i was very concerned that the m.t.a. board, including you, voted to increase fares on clipper card users during this period, when so many san franciscans have lost their jobs, are struggling to put food on the table, when service cuts on m.t.a. have been extensive. i'm sure that you know that the board of supervisors voted 10-1 urging you not to increase fares. and it's -- it's really concerning to me. and i wanted to hear more of an explanation on why you chose to vote to increase fares during this time. >> absolutely. thank you for that question. i voted without -- you know, there was much hesitation and thought and consideration that we -- that myself and i know all of us gave to both the board of supervisors' perspective on this and frankly just a lot of compelling public comment. so i voted for the budget because i really do think it balanced the needs of the agency to move forward in a sustain -- financially sustainable way to be able to provide transportation service as we come out of this. so to be clear, the increases

i was very concerned that the m.t.a. board, including you, voted to increase fares on clipper card users during this period, when so many san franciscans have lost their jobs, are struggling to put food on the table, when service cuts on m.t.a. have been extensive. i'm sure that you know that the board of supervisors voted 10-1 urging you not to increase fares. and it's -- it's really concerning to me. and i wanted to hear more of an explanation on why you chose to vote to increase fares during this time. >> absolutely. thank you for that question. i voted without -- you know, there was much hesitation and thought and consideration that we -- that myself and i know all of us gave to both the board of supervisors' perspective on this and frankly just a lot of compelling public comment. so i voted for the budget because i really do think it balanced the needs of the agency to move forward in a sustain -- financially sustainable way to be able to provide transportation service as we come out of this. so to be clear, the increases

i was very concerned that the m.t.a. board, including you, voted to increase fares on clipper card users during this period, when so many san franciscans have lost their jobs, are struggling to put food on the table, when service cuts on m.t.a. have been extensive. i'm sure that you know that the board of supervisors voted 10-1 urging you not to increase fares. and it's -- it's really concerning to me. and i wanted to hear more of an explanation on why you chose to vote to increase fares during this time. >> absolutely. thank you for that question. i voted without -- you know, there was much hesitation and thought and consideration that we -- that myself and i know all of us gave to both the board of supervisors' perspective on this and frankly just a lot of compelling public comment. so i voted for the budget because i really do think it balanced the needs of the agency to move forward in a sustain -- financially sustainable way to be able to provide transportation service as we come out of this. so to be clear, the increases

but if the board of supervisors is going to ask m.t.a. not to raise revenue in that matter, they need to ask what services or items they would like to see cut from that budget. so i'm just really disappointed that it came to this, and i feel like there are other ways that the board of supervisors could make their voice heard without jettisonning public service. i want to thank the one members of the board of supervisors in particular who spoke out when that resolution was passed, pointing out the things like free transit for youth that the budget did include. so i just -- i want to state my disappointment, but thank you all for your -- >> clerk: thank you. >> operator: you have 12 questions remaining. >> clerk: welcome, caller. you have up two to minutes. >> hello. i'm a board member and chair for the league of women voters of san francisco, and i speak to you in support of item 26, the resolution urging the mayor and city departments to prioritize access during covid-19. now more than ever, sit's important to protect the public's right t

but if the board of supervisors is going to ask m.t.a. not to raise revenue in that matter, they need to ask what services or items they would like to see cut from that budget. so i'm just really disappointed that it came to this, and i feel like there are other ways that the board of supervisors could make their voice heard without jettisonning public service. i want to thank the one members of the board of supervisors in particular who spoke out when that resolution was passed, pointing out the things like free transit for youth that the budget did include. so i just -- i want to state my disappointment, but thank you all for your -- >> clerk: thank you. >> operator: you have 12 questions remaining. >> clerk: welcome, caller. you have up two to minutes. >> hello. i'm a board member and chair for the league of women voters of san francisco, and i speak to you in support of item 26, the resolution urging the mayor and city departments to prioritize access during covid-19. now more than ever, sit's important to protect the public's right t

m.t.a. and board of supervisors here in san francisco. let's see. my next item to update would be about the outreach work that we continue to try to do. it's, of course, a different arrangement now and our staff have been participating in a citywide public engagement network. and particularly trying to ensure that we adopt best practices and reach out creatively to ensure similar studies and connect s.f. and condition pricing, any number of other projects are able to continue to benefit from and being informed by consultations with the public. we are trying to reach out to community-based organizations in multiple ways, ensuring equity-based approach via phone and mail as well as placement of ads in multiple languages, multiple media formats, including tv and radio. so we welcome your ideas and suggestions there as well and look forward to participating this saturday with commissioner mar at his virtual town hall, just want to mention. there will be a virtual town hall this saturday, may 23rd at 10:00 a.m. for the study that commissioner mar request

m.t.a. and board of supervisors for supporting more sloped streets and protected bike lanes during the quarantine time. we're going to be facing an an precedented challenge and businesses start reopening and cars start flooding our streets. and folks feel less and less whether that is a real or imagined reason. and now is the best time to do it. we are doing a good job, but we could be doing much better and time is of the essence. and last week and is a bad time to be gutting the smta board when the decisions need to be made with quorum, with qualified advocates like director rubke who is a passionate advocate for disabled and the people with disabilities community. and last but not least i love for this making duty free for all. and to come up with funding structure and build ridership up and those who do not feel comfortable riding muni, we need to have space to use bikes to get around the city safely without conflicting with cars so we don't see a spike in deaths related to vehicle collisions. we continue to have vision zero in mind. >> mr. president, it seems as though there are no other call

m.t.a. and board of supervisors here in san francisco. let's see. my next item to update would be about the outreach work that we continue to try to do. it's, of course, a different arrangement now and our staff have been participating in a citywide public engagement network. and particularly trying to ensure that we adopt best practices and reach out creatively to ensure similar studies and connect s.f. and condition pricing, any number of other projects are able to continue to benefit from and being informed by consultations with the public. we are trying to reach out to community-based organizations in multiple ways, ensuring equity-based approach via phone and mail as well as placement of ads in multiple languages, multiple media formats, including tv and radio. so we welcome your ideas and suggestions there as well and look forward to participating this saturday with commissioner mar at his virtual town hall, just want to mention. there will be a virtual town hall this saturday, may 23rd at 10:00 a.m. for the study that commissioner mar request

the reason we did that is the m.t.a. board will be considering the next two-year budget in that period of time. we would have given you a lot of data and made a lot of decisions but we essentially spread the pain out being very conservative in when we thought the economy would fully come back. the bottom three boxes show you the impact of the cares grant. so with the revenues in 2021 and 2022, there is still a reduction and the budget will be reduced from what we have shown you on march 17 and at the april 7 board meeting. i did promise at the last meeting the final budget would be less than what you had originally been shown. it's down by 1.2% in fiscal year 2021 and just about half percent, .4%, so we have to reduce by 21.5 million in revenue. that is revenue. we have to cut back on $21.5 million of stuff. in addition, we have brought up and we told the board in the past that there are triggers in retirement contributions and i know director torrez asked at the last meeting about were we covering the cost of benefits. the an

m.t.a. will come back to the board around this time next year to request funds for the construction phase. the next request is to evaluate the request that come in to sfmta on june 30th of this year. so this is the planning phase. m.t.a. is not changing the date that the applications are due. they are still due june 30th. however, because of shelter-in-place, they are no longer requiring the petition requirement from households on the block at a minimum of 20 signatures have to come in. that is waived this year. and so on sfmta's website, under the traffic calming program, you will find the application. by this time it should be modified to state it does not require that. so any individual household can submit the application this year. the next two requests are from the department of public works for prop aa vehicle registration fee funds. they are both for the design phase of these projects, that i'm pleased to present to you today. first is for the western addition pedestrian lighting project. and this will fund new lighting on mccallister street from fillmore to webster and fund additi

m.t.a. and board of supervisors here in san francisco. let's see. my next item to update would be about the outreach work that we continue to try to do. it's, of course, a different arrangement now and our staff have been participating in a citywide public engagement network. and particularly trying to ensure that we adopt best practices and reach out creatively to ensure similar studies and connect s.f. and condition pricing, any number of other projects are able to continue to benefit from and being informed by consultations with the public. we are trying to reach out to community-based organizations in multiple ways, ensuring equity-based approach via phone and mail as well as placement of ads in multiple languages, multiple media formats, including tv and radio. so we welcome your ideas and suggestions there as well and look forward to participating this saturday with commissioner mar at his virtual town hall, just want to mention. there will be a virtual town hall this saturday, may 23rd at 10:00 a.m. for the study that commissioner mar request

m.t.a. will come back to the board around this time next year to request funds for the construction phase. the next request is to evaluate the request that come in to sfmta on june 30th of this year. so this is the planning phase. m.t.a. is not changing the date that the applications are due. they are still due june 30th. however, because of shelter-in-place, they are no longer requiring the petition requirement from households on the block at a minimum of 20 signatures have to come in. that is waived this year. and so on sfmta's website, under the traffic calming program, you will find the application. by this time it should be modified to state it does not require that. so any individual household can submit the application this year. the next two requests are from the department of public works for prop aa vehicle registration fee funds. they are both for the design phase of these projects, that i'm pleased to present to you today. first is for the western addition pedestrian lighting project. and this will fund new lighting on mccallister street from fillmore to webster and fund additi

m.t.a. will come back to the board around this time next year to request funds for the construction phase. the next request is to evaluate the request that come in to sfmta on june 30th of this year. so this is the planning phase. m.t.a. is not changing the date that the applications are due. they are still due june 30th. however, because of shelter-in-place, they are no longer requiring the petition requirement from households on the block at a minimum of 20 signatures have to come in. that is waived this year. and so on sfmta's website, under the traffic calming program, you will find the application. by this time it should be modified to state it does not require that. so any individual household can submit the application this year. the next two requests are from the department of public works for prop aa vehicle registration fee funds. they are both for the design phase of these projects, that i'm pleased to present to you today. first is for the western addition pedestrian lighting project. and this will fund new lighting on mccallister street from fillmore to webster and fund additi

m.t.a. will come back to the board around this time next year to request funds for the construction phase.next request is to evaluate the request that come in to sfmta on june 30th of this year. so this is the planning phase. m.t.a. is not changing the date that the applications are due. they are still due june 30th. however, because of shelter-in-place, they are no longer requiring the petition requirement from households on the block at a minimum of 20 signatures have to come in. that is waived this year. and so on sfmta's website, under the traffic calming program, you will find the application. by this time it should be modified to state it does not require that. so any individual household can submit the application this year. the next two requests are from the department of public works for prop aa vehicle registration fee funds. they are both for the design phase of these projects, that i'm pleased to present to you today. first is for the western addition pedestrian lighting project. and this will fund new lighting on mccallister street from fillmore to webster and fund additional

m.t.a. will come back to the board around this time next year to request funds for the construction phase. the next request is to evaluate the request that come in to sfmta on june 30th of this year. so this is the planning phase. m.t.a. is not changing the date that the applications are due. they are still due june 30th. however, because of shelter-in-place, they are no longer requiring the petition requirement from households on the block at a minimum of 20 signatures have to come in. that is waived this year. and so on sfmta's website, under the traffic calming program, you will find the application. by this time it should be modified to state it does not require that. so any individual household can submit the application this year. the next two requests are from the department of public works for prop aa vehicle registration fee funds. they are both for the design phase of these projects, that i'm pleased to present to you today. first is for the western addition pedestrian lighting project. and this will fund new lighting on mccallister street from fillmore to webster and fund additi

m.t.a. and also considered by the board of supervisors, as well, as to how much this will really cost. another thing that i'm also, you know, got a lot of comments on is -- [inaudible] >> commissioner imperial: and i hope as this goes onto the board of supervisors, i'm curious what this development will be. will it be more home ownership or how many homes will it be for extremely low-income? you know, i hope that there will be more dialogue in terms of the details of affordability. and at the same time, i understand that and other comments were brought up about the permanent affordability. in my experience, there are b.m.r.s and redevelopment times that only last for 55 years, and the city ended up trying to save them. i hope in this development agreement, the avalon -- whoever is -- the avalon will include or the city will negotiate in terms of that the city will be able to have permanently affordable housing because we don't want to have it at the very last minute, like a year or two years before, and everyone's scrambling -- you know, everyone's scrambling, that this might end up pr

m.t.a. it would require holistic studying by sfmta of the existing and proposed projects. the implementation of this is beyond the purview of the commission and the board and would need to be led by sfmta. in addition, there are regulatory challenges that would need to be addressed. education is also part of the menu of t.d.m. measures that a sponsor can choose. there is a projected $160 million in impact fees associated with transit improvements which include the t.s.f. fee. and part of the proposed legislation before you includes two new requirements to address parking unloading. the first is a driveway loading and operations plan, which would be required for projects of a certain size. and this was done in central soma plan, and there's pending legislation to require it citywide. and the second is to lower the parking requirement for half the plan area. we've heard a lot of concerns about the types of uses on the ground floor and wanting to ensure that the uses serve both existing and new residents. active ground floor commercial uses are currently required per planning code section 145.4 on market street and portions of vanness in the planning area