. >> caller: this is david pilpel. there's a lot of material here, there's too much to respond quickly. you can't go through this entire slide presentation and ask for response in two or three minutes. we need more meaningful outreach. i did discuss the connectsf portion of it. there's more to talk about and how all of in pulls together. i disagree fundamentally about the future demand projections. i think as the economy returns and world changes, we're going to see a different and lower transportation demand in the city. i think people are going to make fewer trips. they're going to make different choices and so the pre-covid demand projections based on land use and demographics, i don't think are going to continue to serve us in the same way going forward. i think nevertheless, we should maintain existing assets, first state good repair before we do anything else. i would also say that unless m.t.a. works on building community trust, i think any future revenue measure next year will likely fail in the city. lots of p

david pilpel. on item 13, the board of supervisors usually hears the reports of the grand jury and invites members of the grand jury to report. in the future, perhaps when and if there are grand jury reports that implicate the puc it might be worth thinking about to inviting the grand jury members to present before the commission so you could have a little interaction and not just back and forth in writing. nevertheless, the proposed response refers to a southeast treatment plant campus plan. i'm not sure that i'd seen reference to that before. i would still like to see either a city or puc overall for all the various facilities and space that is owned by the city or the puc kind of chavez and east of 101 including the new cdd facility and the d.p.w. corporation yard and the southeast treatment plant. there is a lot of space there and not just a small campus, but a look at the real estate there would be useful. otherwise, the responses seem thoughtful to me. thank you to john and others for their w

great, david pilpel. could i have a 30-second warning before the end of the comments. in part, this is why i filed my ceqa appeals anticipating all of this. i agree with the previous speakers. they've got it right on. kathy dluka put a fine point on the situation. here's what i have to say today, if i sound up set, i am. the j should be in the subway. there are slots available now and it is inequitable, absolutely inequitable to force j riders to transfer when other rail riders have a one-seat ride and are not forced to transfer at a portal. m.t.a. has the resources right now. we should restore all routes to at least pre-koed weekend levels. the resources are there to do that right now. false choices are presented here and m.t.a. has not presented any route abandonment under the city charter. we need you as members of the board serving here or on the board of supervisors to provide leadership here since m.t.a. is not. we need follow-up hearings at the g.a.o. committee after m.t.a. responds this thursday. there should be possible legislation. muni employees and their un

it's david pilpel.n this item, i am deeply engaged in the mta muni 2022 network plan and preparing a detailed comment letter. the board of supervisors passed their resolution. file number 210820 seeking a restoration plan for the end of year. that plan is due by september 30th. i'm looking forward to seeing this in writing and not just by power point. there are both macro and micro issues here, all with fiscal operational and policy implications. please post or send me the ridership chart that director heminger discussed and the transit riders letter that was referred to. there have been a few efforts like a comprehensive operational analysis in the late 1970s that was implemented in phases between 1979 and 1983 and adjusted throughout the 1980s and 1990s. and more recently the transit effectiveness project between 2005 and 2007. i would describe that as something like a comprehensive operational analysis. those are the two that i could point to that have occurred in my lifetime. considerations here sho