television.

good morning everyone. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the september 16th, 2024 regular meeting of the rules committee. i'm supervisor ahsha safaí, the acting chair of the rules committee. i'm joined by president of the board of supervisors aaron peskin. i'd

like to entertain a motion first before we begin to excuse supervisor sherman walton from today's meeting. yes. on a motion to excuse supervisor walton. on that motion, member peskin, a peskin, i, vice chair safaí i safaí i the motion passes with supervisor walton being excused. great. i'd also like to recognize sfgovtv jamie echevarria or jaime and our clerk today, victor young. for always being on point, mr. clerk, can you call the first item, can i make some announcements before we start? i'd like to make some announcements before we begin. yes, public comment will be taken on each item on today's agenda. when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, please line up to speak on your right. alternatively, you may submit

public comment in writing in either of the following ways. email them to myself. the rules committee clerk at victor dot young at sfgovtv. org if you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors that include as part of the file. you may also send your written comment via us mail to our offices in city hall. when doctor carlton goodlett place, room 244, san francisco, california 94102. please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of september 24th, 2024, unless otherwise stated, the first item on our agenda is item number one. ordinance approving the police department's inventory and policy related to the use of unassisted aerial vehicles or drones, and making findings consistent with the criteria in state law. great. last week we continued this item to make time for president peskin to join us,

as he was unable to make last week's meeting. i know we have representatives from the san francisco police department joining us this morning. thank you for coming back today, can you come to the podium? i think supervisor peskin probably has some questions to begin. or you want to talk about some of the amendments that have been changed or some of the changes that will happen. please. please proceed. thank you. acting chair safaí and president peskin. also, thank you to you and your staff for working with us over the last week. the police department would like to propose some amendments to the drone policy based on your feedback, questions we've received and concerns from members of the public. so if it's all right with you, i'll just read those oud. yeah, please. so in addition to what's existing in our drone policy, we'd like to add prohibitions and restrictions to read department owned uas, which are drones. they're accessories or features and functionalities shall not be used for one, the purpose of

infringing on the lawful exercise of rights protected by the first amendment. two for a non-law enforcement related matter. three in an unsafe manner or in violation of any applicable laws, rules or regulations for the uas shall not be equipped with weapons of any kind. five the uas shall not be a force option when the uas is being flown. operators will take steps to ensure the camera is focused on the areas necessary to the mission, and to minimize the inadvertent collection of data about uninvolved persons or places, operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions, such as turning imaging devices away to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy unless authorized by law. in addition to that, we'd like to add a data retention section to the policy to read one. upon completion of each uas mission, the digital media evidence, or dme, shall be

reviewed and evaluated for evidentiary value. all dme shall be uploaded into the department's digital evidence database. a if dme is found to have no evidentiary value, it is not relevant as it is not relevant to a criminal, civil, or administrative matter. data may be deleted within 30 days. and b if dme is found to have evidentiary value as it is related to a criminal civil or administrative manner matter, it shall be retained for a minimum of 2.5 years and in accordance with federal state laws and regulations, two uas recorded data will not be collected, disseminated or retained solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the us constitution, such as the first amendment's protections of religion, speech, press, assembly and redress of grievances. for example, protests and demonstrations, and three pursuant to sf admin code 96.2, subsection e, the

department must not retain any public footage for longer than 30 days unless a sworn member holding the rank of captain or higher has determined that a longer retention period is necessary due to an open criminal investigation, and must not allow any department staff to access any public footage unless a sworn member holding the rank of captain or higher has determined that access is necessary for an open criminal investigation. so that concludes our proposed amendments. president peskin, do you have any comments to make? i thank you for working with interested parties and my staff in the intervening week, and i am prepared, subject to public comment, to make the amendments that carl has laid out and really appreciate your work in the intervening week. thank you. great. so, before we make any, thank you so much. thank you. i think we talked a considerable amount about how these have assisted already. i think the idea is to ensure that we're

doing everything we can to abate and stop crime, and that's where it's going to be focused on. i think these amendments that are made, and we talked somewhat about that infringing on people's rights, not inadvertently being used in any way as a weapon or otherwise. so we really appreciate your consideration, and i can tell you that, they've had impact on public conversation. so thank you so much for the work that you all have done. it would be good at some point, maybe in 6 to 9 months, to get a little update on how many more operators you've hired and how many have been deployed. that would be helpful. happy to do that. thank you. thank you. mr. clerk will take public comment on this item before we move the amendments. yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. there'll be a soft chime when you have 30s left and a louder chime when your time has expired. you can proceed, thank you very much. i'm h brown, thank you for this

item. and i am all in favor of it, get as many drone operators trained as fast as you can and, give them extra money if they're good. this is not just for the cops, folks. this is for earthquakes. this is for disasters. you can even, send some, send a couple drone operators over to ukraine, send them to gaza, give them some serious training on the ground. but drones are a good thing. technology is a good thing. thank you. next speaker. jordan. my pronouns are she. they. i don't think that there's any drone policy that will be satisfactory. honestly we live in a city that's struggling with its budget, where people don't have enough to eat. and yet we're spending millions of dollars on fucking drones. like, literally. i don't believe that the safeguards will ever be

adequate. i just don't i know the police are going to illegally use this shit because it's just yeah, i'm not a big fan of, spy games and just, i swear to god, in some parts of the country, if you tried to do this policy, like in some place out in appalachia, you know, them rednecks are going to shoot them down. so anyway, fuck, drones disapprove of this policy. i yield my time. fuck you. are there any additional speakers on this matter? there are no additional speakers. i believe we can close public comment. thank you, mr. clerk, i'd like to make a motion to accept the items of the amendments as read into the record on the motion to accept the amendment. member. peskin, a peskin i vice chair. safaí i safaí i the motion passes without objection with, supervisor walton being excused.

great. now we can send this item to the full board with a positive recommendation as a committee report as amended. yes. and a motion to recommend, as amended, as a committee report on that motion. member peskin, a peskin i, vice chair safaí i safaí i the motion passes without objection. great. mr. clerk, please call the next item. yes. next on the agenda is item number two. ordinance requiring the new public library branch serving the oceanview, merced heights, ingleside and lakeview neighborhoods be built on city owned parcel of land at 100 orizaba avenue, subject to environmental review, required approvals and other applicable laws and prohibiting expenditures of city funds to explore, pursue or plan construction of a new library branch serving those neighborhoods at any alternate

location except to expand the existing ocean view branch library located at 345 randolph street on any adjacent parcel and except as required by the environmental review process, required approvals or other applicable laws. thank you. since it's my item, i'll just quickly say, i think we talked mostly about all the issues. just as a reminder, supervisor peskin, this project has been delayed for almost two years. while there was an attempt to look for alternative sites, but unfortunately, that's just added to cost and significant delays. so we made some amendments last week. the one amendment that we made was that allowed in case there was an opportunity to expand the existing site to an adjacent parcel. we wanted to offer that as an alternative, as well. and those amendments were accepted. so i'd like to move this item today to the full board with a positive recommendation, unless you have any questions. i don't, but i'd be more comfortable if we sent it as a committee report. oh yes

it is. i'm sorry. as without recommendation. okay any particular reason why i'm waiting to hear from other parties between now and tomorrow when we vote on it at the full board. okay, i guess we'll do that then. if we can send this item to the full board as a committee report without recommendation. as supervisor peskin gathers more information. would you like me to open this up for public comment? oh, yes. absolutely. open up for public comment if there is any. yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. if you'd like to speak on this item, please line up by the windows. you may proceed. hi, my name is josh. in 2019, this board of supervisors passed a resolution stating that we are in a climate emergency and one of the primary actions as a

result of that resolution was the formation of an updated climate action plan in 2021. that 2021 climate action plan, on page 120, healthy ecosystems, section 5.4 calls for a citywide policy by 2023 of tree preservation and development and infrastructure. and if that cannot be accomplished, then a basal area replacement plan. my understanding of this particular site is that there are a number of native trees located on it which support native ecosystems, so as as written, this motion would not include that policy that was recommended to be implemented by 2023, because such policy does not exist, and it certainly is not an applicable law. so my request would be that if this report goes to the full board, with or without recommendation, that there be an amendment to include that the 2021 climate action plans healthy ecosystems. 5.4 a policy for preservation and

adequate replacement. thank you. trees are like trees. they keep us alive. we've got a character named jake sieg who runs around the city, cutting down 100 year old eucalyptus trees. he's in line trying to cut down 800 trees in mclaren park. this is absolutely insane. these trees provide habitats for hawks, owl, songbirds and raptors. they want to move it back to natural, natural plants. these natural plants were that were here when we first came here, would not support a hummingbird, keep our trees. are there any additional speakers on this matter? there are no additional speakers. i believe we can close public comment. thank you. i'll just

reiterate what i said before. i'd like to send this item to the full board as a committee report without recommendation. yes. on the motion to refer the matter without recommendation as a committee report on that motion, member peskin, a, peskin i vice chair safaí i safaí i that motion passes without objection. great. mr. clerk, please call the next item. next on the agenda is item number three. motion to approving rejecting the mayor's nomination for the appointment of eleanor bloom to the public works commission for a term ending july 2nd, 2026. good morning. thank you for having me today. my name is eleanor bloom, and i am honored to be considered for

an appointment to the public works commission. i appreciate you considering that nomination and look forward to any questions that you may have. i am a mother, a spouse, an attorney, and a resident of the sunset district. i have committed my professional life to public service and look forward to serving my city in this new role. i believe very strongly that we have the opportunity here in san francisco to make the city a great place to live, to work, to raise our families. as i am choosing to do. and a well functioning public works department is part and parcel of making making the city the one that the one that reaches that aspiration. i have spent a great deal of time pushing a stroller around and walking around our sidewalks in the sunset in alamo square in the hayes valley, where i used to live, right here, where my children went to went to childcare and preschool

and where i work across the street. and, and i am struck by by two things. one, that we are working with, working with a phenomenal city. one of the world's very best and have made a great deal of progress in in making the city one that is amenable to a robust and well functioning city that that cultivates those looking to live, work and raise families here. and also that we have a very long way to go. i'm i am cognizant of how much work the public works department has in front of it. and also that it takes the concerted effort of city residents, the board of supervisors and the department itself to fulfill those obligations that we have to the city public works. is it is also

a matter of personal interest to me by way of background, i while i have made san francisco my home over the last seven and a half years and am deeply committed to the city. i grew up in coconino county in arizona, where one of my parents was for a long time the director of public works in what is there the second largest county by geographic area in the united states. very different kinds of challenges than the san francisco department of public works has, but one where i grew up and continued as an adult to see the tremendous work that that my family and that the crews working for the public works department there have done the very challenging work they had to clear the clear snow to do some things that san francisco doesn't have as a as a particular challenge, but that there are some very real commonalities in the in the kind of work in the community effort

there. and i would be proud to help support the efforts of san francisco to build a strong and well-functioning public works department here to serve our own city. thank you for considering my nomination, and i'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. i have no questions and looked at your resume and background and qualifications and think that the body would benefit from a attorney. and i want to say it's a well, it's a well functioning body and is chair post is doing an incredible job. and feel free to call if we can be of help. thank you so much. i have a few questions. thank you for putting your name forward so you talk about challenges. what do you see are some of the challenges that public works faces as a department. yeah, so the challenges that i see from from

the outside, obviously not yet having been in in the mix of, of an oversight role, but from the outside as a person living, working and raising children in san francisco, i think that we have, we have a massive docket for our public works department. i know that across my own neighborhood where i live and this neighborhood here where i work, our sidewalks are in desperate need of maintaining maintenance, and that that is something really hard to effectuate across a city of this size without without adequate staffing and resources behind that. so i think i think we have some very real challenges there. i think that as a department, the department of public works is of course, recovering from a very challenging period. i don't

know what that looks like yet. from the perspective of budgeting and staff morale and the functioning and the relationship between an oversight body, a fairly newly created oversight body and the department itself. but i suspect that there are there's ongoing recovery and rebuilding and engagement with a new oversight body that may be a challenge. i, i think also that in a city where, as i said, i think san francisco is one of the great world cities, i think we are working with tremendous natural environment and lived in cultural environment. and also that means that the needs of the city and the natural world in which we are working is very diverse. and that that can be a real challenge, as i have witnessed in growing up with a in a public works household, can be a very real challenge for a

department to meet those needs of the people and of the built environment that vary considerably from neighborhood to neighborhood, site to site, and sometimes block to block. so you touched a little bit on sidewalk maintenance. one of the, one of the things that public works has suffered from i mean, we had a hearing in this chamber about a year and a half ago. they have a historic vacancy rate within their department, particularly in their operations division that can range between 20 and 30, that has ranged between 20 and 30%. they just got a permanent director within the last 6 to 9 months, which has been great, director shaw, someone i worked with back when i worked at public works almost 15 years ago. so she definitely knows and

has done a tremendous job of getting the operations division more focused on things like sidewalk potholes, graffiti abatement, sidewalk cleaning for illegal dumping, graffiti, pruning trees. and they just doubled the size of the maintenance division. we get calls all the time of supervisors on sidewalk repair. a lot of that is related to tree roots and is the city's responsibility. as of 2017. so it's only been seven years. so there's a lot of work that they're catching up on. and it's important work. so i would encourage you to focus on the vacancy rate within the department, focus on ensuring that that is a top priority for the department in terms of how it operates, particularly in their operations division. so that's something that's near and dear to me. hopefully you can

make that one of your priorities. you mentioned it somewhat, and having grown up in a household that saw it on a daily basis, you understand. but those are the calls that we get the most as supervisors have to do with the operations division more than anything else. so thank you for your willingness to serve and look forward to working with you. great. thank you so much, if open this item up for public comment, mr. clerk. yes, members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time, each speaker will be allowed two minutes, miss bloom seems excellent. i'd like to offer a personal challenge to director short. now that you're permanent, how about getting us a decent bathroom in front of the armory? my dog and i have been cleaning around that building for two years. we managed to push it all the way from 311 all the way up to

planning, and have the scaffolding removed from around the base of the building. it's clean now. the public toilet they have there on 14th is a disgusting piece of plastic shell garbage. what they have in storage is three dozen of those white units, and by the way, the attendants who run that, that, that shell hate it. they're ashamed of it. the mayor has two dozen of these white trailer things in storage. some mayoral candidate ought to step forward and challenge the mayor to put one of those in front of the armory. does anybody know any mayoral candidates who might do that? let's get a good plan. a good one of those big white toilets in front of the armory, the job training corps next to there. they have hundreds of people come through there and they crap and pee all over the sidewalk and next door in front of the armory. please get us a decent bathroom in front of the armory. jordan again. pronouns

she her. they them. now, i'm glad that there is a public works commission and i do want to elevate that anybody who serves on this commission needs to be committed. as the last speaker said on expanding our bathrooms, because i hate stepping in piss and shit just as much as any other san franciscan. and i don't want to. and i think that is a constructive solution. but i don't know if i can support this individual because she's probably just another mayoral hack from the west side who doesn't have an equity lens. and i will say this right now, like one concern i have with public works is the street sweeps that are happening much more often. look after the supreme court did that, like, you know, the police, public works, all these goons are taking away people's medications and ids and all their belongings and making it

harder for them to exit homelessness. is the public works commission going to fucking do something about it, or are they just going to take orders from the mayor and make decisions behind closed doors, and we'll all be more fucked from that? seriously, as a homeless rights advocate, we need to be paying attention to what public works are doing because these goons and thugs are stealing our belongings. they're stealing medication. people are dying on the streets. they're stealing their ids, and shelters are not good places. so yeah, i'm a big fan of public toilets. i think public works has a commission, has a good use to it, as i do think most commissions do. but i we need people of better caliber. we don't need hacks who have no equity lens, who don't care about our neighborhoods. so just fuck this appointment. i yield my time. fuck you. are there any additional speakers on this

matter? there are no additional speakers. i believe we can close public comment. yes public comment is closed, supervisor peskin, would you like to make a motion? i will make a motion to amend the subject, motion before us by removing the word rejecting in the long title at line three and remove the word, rejecting. let's see, where is it in the motion move that the board does hereby reject. remove the word reject in line seven. and then with that amendment, send it to the full board with a positive recommendation. great so there's a motion to send this item to the full board, as amended. yes. on that motion, member. peskin. all right. peskin i vice chair safaí i safaí i that motion passes

without objection. all right. please call the next item. next on the agenda is item number four. motion approving rejecting the mayor's nomination for the appointment of mike chen to the municipal transportation agency board of directors for a four year term ending march 1st, 2025, and chair safaí, i just want to thank mike chen, who we heard earlier at a previous hearing for reaching out to chinatown trip and having that meeting which resulted in chinatown trip being pleased to have the opportunity and recommends, at least to me, that we approve this nomination, which i am ready to do today. great. we'll give you an opportunity to say a few words. thank you. chair safaí, again, mike chen for the san francisco municipal transportation authority agency, we last met. i last came to this committee on july, and i thanks to this

committee, i received very clear and direct feedback about what to do next. and so in that time, i've had a very busy august. i've met with many groups in chinatown in the chinese community, as supervisor peskin said chinatown trip, but also some of the merchant communities and other groups in chinatown, including, ccdc. the chinatown community development corporation, the chinese chamber of commerce, the chinese merchants association, the chinese consolidated benevolent association, and b, chinatown. i have committed to those groups that i'll be working with them in consultation on some of their priorities. and i've heard very clear feedback from them about things around around the outreach process to the public, around public safety, on transportation, and also supporting commerce and small business, let's see, especially, you know, i've heard regarding comments from supervisor safaí from july, talking to merchants and having and hearing very clear and specific feedback around parking and loading

around delivery pickup around customer access and working and figuring out how to use transportation to help support the small businesses of san francisco, i'm happy i know that there have been many transportation, as there are issues that are coming before the board that have come before in the past two months, and i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you. yeah. and i just want to say that part of this process, which i think we took advantage of here, is to just create the opportunity to have those contacts and hear that input and have buy in from the community, knowing that they have access to a commission that has a very direct daily impact on so many different people's lives in various ways. so thank you for availing yourself of that opportunity. great. thank you. and something that came up since we we've since we met last time i met with the transit operators union and one of the

things that they spoke about is how often they're left out of the conversation and the decision making at the mta, i'll give you a perfect example. so we sit on the county transportation authority. oftentimes, the mta comes and asks us for approval for dolls that have come down to make purchases. one of them has to do with light rail vehicles, and it came to my attention that the agency, instead of working with the operators when they were going to purchase these light rail vehicles and talking to them about the operation of the actual vehicle itself, ended up purchasing vehicles that the operators were not familiar with. and so the instruction then became just when it the vehicle needed to slow down or stop, they instructed them just to hit the emergency brake. yeah, the mushroom break and

each vehicle is measured by a certain measurable mileage track mileage. when you consistently hit the emergency brake, you grind the wheels down and it essentially reduces its usage, which then costs the taxpayers millions of dollars, puts them out of service at a higher rate. instead of just getting a vehicle that they actually have a functioning brake that they're trained on, that's just one example. during covid, when it first started, we kept hearing from the head of the mta that everything was safe. the operators were in a contained glass area. there was no need to encourage the use of cash or have rear board, rear boarding. but instead, you know, again, i went down and met with them.

there's a as you know, you ride public transportation, there's a large gap between the glass. many operators were, being exposed to covid at a much higher rate because of the interactions. so then we pushed them to have cashless rides and vehicle, you know, rear board. those are just two concrete examples. so not many commissioners interface with them, interact with them, and talk with them. so i would encourage you to do that to reach out to the transit. t.w. and talk with them about their thoughts and hopefully you can get more of their input. so that's just for your information, but i just wanted to underscore that, that another thing that's come to attention is, and i'm sure you've been following the news since the last point in time count of

those that are unhoused, a number of families living in rvs has gone up exponentially. it is the largest increase in the homeless population in san francisco, technically under the category of homeless, right? even though they have a roof over their head in most cases. and it's been exacerbated by the end of some of the guaranteed income programs that we had when it comes to rental assistance, food assistance mayor breed has put forward a new proposal to essentially reverse a long standing policy of the mta. the policy mta was to not just begin putting up no overnight sleeping restrictions, kind of randomly, but instead working with other different agencies to transition people out of. it's one of the reasons

why, in my district, we did the first safe parking in the city. we did it at the balboa park parking lot. station, and subsequently now there's one in candlestick point. so the push is now to begin to tow people all over the city, not necessarily providing them with good transitional space. it's one of the reasons why we did safe parking, because this in most cases, if it's an rv or if it's a car, it's the only asset the family has and takes a little bit more time to transition them out. now we did, and i will say, and i think it is the correct practice once you've set up safe parking, once you've gone out and done the appropriate outreach, then you can begin to put more of the no overnight sleeping. and that's what we did in in the excelsior. and it was very effective. but we were able to get 40 spots. so i just want to hear your

thoughts on that. you're going to be serving on the mta board. it's happening as we speak. so i just wanted to get your insight and thoughts on the restrictions and rv towing and how it's impacting a lot of families in san francisco and unhoused individuals. thank you. supervisor, for, for to your first point, for the for the operators, i believe i agree with you that the operators are the backbone backbone of mta and that we need to any policies that that involve them, we do need to make sure that that it works for operators and, and on the ground that behavior actually does, that, that things that happen at the board actually do translate and work with people who are actually implementing those policies on the ground, for, for vehicular homelessness. i have seen i've been keeping up a little bit with the news, i would say that in general, we want to make sure that we have policies that that put people in better situations and not in worse situations. we should be using towing as a last resort, and not without using

not without actually providing people realistic and better and credible offers of better alternatives, such as the vouchers such as the voucher programs and alternative housing and affordable housing offers, you know, whatever the mta can do in consultation with department of homelessness and supportive housing, you know, whether that's brainstorming and ideas to offer, as you said, safe parking sites and to help bring those online so that people have a place while while the city and its agencies can work with them to find better solutions and better situations for them. and so that's those are the things that i am thinking about. if i were to serve on the board. so just so i'm clear, the proposal essentially gives the director the authority to push these bans without any public hearings. so there would be no public hearing

in front of your body. so that was really what the question is about. it's a change in policy. not only they've had they've always had the ability to expand, but it's been a little bit more thoughtful and more in coordination, so really what they're doing is they're saying there'll be no more public hearings on this. yes, that's what i really wanted. your thoughts on. i would like to make sure that the mta does hold does hold hearings about this, about the situation. does that mean that does that mean that the mta should be holding a hearing every for every block? i think that's that's a question. so right now they don't put the policy is they don't do it without public notification. right. and as i said, and there was a one block in our in our area actually a couple block area near the safe parking. and they went through that process. they posted it, said we're going to have a hearing. it was on the agenda. and everything went according to plan, but at least there was an opportunity for the

public to be aware of it and weigh in, this is a major reversal in policy. so that's what i'm highlighting for you, is that there would no longer be that option for public hearing when it comes to this, which is an important issue. i mean, listen, at the end of the day, we don't, you know, want people living in vehicles. we don't want people sleeping in vehicles. we want to get them transitioned into into more permanent housing opportunities. and there's a whole host of reasons, as seen by that. they're not the same in a lot of cases, not the same demographic or makeup background of what we see people living in tents. it's oftentimes very, very different. and as i highlighted in some cases, it's people with families and children. it's people that are actually working in construction. it's students. so you know, if you're just doing it without any notice, without any transition, i think it can have a real detrimental impact

and essentially just pushes it from one block to the other. and what'sappened is you've seen a larger increase in bayview-hunters point over the last couple of years, because there's other areas that have been putting up these restrictions. so that's what i'm highlighting for you, bringing to your attention, and wanted to get your thoughts on that process. yes. i believe that that changes to this policy should come with notice. none of this should be a surprise to people who may be living on those blocks. i believe that there should be consultation, whether that whether that happens at the level of the mta board, whether that happens at a different part of the mta happy to happy to have more conversations about that. for example, engineering, public hearing, whether and to make sure that there are that the process works well, that there are solutions for people, that there are real solutions so that people can get into better situations. great, just one last thing. i wanted to highlight for

you. it's unfortunate. we had been pushing for years for new traffic signals to for pedestrian safety, bike safety, turning on alemany, we were able to activate two of the traffic signals at different intersections. one, we is not and still waiting for that to be activated. and unfortunately, a senior was hit in the crosswalk, at that location. so just anything you can do as a commissioner to interface and highlight the work with pg and e and accelerating and the puc and accelerating traffic signals and lighting being turned on, i think will help with pedestrian safety and also just safety in general, particularly at major intersections that are high injury, so that's it for me, mr. clark, can you open this item up for public comment? unless you

have any other comments? supervisor peskin? yes. members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak at this time. each speaker will be allowed two minutes. thank you very much. h brown again, thank you both for your work here, the applicant seems excellent. i'm on the ground again with my dog looking out my window. i'm seeing, the very best, bicycle lanes in the city are in front of the greek orthodox, and the french schools, one block from my house in the old levi's factory. they're raised islands. the whole bit. then you hit 14th and you cross the street. you have all of these people bicycling their kids to school down at the friends in the greek orthodox, on these basket things with 1 or 2 kids in front, and they come down valencia, approaching 14th

from four barrel. and there's nothing there. it's not a question of redoing a bad job in the center lane, which they're going to do. there but there's nothing there. the lines are all worn out, and you see these people who are paying $60,000 a piece for these kids to go to school. they're risking their lives, coming and crossing 14th street extremely dangerous. let's buy some more green paint and paint inside lanes from four barrel down to the corner. we've already had two accidents there within the last year. green paint for barrel to the corner and on the loo in front of the armory, lurie. lurie did it, lurie. lurie had an eventre, and he brought two of those big wide toilets down there. and mayoral candidate lurie did what the mayor wouldn't do. and the mayor's got two dozen of them. let's get a loo in front of, in front of the armory and let's

get green paint from four barrel down to 14. it's jordan again. pronouns she they. as a good government advocate. formerly homeless person. tenderloin tenant, public transit rider, and someone who has been almost been run over by car brained assholes. i oppose malicious mickey chen. he is nothing more but a political hack who only got appointed because the bullshit ass mayor needs a foot soldier on sfmta's. does mickey chen support road diets and high injury corridors, or does he support westside gas masters flying throughout the city? does mickey chen support free muni for seniors and disabled adults, or does he support cutting social programs? does mike chen support banning switchbacks and dealing with overcrowding issues, or does he support undermining public transit altogether? does mike chen support oppressing rv dwellers and poverty toes? i think secretly deep down he does. does

mickey chen even support the idea of commissions, or does he support closed door decision making like commission killing, rapist loving tamil genocide and enemy of democracy? kanishka of together sf and overcrowding on transit is a public safety issue. as i worry often about being groped on public transit like a certain supervisor did to me at a political event years ago. does mike chen care about safety for women on transit? seriously this guy is a corrupt fuck ass that needs to be rejected. but i know you won't because mayor's appointees always get through without any scrutiny, so i yield my time. fuck you. hello. members of the board of supervisors. my name is robin pam, and i'm here to comment on behalf of kidsafe sf to support mike chen's nomination for the board. we represent thousands of parents and allies of families in the city who want to see a city

where streets are safe enough for kids to walk and bike to school and transit serves everyone. we support mike because of his commitment to transit, biking and walking in the city. he walks the walk and he also has extensive experience on the sfmta citizens advisory commission, representing diverse constituencies and diving deep into the challenges facing sfmta today and given the sfmta is facing some massive challenges in the coming years, we are going to need leaders like mike on the board who are prepared to deal with them. people who share a commitment to upholding the city's transit first vision zero and climate policies, and also an ability to help the agency make the hard decisions that are going to be necessary to address these coming fiscal issues. mike, is all of these things, and we strongly urge you to support his nomination. hello, supervisors. my name is peter belden. i'm the political chair of the sierra club in san francisco, and i'm here to voice our support for the nomination of mike chen. i think we sent in

a letter a few weeks ago of support. the sierra club has a strong interest in sustainable transportation, and mike has been a great supporter of sustainable transportation. and the great thing about mike as a nominee is that we know what we will get because of his time on the citizens advisory committee, including as chair. so he has a track record. so we urge you to support the nomination. thank you. hi, supervisors, i'm leanne chang, a transit and safe streets advocate in san francisco. i'm here to support mike chen's nomination. mike is a regular transit rider and cyclist, who also understands what it's like to navigate the city by car, and he's a proven leader. as an asian american, i'd also be delighted to have him represent our diverse community. but more than anything else, mike's uniquely proven and prepared for this role as he's been a member of the sfmta. cac for almost five years and elected by his peers to be chair of that committee.

in that sense, i kind of think of him as having had a five year long proving ground and job interview for this role and having him having seen his work from various angles over that time, in my view, would be very lucky to have him. i've seen mike prove his thoroughness fair mindedness, and commitment to helping san francisco live up to its transit first and vision zero goals, while also working with the communities that he serves to understand and address people's needs and concerns. i think he would do an extraordinary job of bringing people together while also moving these issues forward. thank you. see, i don't think there's any other public commenters, are there any other commenters on this matter? there being no further public comment, i believe we can close public comment. great all right. well, i think there's a significant amount of challenges facing the mta, one is the directors contract will be up at the beginningnext year. small businesses are really suffering in this city. there's a whole network of bike lanes and

pedestrian improvements that have not been implemented, and ridership and bus lines are threatened due to a lack of funding. so you come in, mr. chen, with a significant. and i could keep going, you come in with a significant set of challenges, not to mention some of the ones that we talked about last time where you have a department tt does and is known to and this is listen, not disparaging, but this is just a constant criticism of the of the agency is just its lack of community outreach and communication. and we talked a little bit about that last time. so i'm not going to belabor the point, but appreciate you spending the time. i can tell you're a thoughtful person, you've spent the time going and talking to people that have significant need of a voice. i think you're somebody that will do the job to your utmost

ability. so i'm happy to support you here today. so, make a make a motion to strike all of the reject and change it to approve and send this item to the full board with a positive recommendation. yes. on a motion to amend, to delete. rejecting throughout the legislation and recommended as amended. on that motion, member peskin, a peskin i vice chair safaí i safaí i that motion passes without objection. great. and before you call the next item, i just want to take a moment to recognize gateway high school students that have come here today, thank you for joining us and observing democracy in action. really appreciate you all being here. i know you're going to be here today and tomorrow, but just so you know, for the record, this is how i started learning about local government here in san francisco, 24 years ago, sitting in the chamber observing the process, listening to the questions and then thinking

about the ultimate outcome and how it impacts the city. seeing it right here is where it happens for the city. so welcome. thank you all for coming out. thank you to your teachers taking the time, bringing you here. i think it's an important part of learning about civics, mr. clerk, before you do that, can we take a five minute recess, and we will come back out. three minute recess. we'll come back at 11:00.

sfgovtv san francisco government television.

and.

we're ready. let's get started. yes. before moving on to item number five, i just wanted to clarify that item number one, i wanted to clarify and confirm that there was no amendment to the ordinance itself. the change was to the policy. great. thank you. thank you for that note.

yes, we the way that the ordinance is written is that there's an ordinance that governs the policy, and then there's internal procedures. and we were talking about the internal kind of policy that's not related to the ordinance itself, that the department can amend and change at any time through conversation with this body. yes. thank you, thank you. please call the last item. item number five is a hearing to consider appointing seven members. terms ending november 18th, 2024, and terms beginning november 18th, 2024, and ending november 18th, 2026 to the urban forestry council. okay, so we have a number of different people that are applying for a number of different seats. so any of them here today with us, let's see. would you like me to read the list? sure. that'd be great. yes, first on the list is

morgan bassett for real? she did indicate she was unsure if she would be able to make today's meeting. is this person present at today's meeting? no no, no, you don't need to speak for her. that's okay. who are you? are you also applying? i'm the urban forestry council coordinator. oh, okay. yeah. go ahead. why don't you say a few words? that'd be good. yeah. so i'm here. we have seven applicants that i'm endorsing for seat one. morgan faville, who manages the open space preserve at ucsf. 60 acres, 30,000 trees and is supporting of variety of nonprofits there, including sutro, stewards, who's embarking on the restoration of the creek, carla nagy, who is also not present for seat two, who has spent decades working for

friends of the urban forest and a variety of roles directing various programs and eventually, vp of operations, currently working as a consultant at a variety of scales locally and internationally to support future urban foresters. pam pamela nagel, who is present here today. i'll let her speak for herself, edgar flores, who is applying for seat four, who works for poder and hummingbird farm, current member of the council. i can speak more about him if you would like, a new applicant for seat five. caroline scanlon, who goes by carol, is currently the program manager for friends of urban forest tree planting program, which is responsible for planting the majority of trees annually in our city, and while

does not currently live in san francisco, was born here and was also a youth that went through the program at garden for the environment, which is what sent her on our path for urban forestry, josh cliff, who is also here today, and antonio moreno, who is also present today for seeds one through seven, the other couple of applicants i am not familiar with. great. thank you for your public comment. okay. are there any of the other applicants if you would come forward one by one, that would be great. before you step outside, could i get your name for the record, please? yes. sorry, my name is jesus lozano. i'm the urban forestry coordinator, and i work for the san francisco environment department. in that role. good morning. my name is

pamela nagel, and i'm a registered consulting arborist as well as an isa certified arborist, i'm. i'm applying for reappointment to seat number six. sorry. seat number three. josh's seat number six, and i'm also a registered landscape architect in the state of california. and i've been on the council since 2019. and i'm also chair of the land landmark tree ad hoc committee. and i've lived in san francisco 35 years now, 29 of them in bernal heights. and for i started planting trees with friends of the urban forest in 2002. so i've been i've planted in every neighborhood in the city, and i'm pretty much aware of lots of issues that have to do with both hands on planting of trees and urban tree policy, i what i'd like to do moving forward, if i can be reappointed is, increasing the

visibility of the council. i think we've got a lot of work to do. the urban forest is shrinking, we're we can't even keep up with trees that we're losing, so that's one thing. and just kind of, kind of get everything up into the public eye, the council, although we have monthly meetings, is not really well attended. it'd be great to see more people at the at the meetings, and, that's really it. if you have any questions, i'd be happy to take them. thank you for your service. thank you. thank you. good morning, supervisors and i first want to start by thanking both of you for being ardent supporters of our urban forest in your respective districts, my name is josh clip. i'm here as an applicant for seat six. i'm an attorney and a certified disability access specialist.

and believe in environmental justice for all, especially people with disabilities. but my proudest title comes from the board of appeals, where they simply refer to me as the lorax, they call me this because after years of appearing before them, they understand that i am thoughtful, i do my homework, and my number one goal is always to achieve better citywide outcomes through a lens of climate resilience and environmental justice, while modeling how we can all work together to protect and grow our urban canopy. my proudest example of this is mission verde, which i've described in my application and received a commendation for that work from the board of supervisors, as well as from the monte quatro cultural district. and this model was recently used as a model of best practices delivered to municipalities across the state of washington. most important to me, however, was the community that we built through mission verde and the trust that we built through mission residents and city leadership. through our partnership with public works, i also worked on a tree removal for the ucsf renovation, a very needed renovation. but through my work and negotiation, we were

able to do a secure and nearly a quarter million dollar fee from ucsf for planting trees in the southeast part of the city. as to whether the council is familiar with me or whether i've attended meetings, they pretty much know me on a first name basis as to what i would do on the council. i would really like to begin to implement the mandates of the council, set forth in the environmental code, chapter 12, section 1203, and specifically work on legislation and policy, and perhaps even bringing a dedicated youth seat to this council and working with the san francisco unified school district, and that's about it. i have lots more on these notes, but not enough time. so if you have any questions, i'm happy to answer those great. thank you, thank you. are there any more applicants who would present to speak? good morning. my name is antonio moreno. i speak a littl.

yes, my name is antonio moreno. good morning. i, i'm applying for seat number seven, and i sent in a couple of, recommendation letters, and i've been working with the bonnie sherk foundation living library for almost half a dozen years, restoring areas wherever we get a chance, working with school districts and, restoring and cutting out concrete and installing more trees and more, native understory and whatnot. if you have any questions. where do you work? you said you work in the community i live in library is my nonprofit organization that i work for. it's a life frames. it's a foundation founded by bonnie sherk. and that's we work in the excelsior district with some of the schools there and their surrounding green areas and their gardens developing new

gardens and open spaces that are not being used into gardens. you know, i'm very familiar with bonnie sherk having being the supervisor of the excelsior. that's great. i appreciate that that you're continuing that wor. did you work prior? did you work with her prior to her passing? you know, unfortunately, i did not. oh, okay. friends that did. and they all had so many good things. that's why i was brought in, because i think they they thought i would be good with what her plan was. and she was. oh that's great. yeah. thank you so much. thank you for your willingness to serve. you're welcome. any other members of the public that would like to comment or going for a seat? okay great, mr. clerk, public comment is closed, so i think what we'll do is i move to

recommend morgan visit five zero for seat one, carla nagy for seat two, nagy, pamela nagel for seat three, edgar flores for seat four, carolyn scanlan to seat five. josh joshua clip to seat six, and antonio moreno to seat seven. yes. can we add a vacancy? residency waiver for seat one and seat five for those two applicants? i guess okay, yes, we can do that. yes. would you like to vote on that motion? yes yes. on that motion to appoint, to appoint the members as listed member. peskin i, peskin i vice chair. safaí i safaí i that motion passes without objection. great do we

have any other items in front of us today? mr. clerk? that completes today's agenda. great. we are adjourned. [music] san francisco emergency home program is a safety net for sustableable commuters if you

bike, walk, take public transit or shares mobility you are eligible for a free and safe roadway home the city will reimburse you up to $150 dlrs in an event of an emergency. to learn more how to submit a reimbursement visit sferh.

>> preston, the owner of cafe alma and-- [music] the cafe started as a temporary project and made it permanent projecktd. project. the building is slated to be demolished probably in 5 to 10 years. it u.s.ed to be a awning manufacturing and i decided to turn it into a cafe. it also served as a incubator for small businesses in the area. we also do a food bank from the location.

it has been an amazing community experience to have it, because we are [indiscernible] we like to [indiscernible] everything as much as possible from different vendors in the area, different producers. we like-other people as well. sometimes we have a pop up from a local maker. we also do a marketplace with another local business. definitely a lot of collaboration and local products. we have been in san francisco about 25 years. when i first came here i was in the restaurant, cafe, hospitality world and it is what i love to do and being in this neighborhood i have been in bayview about 20 years, but definitely knew i wanted to be a small business owner and do something here lovely in my community.

>> driver, bye. >> hi. i'm will b. mixture weltake a walk with me. >> i just love taking strolls in san francisco. they are so many cool and exciting things to see. like -- what is that there? what is that for? hi. buddy. how are you. >> what is that for. >> i'm firefighter with the san francisco fire department havings a great day, thank you for asking. this is a dry sand pipe. dry sand pipes are multilevel building in san francisco and the world. they are a piping system to facilitate the fire engineaire ability to pump water in a buildings that is on fire. >> a fire truck shows up and does what? >> the fire engine will pull up to the upon front of the building do, spotting the building.

you get an engine in the area that is safe. firefighters then take the hose lyoning line it a hydrant and that give us an endsless supply of water. >> wow, cool. i don't see water, where does it come from and where does it go? >> the firefighters take a hose from the fire engine to the dry sand pipe and plug it in this inlet. they are able to adjust the pressure of water going in the inlet. to facilitate the pressure needed for any one of the floors on this building. firefighters take the hose bunked and he will take that homes upon bundle to the floor the fire is on. plug it into similar to this an outlet and they have water to put the fire out. it is a cool system that we see in a lot of buildings. i personal low use federal on

multiple fires in san francisco to safely put a fire out. >> i thought that was a great question that is cool of you to ask. have a great day and nice meeting you. >> thank you for letting us know what that is for. thanks, everybody for watching! bye! [music] >> good morning. welcome to the september 10, meeting of the san francisco county transportation authority board. i'm rafael mandelman chair of the board.

our vice chair is myrna melgar. i want to thank jaime from sfgovtv and our clerk today is amy say young. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> commissioner chan, absent. commissioner dorsey, present. commissioner engardio, present. chair mandelman, present. vice chair melgar, present. commissioner peskin, absent. commissioner preston, present. commissioner ronan, present. commissioner safai, absent. commissioner stefani, present. commissioner walton, present. chair, we have quorum. >> thank you madam clerk. i think you have public comment announce ment. >> for members of the public interested in participating in this meeting, we'll welcome attendance in person

room 250 city hall or watch cabl channel 26 or 99 depending on the provider or stream at sfgovtv.org. for those wishes to comment remotely, the best way to do so is dialing 415-655-0001. when prompted entering access code, 26635793764. press pound and pound again. you will be able to listen to the meeting in real time. when public comment is called for the item you wish to speak on, press star 3 to be added to the queue to sfeek. do not press star 3 again or you will be removed from the queue. when your system says the line is unmuted the live operator will advise you have two minutes to speak. when your 2 minutes are up we'll move to the next caller. callers are taken in the order received. public comment for items on the agenda

will be taken first from members of the public attending the legislative chamber. and then afterwards from the remote speaker queue on the telephone line. thank you. >> thank you madam clerk. we are starting late and i apologize to the public for that. i also apologize because given the late start i think it is possible we will not get to 10 and 11 on the agenda. i know those are important items so we'll do our best, but we may be pushing those off. commissioner peskin has asked to be excused from the meeting and i'm going to grant that request. before calling our next item, i like to invoke 3.26 to limit public comment to 30 minutes. each speaker has two minutes to speak on a given item unless indicating otherwise when we call for public comment on that item. madam clerk, please call our

next item. >> item 2, approve the minutes of july 23, 2024 meeting. this is action item. >> i don't see any comments or questions from colleagues. let's open item 2 to public comment. if there is anyone who would like to talk about our minutes from july 23, please come forward and seeing no one, let's see if there is remote public comment on item 2. >> good morning chair, checking for public comment on item number 2. there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 2 is closed. is there a motion to approve item 2? moved by dorsey, seconded by preston. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> commissioner chan, absent. commissioner dorsey, aye. commissioner engardio, aye. chair mandelman, aye. vice chair melgar, aye.

commissioner preston, aye. commissioner ronan, aye. commissioner safai, absent. commissioner stefani, aye. commissioner walton, aye. there are 8 ayes, the motion is approved. >> great. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> item 3, community advisory committee report. this is a information item. >> and i think we are looking for cac chair k a t siegel. >> good morning chair mandelman, vice chair melgar and commissioners. the c a c met twice since my last report at our july meeting we rvled updates from sf mta about the quick build program and vision zero and update on severe injuries and fatalities. members wanted more information about trends in underlying causes of

fatal and injury crashes and also wanted to know whether more data could be collected about more miner injury crashes and whether more reporting about injury crashes could be done by hospitals to decrease reliance on police reports. at the september 4 meeting, the c a c approved funding agreement for bayview street safety and struck bay study with vice chair and d10 representative expressing strong support for that project. along discan cushion on the prop l and tax funds allocation item, particularly on the great highway gateway study. several members were concerned the study was considered prior to the election and prop k would effect the scope of the project and thought it better to wait until after the election. the c a c voted separately on the allocation for the study and it did pass 6 to 3. the c a approved the remaining

request for the 6 intersection improvements and the fiscal year 2025 quick build projects. the c a c also approved the prop k amendments for the two payment renovation projects and the ferry terminal improvements. thank you and i can answer any questions? >> thank you chair siegel. i do not see comments or questions so we'll open up your report for public comment. anyone in the chamber who would like to come forward, please do. no one. see if we have remote public comment on item 3. >> checking for remote public comment on this item. there is no comment. >> public comment on item 3 is closed. thank you chair siegel and to all the members of the c a c and we'll move to our next item. madam clerk, please call next item. >> item 4, state and federal

legislation update. this is information item. >> mark watts, are you around? >> i can see myself, so hope i am. >> we can hear you. >> in the interest of time-- >> [indiscernible] >> thank you very much. so, this is a legislative update. since the last time i met with you the legislature returned to sacramento august 5, the first 2 weeks of the month moving bills through the calendar in the appropriation committee and the last two weeks the bills have came out [indiscernible] i wantsed to turn to item 4, table 1 in your packet and give a brief update on the positions on bills that were taken during the session and where they stand after the close of session. the bills you supported

outright, sb915 was dropped by the author but i have been given indirect assurance he intends to bring this bill back which deals with local government ordinances for autonomous vehicle service. the other measure is sb950 by senator wiener [indiscernible] on the state highway system conventional highway. there is a lot of opposition and concern of the bill. the last amendments were found to be supportable by the transportation industry, local agencies as well as labor, and that bill moved on to the governor's desk. bills that you sought to support and seek amendments as they move through the process included a b1777,

mr. tang autonomous vehicle bill that required manufacturers to comply with the vehicle code. that bill fought off a very heavy last moment challenge by some of the key major labor unions in the state, including the teamsters and it was very interesting to watch how well mr. tang was able to maneuver his bill through the last three votes on that last day. mr. haney's bill, 3361 [indiscernible] on a number of data items. that bill was able to pass and there was some opposition as well. the other bill you were monitoring for

supporting with amendments was the local revenue measure and that's on its on path now and that bill did not move forward. i would report that there were several bills you watched as they either came out of the last year session or the previous year session or moving through this year, and that included a b6 and 7 by the former chair of the assembly transportation committee. she was unable to generate support for her bills and amendments to her bills in the late days of the session, so they died on file. i jump to [indiscernible] a b2813 was the bill that provides the structure for the implementation of [indiscernible] as amended by a c a 5, which is now on the ballot and

is more limited and less focused--let me restate that. no focus for intent to cover transportation programs, but the focus is now on affordable housing. beyond that,b i like to report that bay area including san francisco specifically was recognized by the appointment by the governor of jason elliot to the ccc, the transportation commission. he has left the governor's office earlier this year, has a outstand ing relationship with the governor, as you understand, he was the policy advisor to mayor newsom in the late 2006-2010 period. he has been very welcome in the capital in his work of here and very familiar with a number of local transportation officials throughout the state. finally, i comment on the

special session. you probably likely [indiscernible] pardon me. you have likely seen coverage of the governor's call for special session to deal with gas price issues. the assembly has said yes, they will do that. they introduced two bills. the senate--hold on a moment, we like to wait and see if the assembly is able to put together the votes to move to the governor. [indiscernible] had the votes without needing to revert to special session, so at this point there are two bills introduced. a bx21 and x22 and they are pending committees in the assembly. with that, i bring my last presentation of the legislative session to a close and thank you for the

opportunity to talk to you today. >> thank you mr. watts. is there-are there any comments or questions from colleagues? i have one on sb532. what would next steps on this be? >> as i are understand-- >> i think that is more of like a question for our t a. not rhetorical, but it needs to get signed and presumably the mta wants to do something with this so t a or mta staff. >> martin reyes, principal planner. we have a representative from the mta here if you like to answer this question. >> yeah. >> good morning chair

mandelman, commissioners, acting director of government affairs here with you and we are very excitesed about this as a supporter of the legislation. we do see it as a terrific way to really address some of our financial challenges that the agency is facing and with the muni funding working group we see this as something we will be discussing as if it does get signed, as a tool that can save 10s of millions of dollars in the long run. we wouldn't be able to do anything right away because there is lot of work required to go into it, like creating the accessible equitable parking cash payment plan. we would work with different groups that represent low income communities. we would work with folks that are working on economic justice to put together a plan that would allow for this legislation to take effect

on our streets, and save all kinds of money and save folks of lower income money as we go to start to generate more revenues for the system. >> do we know right now what percentage of the parking fees are paid on mobile devices? >> we don't, but--i am sure we do. i don't have the number off the top of my head. what i can say though is that, there is a significant difference from the way things work now compared to the things work if the legislation was to be implemented. the way it works now is people pay for at a parking meter with their phone. in the future a parking meter isn't needed and they pay with their phones and there are signs that direct people how to do it, so it would be revolutionary. if you didn't have a phone you are able to pay for parking at a local

retailer or you get a bill associated with your license plate number, so it is very different, closer to the way we manage fast-track. fast-track you dont need to pay at a toll. it would be much more similar to that and most importantly, when i say about the allowing for people with lower incomes, now if you are person of lower income and receive calfresh, you don't qualify, there is no way to implement the benefits with the current system. with this future system you would be able to find a way to allow people to pay with their phone and get those benefits right away. >> interested to see how you-what you come up with. thank you. >> what we come with. we'll be working with you mr. chair and the muni funding working group. thank you all. >> vice chair melgar. >> just had a quick question on the issue for staff. that is, who is against this at

the state? what is holding up a vote from or a signature from the governor? >> through the chair, there is it no opposition right now. it has been supported by we got two sister cities that are sponsoring the bill, santa monica and long beach, and all the different groups that have been engaged have been supportive of it. there are mobility advocates supportive of it and of course [indiscernible] the california association of transportation agency is supportive of it, so it feels like it should be signed, we certainly hope it will be signed. i imagine the governor has other things that are important but we are looking forward to that signature. >> alright. thank you. let's open the item to public comment. anyone in the chamber who would like to speak to us about item 4, please come

forward. don't see anybody. see if there is remote public comment on item 4. >> there is no remote public comment for this item. >> alright; public comment on item 4 is closed. thank you mr. watts for your work and for your report, and madam clerk, let's call item 5. >> item 5, appoint sharon ng as the district 3 representative to community advisory committee. this is a action item. >> senior program analyst, so eager. >> good morning chair. yes, very excited. good morning commissioners. the transportation authority has a 11 member community advisory committee with each member serving 2 year term and the board appoints individuals to fill open seats with each of the 11 commissioners nominating one member to committee. neither staff nor c a c make recommendations. must be san francisco residents

and appear before the board to describe interest and qualification mpts there is one open season, district 3 resulting from the prior district 3 representative resignation and with that, happy to take questions, otherwise we have the district 3 applicant sharon ng here to speak to her interest. >> thank you amelia wally. mrs. ng, you want to come forward? >> hi, board members. i'm sharon ng [indiscernible] as the d3 representative. [indiscernible] part of chinatown transportation research improvement project known as chinatown [indiscernible] i work with community based and grassroots organizations in the d3 area. [indiscernible] i like to emphasize community part of my role because i believe good responsive planning fallose when you [indiscernible]

daily transit rider and who occasionally rides and bikes every so often but not a very skilled cyclist. [indiscernible] favorite thing to do on the weekend is walking around san francisco. this gives me insight needed to consider projects. i also work and [indiscernible] overlooked in transportation planning and transportation and planning in general who are largely transit dependent [indiscernible] i want to insure the creation doesn't come at the expense of any san franciscan. if i were to be apointed equity would be a core consideration in all i do

because the transportation system should reflect the needs of its people especially those who don't always get a seat at the table. thank you for your time. >> thank you. i don't see any questions, but thanks for your willingness to serve, and i think calvin yan might have something to say on behalf of his boss. >> good morning commissioners. on behalf of commissioner peskin, thank you commissioner and chair mandelman and clerk to schedule this hearing as soon as we received news that our current or former c a c member rosa chan submitted resignation, and thank you-i want to take the opportunities to thank rosa for service over the last 5 years. as a lot of folks know in district 3, one of e neighborhood with the a lot of historical neighborhoods, but also a lot of vibrant and events

happen. it is a district that bounces a lot of transit needs and there is a lot of family and seniors living in the district. on behalf of the commissioner peskin, we believe sharon has [indiscernible] expertise and younger perspective tackle a lot of transit, transportation, public safety, bike connections in the city. she is a community worker in chinatown community development. i think that we think that her perspective adding on to community development as part of the transportation network is crucial in this position. she is also a member of chinatown transportation research improvement project, which is a transit advocacy group since 1976 for connection on work with the organization would bring a lot of richness into work that the c a c does. on behalf of commissioner peskin, we urge and request for your approval and

hope that sharon can serve a full term and maybe more. thank you for your time this morning. >> thank you mr. yan. let's open this item to public comment. if there is anyone in the chamber who wants to talk about item 5, please come forward. i are don't see anyone. let's see if there is remote public comment on item 5. >> checking for remote public comment on this item. there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 5 is closed. is there a motion to approve item 5, apointment of sharon ng to citizen advisory committee? moved by dorsey. is there a second? seconded by walton. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> on the motion to approve item 5, commissioner chan, aye. commissioner dorsey, aye. commissioner engardio, aye.

chair mandelman, aye. vice chair melgar, aye. commissioner preston, aye. commissioner ronan, aye commissioner safai aye. commissioner stefani, aye. walton aye. there are 10 ayes, the motion is proveped. >> thank you madam clerk. can you please call our next item? >> item 6, final approval on first appearance authorize the executive director to execute master agreements program supplemental agreements and amendments with the california department of transportation for receipt of state funds for bayview street safety and truck relief study in the amount of $525.110 and the state funds for planning, programming, and monitoring in the amount of $199 thousand. this is action item. >> principal transportation planner,

alisa paz. >> alisa paz with transportation authority. i'm going over these two proposed resolutions and these are approval on first read because of caltrans deadlines. the first resolution is for the bayview street safety and truck relief study for $525 thousand and it advances recommendation from connect sf streets. the study high level develop a more complete understanding of freight activity in the bayview and development recommendation for policy and infrastructure improvement to separate the heavy truck traffic away from residential and commercial areas. it would also include safety recommendations and strategies to increase the adoption of zeer or low emission freight delivery vehicles. we expect the projbect to start early 2025 and go through 2027. the second resolution is for planning programming and monitoring. again, this is for $199

thousand and state planning programming and monitoring funds. as the congestion management agency for san francisco, we use a portion of the state transportation improvement program funds for project planning, development and oversight of state and federal funded projects, such as the caltrain electrification project. the intent of these funds is to support grant compliance and project delivery. that's it. i can take any questions. >> thank you. i don't see any comments or questions and so we'll open the item to public comment. i don't see anyone. let's see if there is remote public comment on item 6. >> checking for remote public comment. there is no no public comment for this item. >> alright. public comment on item 6 is closed. commissioner walton, you want to move approval? commissioner walton. maybe not.

i'll move--yep. commissioner walton want to move approval of bayview item? yes. okay. moved by walton. f is there a second? seconded by melgar. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> okay. commissioner chan, aye. commissioner dorsey, aye. commissioner engardio, aye. chair mandelman, aye. vice chair melgar, aye. commissioner preston, aye. commissioner ronan, aye. commissioner safai, aye. commissioner stefani, aye. commissioner walton, aye. there are 10 ayes. the motion is approved. >> thank you madam clerk. please call item 7. >> item 7,ic allocate $284.145 in prop l funds, with conditions, and

allocate $3.493.000 in traffic congestion mitigation tax funds for three requests. this is a action item. >> thank you madam clerk. we are joined by principal transportation planner mike pickford. >> you should be able to see my slides now, sfgovtv. this morning we have three requests, the first request is for $159 thousand in neighborhood transportation program funds for planning for the great highway gateway study that focus on technical analysis and design envisioning of lincoln way with [indiscernible] the study consider geometric design, traffic circulation and signal consideration and place making features and street cape enhancements with the goal improving safety and connective and pleasant driving biking and walking. providing a welcoming entrance to a potential great highway park or

promenade. if the voters reject the proposition the scope will be reconsidered and revised. sf mta confirmed the area benefit from the improvements. expect to complete the study the end of 2025 and we'll present a final report to the board. the next is public works in neighborhood transportation funds for design and funds of pavement crossing at clement street. help improve pedestrian safety, walkability and neighborhood awareness at this location which is close to many inner-richmond businesses shops cafes rez raunts homes and schools. expectss the work is completed by june 2026. the final request is 3 and a half million dollar from the tnc tax

funds for vision zero quick build program. the quick build program designs and installs reversible and adjustable traffic control measures such as roadway paints, signs signal timing, lane reconfiguration and parking and loading that improve safety and implemented quickly. this round of the program sf mta focus on three time of improvements. the first enhance sight lines visibility at 300 locations in accordance with assembly bill 413 by restricting parking near cross walks. the second speed reduction would be along approximately 70 corridors eligible under bill 43 for a 5 mile per hour lower speed limit. locations are too determined, but proposed locations are in the packet and this request would fund the analysis necessary to prioritize those locations. the third, bike way hardening

install concrete medians at 200 locations. this request includes funding for outreach and communications to support community engagement about the proposed projects including translating materials into multiple languages. with that, happy to take questions and we have project managers from relevant agencies as well. >> thank you mr. pickford. are there any comments or questions from colleague snz i don't see any. let's open the public comment. if there is anyone in the chamber who would like to talk about item 7, dont see anybody. if there is anybody who would like to address remotely on item 7, let's check on them. >> we do have a comment on this. going to the caller. hello caller, your two minutes begins now.

>> eileen boken with speak regarding the great highway study. the september 4 meeting urged the c a c to table the projaect. speak state bd agendizing the item could be seen as election earring. the project is questionable at best. at worst it is [indiscernible] deeply divisive issue. speak also questions ct a staff bringing the project forward at this time as it could be seen as implied endorsement of prop k. speak is now strongly urging the ct a board to table this project. thank you. >> thank you caller. there is no additional public comment for this item. >> alright. public comment on item 7 is closed. is there a motion to approve item 7? hello. commissioner safai.

>> one quick comment. i appreciate for this item, there will be a significant number of speed limit reductions on high injury corridors in my district. because our district is bound by two freeways, many people use the neighborhoods a as a cut-through and there is a significant amount of speeding that does happen, so we have done a tremendous work with the t a and i thank tilly and her entire team for all the work we did to put speed cushions, to raise crosswalks and now this is the third element that putting in reduction speed limit reduction and as i understand it, that is signs that will be posted in terms of reducing the speeds from the current number. can you just say what that is so we have that on the record, please? >> i prefer to refer the question to sf mta. they can provide you details. >> sorry, do you know the

actual reduction in speed is director chang? no. okay. [multiple speakers] >> here we go. >> my name is jennifer wong, transportation planner for san francisco mta and streets division. i just wanted to provide a little more clarity about this request. the measure as mentioned is in fact a speed limit sign. this request would fund the instillation of the signs. no laications are currently selected at this point in time. we have potential locations, which is included in the packet of information that is attached to today's agenda, and we are looking at these

potential locations and in further identifying appropriate. >> so they haven't been finalized. what is the speed limit reduction so we have that on the record? >> the speed limit reduction is 5 miles per hour for qualifying locations. >> great. okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> alright. is there a motion to approve item 7? moved by dorsey. is there a second? seconded by ronan. madam clerk , please call the roll. >> commissioner chan, aye. commissioner dorsey, absent. commissioner engardio, aye. chair mandelman, aye. vice chair melgar, aye. commissioner preston, aye. commissioner ronan, aye. commissioner safai, aye. commissioner stefani, aye.

commissioner walton, aye. >> looks like [indiscernible] >> commissioner dorsey, aye. okay. give me a moment. there are 10 ayes. the motion is approved. >> great. thank you. let's move on. please call item 8. >> item 8, amend two prop k grants to allow cost savings from the san francisco ferry terminal security improvements (design)($132,405) and potrero avenue pavement renovation ($737,181) projects to fund, respectively, san francisco ferry terminal security improvements (construction)($132,405) and de long street pavement renovation ($350,000) and sunset boulevard pavement renovation ($387,181) this is action item.

>> >> amelia is back. tell us about this one. >> good morning. amelia wally, senior program analyst and we'll go through requests that amend two existing prop k grants to allow sponsors to use the remaining balances for new scope. on the-sfgovtv, i'm sharing slides. on the slide is summary table of the request. before i dive into each of them, to give background, when san francisco voters approved prop l the plan superseeded the prop k expandture plan and assumed the financial liability including the open prop k grants with remaining balancing. the funds are treated as prop l revenues and [indiscernible] we received a few requests for approval. project sponsor may request amendment of prop k grants with cost savings to apply towards a later project phase of

the same project like design grant for construction which we'll see in the first request. new scope of work if the new scope is closely relatesed to the original, eligible under prop k program the funds were allocated and ready to proceed. the fist first one is golden gate bridge. oct2022 the board allocated $347 thousand to design phase of the san francisco ferry terminal security improval. design completed earlier this year, $132 thousand under budget and construction bids have come in higher then originally expected. the request is to use this $132 thousand remaining towards the construction phase to fill that gap. the project improve existing security fencing, construct additional fencing and [indiscernible] open for use by the end of the calendar year. and then the next two request are public works to use remaining

balance of cost savings of potrero avenue pavement. both are similar scope and eligible for the prop k resurfacing program. the first is $350 thousand delong street pavement renovation that is 80 thousand for design, 270 thousand for construction and repave the block allowing public works to bring up to state of good repair for final acceptance by the city for maintenance. the k funds will fund paving, bart will contributes up to $75 thousand towards acceptance process and the sales tax funds is conditions on the final accept ochbs block for maintenance and inclusion of the block in public works paving data base consistent with prop k and l policy for the street resurfacing programs. the last request as mentioned from public works to amend the potrero avenue grant is for sunset boulevard pavement renovation to use $387

thousand of remainen balance to fund change orders. in march of 2023, the board allocated $3.1 million of prop k funds towards construction of sunset boulevard pavement renovation. the first phase of construction has gotten underway, it is discovered additional quantities of sidewalk and curb ramps will be needed for accessible path of travel between the new bus stops out of sf mta 29 sunset improvement project and the intersections in the area, so this request is to use that $387 thousand remaining to fund those change orders and that's expected open for use by june, 2026. with that, happy to take any questions and we also have sponsor staff available as well. >> thank you amelia wally. commissioner safai. >> i want to say thank you again to director chang and the entire team. this is something that has been

the delong street has been waiting probably for 25 years. this was habitat for humanity project. unfortunately the street was never accepted into the city public right of way. it was initially done so you go there and there is finger pointing on who's responsibility it is to do any improvements and we finally going to recify that and accept the street into the city public right of way. we have the money to do the improvements and public works will maintain this going forward. i talked about this for all most 8 years being in office and it sat there years, years, years prior, so thank you to the entire team. happy to see this finally moving forward. >> thank you commissioner safai. let's open the item to public comment. anyone in the chamber who wants to talk about item 8, please come forward. let's see if there is remote public comment on item 8. >> checking for remote public

comment on item number 8. there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 8 is closed. commissioner safai, would you like to move approval of item 8? is there a second? seconded by preston. i think we can take that motion same house same call without objection. the motion passes. madam clerk, please call our next item, item 9. >> item 9, adopt i-280 north bound geneva off-ramp study. this is action item. >> mike tan. carl. carl holmes. >> good morning chair mandelman and commissioners. also have with me mike tan, senior engineer. carl holmes, deputy director capital projects. if you can please share the

presentation. we'll get started at slide 2. so, commissioner safai's office directed us to pursue an effort of looking into the excessive queuing that occurs on the northbound 280 off-ramp at geneva and as you can see from the slides, there is quite a bit of queuing on the off-ramp and on occasion it is used for pedestrian drop-off. if you can move to slide 4, please. as we embarked on this study, we also noticed additional pedestrian safety potential near miss conflicts and so we added this scope into the effort, and with that, came up with three recommendations. if you go to slide 5, please. the first recommendation is to

modify the timing of the traffic signals. the second recommendation is to upgrade the traffic signals due to the technology and the third recommendation is to further study the queue spill-back. mike tan will get into later slides. i will say a little context, the first recommendation we [indiscernible] not just a recommendation we are asking for the board to approve as part of the adopting the report, but we were able to work with caltrans and sfmta, consultant staff and mike tan was able to corral all them to implement these traffic signal modifications and to also observe improvements not only with the queuing, but also with some pedestrian safety. the second recommendation

requires additional coordination with caltrans. we dont have the funding for that as well as the third recommendation, but the second recommendation also includes things such as street light improvements and to improve the sight lines and also things like, no turn on red signage in working with our vision zero phase 3 team. the third recommendation is the queue spillback further study. :that thecludes stretching of the length of the off-ramp to provide storage for vehicles to be off the main line and to reduce the probability of rear-end collisions. we can go to slide 6. actually, slide 7 and i'll turn to mike tan to talk through improvements. >> good morning chair mandelman and commissioners.

i'm mike tan, senior engineer with capital projects and i'll talk about improvements the near term improvements the project team including cal tran and sf mta implemented august 2023. what we did is redid the timing and phasing of the ramp intersections. that required a new plan and also implemented. we piloted this and got good results initially. the off-ramp left lane improve about 29 percent and during peak hours and then the right lane improve about 16 percent. we were also able to correct and fix a pedestrian crossing conflict at the southbound on-ramp. so, overall, this was a pretty good improvement. as you can see in the photos, the intersections was cleared up and traffic is moving better compared to the previous configuration. next slide, please.

i will get to recommendation for second recommendation, which is the traffic signal upgrade. this is just to modernize all the system out there which reached end of life cycle and this will be looking at longer mass arm, new traffic controllers, and also better street lighting in the area. next slide, please. we also added additional scope from our c a c meetings and will be looking at just improving pedestrian improvements. [indiscernible] intervals and reflective back-plates for the traffic signals. next slide, please. recommendation number 3, this involves off-ramp queue spill-back study that will lengthen or straighten the off-ramp and require additional coordination with caltrans on the i-280 main line freeway. next slide, please. and just in summary, so, we completed the first recommendation, which

was the signal timing and phasing changes, so that was implemented successfully. recommendation number 2 is signal upgrade and also coordination with caltrans and mta and also our vision zero team and recommendation number 3 is a further study of the queue back on main line freeway. with that, we like to request board approval of this study. >> great. thank you. commissioner safai. >> this is something that the t a have been working on and talking about the past 7 or 8 years. i know it sounds like a long time, but there is a lot of other priorities we had to shift to, so we have come back to this. this is a area we have affordable housing, we have done a significant upgrade to the plaza at the bart station entrance, but the truth is, the cars do

really back up coming northbound on 280 to get off the exit there and there needs to be significant clarity so we have pedestrian safety so cars do understand that the traffic flow and traffic signals. i appreciate all three of the recommendations and am in full support and hopefully we can see some improvements there. i do think extending the lane would be helpful, because of the back-up, it is very dangerous often coming off the freeway. i think because of the curve, often times the line will back up. the cars will back up and it is hard to predict exactly the traffic slowing down right at the off-ramp. appreciate again your guys hard work and thank you director chang and your entire team on this. >> alright. thank you commissioner safai. vice chair melgar. >> thank you so much.

thank you supervisor-commissioner safai for pushing this set of impruchbments. improvements. i have a couple questions and concerns. that is, i didn't see-i saw the sort of collaboration with caltrans because that is who controls this but not with bart. the bart station is there and there is drop-off on both sides. one thing that is most dangerous about this intersection is the northbound ramp and also the southbound, because the elevator to the bart station is on the north side of the street, and so sometimes i have seen it often, people taking their bikes or crossing in wheelchairs have to contend with people turning right right there when they are try ing to get the cross walk to get to the elevator so that is really dangerous.

i'm wondering about the collaboration with bart in terms of signage and are then also a better or the timing of the pedestrian crosing from one side of the other on geneva. >> thank you vice chair melgar. in regards to coordination with bart, i propose that would be included with the traffic signal upgrade work if we get board approval to move ahead with that, because it is part of the entire package. we acknowledge that. was it a question in regards to the pedestrian crossing at geneva? >> just highlighting how dangerous it is for pedestrians to cross geneva, because from the northbound off-ramp, people make a right turn into the pedestrian crosswalk, all the time. when there are people on bikes or wheelchairs waiting to cross to

where the elevator is, i have seen a lot of near-misses. >> dually and strongly noted. thank you. >> alright. thank you both for your presentation and your work, and let's open this item to public comment. if there is anyone who wants to talk to us about item 9, please come forward. i don't see anybody in chamber, so let's see if we have remote public comment on item 9. >> there is no remote public comment for this item. >> alright. public comment on item 9 is closed. commissioner safai, would you like to move approval? >> yes, thank you. >> so moved. seconded by melgar, and i think we can take that motion same house same call without objection, the motion passes. and, madam clerk, please call our next item. >> item 10, sf mta quick build program update. this is information item.

>> jen wong. who is the quick build program manager. but is waiting for her slides. >> good morning. that is correct. hi, everyone. my name is jennifer wong, transportation planner from sf mta leading the vision zero quick build program. just wanted to provide a quick update today and to start i have a couple projects i like to highlight. that were recently completed. instillation of the [indiscernible] next to city college is substantially finished as of early august and this project created a new two way bike way along [indiscernible] and judson avenue and transit boarding islands for muni route. on grove street, pedestrian

safety improvements were installed last month as well, including painted safety zones [indiscernible] turn calming treatments and we thank walk sf celebrating the work of our field operation staff and for their special recognition to them in the field. these two projeths are the newest additions to a number of projects installed in the past year. many remain in progress and i like to call out a few exciting ones. the oak street project, completes major outreach this summer, including tabling events along the panhandle and a virtual open house. the overall project designs are available online for viewing and this project team is now putting together a staff report and it will be up for consideration for final approval very soon. the beach street projbect has

also been in close communication with stakeholders in that area, including the fisherman cbd and others. the project is also expected to be up for consideration of final approval later in the fall at sf mta board of directors. lastly, the larkin street team has been engaging with the community in the summer to gain advantsage of the sunshine. [indiscernible] attendeding the traffic safety task force meetings to provide more information. they are now gearing up for public outreach events this fall. to recap on the overall program, we have been advancing about 50 projects in various project stages. and to complement those corridor style efforts, we have also made

substantial progress on treating every intersection of the city high injury network through something we call the quick build tool kit project this year, and the finish line is very much in sight and so we are starting to think beyond those high injury network locations. and scaling up. and so, we do have more efforts on the horizon and i want to definitely acknowledge the feedback we heard about the program as a whole, such as scaling up improvements and looking for ways to improve upon existing instillation. as you may have heard earlier this meeting, we are currently pursuing funding to do more daylighting and to do speed limit reductions at scale in alignment with a b413 and a b43. on top that, we are also looking to upgrade bikeways that use

plastic delinears to something more higher quality such as the concrete medians where feasible. and meanwhile, again we are thinking what's next, and so we are in the process of queuing up the next set of corridor projects and we will be coordinating with t a staff on the timing that. and that concludes my update. thank you. >> thank you for your update. dont see any comments or questions from colleagues. let's see if there is public comment. if there is anyone in the chamber who would like to talk about item 10, please come forward. if not, let's see if there is remote public comment on item 10. >> checking for remote public comment on this item. there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 10 is closed. thank you jen wong for all your work. madam clerk, please call item 11. >> sf mta whault what is next

for vision zero. this is information item. >> alright. shannon haik. speed safety camera program manager.

>> thank you. good morning commissioners. shannon haik, sf mta planner in the streets division with a brief update with next phase of vision zero. as you know, san francisco was one of the first cities in the united states to adopt a vision zero strategy in 2014 that was our city initial commitment to eliminate traffic fatalities within 10 years. we didn't reach that goal, the vision zero policy was our north star and for the past 10 years we used tools like high injury network, [indiscernible] proactive tools like [indiscernible] lowering speed limits and signal timing. now it is time to recommit to vision zero principals while developing policies that guide our work

going forward. we kicked this process off this spring assessing whauts we learned throughout the past decade and identifying programs that will continue. we also reached out to peer vision zero cities to learn best practices. we connected with other city agencies to understand their priorities and listened to residents and stakeholders about what they want to see. we are consolidating input and putting together a draft policy and expect to have a new street safety commitment adopted by the end of this calendar year. i wanted to touch on outreach. we had a online survey asking for [indiscernible] prioritizing high level goals that received about 700 responses. we hosted listening sessions both in person and virtually to hear directly from san franciscans and we atepded about 50 other meetings to hear from neighborhood groups, advocates, district supervisor office and

others who care deeply about street safety. we heard during the engagement process we need to redouble the efforts protecting the most vulnerable among us, particularly as the vehicles on our streets are bigger, faster and deadler then ever. we also heard what the top vision zero issue is for san franciscans and that is speeding. speeding drivers make the streets more dangerous and put all san franciscans at risk. all the feedback we generally heard throughout this process fits pretty well into one of the 4 categories. first, we know we need to slow down speeding vehicles. our data shows as speed is the leading cause of our severe crashes. we need to get speed safety cameras installed as quickly as possible. proactively reduce speed limits and increase traffic enforcement. we also know that we have to

improve transportation choices for everyone, so fewer vehicles are on our streets in general. we must protect the most vulnerable among us, those outside of cars, the very young and very old and are those with disabilities. and finally, we need to measure more aspects of the vision zero work and track progress over time. data is a critical component of vision zeer so and we want transparency as we tackle this challenge. that concludes my update and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you for your update. i dont see comments or questions. how is the camera program going? >> going very well. it looks like we will be implementing cameras in early 2025. >> so on track? >> on track. >> okay, great.

are you thinking at all about--we have a public commenter who regularly really hates the name, but there is sort of a--are you thinking about name and branding and what the right way to think about this is and is it still vision zero or imagine something else? >> yes. we absolutely are thinking about how we communicate around the idea of vision zero. i think that is a topic we absolutely want to recommit to what vision zero is, but we think there are other opportunities in speaking with the public about it that make it more relatable, little less scary and moving towards a vision, rather then trying to avoid something unpleasant. >> also just the obvious, a bunch of work has been done, a lot of it is good. we think it is preventing fatalities and injuries that would otherwise be happening and yet we have this

goal we don't actually appear to be closer to. okay. thank you. >> thanks. >> let's open the item to public comment. looks like we have public comment. come on up. >> hello, good morning. good morning chair mandelman, sfct a commissioners, and director chang. my name is [indiscernible] a campaign associate at walk san francisco. here today representing more 30 community based organizations, non profits and civic groups that are part of the vision zero coalition. the groups represent the diversity of our city, groups like chinatown community development center, lighthouse for the blind, colman advot cans, united playas s. we believe in vision zero as an approach and core to do everything possible to prevent suffering trauma and tragedy on the streets. yered you received a hard copy

of the vision zero safe kwreets strong neighborhood recommendation delivered to your office. i hand delivered them. our recommendations are the result of months of discussions and research around one big question, what is needed for san francisco to accelerate progress on vision zero? the packet includes 7 recommendations from the vision zireo coalition. we believe crucial as san francisco enters second decade. the coalition is asking transportation authority to recommit to vision zero. next, looking to you to do everything in your power to enact the recommendations. changes are needed how projects are prioritized, planned managed funded and deliver. the number of people hurt and killed in traffic crashes, particularly those outside a vehicle shows what the city has done so far is not yet sufficient for the size and depth of the problem and traffic violence threatens our lives and quality of lives. safe streets are what strong

neighborhoods. thank you. >> thank you. by other public comment in the chamber? dont see any. let's see if we have public comment on item 11. >> checking for remote public comment on this item. there is no remote public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 11 is closed. thank you shannon haik and mta for your work and walk sf and advocates for your advocacy. i would note it looks like san francisco police department has begun issuing more traffic citations which is good and no where near where they were when supervisor fewer and i started to complaining how far they were in 2018, so i think there is still work to do, but i'm eager to see what happens with the speed safety cameras next year and we will have another hearing on

traffic enforcement at the board of supervisors before the end of the year, so too be continued. with that, please call the next item. >> iletm 12, san francisco department public health vision zero sf severe injury and fatality trends update. this is a information item. >> [indiscernible] ph.d. >> we are still good morn ing everybody. welcome to the next conversation. i will present finding from the 2023 fatality report. reprelimitary findings from the 2020-2022 severe injury trends report expected out later this month. provided for collaboration for all our vision zero core data providers, including the san francisco police department, sf mta, zuckerberg

general hospital and the department of public health. preliminary reminder of these fatalities trends, as you can see here in the years leading up to adoption of vision zero prior to 2014, between 2010 and 2013, the total number of annual fatalities were trnding upwards and the average trend prior to 2014 is around 30 deaths per year. when vision zero adopted stabilized to 30. decreased sharply 2017 and average number of fatalities wiggled a bit, but hover around 28 annually since the adoption of vision zero. broadly, big pic here, there is some improvements, but overall, not enough. vision zero high injury network

identifies corridors with most severe fatal injuries in san francisco are concentrated. dph released the last update in 2022. another update is expected in the next coming years. we are back-filling a vacancy of the position who responsibility is to do this so hope to have that out soon. this injury network in 2023, 65 percent or 17 out of 26 traffic fatalities occurred on the vision zero high injury network and all most half fatalities, 42 percent occur in a equity priority community. in p2023, there were fewer fatalities that occurred outside of the focus of the northeastern city compared to 2022. big picture, that is a good thing. you want to see fewer fatalities and fewer in the equity priority communities. the real story though by for fatalities

we need to look at the data by mode. in 2023, every mode of transportation we follow here, pedestrians, cars, scoots and other low powered sit down vehicles motorcycles and cyclists, reported decrease in the fatalities compared to 2022. also 2022 was a record year, so we are now more towards where the average is. in 2023, san francisco saw just about under half about 43 percent decrease in the number of moter vehicle fatalities. motorcycle fatalities fell from 5 in 2022 to 1 in 2023, which is 80 percent decrease. we do have a decreasing trends in general for cyclists. we are doing a good job-a

better job of really addressing the vulnerability of our cyclist but still remain the most vulnerable of transit in the city. focusing on severe injury trends. the report for the trends is spthed out later this month. these figures presented in this slide are considered preliminary while we do quality assurance checks qu data we get from the chief medical examiner's office. broadly, the severe injury line which is the red line was pretty stable between 2015 and 2018. down between 2018 and 2020. about 13 percent. up in 2021 another 13 percent and up down, up down. for the critical injurys, we see still relative stability between 2015, 2018. decrease in 2019, but somewhat

steady increase through the end of 2022. when we explore the difference in counts of injuries between sfpd and what we get through the hospital, you can see that the sfpd data is under capturing the total severe injuries because not every traffic related injury receives police report. between 2015 and 2022, sfpd captured about 48 percent of the total severe injuries, so it is really important we really include the hospital data in these analysis. when we explore severe injuries by mode, the trend line hire in the bar charts give a good snaup shot of things. in 2022, severe injuries were the most common among motor vehicles occupants fallowed by pedestrians so from left to right you see highest to lower.

fallowed by pedestrian, motorcycles and bikeals. bicycles. scooters had unique codes in 2018 so we only start the data reporting as of 2018. broadly, overall year over year, total for the modes throughout vision zero period were higher then we like them to be, but it is notable overall the severe injury trends since 2014 are decreasing on average for motor vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. you can see the dotted lines. some of the lowest injury trends in the past 10 years for both pedestrians and cyclists. this is the good news. unfortunately we are also seeing on average since 2015 critical injurys increased over time across nearly every mode of travel. perhaps accept among pedestrens where the trend line is relatively flat. 2022 alone when the data examined by mode of travel critical

injuries most compen fallowed by motorcycles and motor vehicle, bicycles and stand up had few critical injuries given the total vehicle miles traveled since 2018. in 2022, a notable year for critical injuries among cyclists. the average critical injury trend line was relatively flat between 2015 and 2021, but there a increase in critical injuries among cyclists in 2022. the picture of traffic fatality in san francisco is multi-faceted and dependent on travel mode. quick build project and other creative interventions may be helping to reduce the total number of crashes and close calls and common sense, if you reduce the number of crashes in theory we may see subsequent reduction in the total number of injury or fatality totals. however, if we achieve a fewer

or lower encounter or crash rate, but fail to stop the speeds increasing or the car sizes increasing, each encounter, however fewer of them, retains a high er likelihood of resulting in a critical or fatal result from the vulnerable party, which this case is predominantly pedestrian and cyclists. pedestrians and cyclist have seen fewer severe injuries, but critical injuries remain high. motorcycle riders have seen more severe and critical injuries over the past 10 years and drivers recorded relatively stable severe injuries, but in the past 10 years have shown a clear and steady decreasing in the number of critical injuries. while there are very specific success stories in these data, there is still a lot more work to do to turn the curb on injury trends among travellers on the city streets. thank you.

>> thank you. thank you for your work. it seems noisy to me. it is--the finding of trends is challenging and i think-by all indications we have a bad year going now, so that will potentially up-end any conclusion we could draw based on the data through 2022 or 2023. >> yeah, when we look online, we have the city controller's office created a benchmarking page, which really helps us put into context what is happening in san francisco relative to other comparable cities, and we are doing a pretty good job in most modes of transportation. >> relative to- [multiple speakers] >> san francisco is one of the leaders across this nation in getting to zero, but obviously as with many partners we have a long way to go. >> that's good to hear.

alright. thank you. let's open the item to public comment. if anyone in the chamber who would like to talk about item 12, please come forward. >> welcome back. seriously, zero-- you forgot the [indiscernible] what's going to happen. i don't want this on the record. this afternoon is very important. zero, zero vision. you know, i [indiscernible] >> let's see if we have remote public comment on item 12. >> checking for remote public comment on this item. there is no public comment. >> alright. public comment on item 12 is closed. thank you doctor for your

presentation and your work and madam clerk, let's call our next item. >> item 13, introduction of new items. this is a information item. >> looks like nobody has anything to introduce. please call our next item. >> item 14, public comment. >> alright. this is general public comment. anyone like to speak to us under item 14. please come forward. or, let's see if we have remote public comment under item 14. >> there is no remote public comment for this item. >> alright. public comment under item 14 is closed. madam clerk, please call our next item. >> item 15, adjournment. >> we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

>> you're watching san francisco rising with chris manors. today's special guest is mary chu. >> hi. i'm chris manors, and you're rising on san francisco rising. the show that's focused on

rebuilding, reimagining, and restarting our city. our guest today is mary chu, and she's here to talk with us about art and the san francisco art commission. well come, miss chu. >> thanks for having me. >> it's great to have you. let's talk about art in the city and how art installations are funded. >> the arts committee was funded in 1932 and support civic review, design investments and art galleries. projects we have are funded by the city's art enrichment ordinance which provides 2% of

construction costs for public art. >> so art is tied to construction. there's been a great deal in the southwest of the city. can you talk about some of the projects there? >> sure. our city has some exciting projected in the bayview-hunters point coming up. one artist created a photo collage. in the picture pavilion, one artist formed a collage of her one-year residency coming together with residents, and anchoring the new center is a landmark bronze sculpture,

inspired by traditional ivory coast currency which the artists significantly enlarges to mark that it's a predominantly african american community in bayview hunters point. >> are there any art installations around town that uses light as a medium? >> yes. the first is on van ness between o'farrell and geary. it's funded with the m.t.a.s van ness geary street project. another project is for the central subway. it is one of ten artworks commissioned for the new line. it's over 650 feet long, consists of 550 l.e.d. panels

between the powell street station and the union street station. it's called lucy in the sky, and the lights are patterned with unique sequences so that commuters can experience a unique pattern each time they pass through. >> perfect. what about the early day sculpture that was removed from the civic center? >> this is a question that cities have been grappling with nationwide. following the removal of early days in 2018, there was a toppling of statues in golden gate park as well as the removal of the christopher columbus statue. we are partnering with the parks department as well as the

community to engage with the public to develop guidelines to evaluate the existing monuments and memorials in the civic arts collection and evaluate the removal of a monument or statue but also installing new ones. >> finally, it seems like the weather might be nice this weekend. if i fancy taking a walk and seeing some outdoor art, where would you suggest i go? >> well, i would suggest the embarcadero. this work was commissioned with funds from the fire station 35. this suggests the bow of a boat and the glass panel surrounding

the structure depict the history of fireboats in the bay area. >> and where can i go from there? >> then, i would walk up to the justin herman plaza to check out the work of the art vendors. then check out the monuments like the mechanics monument. also, be sure to check out the poster series, installed in bus kiosks along market street, which features four artists each year. >> well, thank you. i appreciate you coming on the show, miss chu. thank you for your time today. >> thank you, chris. >> that's it for this episode. we'll be back with another show

>> hello. i'm jaime gutierrez. san francisco is a marfbalist city full of diversity and culture. district 9 is a embodiment of diversity. the mission showcases latino culture with mural street vendors and cuisine. buno heights is aging hippies and young families. [indiscernible] most people know neighbors and value a sense of community. portola is mix of old native and new residents around the world. all these district 9 neighborhoods exlempify what is great about san francisco. yet the neighborhoods are under economic stress. a shortage of housing and exorddant rent. we need a 2 prong effort to address