these workers have been victimized by the mta. in addition, the mta has been cited by the sunshine commission for not providing documentation. we feel the mta is covered up systemic violations of rights of the employees and retaliating against making health and safety complaints. that has to be addressed. there is also the issue of outsourcing by the mta to non- union people, jobs such as video equipment, and they are lying to the public about the outsourcing, which is illegal under the contract that these unions have appeared that needs to be addressed. when city employees can do the work, why is that big outsourced by the mta? i believe it has to do with nepotism and the need -- the want to go non-union. i also want to talk about proposition g, which has had an adverse effect on workers where they can no longer argue against working conditions at the agency. this should be repealed, in our view. it is detrimental to workers having some control over their working conditions because it prevents them from doing anything. finally, i

i will let mta address the bike planning. >> commissioners, jonathan with the mta. to your questions, all of you are wondering, how did the project get to this point? this grand opportunity, the source of funds allow the mta and dpw to work together to complete a number of streetscape projects, which is in the interest of the city. what happened was, to get directly to your question, this project was built on a number of different planning process cheese. one was the bike plan. there was an injunction, so we did not move forward. there were concerned with the left turn associated with the striping of the project. after the injunction ended, we try to move it forward to an environmental phase, and this grant came up. that is where we tried to put a package of improvements together. since then, the concerns have arisen again and we have tied it to paving, signal improvements along the corridor and streetscape improvements. the second street project will not die, by any means. the signal component, the sfgo -- commissioner kim: i understand the challenges of second str

in february, the mta did a follow-up study to the 2009 study. they published it in february and it showed our fare evasion rate at 8.45%. they look at every part of fare evasion, which included paying partial fares, differences in transfers, and things like that. the cost to the mta is about $19 million a year with the rate at that level. clearly, our goal is to bring that way down, assure compliance, and, you know, get muni to where it needs to be. currently, the mta covers about 40% of the citation amounts issued by the transit fare inspectors. next is used -- youth fare evasion. there is no difference between adults and juveniles and how we act with them, but i will say, when we decriminalized fare evasion, the juvenile piece of it was not decriminalized, and mainly that is because of the juvenile traffic court system and what have you. that is why you see far more warnings issued to juvenile stand citations. as you can see here, of the 3900 citations we issued, only 27 were juvenile. most of that is that we want to educate our youth in the c

muni, and muni is the 800 pound gorilla in the agency, but recently, i believe the staff at the mta have refocused and are working very, very hard to try to improve service in the city, and in my personal view, improving service means two things. primarily, 1, increasing supply of taxicabs. we do not have enough in my view in the city to adequately serve our residents, our visitors, and our businesses, and number two, improving our dispatch system, either by a centralized dispatch or a coordinated dispatch to make sure that taxicab's can officially be sent where they need to go, including to the parts of the sitting that are not saturated, whether it is parts on the west side or the southeastern part of the city where it is extremely hard, even harder to get a taxi cab than in some of the more central geographic areas. so as part of the resolution last year, we requested quarterly updates from the mta on where we are with the taxicab system, what progress we have seen, what the plans are to increase service, and this is the first of those quarterly hearings, so i want to welcome the

also, the mta and the other departments involved, the police departments, the captain. therefore, i will say this year will be a good year and thereafter as well, under our mayor ed lee. thank you. thank you. happy new year. [applause] >> ok, so i have been working with the department of public works for over 11 years. when i took this job, i work with mayor ed lee. someone who has mentored me, guided me, given the advice, and, frankly, been able to get to where i am is the next person i am going to introduce. they are partner in this, and have done a lot of work with dpw. i have had the opportunity to travel to other countries to see how public works and how cities are being kept clean and green. welcome. [applause] >> well, i am not very good at clapping hands. i am very good at kicking behind, and to get things done. you know, the thing about mohammed and our mayor and our leadership in our city right now is that they are willing to listen. i have always advocated that the community comes together when that there is a good idea. when there is a bad idea, i am the fir

mta needs to move off of it. we continue to seek and actively pursue opportunities to improve facilities. including this creek facility. the central subway project, we are proud to report, on -- as of january 10, we are now the owner of the chinatown transportation site. we are under a leasing option to purchase bancroft avenue. our transportation management center is across the street from our administrative headquarters, the agency determined its need a professional services on this side, for real estate, in the 21st century. we issued an rfp in 2011. three of the more qualified. of the agreement was not to exceed a set amount in five years -- qualified. the agreement was not to exceed a set amount for five years i would be happy to enter any questions -- five years. i would be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions? >> we have heard significant input from the key -- from the community, where you are. -- community on where you are. i would like to emphasize that it is urgent that there are some members

seeing none, do dpw or mta wish to comment?ommissioner kim: i would like them to prison briefly on the memo. please go over the projected time on from here on out for the corridor and the funds committed. those were the two requests i made at last week's meeting. i understand the need to reprogram these funds because otherwise we will lose the $4.8 million but one of my requests was to get a firm time line now, going forward, knowing that we have lost these funds, how we will make up for it, and where they will come from. i also know how often times funds and broken down proportionally between districts. i want to be careful that this project should not impede on prop k and st. funds that i would normally allocated to other projects. that was when i was hoping to get a presentation on. i know members of the public want to speak as well. commisioner wiener: thank you. i will bring but the mta and dpw to respond. >> you received the memo that came to the dpw, at risk in. on the second hint of the memo, it lays out our initial sco

part of the asset mta. under that name, we are really moving in a different direction, trying to make parks better for san francisco and making it easier to drive, for our customers who drive, and supporting the economic vitality and growth of the city. when people choose to drive, we tried to make easy. in other words, we achieve the minimum low threshold and from that, we expect lots of benefits. not just that it is convenient for drivers, but added that -- delivers a lot of benefits. cars that are double parking that cannot find parking spaces, those cars distract other drivers circling around, most likely to hit a pedestrian. part of the reason that muni is not as fast as it could be, circling cars, which waste time in fuel. those are some of the benefits. parking -- pay parking also discourages the violent activities in the city. another area that is unique, coming up with a proposal that works with managing special events in terms of transportation. this is what we have done for the last 70 years. her

we do have a steady comprised of transportation staff, mta staff and planning staff. the planning department's role is to make sure we're meeting the regulatory requirement in terms of offsetting the impact of growth. projects would be included in the relevant agency's budget and go through the process including review or approval at the board of supervisors. we buiwill be required every fie years to update the study. we will be required to update the environmental review to make sure the developmental assumptions are accurate and look at how the expenditure plans are performing against what the assumptions are in the sure we do not need any modifications or to adjust as necessary as we are going. we also felt like it was important for this program to be in very close collaboration with the prop k program. most of the funding, much of the funding is levered throughout proper k. -- with prop k. it will be reviewed at the board of supervisors every five years and update the steady and in our mental review. -- environmental review. we begin initial stakeholder are reache

i know that mta staff is dedicated to these things as well.ust a couple of issues that wanted to get a comment on one of them, and i mentioned this before, about credit cards. i noticed that there is less pushed back now than there were a few months ago. there were signs trying to discourage people, and i wondered if they were still there and if the agency was trying to transition more smoothly to the credit card system. >> in boston and new york there was initially a lot of resistance. but we have plans going forward as to the credit card issue. i do not know to what extent i should talk about them today. but we definitely want to reduce the percentage down to something more comparable to what other merchants would pay. 5% was selected because that is what was typical in other cities. in new york is 5 percent, in boston is actually 6%. that looked normal at the time of policy, but since the franc dog act had been passed, there have been a lot of learning experiences from the ground. we will be drafting additional legislation pretty quickly he

we support the mta boss modest allocation request to do some master planning on that. we look forward to the supervisors' committee later this week to take a supervisor at avalos' measure to allow commercial buildings. on traffic calming, we are supportive of this as well. we are most supportive of the process of the mta developing a strategic monitor system. previously, citizens would come and complain about and material -- an

public health, social services, the airport ,mta, mta, puc, and others. this is a new year and we have a slightly different context than before. it is the first time the city will be balancing a two-year budget. we also have policies that require us to generate a general fund reserve as well as placing limits on the use of one-time revenues. last year, you adopted a five- year financial plan that set forth goals on how we can approach creating structural balance in the city's budget. we have labor contracts expiring this year, so the city will be negotiating with all of the police and fire unions on wage is. supervisor chu: nurses, too? >> nurseess, too. the big picture, the shortfall for 2012 and 2013, the local tax revenues are improving. but that is offset by the loss of local -- and some federal and state revenue. our personnel costs continue to increase, and we are losing some one-time savings we had last year that we used to balance. when the mayor issued his budget instructions in september, we projected a shortfall of $263 million in the first yea

we support the mta boss modest allocation request to do some master planning on that. we look forward to the supervisors' committee later this week to take a supervisor at avalos' measure to allow commercial buildings. on traffic calming, we are supportive of this as well. we are most supportive of the process of the mta developing a strategic monitor system. previously, citizens would come and complain about and material -- an arterial. arterioles and now be regarded as something it has in great need. this great need of a rebalancing interests, we are going to serve more people and help more people and save more lives if we can get some attention on the arterial. so there is a little bit of equity there. also, those are the streets were often bicycle and transit trips are happening. we want to hit multiple policy objectives. let me dwell on that for a second. to commissioner cohen's point about prop b, i hope this will put mta in a position to make sure we combine multiple funding sources, opportunities, so that we do not just drop in and do traffic calming or a bike

the mta will get a double bond. a bunt in the current year and additional money in the budget year as well. the department productions, this is the $10.6 million i referred to earlier -- projections, this is the $10.6 million are referred to earlier. public health is suffering significant deficits. they do have additional revenue from san francisco general and the amount of approximately $28 million. on the expenditure side, both hospitals have significant spending deficits amounting to $34 million. we expect a supplemental appropriation to be submitted to the committee. we prefer that the health department, for the mayor and the board of supervisors to get authorization to continue to spend beyond their budget. this will be an approximate hit to the general fund of about $6.5 million if the current numbers hold. we spoke with these departments and will be meeting with them tomorrow to go over in detail. the mayor's office is working with them as well to see if there is any way of reducing the general fund allocatio

i just want to wish mta -- because i know one thing that is good about the mta today is we have a good director in ed reiskin. i hope that he takes us to a better place with this $15 million. thank you very much. commissioner campos: is there any other member of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam clerk. roll-call. >> [roll call] the item passes. commissioner campos: thank you. unless there is an objection, i would like to call item eight, out of order. >> item 8. reprogram $4.846 million in 2010 congestion management agency block grant funds from the department of public works' second street streetscape project to the cesar chavez streetscape project, the second street sfgo signal upgrades project and the market/haight street transit and pedestrian improvements project. this is an action item. commissioner campos: colleagues, this is an unusual item coming before the commission without having gone to committee. normally, i do not believe in making that practice, but as i understand it, we have a very short deadline that has to

seeing none, do dpw or mta wish to comment?missioner kim: i would like them to prison briefly on the memo. please go over the projected time on from here on out for the corridor and the funds committed. those were the two requests i made at last week's meeting. i understand the need to reprogram these funds because otherwise we will lose the $4.8 million but one of my requests was to get a firm time line now, go

>> we have an agreement with mta. they work with us to install and manage the meters with input from staff on pricing and what not. the revenue does come to the court -- port. we do pay their parking control officers to manage and do collection, but the revenue does come back to the port from the meters. >> will you be able to give us a forecast on revenue? >> we did do some projections for the mission bay area. it was covered in the staff report. david may be able to help me with this. the initial investment is around three and $40,000 within mission bay -- $340,000 within mission bay. we expect a payoff to be between 12 and 18 months. >> that is after we pay the mta expenses for maintaining the meters. you can address that when you come to us to provide the economics. as a consumer or resident, you would not want to go from block to block can have different rates. they would not understand that this is on city or port property. i would advocate that we be consistent for the public that the rate per hour and everythi

i do want to think of 40 staff and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office for pushing along on this. -- i do want to think the staff, and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office. it is also a great opportunity and obligation to rationalize our impact fees. that is a good thing, to. o. i'm really encouraged to see the great questions coming from the committee. these are questions that will h we will have time to ask, but the more we ask, the better the program will be. a very much looking forward to seeing the draft ordinance, and that will be a draft and devolve a little bit. on the notion of outreach, we it to talk to as many people as we can about this. let's keep this going and get this done. commissioner avalos: thank you. next speaker, please. >> right now, in the city and county of san francisco we have very few areas where we can have that big developments, so we have one area right now that you commissioner should go and review and see what is happening right now, and what can happen in this area three years from now, five years from now, 20 year

. >> attached, in the staff report it illustrates the jurisdiction between the sf mta and the port. the port has the ability to regulate streets through the traffic code. as much as possible, we try to coordinate with the san francisco municipal transportation authority agency and has a history of doing so over port streets. in 2010 they requested certain regulations. they were also critical that we look at the entire mission bay area in coordination with partners in the redevelopment agency and asset mta to come up with a strategy for the entire area. we requested that the mta take the lead on that effort because of their expertise with parking regulations and parking management, as well as their significant majority of jurisdiction within the bay. as the mta and redevelopment agency began to look at parking strategies, it became evident that we needed to look at a larger area than just mission bay. as we will describe in a little bit, we looked at the buffer area of, where the port began to look at an area that was out of 23rd street, basically between 23rd streets and the creek,

the mta middle management claims that no one can change the divisions. the government agencies are helpless and have the last words. i do not have the time to present the further details, but i would like to pass this on to the board members. chairman nolan: absolutely. next speaker. secretary boomer: [reading names] beatrice. >> that afternoon. my name is jane, and i empower. and also part of a youth coalition. -- and i am with power. but we are hoping you can take action soon on this proposal. i think -- thank ed reiskin and his staff for all of their work on this. we have working -- been working to secure funding. and it seems it will go much smoother and identify the funds if we can move forward as soon as possible, and my and understanding of the notice in requirements with big if we get in the public notice this week, then the board can take a vote as soon as march 20, and that would be really good in terms of moving forward some of the fund increases. what would work really well is a conditional approval, because we do not want anything to move fo

the economic and work force development, mta, the port, and the planning department.in the 1.5 years, almost two years that a working group has been established, they established because the agents it. -- established the agencies. a san francisco terminus. we identified options for maintenance facility for the high-speed rail. and we looked at another approach. in addition to that, we have obtained agreement to include city options in the environmental documents. these graphics are a little bit engineer-y. been involved tunneling under 16th straight -- street. it is just a matter of the length. this envisions the possibility of substituting a portion of the freeway with the surface boulevard, and then having the high-speed rail. the business plan. the california authority at a business plan established in 2008 and 2009. it requires a new plan this year, and it is a requirement of prop 1a before they have any. right now, we submitted our comments on january 13. you have probably read the report from the legislative analyst on the business plan, and there are main conce