in 2009, the m.t.a. took over the taxi business. one of the things that was given to them in their mandate was the right to sell medallions. and they started the program and sold a few medallions. that was in 2010. 2011, they started messing around. and then a funny thing happened in 2012, and that was uber and sidecar, and subsequently lyft came into the city. in their wisdom, and with a little help from mayor lee, the m.t.a. did nothing. they shut their eyes, and continue to sell medallions but they actually -- that they actually knew where worthless. because nobody, by 2016 was buying or selling medallions. the only medallions that were changing hands were a few lucky people that had bought medallions early and managed to resell them before the boat finally sank. so who is responsible for this decision that they knew, in 2010 , i'm sorry, in 2012, when uber was already operating illegally, and yet, the m.t.a. had an opportunity to claim jurisdiction, but it didn't, because mayor lee said no. >> thank you. >> you are responsible f

the m.t.a. took over those duties. the cbc, or a california california vehicle code defines it as any vehicle with 15 more seats or a commercial vehicle with ten or more seats. you can see there is a lot of people where a lot of organizations and businesses that fall under that umbrella and under that category. the m.t.a. does not have the ability or does not have the authority to regulate most of these except if they opt into the program and for the most part, these shuttles are allowed to use arterial streets. they are not allowed unless given specific permission to use muni zones themselves. we have been talking with our operators a lot about where they are seeing problems, where there is issues. we did that a couple of different ways. any time an operator runs into an issue, they contact our central control. we have done reviews of central control logs to see where the sticking points are and see where some of the recurrent issues are. secondly, we meet every month that each of our bus and ra

leave it to the m.t.a. to classically shift the narrative about this being that those were at that ride public transit when this is about the privatization of red lanes to commuter shuttles and private shuttles. the red lanes were forced upon us by m.t.a. without proper community engagement. they removed bus stops in the mission for seniors and disabled and took away half of the -- this should be for public vehicles only and not private companies that are only inducing gentrification and adding to the traffic congestion. paratransit vehicles are barred from using transit only lanes as they do not enter the california vehicle code definition of a transit bus. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is carlos and i am a member of united save the mission. a coalition that exists in the mission district. over the past several years, we have grown increasingly concerned of the board of directors transit first priorities have been instrumental to the public space to corporations

how many people on the m.t.a. board, m.t.a. management, and how many people support vision zero or the bicycle coalition or muni acts? muni acts are those who blindly support muni acts. i can't identify the muni acts, only the muni acts know who they are. so the next time they stair at the meyer or when they look at -- at the mirror when they look at themselves in the morning, they have to ask themselves, are they a muni-ac? >> next speaker, please. >> austin, followed by mark. >> hi. i'm austin peterson. i started driving san francisco taxi in '88. i was looking at other opportunities in the '90's, but people persuaded me that i wanted to work towards a prop k medallion. now that i have a prop k medallion, my take-home pay is less now every day than it was in the '90's without a medallion, so every day has been a slog for the last three, four, five years, not even accounting for inflation. i look at my numbers every day, and i'm taking home less money now than i was in the '90's. flee wheel needs a heat map. that would tell me

so many of the m.t.a.'s poles are also p.u.c. poles because the m.t.a. strings its infrastructure off those poles, but there are poles that the m.t.a. has, and it contracts those with the carriers. >> vice president swig: but this is beyond that. somebody can comment on this so i'm not hung out to dry too badly, but we had another one on fulton street, and i recall this. they look at a building, not a pole, a building down the street because there was furious disagreement from the community. there always is. they looked at a building down the street, they looked at a pole down the street, and again, the same consensus from verizon, this is the only place we could put it. it wasn't an m.t.a. decision, it wasn't a p.u.c. decision -- >> commissioner honda: commissioner swig, can i interrupt for a second? >> vice president swig: what am i missing? >> commissioner honda: no, no. is it required to look for alternative sites? so that's the thing. i think prior, because verizon and at&t had so many cases before us so that they did not -- they tried not to come t

then finally, the m.t.a. should conduct review of its planning process to ensure hiring and staffing goals are integrated with the necessary training. we did talk to the training divisions. know need to have the resources necessary to keep up to increase applicants or if the training process will be expedited. the staffing needs be factored into the agencies overall budget processes including capital expenditures. that's summary of our report. we're happy to answer any questions now and throughout the hearing. >> supervisor brown: thank you. i guess my -- just looking at your suggestions what we could do and the board, of course doesn't have a authority. as a city, the thing i think that jumps out is the wages. i think because of the fact that we're not even paying them enough to qualify for affordable housing in the city. we're moving them -- they have really not many options here. that's my take on it. what would yours be? what's the recommendation or the one recommendation you feel that we should be pushing

m.t.a. regarding the power well station , m.t.a. will not do this work. we understand that we will change the different types of buses. we do not need any additional substations. our future plan is we are focusing on the upgrade or make sure the current substations will be in this program instead. >> okay. i think last year, when this was presented to us, presented as a fairly urgent item in terms of ensuring that munimobile could continue to run. because it depended on the substation for power and it can impact thousands of munimobile buses. if i'm hearing correctly, because we are thinking differently about the vehicles, they may not require as much power. is that correct? >> our engineering team have a report to mention we don't necessarily need the holiday plaza. >> okay. thank you. is it possible to get the new budget? clearly there are things that are no longer moving forward. how large is this budget now? it was 600 million. it is at least 500 million now. is that the only aspect of the budget that has fallen off? >> that is the largest component th

and not only are we working on the street, the three leadership at this board and the m.t.a. board to, we are improving our fleet. because of that, we have fewer breakdowns, and service -- more service on the streets in maintaining and staying on the streets. but both of those things really are about implementing the city 's transit first policy. the transit first policy was a drop -- adopted in 1973. as you can see on this picture, transit only lanes have been a mainstay of how the city has implemented those policies since then. this is an older picture on the left of gary in 1978. and how we used to designate transit lanes was just with paint. or white lines in writing on the lane itself and signs. and then in 2013, we tried a pilot on church street between sixth street, a three block stretch to paint the lane it read to improve compliance and improve the lane itself. we reduced -- we were able to reduce violations in half by putting those red lanes on church street. this map depicts now where we hold out a red lanes around the city. this is a representation of the division

so i think making a formal request of the m.t.a. to look into trees is the right process to go through. as far as i understand. the process going forward. >> sure. thank you for coming today. i would like to say that the intent behind transit only lanes is to increase the reliability and i do think it is a time to really explore the responsibility to protect red lanes as a public infrastructure for publicly operated transits. so i would like to work with the community and sfmta. i think to revisit division i and division two of the transportation code so we are clarifying and protecting our red carpet lanes or transit and taxis and paratransit. lets have an agreement to work together on that and see what we can do. i want to thank everyone who came out today to give public testimony and also to voice your opinion and also your adoration or frustration with our wonderful -- wonderful system. thank you for using muni and thank you. thank you very much to my colleagues for allowing me to hold this hearing. i would like to make a motion

. >> the m.t.a. is getting $38 million out of these eraf funds. is that in the charter? >> yeah. so each of these baselines that are on this list, m.t.a., library, schools and first five and so on, they each have a charter amendment that voters passed at different points in time that basically established the formulas and conditions by which these funds are being allocated to those purposes, so yes, m.t.a. does have a charter amendment. >> so to overturn that, that would have to go back to the voters? >> correct. >> okay. i just want to mention that, as it's pretty clear, that m.t.a. is getting more funds out of eraf than the school district. >> that's correct. >> and there's some tree trimming. tree maintenance gets $2.1 million. >> president cook: commissioner haney? >> commissioner haney: i have a question and then more of a comment. so the state statute says that 33% of san francisco local property taxes will go to sfusd. why did -- why were we set at such a lower level, and there were some attempts or some conversations over the years to try to revisit that, and is that somet