accurate. i apologize if there's a mistake on that. >> chair borden: do you accept modifications based upon the city attorney's guidance? >> yes. >> chair borden: great. secretary silva, please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion to approve the minutes for the february 15th meeting with the modifications. [roll call vote]

minutes are approved. >> chair borden: communications, next item. >> clerk: item 5 is communications. >> chair borden: we'll be journeying in honor of jeffrey diggs who recently passed away. he was a supply chain manager here at sfmta. his personality expertise was respected among staff. he was known for not meeting a stranger and instead meeting people with a true interest in how he can support their role.

mr. diggs carried expertise into the civilian world here at the agency. he was decorated u.s. veteran who served overseas in afghanistan and tours of duty. he was highly certified in federal regulatory matters which benefit sfmta and roles he served. he leaves behind not only higher family but sfmta family who will hold on to his memory dearly. we speak his name today to honor him and his contributions to sfmta. it's always such a sad day when we lose a member of our sfmta family. our hearts go out to his family members. secretary silva, please read the rest of your communication. >> clerk: yes. due to covid-19 health emergency is meeting is held virtually with all members of the staff participating today via teleconference. we ask the public to participate

remotely by writing to the board by leaving a voice mail message. we have received and appreciate these comments. they were sent to the board members. we continue to urge the public to write to the board at sfmta.com or call us in advance. if we lose phone connection during this meeting we will pause the meeting and recess until the connection has been reestablished. this meeting is being televised by sfgov tv. for those watching the live stream, there's a delay between the actual meeting, members of the public oare seeing on sfgov tv. if you're watching and wish to comment, please call the phone line when the item is called.

(888)808-6929. the-in closed session item 3 is continued and will not be heard today. item 6, introduction of new and unfinished business by board members. >> chair borden: i want welcoming our newest director, director cajina. i want to turn it over to you first to make your initial introductions or words that you like to say. >> director cajina: absolutely. thank you so much chair borden. i'm so excited to start today with my esteemed directors. i've been watching you guys for the past few months, trying to catch up with all the important decisions.

the work that the m.t.a. does, it touches so many san franciscans. as a native san franciscan, that comes from an immigrant family, that depends on transit to get by, it's an honor to be on this board on -- looking at all these different matters and see how to best serve our city. i want to thank you all for welcoming me. it's been an adventure to get here and catch up to and get up to speed. i want to extend gratitude to director tumlin and to all the different managers that have debriefed me on different issues. i'm just ready to get to work. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. directors are there any other items of newer or unfinished business by board members? seeing none, i will open up to public comment.

this is a time when members of the public may comment on our new and unfinished business by board members. we will be welcoming our new director cajina. are there any questions on the line? first speaker please. >> caller: good afternoon directors and welcome director cajina. my name is kathy deluka, i currently work for community living campaign. i have had the great pleasure of working with director cajina on so much pedestrian safety work. i remember one of the first projects i went on was a walk audit. the director cajina organized in the excelsior, getting the community out and trying to find a solution to all of the key intersections on mission street so that folks in her neighborhood could walk safely. getting to where they wanted to

go. director cajina led an amazing vision zero project on mission street in the excelsior, painted the poles pink and they had amazing signs to say how many people were impacted by crashes at each intersection. she's super smart. welcome dreckman. director -- director cajina. >> chair borden: are there any speakers? >> caller: i want to officially welcome stephanie cajina to the sfmta board of directors. she is an amazing person. see will be welcome addition to

this governing body. considering that lot of taxi passengers are from the latino community. we couldn't really operate without these passengers considering they work as essential workers like we do. late at night and early morning hours. we look forward to picking them up especially on mission street and other parts of the city. i welcome stephanie cajina to the board. >> chair borden: are there additional callers on the line? next speaker please. >> caller: my name is -- i'm from san francisco. i wanted to say congratulations also and looking forward to

seeing good things you will do. also thank you for bringing back the 31 and the -- but the 5 was taken away. have a good day. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line related to new and unfinished business by board members the welcoming of our newest director? we will close public comment. secretary silva, next item. >> clerk: director's report. >> chair borden: director tumlin? >> director tumlin: we have a relatively short director's report today. i will cover bunch of vision zero project updates to a brief transit update. talk to you about our parking meters and brief budget update. let's get started with vision zero. pleased to announce that our

south van ness avenue quick build project was completed in january. including left turn pockets, new median fire way and signaled timing changes all aimed at making the entirety of south van ness safer for all road users. i'm also very happy to announce the new assembly bill 43. as all of you know, speed is the leading cause of severe and fatal traffic collisions. slowing speeds is the most effective thing we can do towards achieving vision zero. we're very happy that assembly member laura friedman from glendale introduced 8043 and governor newsom signed it in law

about reducing traffic speed limits to 20 miles an hour in narrowly defined corridors. we have completed the first four of seven approved corridors, polk street, haight street and 24th street.

i believe we're moving more quickly than any other place in the state of california using our new authorization under ab43. i also want to announce the introduction of a new speed safety camera enforcement bill. this is ab2336, also being carried by laura friedman and are own assembly member phil king. this will authorize six city speed safety camera pilot program. it builds upon efforts that we pursued last year that were led by former san francisco assembly member, to allow san francisco to use this proven tool that save lives, can allow traffic safety enforcement to be more

equitable and is consistent with our vision zero action strategy. finally, you want to talk about, we're happy to announce the substantial completion of a new two-way bike way along the embarcadero. stretching from the northern end of the existing bike way at mission street and continuing to broadway. staff are in the progress of developing a detailed evaluation plan that will be conducting this spring. then we will present at stakeholder advisory group in late march. we're very happy to have the support of the port of san francisco as well as having secured funding for detailed design and more permanent measures including two bike extension of the bike way south of bryant street. i will likely be out there this

weekend riding that and see how it's working. you are welcome to join me. next up is transit update. as you know, our transit service has been struggling with a very high rate of omicron contraction about our sfmta staff. i'm happily, all of our staff have done well, thanks to our 100% vaccination rate. they are steadily coming back back to service. we expecting the service to stabilize this week.

free muni program came together on thursday just before the saturday, free transit program. we worked very hard to get the word out using our own signs and earned media and all our social media accounts -- in order to let riders know that the free service existed. we would want to know much further in advance so we can do more effective job getting the word out as well as investing in things like covering up all of the clipper card readers which we did not have time to do. we were able to open all the fare gates at our station. as our service has improved, operator availability has improved, our service also improved including our headway

performance. as you know, two weeks ago we were missing between 20% and 25% of our operators, which was wreaking havoc not only on the amount of service but in the reliability of that service. staff, the dispatchers and schedulers trying to reallocate service every day in realtime in order to manage headways. we're not perfect. but the headway management have gotten a lot better and we're expecting it to continue to improve in the coming weeks. next topic is parking meter replacement. we just wanted to remind you that starting this week, we will begin replacing all of the parking meters in san francisco starting with market and hayes valley area. current meters are at the end of their useful life. including many of which that rely on the 3g technology being

phased out by at&t that is impacting our realtime signage for our muni service in our bus shelters. happily, you all and the board of supervisors approved our new meter procurement contract back in late 2021. we're going to receive those new meters. about half of them will be simple upgrades to the existing single space meters. another half will be multiple space pay stations that will have a new pay by license plate function. it allows you to pay at any parking meter any parking pay station in the vicinity. you can just enter your license plate rather than having to walk back to your car and put a little piece of paper in your dashboard. just enter your license plate from my meter. that is automatically uploaded to the enforcement devices that are parking control officers

carry. pay by license plate is also streamlining our enforcement ability giving parking patrol officers to focus on parking and neighborhood concerns like enforcement. finally, we are hoping that today the board of supervisors will approve at its second reading our $400 million general obligation bond to be placed on the june 2022 ballot. finally, a reminder to all of you and the public, there's one more public budget listening session scheduled for 5:00 p.m. on march 3rd. we are still looking for the public to complete a brief survey about how best to use our limited budget capacity in order to make san francisco better. more details for all of that can be found online at sfmta.com.

if you just google sfmta budget survey, it will come up. thank you very much. that's the end of my director's report. >> chair borden: great. thank you. i see director hinze has her hand unand so does eakin followed by director lai. >> director hinze: one quick question, the 343 implementation, obviously it's great that we're moving forward so aggressively. we should continue to maximize the authority that we have under ab43. i'm curious if there's going to be any evaluation of performance and fee reduction. i know that the tenderloin

report is 40 miles an hour is due out soon in the spring. i'm wondering there will be ab43 evaluation period. >> director tumlin: yes, evaluation is very much part of this pilot work. we will be collecting the information on a rolling basis and doing some summary reports part of our vision zero evaluation report. >> director hinze: thank you. that's it. >> vice chair eaken: related to director hinze's question. i have two questions, ab43, there's some transit. i know we didn't get everything we wanted out of that bill. there was some negotiations and compromises to get that across the finish line. i'm curious as we dive into the details of implement takes, what are we learning about the

limitations of that authorization? are those coming into crystal-clear focus in terms of if we had an ability this year to go back and revisit and improve that legislation and what might some of those recommendations be? >> director tumlin: that's an excellent question. it's part of the reason why the evaluation is so critically important. as most of you know, ab43 allows us to reduce speed limits predominantly in business activity districts where half of the frontage of the buildings is either dining or retail. it excludes -- it's basically san francisco neighborhood commercial districts. it excludes almost all of the rest of the city. it's very narrowly focused. we're hoping to be able to show both some benefit as well as absence of harm. of course, we'll work with the california city's coalition to

continue to seek additional authorization to prioritize safety and particularly safety of people outside vehicles as a criterion for posting speed limits. >> vice chair eaken: okay. great. just presuming there are sections that are covered by this authorization but there are large gaps and we're not able to address with this legislation right? >> director tumlin: that's right. baby steps. >> vice chair eaken: my second question was related to transit. i'm glad to hear it sounded like we may be hit the low point and moving into a better situation in terms of operator availability. i wanted to understand may be it's -- operator availability being one challenge.

it also feels like we're having challenges with the realtime arrival information and letting people know how long they will be waiting. for some reason, i ice a tran -- i use a transit app, you will see a darker color arrival. you'll see the bus, which is quite satisfying. in other cases you have great out numbers. i understand the schedule information. no actual bus that you can track along with any confidence that it's coming. with the knowledge of this significant lack of operator availability -- we talked about customer service, it feels an essentially important customer service moment especially when we'll have service gaps when there's a real bus, as opposed to a scheduled bus, we help the public to understand that. really trying to understand what's the connection between a operator availability shortage

and our availability on some lines to have real arrival info and other lines only to have scheduled arrival info. >> director tumlin: i want to say, we just spent big chunk of time today talking about this very issue. along with hiring our customer information are my two biggest issues at the agency right now. san franciscans are tolerant of our under invested infrastructure and the way that we have suffered during covid. only if they can get accurate information. getting accurate information to our customers is absolutely essential. like everything else we've had to contend with covid, we had run into some perplexing supply chain issues and being able to upgrade our existing systems.

>> only thing that i would add is that fortunately, when we need the customer information the most is when it is the least accurate because the system as it is currently designed, which is based on 15-year-old technology, really relies on the schedule. the schedule is the most useless to us when we're missing a lot of service. the next generation of customer information is very much designed to work in a non-schedule environment. if this were a year from now, i would be able to say, with confidence, well, even if we can't run all the service that would like to be, at least we can get accurate information about what we are delivering.

unfortunately, that is not where we're at right now. we're seeing some of the real stretching of the system because of how we had to operate during this period of uncertainty. only silver lining i would add, we have added a lot of additional functionality into the next generation of customer information because we're seeing the system. we really understand how we need the system to work in this very difficult environment. we are going to come out with a better system but we like it to be here faster and don't have a lot of ability to influence the timeline at this point. >> vice chair eaken: like a year from now until we have a better

system? >> director tumlin: we should start seeing some improvements this fall. we will not able to have implemented the full ambitious array of improvements that we had expected to be able to implement this year. we will not able to complete those until probably early 2023, unfortunately. we're also wanting to make sure that as we implement the new technology that the rollover from existing technology to new technology is seemless. we are taking a strong project management approach to this and taking fewer risks customer information. then for example we have on service planning. just because of how critical that information is how fragile our existing system is.

>> vice chair eaken: i want to make face for my colleagues. i like to understand more about this. we're all walking around with gps devices everywhere. >> director tumlin: that exist. what we don't have -- there's a very long complicated technical explanation about the hand off information from one system to another. it's because we're using -- we're operating all of this off a 2007 blackberry. >> vice chair eaken: okay. i'm convinced that you're both aware and doing everything you can on this issue. just to reiterate director tumlin, people can accept service disruptions they can plan around it. they know and they feel treated with respect by us, when you left out in the cold looking at those grayed out numbers.

what are you supposed to do? thank you for your attention to this. >> director tumlin: keep in mind, as a transit dependent person myself, i'm frequently confronted about this situation. julie tried to explain, i can make clearer, our system is designed for it to work well when the schedule is unchanging. we have made our realtime information system like struggle to catch up because we're constantly changing. we rebuilt the muni system nine times in the last two years. that's something you do once every 15 years. we've been trying for headway management to adjust the schedule in realtime on every line all day long. that is the conflict. trying to deliver better service and to eek the best out of everything that's available service hours that we have, we

pushed our realtime information system beyond its capacity. it is 15 years old. >> vice chair eaken: thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. have we thought about a hack a thon? seem to me we can do a hack athon promotion. i'm not saying that's the solution. i'm saying i feel like there has to be a hack, may be it's not using, may be for a year, we have another way to do this. i would seriously hope we would consider doing hackathon that the public can bring us a

solution. >> director tumlin: we have one of the best i.t. divisions in the country. this is not shortage of ideas or shortage of staff talent. what this is is ancient proprietary technology. the requirement of our technology is multiple handoffs. the technology is ancient and propry tri-- proprietary, simple hackathon will not solve the problem. the other issue is our antiquated train control system that the system has to interface with. this is why we are fixated on updated our core technology so we can push out the information in all kinds of ways and anyone can play around with our realtime information. right now that's not possible. >> chair borden: i guess i was saying, something outside of

that system. we do a gps-based system. i mean not using what we trying to use today. that's not going to give us an answer any time soon. aisle worried about service quality. i find myself texting julie being like the next bus is really coming 16 minutes? my point is, may be we get creative here. we look at short-term basis. since we have gps and the buses and there's ways to create a system just working off gps, even it's google best way to find it. i don't know.

this is a real customer service issue. extremely frustrating to see strange times for the next bus coming. you get on the bus, the one you wanted just showed up. that's just to say, let's get creative and not try to work within the system on this. so we can focus on the long-term issue. there's a lot of other directors. director lai? >> director lai: thank you. i will may be steer us in a different direction. back in the day before gps, we all relied on bus schedules. if staff can make sure we're not missing runs and provide service as close to the scheduled time

as possible. i think that's probably what we need try to improve on while we're tieing ourselves over until we get the new technology. just quick comment on the update around the board of supervisors funding the free muni weekend. i want to add my immense gratitude to the board of supervisors for doing that. in the last couple of minutes, mayor's office finding funding for supporting some community business community parking programs. special discounts and what not. it is such a great complementary service to be able to essentially balance out the free parking with the free transportation. i know i made this comment in

the past. i really want to underscore how thankful i am that we were able to -- as the city come together and find resource to elevate transportation and not leave that behind while we are making it easier for certain populations to travel by car. i want to thank everyone for that. my question relates to also service really around what director tumlin was providing an update on with missed runs and our current staffing levels. i want to get a rough percentage, not an exact one, where are we at with our service percentage? how far are we from that?

>> we need to do little bit of math. we're current scheduling about 75% but on the the weekend we missed about 10%. on the weekday we missed about 15% of our service. we're marching back to that 75% but are not there yet. >> director lai: how are we looking for our next restoration. we got little bit update, appreciating the fact that staffing scenario is evolving. just wondering where you're currently projecting in the current week for march or june service? >> we're currently on track to implement a schedule april 16th that will add the 8, ax and bx. it will improve

our service management on some of these corridors that we are making ad hoc cancellation. we're looking at the best way to handle the summer and we will come back to the board. one option is to wait a little longer to be able to implement more stuff. the other option to do sort of a next phase with the resources we're going to have in june. we're doing our best to determine that. we don't want to put our customers or our staff in a situation like they're in now, which is they are managing canceled runs because all the other things that you guys are seeing. we're still seeing attendance improve but the impact that omicron has had on our training

continues to linger. we're continuing to watch and monitor as best we can. >> director lai: am i hearing correctly then that we should probably not assume that we would be able to achieve the 85% service in june in the summer? it sound like you're saying we probably have to see how things go. >> i think that's a good working assumption. we'll come back. >> director lai: i think this is still related to your update director tumlin. i wanted to ask about level of service and how prepared we are in kind of supporting supplementing the mayor's plan

for like concerted effort to bring people back to downtown. are we able to support that at this point given our uncertainty with our staffing? >> director tumlin: we're staying well ahead of travel demand in terms of our capacity in almost all lines with some exceptions. usually related to the morning school commute. we're focused on making sure that we're providing adequate capacity for the schools. which we should take care of as soon as we get our staffing levels back up to where we expected. we have abundant capacity on all lines heading into the downtown. >> director lai: thank you. >> chair borden: thank you director cajina? >> director cajina: i had a question about ab43. i'm quite excited about seeing

that implemented in the city. i was wondering if you can speak little bit about how the corridors determine for the pilot project. what are some considerations for evaluation of future site. what should they do to have their corridor under consideration. if small business working group has any strong reaction about this or not. >> director tumlin: those are all good questions. i'm glad to see streets director tom mcguire is here and he can provide details. >> welcome director cajina. we have identified all the streets in the city we think are

eligible within the narrow parameters of ab43. it's going to be our goal to get all of those signed this year. the first seven locations we chose were places where we know we have both high injury network condition and also where just -- in our conversations with supervisors, emerging groups and community groups we know that 24th street, continues to come up people are urging us to make safer. mostly because there's pedestrians and vulnerable folks. that was -- we're committed to getting every eligible street in san francisco built in the next 18 months. we have talked to a lot of business stakeholders. we're going to make a

presentation to them at our next meeting to explain what's coming. we've also spoken to some stakeholders in some of the more industrial areas where unfortunately, this law does not apply. we wish we could produce speed limits on streets like jennings. we'll keep working on that. >> director cajina: thank you. i did have another question about the parking meters. glad to see that's getting updated. we heard stories about working families impressing -- expressing the burden they are experiencing. i'm wondering how this new iteration of the system is going to help solve for that? especially -- i wonder if there

are folks that experience digital divide, is it thing gob more burdensome for them and how that is working in the calculus of whether or not this is a good resource or not. >> good question. on the digital divide question, all the meters will continue to take cash payments. there's no question. you don't need to have a smartphone or credit card or bank account to use the parking meter here. we don't want anyone to get a parking ticket. we don't want anyone to accumulate citations or fines.

we much rather have everyone paying price at a the curb than to collect citation. >> director tumlin: another thing that we have done for people who do have a cell phone and credit card. the pay by phone option allows users to buy extra time. we really want people to avoid getting a parking citation. unfortunately, at a parking meter, you got a guess how much time you will be there. if you guessed too low and i you're having a better time and shopping more in commercial district, you're penalized about we don't want that to happen. with pay by phone, it's easy to add extra time on the meter without having to go back to the meter. if you're registered user, the

meter can actually send you a text message to ask if you like your time extended. we're trying to do everything that we can to make all of our services easy to use within the constraints of technology and try to allow people to avoid ever being penalized, very important. >> director cajina: clarifying question, is the pay by phone, is that only in english or bilingual? >> director tumlin: it is multilingual app. >> director cajina: thank you. >> chair borden: director yekutiel? >> director yekutiel: i have one question. that is about your sending out comments on the increase in ridership. hopefully it wasn't all due to the events over the last two

weeks. my question where we seeing that increase in ridership? where are we seeing this growth? what kinds of trips? >> director tumlin: our travel map in san francisco changed dramatically. we're seeing very strong ridership patterns in our neighborhood commercial districts. essential institutions like hospitals. i think very good example is the 22 fillmore which run the length of fillmore street and length of 16th street. during covid we rerouted the 22 to serve the heart of mission bay and both of the large mission bay hospitals and upgraded transit only lanes on 16th veto. as a result, the 22 is just before omicron was getting to higher than pre-covid levels of ridership. because it does not go downtown. for all of our lines where we're

experiencing low ridership is anything that goes downtown as well as services that focus on the peak commute. our ridership is completely flat during the day. there is -- ridership at noon is the same as ridership at 9:00 a.m. the same as ridership at 5:00 p.m. >> director yekutiel: if you mind in the coming months, may be continuing to keep us abreast what you're seeing with the patterns? having all these conversations about predictions and recovery and all that, will be helpful to know what you're seeing is a longer term trend. >> director tumlin: what we're expecting that downtown san francisco gets re-occupied kind of on the same cycle that our boom bust cycle happens on. we're starting to see employers bring people back to the office.

at a lower rate than they had in past. the employers will shrink their footprints to only the spaces they need. downtown office space is very expensive. what will happen then is employers that will pushed out of downtown san francisco in the last economic upcycle can come back in and new businesses can form. the san francisco real estate cycle, usually takes five years or so as leases come up for renewal. that is what we're expecting. it's similar to patterns that we have seen elsewhere in the world. although, we expect san francisco to happen more slowly than other global cities. >> director yekutiel: with the omicron surge, it's over now, it will be good to know how our ridership changes over the coming months. >> director tumlin: probably what we should do, if you're interested, a tag, a deep dive into our transit ridership data.

we do have excellent data for all of our lines. it's something that i track every single week as i think about where the problems that we're experiencing but need an immediate solution. the morning school trippers stand out strongly in the data. we've been trying to direct resources there. it might be a good for you to see the data that we rely on. >> director yekutiel: thank you so much. >> chair borden: thank you. directors, i don't see any more hands. we'll move to public comment. this is opportunity for members of the public who like to comment on the director's report. any of the comments or questions addressed by directors. this is item 7 on the agenda. if you're on the line, please press 1, 0. if you like to speak, there's a number posted on the website and agenda to call in. are there any callers on the

line? first speaker please. >> caller: thank you. good report. thank you for the good update about the parking meters. if i decide to rent a car, i don't want have any problem with parking meters. thank you for doing some of these visa cards and smartphone apps, situations if i'm out there, i can add time so i don't have to go back to my car and feed the meter once again. that's very good thing. i'm looking forward to this new bikeway. i like riding electric bikes and scooters. i plan to use it. like riding the embarcadero from

the ferry building and fisherman's wharf. it's an option for me. it's crowded. i can get out there on the bike and scooter and be out there on my own. i'll be wearing a helmet. thank you for that. concerning these slower street, we have to have slower street. i speak simply as an ordinary of pedestrian and rider of two-wheel vehicles. thinking about this ab43, which is still way above my pay grade. i know what it's like to have close call being hit by a vehicle. it hasn't happened. i hope it never will. it's important to moderate the speeds of larger vehicles for those of us on our feet and smaller vehicles will be less

disadvantage and as far as the transit update goes, it's good we're stabilizing. we have to ask yourselves of the people who got covid, how many are vaccinated and how many are not. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: i've been listening to you very carefully mr. director. i would like you to call your i.t. people and give us a presentation. i see all over the place. we can't be talking we have a old system that's 16 years old. we can't be talking in the year 2022 about that. i want to know what that type of

platform they are using. if you can be divide our system in quadrants and we can take it from there. we don't want to hear this b.s. that the scheduling and 80% or 50% of everything has to be going smoothly in order to give us some service. again and again, that segment of the population that you don't address are the seniors. they are left there suffering while you're talking generalities. let us have a presentation with your i.t. i want to see what type of platform they are using and we can take this matter before the department of transportation. whatever just speaking in generalities, because of you don't have the experience. the real experience.

thank you very much. >> chair borden: are there any additional callers? >> caller: basically, this pandemic has been a test of the stability and reliability of muni. there was such a lack of service. you have to wait up to 30 minutes to get a bus. what you need to do is you need to add more vehicles to the fleet. the fleet has to expand. you also have to provide more services to the neighborhood. what is happening is that

services, the bus stops have been taken away, bus routes have been taken away and the services worse than ever. it gets progressively worse. you have to make transportation a priority in your budget. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. are there any additional callers? >> caller: i'm with the tenderloin community benefit district. long-term resident of the tenderloin. first off, i wanted to thank the sfmta for their efforts to improve both transit and safe street conditions. i do want encourage sfmta and the board to continue to fund when possible increase funding for vision zero. i like to offer the tenderloin

as a place to incorporate the speed cameras. we've been conducting outreach for the tenderloin community-led approaches to alternatives to traffic enforcement with the bicycle coalition. as of now, we haven't completely analyzed our data. we're wrapping that phase two. we've been getting lot of feedback and encouragement for speed cameras. we would definitely like to offer the tenderloin as a possibility to put those cameras and begin that enforcement here considering that all of our streets part of the high injury network. we have already begun that outreach. that's it, thank you very much for your time. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line?

>> caller: hi. i might as well add to the list of usual public commenters. as i regarding the issue of next bus. when i used to take muni, the next bus app, or the next bus website was the best thing since sliced bread regarding being able to get around the city by public transit. the fact it's not working properly is going to make it more difficult for people ocome back to using transit or discourage people. especially in this day with all the tech people and those looking at their phones. they can know that the bus is not going to come for 45 minutes to an hour or it's going to come within the next 10 to 15 minutes. i think it's important to make that a high priority because when i want to go along narcotic --market street or mission, you see people looking at their phone wondering when the next bus will arrive.

they may not be excuses for your explanation, it's not coming out that way to the public. it's not. you need to provide a better explanation as to why it's so difficult to make this right so that people don't have to wait a long time or they can have other alternatives to public transit if the bus is not going to come. thank you. >> chair borden: are there any other callers on the line? next speaker please. >> caller: hi. i'm a disabled resident of the tenderloin. i wanted to say that, we're not getting very good service with the 38 bus. i'm concerned that we don't get routine stops from the 38r.

i would prefer they not skip over stops in the most populated district of the city. i would like to support safe streets, slowing everything down and reducing lanes and that. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line? with that, we'll close public comment. we are done with the director's report. >> clerk: item 8, the citizen's advisory council report. we have no report this is item

9. public comment. >> chair borden: for members of the public this is an opportunity to comment on things not on the agenda. right now, for you to comment on whatever you wish. if you would like to be put in the queue, press 1, 0. are there any commenters on the line? >> caller: thank you, again, chair borden. in general, i hope to be back on the system soon. i ask that you strive to make a muni that is more inclusive and

welcoming. i'm often a lonely voice in the things that i say about muni and the muni that i would like to have. for me as a person of challenges, in using various services to achieve my goal of getting around. i use those scooters and bikes and sometimes i use ridership. sometimes i do lot of walking. when autonomous vehicles come, i will use those too. i have a raiders t-shirt on and i wear a skirt and i live in the 702. i ask those not be impediments for me to have equal access to the system that is muni. i am lonely independent voice. simply wanting a muni that will

accept and welcome me fully into using its services. yet, there's some who do not want me on this system. i hear all the time of people who hate muni. i come to you with respect simply one who wants to get around my beloved san francisco in the safest most affordable and most equitable way. i'm a person with equity concerns too. i shouldn't have to wait in a long line to get the equity that i think i deserve. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. are there any additional callers on the line? >> caller: the elephant in the room for m.t.a. is adding more buses to the fleet. i have emphasized that under item 7 and i'm emphasizing it

now. this is extremely important because we need more vehicles in light of the rising population of the city and the need from public transportation. this is a transit for city and basically, the riders of muni are getting short stripped. people are waiting long time for the buses. you have to add more buses to the fleet. you should actually restore some of the bus stops so people don't have to walk long distance. if ridership is declining, it may be due to the fact that people can't negotiate those long walking distances. you place unnecessary burden on transit and which is overloaded already. decades ago, there was a comprehensive map that covered

the whole transportation system as a city. you have completed that. the services -- if you followed through with your plan and don't restore service 100%, you are going to destroy public transportation. you definitely had to restore pre-pandemic services 100%. the board of supervisors agree on this. please, restore services 100% as soon as possible. we cannot wait and delay this. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: good afternoon. this time i want to talk about

the issue of the taxi virtual qf. as you may be aware, the airport in cooperation or enforcing by the sfmta, instituted a taxi virtual queue where drivers instead of waiting at the airport get themselves on a virtual queue through the taxi queue app and wait for their turn. it allowed for more drivers to work the airport. however, you cannot go there when you want anymore. you can only go to the airport when the app tells you you can. you can be waiting in line and you're called to go to the airport. if you don't have a passenger yet u just leave animo to the airport. if you don't go, you have to wait another two or three hours before your turn comes up again. if you do go, you're preventing somebody who needs a ride from the basketball game at the end

of it, home. therefore, forced to pay double triple, quadruple fare. the thing is, this is not in the right time to instituted it. some people it works for them because they mainly work the airport. they think, well, you can work the city. i waited 15 minutes at the current theater when it broke the other night. luckily, you got a fly wheel alcohol that you dod me to leave empty from the venue even though there are people right there. but they're looking at their phones. some of you people think you're experts at taxi business. unfortunately, this is not what we're experiencing what you have in your mind. not you but some of the staff at the m.t.a. and the airport. i beg you to look into this. if i wasn't going to the airport, i wouldn't be able to pick up one of your board

members and taken them home after a show. thank you very much. take care. >> chair borden: are there additional callers on the line? >> caller: can you hear me now? >> chair borden: yes we can. >> caller: this is david pilpel. i saved my comments for item 7. welcome director cajina. i supported her appointment. i'm expecting great things. please deliver. in the last two weeks the j line is back in the subway. there was a community event the first day on february 19th. there was a small but determined crowd that was very much in support of restoring the j in the subway. i hope that service works well

and there are no impediments introduced and the j continues to remain in the subway with it should be. that weekend, which was the lunar new year, director lai talked about, the free fare initiative that apparently was started on just that thursday. did not have a great rollout. on both saturday and sunday, encountered number operators who got insufficient direction. many operators did not see that fare bulletin. we're still charging fares or inconsistently charging fares and neither fare boxes nor clipper readers were covered. some peopler paying and others

weren't. it was incredibly confusing. there should be communicateds planned how to addressed that in the future. even on a friday afternoon, you're given free fare day or clean air money to provide free service, there's a way to implement that quickly with existing resources. thanks. i appreciate that director tumlin mentioned there's a budget get together this thursday at 5:00. it's not on the m.t.a. website under the calendar of meetings and events. i would not have known about that if that wasn't mentioned today. can someone put that on the calendar. i hope we'll hear more about how hybrid board meetings will work. thanks for listening. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line? with that, we'll close public

comment and move on to our next item. >> clerk: that places you on item 10, consent calendar. they consider to be routine and will be voted on by single vote. members of the public if you wish to address the board on a consent item, press 1, 0 to be added to the queue. item 10.1, requesting controller to allow funds against such funds available in payment of the following claims against sfmta. item a, rosa flores versus ccsf filed on september 15, for $60,000, item b, anna mims, filed on december 2018 for

$35,000. item c, allison winter, filed on december 13, 2019 for $9999, item d, deirdre coyle filed on august 13, 2019 for $7500. item 10.2, approving various routine parking traffic modifications. for item 10.4, staff requested that item be severed. that concludes your consent

calendar. >> chair borden: we're going -- for members of the public, item 10.4 will be considered separately. if you would like to make comment on the rest of the consent calendar, this will be the time to do so. we will take up 10.4 separately. directors are there any other items that you want to sever or discuss that should be severed? >> motion to approve 10.110.2 and 10.3. >> chair borden: hold on, we need to go to public comment first. [ indiscernible ] >> caller: it will be good to hear more about what that includes. >> chair borden: any other comments on the consent calendar? seeing none from the directors, now we're opening up to public comment for members of the

public workshop like to comment on the items under number 10 with the exception of 10.4, this is your time to do so. you may press 1, 0 to put yourself in the queue. are there callers on the line? >> caller: this is david pilpel. i have one brief comment on 10.3. can i make that now? >> chair borden: absolutely. >> caller: it's two quick comments. on page 2 of the amendment, page 8 of the packet, it still says dennis, the city attorney. i hope someone change that oour current city attorney. to director yekutiel, this simply extends the contract term by one year to allow for

delivery of spare parts the work on the vehicles have been done. the spare parts are in a shipping container sitting off long beach. that's impacted the ability of the contractor to get those parts to m.t.a. that's my understanding of all this does. i support item 10.3. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line? >> you don't need to sever 10.3. i misread it. >> chair borden: we were closing public comment. did you want staff to talk at all about? >> no. >> chair borden: secretary silva, please call the roll on the sfcta, items 10.1-10.3.

[roll call vote] thank you. the consent calendar, is approved. >> chair borden: city attorney, anyone from city attorney office on board? we should take up item 10.4 now? we can move forward now? >> you can. our city attorney, deputy city attorney will join us at 2:30.

she'll be available for questions. >> chair borden: secretary silva call in item 10.4. >> clerk: authorizing the director to execute the predevelopment agreement for the yard modernization project a potential termination payment that will not exceed $9.99 million. if approved by the board of supervisors the potential continuation payment of $4 million. the action today will be approving the predevelopment agreement of the petreo yard modernization project. >> chair borden: staff, do you have anything that i wanted to add on in project? >> yes. i'm acting chief financial officer and building progress program manager. first, let me say before we go into questions, the team and i

really do appreciate all the board interest on this item and your willingness to do the due diligence. this is a major project. this kind of rigorous review is appropriate. to again declare just the item today and if i or my team -- this is 200 page agreement. i think i've been getting asked for simply case. you're approving the term and not the agreement for the predevelopment phase of this project. you are not approving the project. we bring the project agreement back to the board on a future date. we're essentially into the design phase for this project and during that phase, we will come to final financial terms on the agreement. what the action you're taking today will do, set the rules of

the game for the predevelopment phase for the petreo modernization project. the final agreement will come to the m.t.a. board for approval and will be required to go to the board of supervisors. first, why do we need to do this project? the potrero yard is 100 plus years old. the current facility is operating at 150% of its design capacity. it is not resilience. it needs seismic upgrade. the technology is aged and our other maintenance equipment need

to be replaced. to be good neighbor, the urban design is boor. this is a mixed use neighborhood with a park next door. as the m.t.a. we want to add to the city and take advantage of that. we also need to prepare the agency as mr. herbert wiener pointed out, we plan to expand the fleet. by 2040 we expect our plan to be 200 buses larger than it is today. we need to have the maintenance in storage capacity. we need to have the technology for those buses to be electric. this facility will provide the ability for us to accept more vehicles and to those vehicles to be electric. on the model to deliver the project itself, which is another question, the public private partnership p3 model we are using. this is based on feedback from the m.t.a. board as others on the agency's ability to deliver mega project of this type. this is a significant project.

what the p3 model does, it moves lot of the risks on schedule and budget to the development team. the risk is not on the city. it is a non-traditional model. we want to shift that risk. the availability payments that are planned in the future occur after substantial completion. the lead developer, once we enter in the project agreement outside the initial payment doesn't get a dime to pay their finances or other costs until they complete our project. it is their incentive to complete that project on time and on schedule. if again, over the period of time, with regard to certainty or the condition of the building the availability payment can go down depending on how much capital we choose do pay up front. that decision has not been made

yet. at the last meeting i gave you average of $30 million to $35 million. we can choose to pay more capital up front. we will discuss update the board on that as the project progresses. another element when we talked about cost of the project, specifically, one of the attractive reasons to pursue this method what you agreed to and board of supervisors through special legislation, the savings and value of the replacement of the asset itself overtime. the agency receive significant savings in the replacement and renewal cost over the life of the facility. over 30 years. the lead developer must maintain that facility at is certainly level of quality. when we get the building

back-end of 30 years, we'll get it in good condition. the developer again is incentivized when they construct this facility to construct it at the highest level of quality to ensure that renewal cost overtime is reduced. same thing with public infrastructure, the more we put in up front, the lower the operational and maintenance costs are overtime. i want to stress that. there's been a question about the cost of the project itself. the current estimate and again, this is just what we estimated today, is roughly $606 million when you include the cost of escalation. when you include the cost of contingency and the design build cost of the facility itself.

the lenders will look to the city essentially to guarantee those payments and so, the lead developer should essentially good rates on the private market to support this project. those were some key questions. why do we need to do this project? why are we using this model? you are not approving the project today. you're approving the terms that will go into the agreement for the next phase. with regard to the action itself since the last meeting, we are

recommending that the m.t.a. board approve the terms of the p.d.a. today. we'll bring the agreement back probably in april to the m.t.a. board for approval. shortly thereafter, to give you an opportunity to speak with the selected developer, we would propose a presentation will be made to the m.t.a. by the lead developer. if the m.t.a. board wants to have further oversight during the project, you can set up an an ad hoc committee to get updates during the p.d.a. phase. i know this is a super complicated issue. i do want to thank very much the team. they are team of at least 15 city staff who have been

working on this project for four years. to date, we have successfully completed our draft e.i.r. successful public outreach and with potrero hill and we successfully gone to market and gotten very interested development teams. with that, i tried to stretch it to 2:30 until carol long get here. thank you very much. >> chair borden: i know that the city attorney needs to speak at this time. >> thank you, i think this came up at the last hearing. i want to remind the board that we are in the middle of an active procurement on this project.

there are some limitations on things that we can discuss during an active procurement. thank you for that. >> chair borden: thank you. director heminger? >> director heminger: thank you. i know i can consume quite bit of time at our last meeting. i will try to consume less here. i do have a few things to say. i want to thank the staff for the briefing that they did and the information they provided. starting with the information from some of the other cities in the united states and abroad, who have used this model, one thing i noticed is that almost all the projects, almost without exception, came in on schedule on time. that's not something that the public sector could brag a lot about. including ourselves recently.

i think that project delivery discipline is a significant advantage of this approach. i am less certain that the financial advantage is all that significant here. i asked for a budget breakdown. we received it. jonathon, i think gave you the topline numbers. when you add jonathon's numbers together, it's $811 million. i believe that does not include all of the interest cost or at least if it does, it includes a discounted level. i think where we are in terms of the basic financial package here is we're spending about $1 billion to build a half billion dollar yard. whether the developer sells the debt or we sell the debt, when i

sell debt, you're going to pay a lot of interest cost to pay it back. that's the price waiting until now to get this project done for 100-year-old building. if we done it 20 years ago, may be we could have done it on a pay go basis. i don't know. we are where we are. i think the interest costs that involved here is going to be considerable. that's just part of the package of going forward with this approach. i looked especially at two components that i think we had some trouble with in terms of budgeting large projects. that's the contingency and the escalation. in other words when is going to be built and how much don't you know about the project. the contingency i was informed and i look for a shakier head,

jonathan, 25%. which is probably reasonable. i might prefer to be higher. we're sort of at 5% design which means there's sort of like 95% that we don't know. 25% i think at a minimum is reasonable but probably it wouldn't hurt us to go a little higher. i think the escalation is quite a bit diceyer. our staff is struggling what number to use. we're in -- if you buy milk or a washing machine -- how that reflects itself in the construction cost. i think the staff is carrying an assumption now about 3 1/2 percent and quite nervous that might be too low. my expectation is that both on

contingency and escalation, we will have more work to do before we get to what the p.d.a. describes as the fixed budget limit. we're being asked to consider approval of the p.d.a. in form. but not the actual p.d.a. i think that's fine. we should be asked to make this approval now. i think we also should be approving the decision or the recommendation from our staff about who the winning developer is. i think several of us commented at the last meeting that it's unusual at least in our

experience, we're asked to approve a theoretical approach without approving who the person is who's actually going to carry it out. i would like to suggest that includes that our approval includes the winning developer's selection. obviously we will be approving in a year or year and a half, the actual construction documents. what i'm looking to do here is to fill in the blank in between approving the p.d.a. form and approving the construction contract. we should be three bites at the the apple. secondly, i wanted to suggest that we borrow a page from the federal transit administration. they have a procedure when they enter into contracts for big projects. just like our central subway. like the caltrain electrification project or barred extension of san jose.

which has been in the news lately. they call it project management oversight process, orp.m. o. the concept, the idea is sound one. it would involve us as a board hiring some kind of independent resource to advise us as we go through this process which is new to most of us.

given unusual nature of this procurement given how large it is and given how complicated it is. as i noted in our last meeting, this isn't just about one bus yard it's about two bus yards. we're talking about a major housing component. i know there are other colleagues on the board who want to talk quite a bit about that today as well. we're trying to bite off a lot here in pursuing this procurement. i think under the right conditions, we can be successful or at least position ourselves to be in a place where we could succeed. i offer those three recommendations, madam chair, for our consideration. as we deliberate on this item today. >> chair borden: you'll have it together in a motion if we need

it. director hinze? >> director hinze: first point, jonathon, -- last week, that's currently not in our sort of scope. am i understanding that correctly?

>> at the prior hearing you will approve the term and you authorize director tumlin to execute the agreement with the selected lead developer. we're recommending today to bifurcate that. it becomes the second bite of the apple that today you approve the terms, meaning we are not going to renegotiate the terms of this agreement. which i think is very important to keep this process stable. we will come back to the m.t.a. board in april, at which point you will approve the agreement with that lead developer. in theory, in that meeting, we will add the name of the lead developer. it will be up and down vote, you can choose not to vote to select that lead developer. >> director hinze: okay.

to the p.m.o., will that be something that's currently in our budget? do we have to budget to do that? >> throughout the process of this project, we have independently vetted technical elements of the project. we did initial estimates and then hired them to review our initial urban designers and planners worked.

>> chair borden: director cajina i saw your hand up. go ahead and make a comment. >> director cajina: i wanted to understand the financial implications of the bifurcation.

does that put us on hook for $9.9 million. what does that look like? >> today's approval of the terms, essentially sets the payment. if this happens, then we will pay you either the $4 million or under certain circumstances there will be payment $10 million. when you take the second bite the apple, with whomever the lead developer is, we will be executing that agreement. today is the terms, meaning there will be a milestone payment of $4 million, there will be a termination payment of $10 million. we are not going to modify that. that's today's decision. in april, that will be the execution of that agreement. susan or any of the attorneys, we are legally bound from that

point on based on those terms to make the payment. the actual financial discussion on use of those dollars will be the second vote. >> director cajina: thank you. >> chair borden: are there any additional questions? director yekutiel? >> director yekutiel: my questions are on specifics on the terms. thank you very much staff for all the help for briefing us and few of us were able to get in person tours of the potrero yard site last week in preparation for this. the first question in the terms, is there upper limit? >> f.p.l. is a fixed number. there are circumstances within the p.d.a. in which it will be

changed. i will let tim goes into detail. >> thank you for the question. there's no limits for the f.p.l. >> director yekutiel: let's say this project will cost $1 billion -- >> that's right. the scoring has established additional incentives for them to establish the f.p.l. as high as they want. at the same time, it does not incentivize pushing it as low as possible. there's that balance there. we're averaging all of the f.p.l. if you're at the average or lower, you get a certain score. as the f.p.l. gets higher, you have a sliding scale of decreasing score. >> director yekutiel: next question is on the 2027 finish date. is that included in the terms? explain why that is a hard and

set date and can it be moved if we need to and if so, how? >> let me start backwards and tim you can talk about the schedule itself in the 2027. in 2017, the agency, it's on sfmta.com for any board member or member of the public can see it, we completed the framework, which is the master plan for our entire campus across san francisco. one key component of that was that our fleet plan was showing that soon, we were going to outgrow our physical plant within the city. we needed additional storage for vehicles. the 2026-2027 date was the date when the fleet size becomes too large for us to store the vehicle. my recollection, we start getting about 55 to 60 vehicles too many. like we can't store them

anymore. that grows to 220 vehicles by 2040. that's part one. the second part, since then, is the need to electrify the fleet. now we need chargers and the electrical infrastructure required, potrero assumed that. the additional capacity is to accept what will be the new electric buses including trolley at potrero. we're also changing the schedule of the kirkland yard to electrify that facility which will kind of meet our capacity requirements and our procurement schedule. that's the reason for that date. the other is the technology required for electric bus. tim, if you want to add to the incentives and the schedule for the developer and the terms within the p.d.a., feel free. >> sure. you asked if the date is the end

terms of the p.d.a. it is. it's under the timeline for the bus yard. it has a specific date end of april 2027. no later than the, long stop, late finish milestone. can be extended? it could be. under only specific release eventings, that have yet to be spelled out as we get through the p.d.a. term and negotiate on those terms with the selected proposer. >> director yekutiel: i have questions on housing. as i've been thinking about this, worried about a scenario where we have required the developer to finish the housing with the finishing of the depot. they can't construct the housing after the depot is done. we're saying that the project needs to reach financial

completion by 2027. what happens if the developer cannot find how funds from the state and federal government which with sometimes take a long time for affordable housing to be completed. >> it can be that the completion of the housing does exceed past the completion of the bus facility. let's say it's 2027, the bus yard is ready to open. potrero division moves in. it could be that the housing has more work to do to finish. in the p.d.a. term, we say that if you dialed the timeline all the way back to starting into this p.d.a. term, we are having the developer tell us what their plan is, getting more specific about their timeline, their fund sources, the strategy for getting affordable housing fund sources. we'll know well in advance of

when it is that affordable housing and housing will be done. it can elapse after the date of the bus yard completion only if they do not violate any of the interfaces it that we defined in the p.d.a. those are defined as, you can't impede on operation maintenance. in other words, -- does that answer your question? >> director yekutiel: it does. seems like there's a possibility for variety of things to happen. which makes the housing component to fall through. how does that affect all the common area that's written in the p.d.a. terms. >> that is one risk that we're

asking lead developer to follow through with. we're there designing this integrated facility. as time goes by, portions of the housing fall away as result of award of affordable housing. we have to make a decision as a partnership between city and developer regarding how to compete with design with respect to the common infrastructure, the vertical elements, vertical circulation, things like that. >> director yekutiel: seems like a different design than building a bus yard with a house development. i imagine they are proceeding. it will be considerable that would change. >> the floor plan looks similar to a regular bus yard. you have certain spaces the

structure of the building is probably the biggest difference as a result of having housing above. in that respect, the design does evolve past then. there's a certain sharing based on the allocation of square feet of the housing versus the ilcase of square feet for the bus yard. as those proportion changes, there's a common infrastructure. >> director yekutiel: thank you, tim. i saw in the terms it does include the affordable units. does it include as well the exact dimensions in the total number of units in the terms? >> yes, it does. the terms of the outer envelope are expressed in both ways. both height limit as well as a unit limit. those were essentially locked in

when the agency went to the planning department to apply for the ceqa application. >> director yekutiel: what is that number of units? >> 575 units as a maximum. the height is 150 feet. presumed to be at the south portion of the building away from franklin square, which is to the north. >> director yekutiel: my last set of questions which is about thinking 50 years from now to the sfmta board looking back and wondering what they might think about this conversation. it seniles -- do seems like we're spending lot of money on the bus budget. i want to hear once again from jonathan and the team why it's necessary to sacrifice the ability to have a revenue source that will pay for this bus yard for the next 100 years?

>> that's a great point. this is a 100-year decision. we are -- this is the m.t.a. board municipal transportation agency. we're also part of the city and county of san francisco. there's public side for housing program in the city. it's a policy priority for both the mayor and board of supervisors. we have this development opportunity on this property. the agency evaluated numerous different alternatives for development, housing was determined to be the greatest revenue generating opportunity on this office. the board of supervisors have priorities to add as much affordable housing and make units available to especially the mission.

the mayor have made it a priority to add housing and add units to the city as quickly as possible to deal with affordability issues in the city. my answer is, you look at a loan from the m.t.a. alone, it's a fair question. the m.t.a. should look to its own interest. when we look at it from the perspective that we are department and the agency of the city and county of san francisco, we're advancing significant benefits to the city at a time the city needs. that said, i really appreciate the question, this concept and process by which we are doing a p3, the speed which we will deliver this project will be a model for other sites that the agency has where do i believe there's political support to have the agency raise revenues

off that property. again, the process locking down terms, testing, what does and does not work overtime. why the oversight is great. we'll take lessons learned going to through this process. i do believe that we have opportunities on other properties we own both as the parking authority, city and county of san francisco and the m.t.a. to achieve additional revenues for service and capital improvements. >> director yekutiel: thank you. this is my last question. are there people on the working group team that have specific experience with large housing developments? >> i don't know. there might be. >> director yekutiel, are you

asking about the potrero yard community working group? >> director yekutiel: the group of city folks who are involvedin the selection pros. >> the answer is yes. there are parts from the mayor's office of housing and community development. mayor's office of housing and the office of economic and workforce development are part of the staff team and are part of the selection team and review of the r.f.p. >> director yekutiel: last question is $800 million, how are you budgeting that over the course of the next 20 years? where is this money going to come from and are we potentially leaving future colleagues in debt? >> the cost when the project

agreement is done and when we have begun the availability payment process, let's say if until year '28 or '29 this will be normal contractual agreement with the agency. this will be a service contract estimated about $35 million a year. there are two points about it. one, between when we execute the project agreement, one we need to start the availability payment. the m.t.a. keeps its own cash. we will gain interest. we will be able to use those dollars on other things in that period. it will become an operating budget obligation in about the fiscal year '28 or '29 for the 30-year period. >> director yekutiel: thank you very much. >> chair borden: directors any more questions or comments? i know that director heminger

have some amendments that we could use for making a motion. why don't i go ahead and take public comment at this time before we get to the motion. members of the public if you are on the line, this is the time to comment on item 10.4. which is the potrero yard item. if you have comments and you like to place yourself in the queue, please press 1, 0. are there any callers on the line? first speaker. [ please stand by ]

. >> this is a unique asset. respect we getting the most value. our goal to be good citizens. are we gets as much housing as we could out of this site right near transit extraordinary well located. 575 units the right number of units? are we locking it in today f.the developer came back to say i could get 1,000 units. we are saying no room.

m.t.a. board says 575 is it. that is all we are doing. >> there are a couple answers to that one. i mentioned the mayor's policy priorities, policy priorities of the board of supervisors. when i didn't include in that conversation was priorities of the neighborhood and the public themselves as we have gone through the public process. on any m.t.a. board knows this. outreach, engagement, negotiation and conversation are all important we are answering to different constituents. one goal is to be a better neighbor. this is not typical transportation project. this is a fixed plant in the neighborhood in part of the city for the next 100 years. we went through extensive two

year outreach process with the goal to build those two goals. maximize affordability which is a question and maximizing number of units. we started that with the city planning department looking at the existing zoning. tim noted how high we can go. that was an element. after considering our needs. this is closed. those ceilings need to be high. how much on top? we have a park next door. shadow impact is an issue which the neighbors definitely wanted us to consider. bonnie jean, i want to say february 2019 when we did the well attended workshop and went through mapping scenarios in partnership with oewd, planning, m.t.a. staff, mayor's office of

housing. how much mapping was potrero hill and the mission willing to accept? those elements plus environmental impact in the seea documents. when we went to r.f.p. based on what we evaluated in the ceqa document and what we heard from the mission and potrero hill and the policy goals of the mayor and board of supervisors on the housing side of things. i think what we ended up within the r.f.q. and r.f.p. is what we could fit. what people would be comfortable with. 500 unit project is big when it

comes to the mission it would be one of the larger housing projects in itself. if we could hit that goal minimally half those units be affordable that is a 200 plus unit affordable housing project which is significant when you consider the mission. my answer is yes when you consider all people involved and building a coalition to advance there project. we did try our best to maximize use of the site and number of units and affordability. >> there is no chance in the process beyond this to add more units on the side if it was determined community had a change of heart if housing crisis becomes worse no ability for a thousand? >> that is a tough one. i wish she could help me with this one.

i believena the 575 and if any of the team knows the maximum units analyzed in the current draft e.i.r. we will take the project proposed and add it as an alternative prior to the finalization and approval of the certification of the e.i.r. i think the 575 was the upper book end based on that analysis. based on the height and zoning that was high end of the book end. if you want to ask about that? >> to confirm, that's right. >> what is the market value of the land? >> boy, kirkland, do you know?

i don't know. >> this is kristin, senior manager s.f.m.t.a. there was an appraisal done $4 million value is exceeded by the appraised value. assuming the current site if we were to use that and build housing on it. that value is exceeded by the $4 million. if you rezone it, it is worth more. m.t.a. has value with the current site that exceeds $4 million payment. without the land entitled because of the current administrative code we could actually build housing above the parking area but it would not be the number of units we could do with the current project

development agreement. >> i guess where i am this is an extremely valuable piece of land and rare development opportunity. in the staff report the intention of generating revenue for transit for m.t.a. i am concerned we are getting the greatest value for the land in terms of the city's goal and generating money for transit. i am happy to defer to my colleagues. thank you. >> thank you, director lai. >> can you hear me? thank you, chair. i will piggie box off one thing

that was asked about the maximum density recognized under the draft ceqa document. could the site exercise the density bonus? >> i can take a step at this. the density bonus allows three additional level. 65 feet now. we are well over that at 150 feet. we are entitling that through special use district. maybe carol can add anything to that. >> let me clarify. it is the 40% bonus of the base development scenario. maybe to restate the question is the 575 the base density?

could it be 40% of that or an additional 40% of that? >> carol, could you owe pine on that? >> we need to talk to planning about that. >> not intended to put it on staff. this is part of what the developer would figure out. i want to maybe provide another possible alternative consideration. there are a lot of layers to the density rules because this site is already outside of a lot of the normal review path that precludes us from using it. that is a possible way out seed of the ceqa document we can exceed density. shadows is in place.

i am sure the developer will fill us in on that. i want to focus on the statement. i see perceive the agency and staff having done a good job to provide an opportunity to maximize housing and commercial development on a site that to our core our responsibility is to build rebuild the facility. we are stepping up and meeting the city-wide goal and challenge of trying our best to present an avenue to add housing inventory to our city, which is great. i think for a variety of reasons including the way the terms are set out. it is possible the housing might not happen. i want to make sure if the housing does not happen what does that mean for the rest of the pda path forward?

what does it mean for our timeline? staff do you want to address that? >> that is a great question. pda directs the selected developer to proceed with it. that is a binding obligation. it is a commitment to deliver the housing subject to all of the things that need to happen to make it come to fruition. they are identifying the commitment for them to deliver. >> i will opine on the fact that i think without the housing component it is a great mechanism for us to proceed with the p3 model for the obvious reasons stated around on time on budget project delivery. as well as what jonathan had mentioned about off-loading our risk to just remind the public

who might be watching this we are -- the development team, i'm assuming, will throw in equity. we are also shifting equity shift to someone else. this is a good approach. it is tricky with a lot of unknowns. it is an experiment worth pursuing at this point. the last bucket of questions i want to chime in on to help the board and public fully make sure we are on the same page and understand what we can and cannot wiggle around this current draft pda agreement. maybe just to clarify that. we haven't seen what the projects look like. there will be presentations, board of supervisors, planning

commission. what if there are changes? it sounds to me like we built in flexibility within the terms where that can occur. can you and i know this is maybe impossible to answer because there were a lot of words to provide the guardrails. most importantly what i want to make clear in the record is if let's say the housing component drops off or drastically reduces, what are we object gated to do? do we need to reopen the selection process? can you give us a little color on that? >> you can jump in as i finish this. director, our term sheet allows for flexibility in a lot of different fashions. one could be a project agreement we have been talking about.

third bite of the apple in a year and a half. there is flexibility in one or two projects. that is stated into the pda. that is just one example of the flexibility that we have based on what our development partner is going to determine after initiating the pda term, generating housing term sheet in april of itself. carol, would you like to take it up from there? >> yes. city attorney's office. you are right, there is flexibility in redevelopment agreement for changes in the project. right now with the housing developer is telling us what they expect to produce in terms of housing. the financing and entitlements. that is still a path to go. we have different situations in predevelopment where if they don't get approve alls or

financing by best commercial efforts they can request a change in housing project. s.f.m.t.a. if they want to change in a way to interfere with transit elivery we can say no. there is flexibility. m.t.a. can derm on its own that you think you are able to do the housing. it is not going to work. it is going to take too long. we need to change the project. there is flexibility for that. we don't know what financing they will get and the entitlements they will get and the conditions on the entitlements. >> reissuance. the selected developer cannot carryout -- i will rephrase.

during the pda phase before we get to the final development agreement during that portion of time that is when we would figure out whether or not the housing is go, no go. let's say they are not able to deliver that. we go before the board of supervisors because everyone is so eager for the housing inventory. where do they want it without the housing component? what do we do? we have other sequential issues. -- consequential issues. we have buses coming. what do we do at that point? >> again, this is hypothetical. we could find dinosaur bones

there. if we get to that point in time in the process to develop this project and i think one of the other directors might have said it well. the m.t.a. is doing it to the city. we are adding housing stock to the city. it is net zero. we get a new bus yard. the deal will get the value of that asset replacement over time. we will get a successful project delivery method. city is getting housing added beyond what is required in the mission. hopefully that will be successful. during the pda phase, the number of units and financing might not pencil. there could be unknown design issues or cost per unit isn't feasible and doesn't make sense.

that could occur and housing might be removed. >> the board of supervisors understands up to this point. they were believed. it is priority to get the bus yard done for the operational reasons we discussed. the board of supervisors understand how critical it is to get our faults updated. they passed out the general obligation bond for dollar goes to make that happen. that said, i would hope the boys would not put maintenance of fleets and ability to provide transit service at risk over this situation. that said the worst case we have to step back andtady sign, bid out project as is we would have

designs for the project and build the best yard if needed. that is definitely a risk. the mayor and board of supervisors are partners in moving this forward. i hope if not transbeportation versus housing situation. they are both priorities for the mayor and board of supervisors. if it just doesn't work and puts the bus yard at risk, my hope is that the board will support and have the project continue to move forward. >> thank you, jonathan. we are all across the streets the to carr forward in this project. it is not m.t.a.'s.

we don't have the financial wherewithal to subsidize housing development necessarily. that is under the authority of ocd and the board of supervisors and other powers that be. really encouraged by the partnership. having said that i definitely have no issues with director hemingers suggested modifications. i support those. it would want a conversation what skill sets we are trying to obtain so that we don't double up on the expertise we have while we serving independent review. clarification question. is the current draft of the motion reflecting that we are removing the dot's ability to

authorize and proceed without coming back to us or do we need to add that as an amendment. >> the updated staff report you received abated that language. it removes that and you are approving the form of the pda. >> i look forward to seeing what the team looks like. thank you, chair. >> i just have a few questions about what we are going to gain. we are foreseeing 2040 milestone going to 100% electric feet. if this project is going to in 2027.

that is years ahead of the milestone. at that point will we be ready to transition and maintain the fleet at this site or make additional repairs to the facility to maintain the 2040 all electric fleet. some clarification around that pan i am trying to think ahead if this is a project that we are trying to ensure for the next 100 years. is it doing that? >> will we have additional investments so that we need that milestone and we are setting up for success. i want to ask about the a.m.i. level. he want to get more clarification what the a.m.i. level are. is that defined or are we

requesting from the project team we end up selecting as edefine it more. >> second part first. mmi we will have when we bring the lead developer back to you. table to the third or second byte how ever you want to talk about that. on the element transportation element be within our campuses in san francisco we have two electric. one at presidio and potrero lots. they are 100 transitioned some they still employees.

we knew as we reconstructed those row were requirements we are partnering with p.u.c. on that. technology. we want these future proof for elect trek bus. director kirsch ball and i are working on a joint report. i am passed back with our facilities transition of our elect crimfleet. we have completed that and have a sequencing plan. pow prayer row was a key part of that plan. we want to move away from motor coach and purchase electrize buses. we need to maintain and charge those vehicles on site. part of that is to move dirge cleveland was in the back epover

the modernization p.east first, then kirkland we are going to swap kirkland and prisvideo. just do multi-tory. we are doing the after there to be able to procure the vehicles at the right schedule and time. kirkland and potrero are key elements to do that. if we cannot we might meet the regulatory deadline. we step the for ourselves to electrify the fleet. pow prayer row is a key element of doing that. >> yes. with all of the other agencies, owd. we are trying to create a better

working condition for our staff, right? as we are speaking of that. 2040 milestone within the capacity. is that in the mou, we are talking about already? it is a greater conversation i want to see if we are thinking about that already. >> i will keep on my building hat. with regard to planning to have the space to fix up fully implemented programs, yes, we have plans across the entire campus. potrero is a key element of that in that our current trainings

ran operations at the p the preo yard. we have made minor improvements until we can reconstruct the training federal and be our central training for staff for successful work force development. we will have that at the march 15th meeting about programs necessary to get to the objective you are talking about, director. with regard for the square foot rage and rights. we will talk about fundings of if program.

>> director eaken. >> i know we are putting a lot of time in this. it is $1 billion. it merits real diligence. i would love you to clarify something you said twice now. this project is net zero to the city. in context to the $30 million payment we are making every year for 30 years. >> what net zero means. we are not spending a dime of transportation dollars on the housing component of the project. i repeat. we are not spending transportation dollars. ability has to do with finassing of our infrastructure and percentage share of the shared infrastructure.

it is self-financed. not a component of our viability there. >> it is $30 million a year for 30 years. that is $800 million or something which will probably get hyper. >> our availability payment has to do with transportation infrastructure. if you were to remove housing component we would pay the same thing through the same method. city is committing to the housing and lead developer will make their capital back from rends and housing components of the project. >> thank you. it is a lot of money to sign off

on today for this project. what i am wondering are we getting the best deal out of this piece of property? that is possible. they are taking on the massive and you can tell it was saddling our future with this $35 million payment every year. we have thissen credsible assets of the land in the mission. process recommendation for staff. i would have loved you to bring us three scenarios. one to maximize revenue scenario. another would have been whatever maximize equity and affordable housing scenario. for an investment this large. not just up and down on this

project. i think the cease of scenario that could involving us having a lower payment. they could make more money off the land and we could pay less to the overall project. i would like to see that for us to consider. i don't think we are getting as much value out of the lander and housing units as we could be. sometimes i am feeling like this is the best projects going forward. >> you will get that opportunity when the lead developer comes to you. challenge their concept. what if it doesn't get 575. it doesn't works.

what if they have ability 60%. they wanted to go higher. they might have shade housing over those chonsing units. you will have the opportunity when they come forward to challenge them. it doesn't mean you can't headache headache estimates estimate --you can question ande every penny. get every unit so we can bring in the city planning department and say could we go higher in the sud? there are so many opportunities during pda phase. i am happy to come back

regularly, work with a specific committee of the board to dive deeper into those questions. >> then. we want to move to director huminger's modification. chair borden we haven't here from you. where are you? >> i think having been on planning before and seeing these projects i am a little less concerned. i think a lot of incentive will work because the money is not in housing. i would say in terms of debsty my concerns which i would love for us to go greater is are l pro jobbing golfing do leafed --we have to present something

winnable or it will blow up. i think that is the other component there. i feel confident working on design before project should put us in better position. we are engaging professionals with vested interest in getting this project done quickly to make those benchmarks. every day or year of delay costs them money. doesn't make them money. that is one of the reasons i am a fan. my business this could be a model going forward looking for other projects. do i have hesitations whether or not we are in. >> i don't know enough about the team we are not making the decision to know about that.

that is where i am uncertain. i don't know the track records of the people involved in all of that stuff. it is worth a chance of trying this approach. we know ourselves in project delivery lieu are people who have a vested interest in success can be a game changer. we can have a win with a great amount of housing is significant. finally, i believe that this approach is two-step approach. hopefully we will know before we bid real money whether or not we can say what we can do. this is that that process helps us validate like we did with the other projects.

that is why i am more comfortable than other people might be. it is a chance. $30 million is not that much money down the road at the rate of inflation and the way money is today. maybe that payment can be left. ir do think we have to try a different approach. we had another project looking at hotel/housing. that was much more complicated. sticking with one type of unit it says probably the best drug in my opinion. the city attorney wanted to give us more advice before we moved forward. >> thank you.

deputy city attorney. two comments the whereas clause does provide that staff will come back to the board with the predevelopment agreement once the developer is selected. you can put that in a resolve clause if you would like. it is in your existing. second director heminger's point about the oversight consultants. i recommend instead of obligating that today that you direct the staff to look into that issue and report back to the board. noticing the potential cost and other legal issues to look into. i am happy to henry frame those

or perhaps director heminger can make the motion. >> thank you. >> director heminger. do you want to remake the motion? >> big build-up here. ty wonder if i can sneak in one last question before i get to the motion. >> this is our show. >> i am very sympathetic to the concerns that director eaken is raising are we under shooting on the housing piece here? it is hard to know. one problem we are suffering from is that we are looking at this one project at the same time. this is first one doubt the chute. i have been asking for some time for some comprehensive look at our assets. we have a lot of garages.

when would you be prepared to give us that picture look, not just one bus yard, one part of the city. all assets and they could menus if we deployed them all in a similar fashion. >> based on the work my team is doing we have been prebearing for this for a while. i recommend after the buckets buts easily this summer in june or july we can update on potentials and opportunities and projects and objectives we are looking for. i would ask that it is more opportunity based. chair borden brought up attempts at the garage and that did not

go well. we need that very well thought out community process when we work on these projects. we were successful at potrero. the estimates i am giving the board on iowa think we can generate $40 million from the properties if based on the work. this summer after the budget we can give a full update on that. >> back to the amendments. i do concede the point that jonathan you have conceded that we have three bites at the apple. next bite is approving the selection of the winning bidders. i am down to two amendment bees which are in the chat. i will read them for the record. first is that the m.t.a. board

of supervisors should retain independent oversight pmo to as sit in seeing through define and construction process. second they should report quarterly to m.t.a. board of directors on project delivery challenges pan solutions. i would make that motion to amend your resolution in those two effects. >> is there a second. >> susan was indicating some concern. i realize this is not on the agenda. i am speaking generally with this language. we are not recommending a particular consultant or

particular amount or particular contract. if you can approve on this, that is fine on me. that my pension. >> thank you. it would help if you directed staff table it and gain project manager oversight to oversee through design and construction and report back to the board. >> i think that is agreeable as long as the exploration leads them to hire one. i am not thinking we should ask them to think about it and come back and tell us no. >> i will see as the person that managed the pmo, i am admitting to hiring one that oversees the team we mittment. we will follow-through and report back to the board.

>> i am susan. we all understand each other. >> is there a second. great. any further discussion or secretary call the roll. >> on the motion to amends the resolution as proposed by city attorney. director himmingger. >> director heinz. >> director lai. >> director yekutiel. >> aye. >> chair eaken. >> i did not hear the amendment. restate. >> there is an amendment to resolution to direct staff would

explore an independent project management oversight consultant to assist in overseeing the project through designing and construction project. for project staff to report back orderly to the board on delivery challenges and solutions. >> aye. >> borden aye. >> that motion passes. >> now vote on the main package which is now amended. please call the roll. >> i don't believe there is a motion and second. >> now you can call the roll. >> mode to approve as directed. director cajina. >> aye. >> him engager. >> aye.

>> heinz. >> aye. >> lai. >> yekutiel. >> aye. >> chair eaken. >> aye. >> chair borden. >> aye. >> that motion passes. >> next item. 11. authorizing director the execute s.f.m.t.a. 2021-05fta to replace and rehabilitate systems up to 48 standard hybrid electric new flier coaches, 111 new fire coaches and 60 electric collow coaches for an amount not to exceed 101-65-9122 the $25 for a term not to exceed five years. >> i want to hear about this and how it plays into our efforts to fully electrify. >> thank you. i am going to share my screen.

are you able to see the presentations. >> yes. >> i am here today. i will keep this brief because it is something i have been tracking closely to talk about our first overhaul contract. i am so glad to be here today to talk about this contract because it is an accumulation of almost a decade of work and commitment. it is a critical next fleet to keeping the fleet in a constant state of good repair. it makes it a model for assets management throughout the agency and very much where we would like to be on other assets like

the subway system. this fleet work has been guided by a strong fleet management plan. the guiding principles include trying to get to where we continuously buy 75 to 100 vehicles per year and never having a situation like 10 years ago where everything got old at the same time. that is difficult on your operating budget you are spending a lot of money. in the capital budget you need large outlays. it is difficult on your staffing. we also really let the industry be the expert instead of prescriptive we shared how they expected vehicles to perform and the industry as the expert.

we developed maintenance standards that included a heavy commit mit to meet or exceed purchasers expectation for maintenance. we have an exciting program. it is staff leads. there is buy into at every level at the organization. we are working hard to make sure we are fixing things before they break so the customer never experiences the failure. vehicles today are sustainable, hybrid vehicles running on renewable diesel. with that i want to share highway that has paid off. s in the 1980s or 2000s

customers would experience breakdowns every couple weeks or months. now we are it is rare if a bus drakes down in service twice a year. we could not do this without the incredible work of our maintenance teams. they wore r work every day to anticipate what is going to happen to complete the preventative maintenance on time. no maintenance team can keep an asset reliable after it passes the useful life. what is complex is the buses themselves, the shell, the seats they can last up to 12, 15

years. a lot of the critical components. the engines and breaks wear out at half the life life that is why this is so important. you are 10 and 11 they can perform as well as they do today. the mid-life program has strong policy support from predecessors and board of supervisors and transportation have when they helped fund this through prop k. the overhaul program is divided into three phases based on the vehicle age and also trying to cluster similar types of vehicles into the same cases.

60-foot charlie is going at the same time. we did have to split one into two-parts. we had originally expected in 2019 to be where we are today. we did not receive any bids to the initial procurement because we had made the vehicle tax too expensive asking for too much specialized work that only the manufacturer of the vehicles really had the competitive edge for. we did a lot of industry outreach. we worked hard to adjust the core systems. it means we don't get everything. some of the seats will continue to be rattling and substandard

parts that we won't have. we are going to really improve the major systems to keep the buses looking and feeling like new. when we missed the opportunity in 2019 to bid this work, we knew that we had to break off the first 112 vehicles in 2013 and 2014 to get that work started. that is mening us to catch up -- helping us catch up on schedule. this is for 219 vehicles today. 40 and 60 food coaches purchased in 2015 and 2016. the contract was issued june of 2021. we received one complete proposal.

they are partnering with new flyer. the original manufacturer will be involved. complete coach works is a firm we worked within the past. they are located in riverside california which also has some advantages in terms of oversight and transportation. the next step if the m.t.a. board approves today we will go to the board of supervisors at the end of april. they will produce a first coach similar to the first vehicle. once we have agreement on all of the work being up to the expectations of the contract, we will be sending between 15 and 20 vehicles at a time with the plan to complete all work by mid

2025. this is to approve if contract for 219 coaches. it is approximately $100 million. the overall work in house as well as contract as well assaile sales tax is $155 million. the action today is specifically for the contract. with that i can answer any questions you have. i do appreciate your time. i also have with me the fleet engineering team that leads this work. gary chang and chu and they are available. this could not have been been done without them and without

their close partnership with maintenance which is another reason this is so successful. it is a group of technical people integrated with maintenance teams responsive to feedback and the experts in this area. >> thank you for focusing on this. directors, do we have questions? should i move to public comment? >> director hinze. >> i have a couple questions. i did want to bid only one bid for this. going forward is that a concern for staff? is there something we can do to

attract other bidders, other firms to do this work for us to make it more attractive at all forbidding purposes? >> thank you for that question. we are very focused on trying to generate competition and generate interest. the bus manufacturing industry is continuing to shrink. while we are trying to expand it. a big part of the pilot for electric buses for example is to get four companies vested in our system, understand how to work with our sub vendors, understand how to work with our city and contracts. that is one way that we are trying to grow interest.

another is through the industry outreach. we did have several potential bidders. some of whom were on the east coast and did not see this as a sort of a big enough incentive to establish a west coast presence. we also used consortiums in the past for competitive bus prices that is how we purchased the 32 feet buses that are coming. with the trolley buses we partnered which helped us get a larger purchase amount which in that case allowed us to attract one bidder because the trolley industry is not a big market share. it is something we are working on on a lot of fronts. i think it is something we will

continue to be vulnerable for. >> my next question is we are going to we having coaches out of service. they take the trip down riverside. are we concerned at the moment? are we able to cover the coaches out of service? we are not operating 100%. looking down the road do we have concerns? if so, do we have a plan for that? >> i don't at this time have concerns. it is one of the benefits as i talked about earlier going to the stable annual plan. [please stand by]

>> director heminger: it wasn't that great to start with -- but it's a substantial improvement. the fact that you're doing this work, lot of transit agencies

don't bother. >> director lai: one quick question. could staff remind me why for bus fleets, if you can remind me we lean on operating funds as a source of opposed to capital in the sources of funding this? >> we do use -- we do consider this a capital expense. we do use capital funds. there are some funds like prop b which are flexible funds.

this is not funded on the operating budget. it's challenging to fund and it has a lot of different colors of money because there isn't federal program or even a regional program that prioritizes. mid-life. it's in the capital project and in the c.i.p. >> director lai: sorry, we do have the t.c.p. funds that's funding lot of it. there's a chunk operating fund. thank you. also a compliment. i know with covid and everything, we did delay this basically the timeline by year. as i understood it from you, we also found ways to be smarter about the cost of this and narrowing the scope which brought down overall cost of this. really appreciate the ingenuity

there. thank you. >> chair borden: only question i have, how do we see this in terms of like, when do we hope to get electric coaches. are we only thinking about certain segments of our buses? do we expect them to eventually 10 or 20 years being the complete fleet replacement? >> thank you for that question. right now, we are piloting 12 electric vehicles. three of which from three different manufactures. we've now put in service. they are being tested on all the routes. starting with like the hardest routes. so we can really might sure that they are going to meet the expectations our terrain and of our loads. the current m.t.a. board policy

says that we will buy only electric battery buses and that the next battery buses and all future buses we purchase will be battery. as we talked about a year ago, at the staff level, we have some significant concerns about that policy. the first is it puts us ahead of the carb requirements by five years. we do have not even with the really ambitious facility plan, we do not have a current facility pathway to have an electric facility by 2025 when the first 112 that we're working on in-house now, reach the end of their useful life. we also think that it's really too soon to make a decision on

trollies. that's something that we have a big up front investment in. if partners like seattle and vancouver stay in the trolley market and there continues to be a demand, we think that's a very good fit for san francisco. we're going to recommend over the coming months that you guys revisit this policy, looking at zero emission little more agnostickicly than just electric buses. we realign our timeline. as a city we need to look at

resiliency. even going all electric, which is requirement of our regulator may have tradeoffs for san francisco. >> chair borden: i look forward to robust policy discussion. any more questions? >> vice chair eaken: thank you. thank you julie for this, for taking care of our fleet. just quick question through the numbers. this is $100 million for 219 buses. this is estimated about 450k per vehicle that we're spending on the maintenance. can you help us understand what one of these buses cost new and what percentage -- so we understand.

>> thank you for that question. at a high level, about a 30% to 40% cost. i'm going to ask gary to come on and go through the specifics of how much new bus cost and what percent we're investing if the mid-life. >> this is gary chang with program delivery and support of the transit. for the 40-footer hybrid vehicles it cost roughly about $850,000 to $900,000 per vehicle. for 60-footer, it will be running around 1.3 in general. for the trolly vehicles, we got to be spending about close to $1.5 million. the rehabilitation cost as julie point the out is roughly about

30%. >> vice chair eaken: this is part of plan turning over 2040 to get the longest use out of the vehicles. >> it is not my recommendation that we use the mid-life to extend the license of vehicle. we're making this investment because we want to maintain that 10,000 to 12,000-mile during breakdowns. the program needs to be two parts. it needs to be a consistent replacement plan because we do run these vehicles hard as well as the full rebuild.

>> vice chair eaken: last question, is this kind of proposal as like efficient and cost effective as possible? is there a chance we're doing mid-life overhaul and buses working fine and doesn't need it? >> we are starting to see increase maintenance costs and increase in critical systems failing. i guess there will be some questions we're doing the overhaul. this isn't a scientific experience. we're not upgrading half of the

vehicles. this is a pretty tried and true best practice in the industry based on lot of data that shows if we want the vehicles to continue to perform at this level and to not require increasing maintenance hours to maintain the investment. >> i think from every agency, they have a different set of goals and different set of requirements. i think more importantly, is the terrain that we will be operating. i do want to bring in example on

the coaches. we have overhaul program using the funds back if 2010. we have seen the performance of the vehicles sustain at the level they should be. with this amount of dollars, i think we can certainly reinstate the vehicle performance and last through their vehicle life. >> the gary, the question was comparing to other industries, other agencies is 30% of the vehicle cost the high-end pretty standard basement in terms of costs? >> i think this is in line with the one industry performing. to answer that question. yes. >> vice chair eaken: thank you. >> chair borden: we have no more director's questions at this time. we'll open up to public comment. to members of the public, if you like to comment on item number

11 on our regular calendar, which is mid-life overhaul to replace some of the buses. now is the time to call in. you may press 1, 0 if you're on the line and like to be in the queue. are there any callers on the line? first speaker. >> caller: this is david pilpel. last time for me today. on item 11, the mid-life coach overhaul services contract. i like that these funding plan and the staff report on page 5 and 6 has a line item for this action. that's what i was looking for in the budget and finance plan on items like this. there's a specific line item makes me feel great. in terms of stakeholder outreach, there was no outreach

to the m.t.a., c.a.c. items like this are good opportunity to bring it there to kind of make this academic concept of state of good repair very real that it cost $100 million for this particular piece of work that it involves taking vehicles out of the fleet that extends life of the fleet and reduces the number of in service failures and increases distance between failure. it's got lot of benefits. it may have some service impacts and staffing issues. it's a good opportunity to tell that story to the c.a.c. and in the world. in summary, i support the proposed accurate work. it is entirely consistent with state of good repair efforts. this should be common practice. it shouldn't have been required

by sfmta has a condition of prop k grant funds. this is what we should be doing to properly maintain and extend the life of the fleet and vehicles. with that, i say thank you until next time, look forward to the budget conversation on thursday. thanks. >> chair borden: thank you. are there additional callers on the line? we will close public comment. i see director hinze has her hand up. >> director hinze: i'm just to add my compliments to the staff on this and their work for really incredible overhaul and trying their best with the current contractor. i will say that i been talking

about lot about customer service. lot of expanding customer service in the budget. this is sort of a first investment in this particular cycle that we can do in customer service in terms of keeping our buses clean, looking in good condition. with that, madam claire, i'm happy to move the item. >> chair borden: is there a second? please call the roll. >> clerk: on the motion to approve. [roll call vote]

the motion passes. >> chair borden: next item >> clerk: item 12, presentation and discussion regarding the office of racial equity and belonging racial equity update. >> thank you so much. greetings to our distinguished board of directors. i'm racial equity officer for the sfmta. i will give an update on behalf of the office of racial equity belonging. this update will focus on the implementation progress of the racial equity action plan, focusing on about one-year of work. thank you to board secretary silva for advancing the slides. first i will start by setting some context how i've been working with several colleagues across different levels of work

to establish the foundation of a comprehensive, sfmta racial equity ecosystem. background really important for framing how we are trying to scale and growth overtime how we see that being racial equity work being compliment to everything that we do. i will spend some time giving high level updates of core areas of concern related to our racial equity action plan. this image our of racial equity ecosystem is based on the four programmatic area of office of racial equity and belonging. if you think about integrating racial equity everywhere there are many ways in which this work has happened. as we think about globally to do racial equity work to understand and mitigate any disparities or

inequities and to be affirming to our culturings of our workforce. the work will continue. briefly, equitable communication is one area. there's a lot of really great work in our public outreach and engagement team. we're not starting from scratch when it comes to doing equitable communication. at the top right you will see equitable services and systems. this is where most people goes to when you think of equity and sfmta. we have free muni and vision zero. again, for many years, many different programs have work to advance equity through our systems and services. as we think about comprehensive racial equity operations, where we'll be learning what we know

to be best practices and expanding our work and function. at the bottom right, policy improvements will be consistent effort and the racial equity action plan will drive the core of that work and that work happens every day. that work is in teams and through different projects and through identified data-driven approaches. we have documented areas of improvement when it comes to racial equity within our system. bottom left, equitable workforce and workplace. again, following the model of both the phase one of racial equity action plan which focuses on our workforce and it's important we take care of home first. you will see in this update different programmatic updates with areas related to the workforce and workplace. first starting with racial

equity in hiring, i want to lead with data. the equity data project is one that we worked on for several months. this different dashboards that support staff and make decisions around advancing equity in the workplace. these will be published on our internet in the coming weeks. related hiring, we'll have one focusing on hiring. gender identity information available and in compliance with our data and demographic policies around the workforce and what we can share publicly and internally. these dashboards really are meant to be educational tools to help broad range of folks to use data to drive the decision. we'll be doing work with our leadership team. in particular leadership positions to have appointing officer authority for those who

hiring. what you'll see on the left is identified major groupings of work scopes that are core areas of interest when it comes to racial equity in hiring. either because they are management positions where we have identified areas of growth also racial equity action plan compliment or because they are different classifications that has some gaps when it comes to diversity. there are few that are very big classifications where we have huge hiring needs.

lot of the data has driven our outreach strategy. i'm grateful for all these projects to have partnership but in particular to work with several teams of hr. we be rooting our understanding and currently working on a series of different campaigns and strategies based on nongap as well as upcoming hiring needs. this is an opportunity for us to be creative and think about marketing sfmta as an employer of choice in tandem with not vacancies and record numbers of hiring that we have to do this calendar year. briefly, we piloted both outreach and in reach campaigns. starting with the positions coming from oreb, office of racial equity and belonging.

we will assess racial equity challenges and staff supportive challenges. we need better information, education and communication about not just the vacancies but have navigate city hiring processes. we found very helpful information whether it's best times to reach our 24/7 workforce or get the word out. in our outreach in education, we worked on emphasizing information that not only supports our workforce as well as the public in navigating m.t.a. jobs but jobs in the city as a whole and lot of that involves education around the minimum qualifications. normalizing education about the hiring process so people are more capable and more equipped to navigate whatever job they

may have. with the pilot outreach efforts, we were able to reach over 350,000 people both online and in person which we built in about 280 applications. we are really excited with the progress of this project. we will be collaborating with divisions to expand these resources and again be marketing our agency as an employer of choice in parallel with workforce development efforts. as far as access in hiring, there's so much work that will continue. i want to start with the systemic change. as you recall from the racial

equity action plan, this work really is transforming systems. it's about integrating justice in our system. that takes time in learning. few things we'll be working on equity analysis currently conducted by myself and currently extended to the oreb managers. racial equity standards will be integrated throughout all forms of hiring process from the job creation to tests to interview questions to ensure that we are not only establishing the expectation that racial equity is a skill set here at the workforce. we're determining who's competitive for employment. we look forward to scaling that

across our job classifications and pacing that work according to the capacity being the full manager on the team. i talked about the outreach and in reach campaign. i look forward to working with human resources. you are recall that we have an equitable communications sections. we'll have more bandwidth to work with partners across divisions. as far as the forthcoming events, is community connections. we're still working on rolling those out. we will have request for the board to be part of that mostly marketing our jobs but centralizing planning processes, outreach processes and doing outreach to attract more members

from the public including black and indigenous and latinx and other communities of color. there are other projects to support the capacity voting on the workforce. whether it's videos or booklets and other tools. pipeline programs are ones that you hear a lot, especially from director ackerman, they are managed by the manager within the workforce evolving unit. this past year, the collaboration around racial equity has been in two core areas. first has been in supporting analysis and establishing equity standards. the second has been collaboration for the outgoing outreach. on the right, i want to highlight five amazing participants who are working across the agency. there's lot of work. in their first half of their fellowship to headache sure we're wrapping our arms around them and bringing in racial equity projects and leveling

their expertise. we worked directly with the hr team on establishing strategic partnerships. part of our strategy for equity and pipeline program is expanding where we placed pipeline program participants. as we scaled the goal will be to continue to market a diverse job to attract more people but also be giving participants the opportunity to explore the many different jobs that make up the m.t.a.'s workforce of nearly

6000 people. there has been ongoing work engaging and developing their skill set. discipline a major area of interest. i will spend few minutes talking through discipline. over the past year, most of it last eight months, there are four goals that you'll see on the slide. really focus on systems to support staff as well as management and understanding the standards and complying to them and developing series of intervention to try to drive down where we see disproportionate outcomes. we'll continue throughout the year and scale up beyond the transit division. for today, we are actually going to specifically focus on transit

operator data. that's primarily because we enough data to analyze which i would describe in a second. it's not representative of the whole agency but within one acquisition of our agency. this is a demographic breakdown of the workforce. 70% of the workforce is transit. the analysis was transit operator data. we looked at data over the past two fiscal years. what we found is that vast majority of incidents are driven by safety followed by those in category named performance. it's important to note that term is little bit of misnomer.

it speaks on investing in our staff and making sure they are supportive and performing well. our analysis, we did find disproportionatety among african-american. african-american women are operators and disciplined were attendance related incidents. we saw disproportionality. the approach is meant to support in figuring out the best ways to intervene and reduces

disparities in understanding the best way to improve the situation in our workforce. this summarizes our next steps. which is not everything of a highlight. there's an ongoing process. i want to give kudos to the transit operations team and director of transit for lot of the collaborations. transit office did much of this work. that work to do with bigger systems change and support staff across the entire agency. we will be continuing the development of the comprehensive database on discipline standards for transit operations and also scaling up efforts. in 2022 we are expanding two big divisions. there's a disciplined dashboard. we'll see a scaled series of dashboards primarily to guide

leadership as well as staff in understanding how discipline is of it is at the current agency. as far as systems and support staff. that's really important especially considering the ratio of direct reports in many managers in transit is. we'll be developing tools like automatic tracking system. really thinking about consistent tools to support compliance to these consistent standards. there are full fleet of interventions to support staff in reducing where we see disproportionality. that includes research about common methods about change in behavior.

equity training is a core area of interest. it's one that will overlap with the mtab. we look forward to reaching many more. these have been m.t.a. staff but we've been working to be resource of the city and county as a whole. in 2022, oreb will be launching leadership lab, training for staff this supervise other. if you have supervisory responsibility, there will be a racial equity training responsibility. those modules will be tailored interest areas.

we have leadership labs which launched last month with a training called mobility justice for black community. i may have it on a future slide. it's ongoing training community, not just for our staff butter the m.t.a. board of directors also for the state as a whole. those will focus not only on racial equity and foundational understanding of racial equity but also mobility justice and transportation equity. this is open to haver diverse group stakeholders. we hope to be really a leader in providing equity training across the county and within the transit sector. there will be a subset of training with an equity lab that's tied to the racial equity action plan which will focus on our external racial equity commitment. we will ensure that sfmta we are

having capacity building speaking the same language and all on the same page before getting started with the planning phase of the racial equity action plan. we look forward to engaging the board of directors. the racial equity policy is one of the most significant racial equity action plan commitments that are tied to the operations of the board of directors. we see the racial equity policy has a bridge action. this is a commitment within our phase one racial equity action plan. it will be linked to our phase two racial equity action plan. we see this as a bridge action. the racial equity policy is meant to drive equity centered decision-making, prioritization and evaluation practices across our entire agency. that's driving the strategy for equity and evaluation of

internal m.t.a. operations. it's also to drive the decision-making within the m.t.a. board of directors. there will be more information to come about the development of this policy. i look forward to working closely with you all about adopting that policy in the coming months. last thing, we do have a racial equity policy advisory team with staff from across the agency who are supporting the development of this policy.

we also had recent events that have engaged our board. we were very grateful to have two board of directors at our february 4th event. director hinze attended and chair borden was speaker. really excited to be engaging our 24/7 workforce.

we look forward to engaging more of our board of directors in future events. on the right and in the middle you will see two pictures from our first ever black history month cable car. i want to express gratitude under the leadership of director and staff to bring new opportunities to really think cultural affirmation and staff belonging within our cable car division. this is briefly will be a yearlong project. starting with black history month, next we'll have a women's history month cable car. we'll have a series of educational racial equity themes cable cars. there will be lot of work around staff engagement. we want to have a series of inaugural launches. where we center staff,

especially the staff reporting in-person throughout the entire pandemic. for those who are able, we have the black history month exhibit up through this friday. i want to express gratitude to the staff who made this possible on a short turn around. you will see pictures from it first gathering. which many staff really enjoyed the first ever black history month cable car. in this first year, we engaged about 600 people around wellness. which talked about racism and racial equity as well as the role of culture. cultural affirmation. starting on the left, you'll see another partnership event with the latinx infinity group where we focus on self-care and highlighting latinx in the

community. on the bottom was an event hosted for mental health awareness month that was an event hosted by the department of human resources for the

entire city and county workforce. i want to emphasize the team we've been working hard. we circulated about 10 publications and have been working with board secretary silva to make sure the board of directors is on the list for that. essentially the equity newsletter will be an ongoing space about the racial equity work in the agency as well as programmatic update. i want to highlight few of the staff involved in the black history month campaign. staff acknowledgement, staff appreciation.

in going forward, that campaign will be integrated into a project led by our strategic communications advisor. we will continue similar to cable car, we'll continue to acknowledge staff and celebrate staff by integrating them into the people of the sfmta campaign. which is marketing m.t.a. lastly, we will be collaborating with our communications marketing outreach team to populate this campaign on social media platform. we're primarily trying to acknowledge that, acknowledge and also secondary benefit so we are marketing the many diverse jobing some of which people may not know exist in advance of needing to hire. we know that we have unprecedented numbers of people to hire at a time where it's very challenging to hire and there are many staff vacancies

across the agency. last, we have launched our website. if you visit sfmta.com/equity, you will find the oreb website. it will include updates on the racial equity action plan and includes material. this is something that we hope to really build up overtime to not only be resource for our staff, no matter city or colleague, we already started to network with many different colleagues in similar situations. we also working to market m.t.a. as a space advancing equity. we'll see that many of our

existing equity projects whether it's the equity or essential trip card primary or free muni, we'll have links. as the public gets familiar with oreb, they'll be familiar with the equity investment. thank so much for many staff across the agency to make this work possible. it's all done in partnership with so many different racial equity action leads. several staff have dedicated countless hours to move this work forward. i look forward to being able to do this work five fold. i will stop for any questions from mtab. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you for this report. i have a question. i know you created a dashboard. we've seen an issue related to -- you pointed out the discipline issue.

i guess the question is, what's the next step? how do we -- ultimately people want this to stop. i know we'll do training. what are the interventions we can do today or happen in these cases? this has been the biggest areas in we've lot about for many years now. >> thank you. we have to start by normalizing the data. why it may seem like small steps, we have to make sure we have downed practices and training staff on new expectations when it comes to entering data. we prioritizing within transit operations, sharing our findings and also sharing the new tracking it system to flag data within hr personnel systems. other part of that, we're working to have more frequent monitoring and case management. i'll can be collaborating with

leaders in hr and eeo and safety and transit to intervene where appropriate. it really depends. you saw that safety was one of the biggest drivers of discipline incidents. we have lot of training happening within transit. we're grateful to have their partnership and collaboration in talking more about what we night do differently. outside of rolling out new forms, making sure all system match up, we want to have the racial equity training around big picture concepts like for example, racism and how that intersects with surveillance and violence. >> chair borden: are we drilling down -- looking at the numbers in the past we could look at

particular managers. will we be able to see in that data where mostly a few managers was it spread across all the managers. it would be interesting to be able to drill down little bit more specifically. in that instance like if specific managers looking at how they are overall safety across everybody. i really feel like, i know that data is part of it, drilling down the data and then targeting whether or not there are managers of people that needs specific direction, training because they are specifically may be they have implicit bias they don't realize or they are harder on the people they manage. i'm trying to figure out, i feel like i want to be able to in year from now, when we talk

about this issue, have real interventions that we put in place so that number changes. >> you're right. we have the idea of individual level and then sight level data. discipline information that personnel information is highly confidential. it has been situated with the senior most directors. it is confidential. we have to make sure we can't say josephine did this one thing at one place and make josephine vulnerable. it's really important we have claim that's identified. there's the challenge with

promotions and turnovers. when we started the case management, that's the idea. i'll be working with both our hr director to define a level of equity analysis of support and other teams that may involve accountability with key members who are managers.

we want to be careful not to promote fear but to be straightforward and be transparent. i'm saying this to say, absolutely, there's a possibility of individual level interventions. we have to make sure that's situated within appropriate personnel and privacy processes. it's important all levels of leadership, not just in transit and divisions that we have robust understanding of our standards. i want to see if director and tumlin want to chime it out. >> i want to thank josephine for her partnership as well as virginia and eeo team and hr team. it's incredibly complex topic.

we're focusing first and foremost on where implicit bias may be playing a role. which is why we did make the change to customer complaints. if customer complaint can be collaborated with a video, that's very different than, i didn't like the look of xy or z operator. therefore i'm submitting any complaint. we got a lot of customer complaints for p.c.o.s when they don't like they are written a ticket and they want to under around and inflict pain on the person writing that ticket we want to do this in a way that we don't undermine accountability or the process of corrective

action. putting heavy emphasis on training and things that can support everyone operating a safer system so that ultimately we need less corrective action is another way we're looking at this issue. we don't have all the answers at

this time. >> chair borden: i guess the question around, for example, lateness. that's an easy one, i think. i think there should be a hard line, no matter who he is at 10 minutes, it shouldn't be subjective because i think around lateness, obviously you're late or you're not. other people are late aren't getting cited and others getting cited it's problematic. at least hard lines -- any minute late is a hard writeup. doesn't matter if it's one minute or 20 minutes. the last thing you can have things that are subjective, then the easier it is for people to accept the rules. if someone said you're five minutes you will not get in trouble, if you're seven minutes you are. that becomes really subjective. i think where we can introduce

hard line based upon the graduations what you see in terms of behaviors that not acceptable. that will make it easier for people to understand and accept and then someone can say, susie was eight minutes late, you can clock in and you can see that, they didn't get written up. to the extent that we can also pull those kinds of records around lateness and writeups, that kind of thing. my only thing, as much as we can get rid of things that are subjective, makings things that are like hard and fast and then measure against that. you're never going to win the subjective battle. if someone gets passed for five minute and somebody is not for seven minutes, there's always that battle.

>> i had a similar question about drilling down the data. i completely understand that you have to get the data first and use that as your basis. you're jumping off point. i understand that. >> director cajina: i know that is one heck of a task. i know you're small team, i really congratulate you for all the work on that front.

when it comes to drilling down on the data, as you start uncovering these different trends, like you're seeing in lateness, you're starting to see these trends, i wonder if those present itself with an opportunity to try to create programmatic elements. we're seeing the lateness is an issue, let's figure out why it's an issue. if it's an issue because like there's not person dealing with child care issues or this issue or that issue, we start thinking about holistically how owe do we solve for that. things like that. i hope that as we start digging deeper into the source of data sets, we start asking the why and once we ask the why and we

start seeing the trends, trying to figure out solutions to that that can benefit our employees. nobody wants to be late. nobody wants to get disciplined -- you get the point. other question i had was you outlined positions of interest. i want to get better understanding how the core positions were determined. why did those rise to the top of other positions? if you can explain that piece. i other questions in addition to that. >> i will try to be brief. board secretary silva can bring up the slides for one moment. i want to emphasize where we have concerns for individual case of discrimination that's handled by our eeo office. that is separate.

we had several analysis with the high levels we did look for example at commuter trends to see where we're commuting from to determine if may be can be a ton. can be an impact on being late. one thing that, 61% of what we saw was safety. there are several different ways we want to intervene. whether it's training, within transit, safety, division and other teams. the suggestion for example of

timeliness. that one area is matter of calling it earlier, we want to look at what's happening and why staff not doing that. is that a gap or connection in gap? it's very multifaceted. with the staff that we do have, we will be moving to lot of interventions as possible.

what you see is core areas of concern. eeo has their own work. with the equity data dashboard. we start to get into 50, 60 or 70 percent of one demographic group within a job classification. there are some -- there's a dashboard feature top 10 largest grouping. transit operators will be an area of concern because the need to hire so many transit operators. less because of the diversity gap. i'm happy to follow up more detail about the full fleet of jobs. [ please stand by ]

>> this is a moment to help hiring folks who help us meet our equity goals. the last thing i was going to say is, you know, we are here trying to make decisions with the facts and figures that are presented to us. so i want to see, at some point whether it was in the plans that we have a way to evaluate equity impacts in the decision-making that we will be making here on the dais. i wonder what the work of that process will look like. defining metrics, and i don't know what that is. at some point, i would like to see that so when we do make decisions, we have the at the forefront of the decision-making process. >> thank you so much. we want to be having

decision-making structures not only to guide the board and all various operations, much would be initiated through the equity policy and get us to another level of our action plan which is to commit to several different actions. that will be the expectation and we will be working with several teams to operationalize that. you are absolutely right. the workforce chair is one of concern. we are at a prime opportunity to hire across the board. we want to integrate diverse outreach and ensuring we have robust antivirus training to complement the work of hr and we also want to do the integration of racial equity standards. it is not just an option like a hobby. if you are working with the city and working at m.t.a., there are a few ways where we can transfer into the workforce. i know you mentioned leveraging the personal community network of the workforce which is absolutely our work plan.

we have even been in contact with stakeholders. their quest to analyse the reach of our workforce, i just want to make sure i am clear on the follow-up. >> i'm sorry, is this about the staff that have external touch points? >> yes. so in terms of the positions and understanding the diversity makeup of those positions, the position specifically have touch points for the community. i would like to understand what the diversity makeup is of that group of staff. the different types of folks that are part of the community and have to attend community meetings. i would want to see what our current diversity is and language ability. >> excellent. there is limited capacity with staff and not just hr.

there is a lot of plans and operations that incorporate that and generally speaking, you can imagine it is a challenge to get accurate gender identity data and do it. it might be a bit of a task for us. i can definitely apply that as an area of concern and i think, as we work on engaging more staff and enhancing outreach functions, we can probably adopt more of that. thank you. >> thank you. is that everything? >> all right.

you sort of touched on this, and thank you again. you are always so enthusiastic. i did just want to -- you did mention this. if you could just remind us of your vision and your current vacant positions and your ones that you have unbudgeted for your vision and for your office. if and when you are fully staffed. >> thank you, director. there are four program units. the four dimensions of size and within each of the four units, there are four program areas. currently my budget requests for the operating budget have one

staff in each program area. in addition to the four managers who managed one of those scopes of work. all the other staff are entry-level, mid-level, program level staff. either coordinating or organizing planning and designing and still have a core function that we need to carry the work forwards. i do have for budget positions for three managers, one that is comparable to a manager and the first two positions, i should be getting interviews on them probably in the next couple of weeks. there's a second manager position that has been waiting for d.h.r. and so i can begin to stream and schedule the first two managers. there are two managers on the test for this position. sometimes between late to early march. much of this time, at the mercy of the citywide process, there was a period where we were in a holding pattern.

our hands were tied in terms of what they could do. i'm happy to have great support in moving that work forward as we have the green light. very much eager to hire them back and hopefully by april we will have good news about the first two managers. until -- [ indiscernible ] -- sorry. and total division to have this program area. i want to emphasize, we will budget deficit. this work is not meant to be in extracurricular. it is meant to improve all the work that we do and much of the work that matches myself and we have worked tirelessly to several different teams and all the different teams and all the different devils of leadership. as supporting delivery and supporting customer service and supporting outreach. we have looked forward to seeing what we can do. >> all right. i would second all of my colleagues on discipline and

seeing how we could maybe standardize that and minimize the impacts that you found. on the training side of things, you are clearly developing great training. you mentioned that. one of them -- i attended one of them. and a attended an event which was also great to see. how are we -- we have a 24/7 workforce. how are we doing the best that we can to accommodate them and making sure they have access to all of these trainings and things that we want to operate? are they recorded? >> thank you, great question.

it is critical that we reach our public safety and/or front-line staff. especially because the bulk of what we see as many agent and specific -- pacific islander staff are in the front line position. for the bulk of that, not able to hop on a computer nine to five. they are in transit and streets and the finance of it division. specifically the buildings and grounds. there's also the customer service staff. one is that we are working to record events to do outreach and live streams and at different locations. we have trainings available and we do work to share this information on the internet. some staff still have a culture of checking in. as i am able to staff up, and even with the limited staffing we have had, we have tried different times of day. for example,, for operators, it might be at 445 in the morning

to catch folks for their morning run. there might be later shifts and we just have to go to where the people are. the short answer is working to staff up and understand our global scheduling. archiving materials and also with internal communication staff, they circulate a lot of information on digital boards. often times for big meetings we might have a goal of going forward and maybe an operator might have two managers and they are scheduled around for the day. some of which they will go down and some of that varies. 's retraining and engagement for communication in general. for racial equity it means many different teams including hr and communication. as we work on investments, i really have been very grateful to have collaborations with other divisions and thinking about what we can do to better

reach our people. the short answer is more staffing, more availability, and more shifts. we would need to budget in training and development time so we can have people and time regulations scheduled with communities training. it is part of baseline capacity to do a job well that we all need to be investing in. >> right. and lastly, i will say it, i second the suggestion that maybe we do you work with the secretary and maybe on some of our dashboards to develop how we can incorporate those, maybe the staff report. and how we make decision making. it is right there. maybe now that is the road we can work on with you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, director.

director eakin? >> thank you. apologies again for my internet challenges leading me to need to change locations during the meeting. i apologize for that. it was not anticipated. thank you so much for your leadership. my question for you is about, you mention training and how staff is into training. how are we going through the next steps beyond training to think about staff accountability through racial equity? what i mean are things like our staff in their annual performance review and invited to set their own antiracism goals and how are they held accountable in that goal? are managers checking in on a regular basis on these commitments and, you know, it is one thing to take a training, and my experience is if it involves training, they are already similar.

they could show up to the training and not necessarily need the training want to show up for the training. how are we reaching the other 5,000 staff and creating accountability in the culture? >> thank you. that is a really great point. it speaks to the need to operationalize equity everywhere. the model is it is not an option. it is a requirement. it is a management process. it is one that many different departments are trying to model and it is requiring it. this year we will be requiring racial equity training both general racial equity training for foundational knowledge and also leadership specific training for anyone with a supervisor role responsibility. it is roughly half of our workforce. gearing up for next year. and we will have more stuff to provide the training. there will be racial equity requirement. we anticipate that for

leadership positions, there will always be a higher requirement of hours because of the increased decision-making and authorities of directors and managers. as far as accountability, i spoke earlier about some of the workaround discipline. right now we are working on building the system and making sure staff are supported, and not penalizing folks to make sure we have the tools to do the job correctly. and specifically when it relates to discipline, there are hr departments we can go to and we will be working with multiple people as well to develop a monitoring and accountability system that will be coming to myself. depending on the extent to which that kind of accountability works, work with personnel, and it may involve other parties. it is important to maintain integrity of the work and our processes that were not duplicating work functions but actually complementing that.

the leadership, as we look at the interventions, what should that be doing and there would definitely be a move to a space of staff complying to be standard. and aside from that, there are other big areas filling around the area around standard hiring. we could also go as fast as we can do the collaborative work with the business. it hasn't been required. for example,, racial equity questions will be required and i have been working with divisions to craft those and not the diversity center but on racial equity. the same goes for defining key components of jobs. in the last thing i want to point out is the racial equity policy. that drives the racial policy expectations and the concept of standard business practice. as you all know, there are many different ways in which work happens and prioritize asian happens. there is partnership and collaboration. we want to learn as we define these standards, including learning the best way to work with the board.

thank you again to the director and the chair board for sharing their ideas about how to flag equity measures and equity decision-making in the space. eventually, we want this to be acquired everywhere and have systems and protocols so people can make sound decisions everywhere. the big picture is it will not be an option and we have to fill that according to where we are in staffing and to make sure it is actually feasible. i don't want to say well received, people are always resisted to racial equity, but we don't want to do everything completely different. it is a process for much of what we are doing. thank you for your questions. >> thank you so much. >> great. seeing that there are no other comments from directors at this time, we will open it to public comment. it is time for members of the public to comment on our racial equity action plan update. this is item number 12. if you are in -- on the line and you want to be in the queue,

please press 10. if you would like to call in there is a call in number on the screen or on the agenda. moderator, are there callers on the line? >> you have two questions remaining. >> for speaker, please. >> thank you again, chair. interesting presentation. a lot here. i am seeing some things missing, though, and it concerns me. what i look at gender, male and female, are we not cognizant of the fact that there is such a thing as nonbinary and gender variant? does it -- it doesn't mean -- it doesn't mean that we are not recognizing that. at least i see the racial categories that we are making a provision for multiracial. that is good.

i certainly think we should have others because some are undefined and some choose not to answer. i think it racial equity work is important, but i ask that it not be linear and not be the only kind of equity that is pursued because if equity is linear in nature, than everybody else behind will be forced to wait behind a potentially indefinite line. i think that we need to have a greater sense of expansive global inclusiveness in this because if we are predicated totally on definition, then those who are not of definition are excluded by default. we are getting somewhere. i would like to see more about how this is going to benefit the riders and i would hope that this department would have a public facing aspect to it.

i would like to know and be informed. i just hope that we are not training people to exclude others who don't fit into these categories because equity goes beyond simply narrow racial and gender-based definitions. i ask that you be willing to accept those who are different from you, like myself. if we don't, then many, unfortunately, will fall through the cracks. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have one question remaining. >> one thing i am concerned about is harassment. and this ties into the problem of racism. what procedures are set in motion for addressing grievances

that they have been harassed on the basis of racism? i think this is extremely important. it is very important to know that when you have internal problems like racism and harassment, it affects productivity. this will affect service delivery on the part of m.t.a. i am wondering about these provisions in your presentation. thank you. >> thank you. >> moderator, are there additional callers on the line? >> you have zero questions remaining. >> two things. i wanted to follow-up on what public comment was just said. he hit the needle on the head in terms of the issue when we talk about internally about race and equity and belonging. it is about culture and how we are able to better deliver service to the public and people who work in a place that they are proud to work in. that is the reason we are focused on this work.

we do have work to do on the external component and making sure that our agency represents the public that we serve and the outreach and the people speaking about the work that we do also represent the public that we serve. i do want you to clarify because, as i understand it, nonbinary and sexual orientation is part of the race equity, including and into belonging. it is not meant to be the exclusion of other differences. i think that maybe you can talk a bit about the efforts in that way. they're not race specific, but also about inclusion and belonging. >> absolutely. i will be brief. racial equity work is guided by the human rights commission office of racial equity. it is one of the guiding principles that we look at. i think often times when you hear about racial equity, specifically for folks who are white and identify as belonging to another group with the

history of oppression, that is not the case. it is to say we are centering this around all different questions. we're doing that in the context of race. that doesn't exclude identifying any of the identities. there is more context in the ways that race and racism compound that experience. we are currently limited by what is available. citywide, with our date of implementation we acknowledge and we also have to comply with existing data standards. that is part of our challenge. we don't courage and -- currently collect data to monitor portions of our population who are nonbinary and trans. i would also ask when it comes to external equity, you are right. there's a lot of work to be done

and it is very much focused on things like the customer experience. i think one of the public comments was about harassment and i wasn't sure if that was clear for the public or the staff. those are concerns for both. our chief security officer looks forward to working with her with integrating the stronger racial equity priorities and projects. we will be working on improving data across the board to better monitor and understand and intervene where we see challenges. i very much look forward to extended capacity to do robust work around the theories that they are dealing with race first. >> director, very quickly, should we move on?

>> it looks like no further comments. thank you so much for this presentation. we always look forward to it. we are committed to having these metrics that we can make decision on. i look forward to working -- looking at those soon. can you please call our next item. >> that places you on item number 13. discussion and vote as to whether to invoke the attorney-client privilege and conduct a close session with legal council. >> is there a motion? >> i motion to go into closed session. >> i second. >> i will take public comment. we will go into closed session. before we go into closed session, are the members of the public who wish to comment on our decision to go into closed session? >> with that, we will close public comment and recess the meeting to closed session.

>> we should take a roll call vote. >> yes. i'm sorry. >> on the motion to go into closed session... [ roll call ] the motion passes. the board will now go into closed session. >> chair borden: please call item 14. >> clerk: the board did meet in closed session. item 3 was not heard. board discussed item 4 performance evaluation for jeffrey tumlin. no action was taken. item 15 motion to disclose items

in closed session. >> director hinze: motion to not disclose. [roll call vote] >> clerk: thank you. that motion passes. that concludes business today. >> chair borden: our next meeting will be on march 15th and hopefully, in person at city hall! look forward to seeing you all there and not being here in my house. [ laughter ] >> clerk: thank you. >> chair borden: bye.