the m.t.a. board. >> supervisor kim: okay. so in terms of the request from the community that we consider muni and cab only transit red lanes, that request would have to be done through the sfmta board of directors and not through this body? >> that's correct, although your opinion how we should manage the street is very important. >> supervisor kim: yes, i would like to hear some more about this. this is a new point of information for me, but i'm generally leaning toward that position that it should be muni and cabs only. i'm open to hearing arguments as to why we should have more than that, but i do hear that from the community. and i do see members of the board here, cristina rubke, who is here, listening to the comments of the community. i do just want to quickly respond to the community. thank you so much. somcan did provide our office with a list of potential soft sites for 100% of -- a list of 100% affordable housing. we are actually visiting those lists personally and take photographs and

so what the m.t.a. did is offer as part of a transition to sell up to 200 on the waiting list at half price. . do you want this much detail? >> superviser fewer: i think detail is really important because it is very confusing. >> i recognize that. >> superviser fewer: it just shows how crazy the whole system is that in the inequity that is actually built into the system. i am so sorry that you were the messenger because it is not you. >> i understand. >> i know you are trying to fix this problem. >> and waiting on the list and have the $250,000 and so sorry and the first 250,000 and is that how we created the $125,000? and so when we talk about purchasing the medallions after 2010, we see that we have some that are purchased at $125,000 and that was the first 200 on the list. $125,000 and that was the first $200 on the list. is that what i am hearing? >> generally right. let me answer this one and we'll move on. also, m.t.a. set up a down payment assistance program. m.t.a. set up a down payment assistanc

>> no, we asked the joint committee of the m.t.a. and t.a. >> supervisor safai: but you didn't go to the emerging technology working group that supervisor yee setup specifically to cover all types and forms of emerging technology? >> we did not review the process with them, no. >> supervisor safai: okay. and did you go out to community based organizations or neighborhoods that are currently under served by alternative forms of transportation before you put out your documentation? did you get any input on the actual application for the -- in terms of under served communities? >> yes, we did. we got that input in this chamber on march 24. we got that input on the our -- at our board on april 27. >> did you go out to the community other than the one meeting with our board. did you go out to underserved communities to solicit feedback? >> so m.t.a. staff had met with some community groups in under served communities. for instance, united save the mission. i do not want to suggest that that group or any group has endorsed the process, but

if the m.t.a. and all the other businesses did the right thing at the right moment, if you know, we won't be here, selling the medallion as a pilot program is a failure. that's the reason why our money has to be returned, is because it's a failure. anybody know, we can't afford with the type of income we have right now . sfmta is doing the best for everybody to keep alive this industry. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is ahmad. i purchased a medallion for 125,000. but if i want to sell it for 100,000, i can't. i have to go to the m.t.a. for the amount they want to and the percent they want to. that's kind of hard. the pick up in the airport, when they say 18,000 flights or something, 80% of the flights come to uber, so maybe, we get 20% of the flights. 560 cabs, they will cover the airport. thank you. [applause] >> hi. my name is roberto marquez, and i've been driving a taxi for 25 years, and i purchased a medallion for $250,000. uber and lyft came over,

our request is if the m.t.a. ook the money from us, please buy back the medallions if you want to solve that problem. i don't want to [indiscernible], i know, if some money is going to come to my pocket or go to the airport but problem is the uber and lyft and the m.t.a. didn't do their job. please, lower the price if you want to -- $125,000 for the medallion. >> commissioner: thank you, next speaker, please. >> thank you so much. >> is sukma wijam here. suk atell. jarhan shohaz. >> i'm giving you this information. this will give you about the purchase of the medallion and how much money they made in seven years and they are not telling the correct information. this is a letter you received from the credit union saying the proposal is like trash. coming to the question, your proposal is 579 post medallions cannot pick up from the airport. we paid $100 per shift and after working 10 hours we make only $100 extra. so $100 to take home, in other words. if you change the law our economic will go down to only $50. this

the plan. mr. molinaro: your m.t.a. costs five and six times more to lay a mile of track than it does anywhere else in the world which means we're wasting dollars and savings need to go back in the system but what is equally important is that when you declared a state of emergency to solve the problem, it's gotten progressively worse and at the same time -- gov. cuomo: that's not true, once again. mr. molinaro: it is true. and at the same time, we know there were hundreds of employees brought in to work on the m.t.a. and nobody knew what their jobs were. there needs to be accountability. taxpayers and consumers and commuters deserve it. we see the deterioration in the commute -- gov. cuomo: you have never seen a governor take more responsibility for the m.t.a. than i have. i know. mr. molinaro: you are obsessed with him. gov. cuomo: i declared the state of emergency. george pataki never went near it. gov. cuomo: he was a republican. i said to new york city, pay half the funding. they refused. i went to the state legislat

since the m.t.a. uses four times on subway of workers projects than any other city, for efficiency sake, you clearly to slash labor costs to make scarce dollars go further. how do you do that without angering unions who support you and avoid strike? i want to ask you is it acceptable for unions to have jobs like nippers who watch andrials be moved around hog house tenders who man the break rooms? think i've i don't ever met a nipper or a hog -- theia: but they exist on m.t.a. projects, under second avenue subway and other projects. what?uomo: hog marcia: hog house tender. jobs. really need those gov. cuomo: i thought i knew what i was talking about. obviously, there's going to be in these abuse programs and we can do better. marcia: is it acceptable? not.cuomo: of course you've watched my performance for seven years. rein in thedo you union? gov. cuomo: i'll tell you. first of all, there have been meons that have been mad at for seven years. you know it very well. the most powerful unions in the state

the m.t.a. im on board in january to stop the hemorrhaging and resurrect the system. >> byford: i pinch myself sometimes, because how did this spotty kid from plymouth suddenly end up running new york city transit? but, it's a dream. >> whitaker: well, some people would call that a nightmare. >> byford: it-- when i left toronto, there was a mix of people saying, "congratulations" or, "are you crazy?" but i like a challenge. if we can turn this around, then it'll be the most satisfying period of my career. i mean, it will be the pinnacle. >> whitaker: byford seems undaunted. he proudly wears his nametag for all disgruntled commuters to see. he expects to be held accountable. like everyone else down here, he just wants the trains to run on time. >> byford: i'm andy byford. i'm the president of transit. >> whitaker: with his friendly neighbor approach, he's that rare executive who does his own market research, routinely popping up unannounced to query customers... >> byford: how do you find the serv

what is curious is what happened yesterday is the m.t.a. board gave the discussion to their director to restrict the use of p. 16 which is the taxi to permit to certain p. 16 holders. i am curious when your board comes to the report, to see if you will exercise your jurisdiction with such a major taking of our income and ability to operate, whether it is your purview or can the director of transportation say that a certain subset of people who have this p. 16 permit cannot go make money at the airport and not be able to rent a cabin but others can? it is sacrosanct and so important to have one group make money and not another. you will see some cases and thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? ok. seeing then we will move on to item number 2. commissioner comments and questions. seeing none, we will move on to item number 3. the adoption of the minutes. >> mr president? >> we are moving onto the adoption of the minutes to. >> any corrections or additions? >> as i indicated, i

we request the m.t.a. reserve the right to make minor modifications to the bicycle line to make it work as intended, to tweak any configurations to the lane. we ask an ombudsman to be elected to this board. [inaudible] >> once again, we thank m.t.a. and thank you for your time. >> thank you, mr. zucker. next speaker. >> good evening, board of directors. charles defarge, san francisco bicycle coalition. very happy to be here late this evening to express my strong support for this protected bike lane project. it was almost exactly a year ago that we were here supporting the folsom protected bike lane. we've seen great improvement in biking safety for riders along that corridor. we need the same at howard. [inaudible] >> i want to echo what some people have said about doing more. i think one thing that we learned from the folsom parking protected project that we really love these signalized intersections. that's the beginning towards the intersection that roland referenced. right now this project at each inter

so the m.t.a. has limited jurisdiction and right now because the cpuc has jurisdiction, it is not something that's within the m.t.a. jurisdiction. >> if i could just clarify, so we have general jurisdiction over parking and traffic, the general parking and traffic rules in the city. so to the extent that a t.n.c. or any other vehicle is in violation of those, we have an enforcement authority, no different than we have over any vehicles. so it's not that we have limited jurisdiction with respect to the t.n.c.s. we have no special jurisdiction with respect to the t.n.c.s. we have been fully been preempted by the state of california through the california public utilities commission in terms of our ability to regulate them. so the c.p.c. has regulatory authority. there has been a rulemaking process that's been going on for at least since 2012 that we have participated in through those 30 plus filings. i can't say that we've had -- we've had almost zero success in terms of the positions that we have mad

if the five-year extension is approved, the m.t.a. would receive 32 million in minimal annual guaranteed revenues over the five year term plus an additional $1.6 million had showing in our marketing fees, and we recommend approval. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. colleagues, any other questions for miss stein? i have one. i'm wondering, do we have the option to eliminate the wraps on the buses? >> if we were, we would have to renegotiate the minimal annual guarantee. the proposal is to extend the contract as it is. any changes would result in a reduction in the minimal annual guarantee and possible a substantial reduction. >> supervisor fewer: has it ever been discussed eliminating the wrap from the buses? >> we understand we do have customers that don't like them. we have limited it to 30. the contractor, there are months where they could sell more. for example, right around now with dreamforce and the holidays. generally, there are no more than nine or ten at a time, which is 1% of our vehicles, but yes. >> supervisor fewer: thank yo

now forget all of that, the thing is that when the m.t.a. took over they have done nothing for the taxi industry because there is no communication between the drivers and you. we have a bar in the middle. it's called the townhall meetings and this and that and many good ideas get put out there and you never get to hear them. the most important idea that you can understand is we need more taxis in this city and the thing that you have neglected is an app. we have been asking for at least 10 years for one app. and you have got to knock the taxi companies' heads together and say, within one month or whatever, we want one app out there. we want faster response. we want every cab taking a credit card. and not messing around with square this and that and the other. we want good service. you made a terrible mistake allowing all of the taxis with higher mileage. we want high standards, good drivers, and we want some support from you. you can put out tickets to lyft for dos u-turns, to be driving down the wrong street, but you don't want to put out a

the level of efficiency. so we need to have accountability for m.t.a. the public, and i would make sure that that happens. >> thank you very much. miss basan. >> thank you. i agree with mr. tom that when m.t.a. was created as a merger between the department of parking and traffic and muni, it was a colossal failure, and i think it should be split up again, and it should go back to the way it was with the department of parking and traffic as one entity dealing with traffic, and muni as a separate entity dealing with what it needs to deal with, which is the movement of people. the emphasis that m.t.a. has put on shaving nine seconds off a trip is ridiculous. everybody knows that the streets of san francisco are so congested with all kinds of vehicles that nine seconds isn't going to make a difference. they should be focusing on service to the constituents. instead of taking away stops, they should be adding stops. it used to be their goal that every household could reach a muni stop in two blocks. we don't have that anymore, we need to bring that back. >>

the project was born out of concerns about the m.t.a. and supervisor tang's office, heard from residents of lower great highway. these resolved around crossing at places other than the crosswalk, and speeding. [inaudible] >> today, we are just talking about the near term project and later in the year, hopefully, we will come back with a medium term project, there have been four pedestrian collisions in the past fewive years. the near term project has three major elements, pedestrian advisability zones, also known as daylighting to ensure visibility when patrons are trying to cross the street, painted zones, as well as back and angled parking on the block between kirkham and lawton streets to gain back some of the parking reduced by the previous two elements. so taken together, these three elements over the entire two mile corridor would result in a net reduction of just 14 parking spaces. the project was initiated earlier in the year. since then, the project team held two open houses, two public hearings and attended multiple community ev

and i know we have members of public works, public utilities commission, and the san francisco m.t.a. supervisor yee is the sponsor of this hearing, and so i will turn it over to him. >> thank you, chair kim. colleagues, today, i'm holding this hearing on a citywide approach to construction safety in light of the tragic death of a worker in august, during the twin peaks tunnel construction project. the company that we had contracted with wasn't question, and i think what happened was the media brought this to our attention, that they discovered that the contractor had checked no in their application when asked, in the past ten years, has the potential bidder, or if a joint venture partnership, has any member of the partnership been cited or any willful or serious safety violations by cal-osha, and the company checked no. so what happened? what does it mean? did they really have no citations? but in 2015, osha had upheld a serious and willful violation of this company. this case is still under litigation, so we are not able to publicly discuss it today. today is not about focusing on a

beside us, we will have the m.t.a. e room, and hearing the same thing that the panel hears, as well. our structural and seismic review committee, the original one, has been involved in this process. certain one of the members, when -- based on availability, have been included and will continue, as well. so with that, that concludes my update. if you want to add anymore, we're ready for any questions. >> vice chair gee: very good. director reiskin, want to start us off? >> director reiskin: yeah. thank you for the update. i apologize. i was not at last week's meeting, so if some of these things, you've already covered, please accept my apologies. first of all, up until monday, we were working on a date of opening tomorrow in terms of fremont street, so now, it sounds like we're off by about another five days or so. it's -- and i think you made reference to the fact that maybe you didn't anticipate having to go below ground, but if you could just help us understand why that change and what level of confidence we and the p

kapur was surprised, to say the least, that m.t.a. said no we're not going to go out and single-family neighborhoods and put racks in. >> i'm sure if staff can get more information about the request, that's a block by block decision. i have seen racks in front of residences. again, you're sitting next to the right man. next speaker, please. >> tarik mahmoud, director heinicke -- [inaudible] >> -- 7% on credit cards, and she lowered that money to hundreds of dollars instead of $100,000. when i spoke again director heinicke, you admonished me from here and i'm here to tell you, get some integrity for yourself. if you would have worked for me, i would have fired you today. going back today, somebody called you a liar, and that lie, you accept it, and you pass a proposal that's not fair. director kitterean is a total liar. she told you in approximate one of hur notes she -- i give her physically signed 64 pages against what she said. and signed in the office. and i sent you also e-mail with that pages, so she gave a wrong data, not talking

they came in here and made pleas to be excused from paying payroll taxes and highlighted by the m.t.a., and yet they cannot be exempt from payroll taxes, because they get along with the m.t.a., but yet you turn around and exempt the high-tech companies from payroll taxes, giving them a break. they don't need a break. since when does a mul multi trillion, billion dollar corporation need a break? the people that need a break is the people that's most vulnerable, who you campaign and say that you want to help get situated in the city. >> bob finebaum from save muni. well, you've done the wrong thing, but i hope you realize that what you've also done is criticized and commented about the tjpa board. the tjpa board is controlled by the city of san francisco -- >> chairman peskin: so, i don't want to interrupt you, but in as far as item 11 has been discussed, this is general public comment, so if you want to make general public comment, you can, but you can't talk about something already on the agenda and we had public comment on. >> this is general public comment, because the tjpa board is

and i want to thank you the supervisors who weighed in with the m.t.a. against their terrible plan to ban most cabs from the airport. on the same day that that plan was approved in most of its elements, the airport commission passed a rule that is going to forbid taxi drivers from conducting free speech activities in the taxi lots. this has been going on for decades. i started driving a cabin 1983, and ever since that cab drivers have had the right to hand out materials, collect signatures on petitions and then so forth in the taxi lots. we always get a permit from the airport to do that. we follow their rules, and it just makes no sense that they would, you know, stifle this free expression at this point, except for the presumptions that they are doing it in concert with the m.t.a. to quiet taxi drivers' voices, to impede organizing at a very, very critical point for our industry. the taxi lots at s.f.o. are the only common ground that taxi drivers have to meet together, to talk, they typically spend an hour, three hours there, they have always had, you