maybe they do not all come from the mta. that will help us on our end, those dollars, and if the transportation authority can be part of that, i am also hoping they will look at the data as well. it would be very, very helpful. commissioner campos: colleagues, can meet have a motion to continue to the call of the chair and have a hearing, follow-up hearing in july? motion by commissioner avalos. if we can take that without objection. madam clerk, if we can do the reading. >> market street project -- the regulation for fire safety. >> good morning. >> my name is chad rathman and i will be making a brief presentation on the improvements to the northeast corner of market street. this is agenda item this projece second stage of implementation of this project. the first stage was in 2006 on a one way four-lane street on market. the project would be part of the prioritization program ended is also consistent with the area plan in the upper market division. the most significant improvements are for bicyclists and pedestrians. improv

supervisor campos: if i may ask janet martinson of the mta -- of want to thank her and the entire mta staff for working so diligently in the last two months to try to make this happen. i also want to think the director and executive director for their efforts. >> thank you for bringing this resolution for us. i am janet martinson. i am mainly here to voice mta support for this resolution and to talk a little bit about the mta's actions. the mta has been working collaboratively with supervisor campos's office and the school district to support implementing the youth level and program. in regards to the mta action moving forward, since the mta board did previously approved the allocation of 12,000 monthly passes per month to low-income youth at $10 per month, it will need additional approval by the mta board in order for the mta to be able to provide the same passes for free for the remainder of the fiscal year. we are planning to have that heard at the march 1 mta board meeting. that is all up i had to say. i am available to answer any questions. supervisor campos: i do want to thank y

finally, there is an inherent conflict of evidence, because the mta, its own employees sat in judgment and stand to directly benefit if mr. arvin loses. a preponderance of the evidence means that the mta has to put forward reliable evidence which is unopposed to establish that there was a violation justifying this penalty, and it has a problem here, and it knows it because of its past rule to fix it. something adopted last year reads as follows. "in the event that sfmta requires original records, they will provide a receipt for any original document that is removed from the permit holders premises or that are otherwise provided -- from the permit holder's promises -- premise s." that is not what happened here. it is undisputed that a recently hired a probationary employee of the taxi commission picked up mr. it ar to mr. -- picked up mr. arvin's bills, and he was not given a receipt. we do not even know if she made it back with them. in the file is a notes document is intended to go out and get the bill. -- is a note document. there is no record. there is no list. there is no audit rep

the mta is projected to spend approximately $5 billion more. public health is under $2 million more and that the fire department, approximately $6 million more. those account for the majority of the increase that i talked about that is a $12 million increase, those three departments. the other two large overtime using departments show a decline during the current year versus actual spending last year. the police department is expected to spend a million and a half less than this year. the sheriff's office to spending approximately 1.5 million less on overtime than they did last year at this time. we have seen a mix of trends that consume the overtime expenses for the city. the mta, fire and police are all a absorbing their overtime expenditures within budget. dph and the sheriff's department are anticipating meeting a supplemental to cover some of their costs. some are overspending but absorbing this within their budget. that is the case for three of the five. the board placed a cap of 624 hours per individual per year on overtime use. this has

[applause] >> our next award is a group of war going to the mta taxi services team. will the following employees step up to the podium and bear with me as i tried to work through these pronunciations. we have some creative names here. [reading names] has you are well aware, in march 2009, the end he assumed a response ability for the regulation of the taxi industry. today, the mta taxes services that worked daily with an industry that includes 5000 vehicles, 7000 drivers, and nearly 40 private businesses. in that short time frame, this team has achieved many significant accomplishments that include acquiring 50 all electric batteries, switch, and plug-in taxes by leveraging federal grant funds that will be on the san francisco streets by 2014, launching a pilot program of transferable medallions that has netted the mta nearly $6 million to date, including $1 million for a dedicated driver fund. implementing electronic waybill requirements so that by july 1, the mta will for the first time have industrywide electronic taxi trip data. inaugurating a hybrid vehicle incen

who is the point person on pedestrian safety issues in the mta? >> the key person would be myself right now, as the deputy of planning. two project managers working on these issues. we have a whole team working on the different modes. commissioner chiu: to the point that was made earlier in the presentation, the fact that there are so many different agents to work on this makes it confusing for those of us that are not part of your administration. it would be great to have a clear sense of who is in charge on this. as far as the master plan goes, if there are things that we can help from the board, i would be interested in that. i do have a question regarding your relationship with sfpd. this is a board that has looked into the relationship between sfmta and sfpd. when you mention have written reports of how sfpd deals with this, could you talk about how the mta measures accountability with the sfpd, when it comes to pedestrian safety? it is it literally and written pieces of information that go back to your department, what are you thinking about

. >> the revenue generated from the citations, does it then return to the mta? goç to the criminal court, just as any other misdemeanor case. the $5,000 fine by state law is required to be reapplied to illegal vehicle investigation and enforcement. >> whaf is your standard for determining increase in staff? you said three investigated by moving up to seven. right now, it is quite restrictive in how we are bringing in new staff in city government. i would like to hear how that determination is to be made. >> the number that i have set upon is based on trying to schedule it in a way that they are not in the field at theç te -- all the time, that they have a combination of being in the field and at the desk. the financing of those positions, first of all, comes from a reduction in the police department work order for the first two new hires. the police deáartment used to provide the taxi detail for this kind of enforcement. now that enforcement model has changed. some of the work order money is coming back to our agency. with that money, i will be hiring two more

do not know what happened to any bill that went into the commission offices or if they made it to the mta after they and the commission merged korea in february 2010, rummaging through files or boxes -- the commission merged. in said uri 2010, rummaging through files or boxes -- in february 2010, rummaging through commission files or boxes, they found some items that belonged to mr. arvin. it is a complete break in the chain of custody with sfmta. they are in violation of their own policies. it is a fundamental fairness to make a record if you take something from someone, and it is fundamentally unfair if you do not and then say it was on somebody else's watch. this should not depend upon the timing of a much needed change in the law, which now protects the way evidence is protected. -- collected. the actual violation is that the medallion holder ceased to be a full time driver. there is a conflict in evidence as to how much mr. arvin drove. they are the dispatchers that heard him on a weekend night come out driving, -- night, out driving, and inflation -- and the implementation of a pena

the system. prop g allows mta for the first time in decades to bargain with everything on the table. it specifically provides mta with the power to negotiate away work rules that make no sense, the cost mta millions, and that underline the functioning of the system. now that the voters have done their job, it is mta's turn to do their job and bargain effectively. it is not enough just to get a few successions and nibble around the edges. mta must set a new base line for its employee relations and particularly for the work rules that need to be addressed. mta must show fortitude to change the way it does business. to be clear, mta's work rules and labor costs are not the only reason for muni problems. for decades, we have under invested in the system, and, of course, we are dealing with a year in europe cuts from sacramento -- dealing with year- in, year-out cuts from sacramento. power to negotiate a labor agreement that is not only fair to employees but also to the hundreds of thousands of riders, who depend on muni every day, mta needs to get it right. san francisco is watching. fina

. -- working with the mta the transit effect of this process. a number of other things you can see on the slides, but i know we are under a time constraint, so we're happy to answer any questions you have. supervisor farrell: but in terms of the nonprofit monitoring and capacity building, does that correspond to the hsa line item here or is this the broader tracking system we have in the place now? >> good morning. another deputy in the city performance group and i direct the health and human services portfolio including the non- profit program. that particular project, it turned out a couple of months ago that hsa no longer needs that analysis and have moved forward and adopt a contract management system that is actually a great outcome. we thought we were going to need some analysis around that, but we are not going forward with that project after all. while it was related to our on going profit monitoring and understanding performance, it was not otherwise related to that. we have a very robust program working with not profits, improving acco

to that end, they dedicated $1.4 million of the mta budget to the youth lifeline program and asked the francisco unified school district to sell and distribute the passes. we're nearing the end of the 2010/2011 school year, and unfortunately, the program has not been implemented. there are many reasons for that, many complications, many challenges that have gotten in a way, including some legal challenges where you are talking about a student population. the point of this and then the resolution is to modify the program so that irrespective of the challenges, we move quickly to implement the program. we need to make good on the promise that we made to our low income children and their families, and we need to do that as soon as possible. that is why my office, working with a number of organizations, has introduced this resolution, and i want to thank the offices of other supervisors that have been working on this. i want to thank the youth commission, community-based organizations that have also partnered with us. i want to thank the school district, the mta, and its board of directors

supervisor chiu: i have a specific question on exactly where we are on the mta. what i continue to hear is there is so much of the tdp that has not been implemented. maybe for the public, just a 32nd on what the tep is. >> that was a joint project initiated with the mta problem about four years ago. it was the first comprehensive review of the punctuality of mass transit in san francisco since the 1970's, a line by line review, ways to speed the system, a comprehensive look at the transit side of the mta. the initial report was completed a couple of years ago. you will recall the board of supervisors heard it at that time and adopted many of the key findings. at that point, it moved into implementation, having adopted the concept. we have just completed the implementation plan which is in final draft form and pending review at the mta. i believe the board c operations and services has actually called for and is hearing an update on but an implementation plan for early april. the next steps from there are frankly going to be -- is sequa. a lot of the reports here a

the state of the cab industry in this town is unacceptable. several years ago, we provided this mta with follow-up legislation from this board with the tools to transform the cab industry in san francisco. in a way we have been unable to do in the past. several years later, very little progress has been made. i want to stress that the staff working on this at mta have been doing a very good job in trying to bring these issues up and trying to move the ball forward. unfortunately, i don't believe senior management at mta has sufficiently focused on making this a priority. i understand that muni is the 800 pound gorilla, but the mta is responsible for making the caps work in san francisco. it is a critical part of the transportation in our city and i have been frustrated by the slow pace of progress that mta. as a result, i'm going to offer the following amendments. the first is to section 7.3.5 to strip out the second sentence reading "the penalty for a

. >> we have a few follow-up questions for the mta. i know when we had the previous hearing, supervisor avalos and i asked the question is pertinent to win the next train would be. the other important issue was the tracking. was it a delayed? and equipment failure? the public speaker reminded us of that we know we have a significant amounts of those. those are significant issues we have to address with mta and in our body here. i am wondering as we track this data, when the lrv's are arriving, are we tracking when the switchbacks need to occur. >> thank you we are tracking -- thank you. we are tracking directly within our control versus other events that occur, mostly on the street. it is a very challenging, for us, because of delays. we continue to look -- we take every delay and i put together on a monthly basis of cause, and nature of each of the vehicle delays. we look at the maintenance programs. we look at the particular campaigns. we have very tight margins of availability on the lrv's. we have 130 scheduled, not including the f

department of transportation with the deputy transportation secretary, and we also joined several mta board members in staff meetings. the prospects for the new federal funding for transportation continue to be less than glowing. there is no agreement in congress about a funding source, and there seems to be universal acceptance that the concept of a federal gas tax will not be raised, at least until after the next presidential election. there is a distinct possibility that the reauthorization of the six-year surface transportation act, if that happens prior to the presidential election, could actually contain less funding than the current levels. stayed tuned for future updates, but do not hold your breath about future money -- stay tuned for future updates. the name of the game seems to be do more with what we have. able it was also dodged last week in sacramento when the legislature approved and the governor signed assembly bill 1052 from last year's $1.5 billion fuel tax loss. the bill also contains other provisions that make it possible for the state to support transit operations

for the parking tax, as you know, an amount equivalent to 80% of the parking tax is dedicated to the mta, so it is deposited into the general fund, and then we transfer that over to the mta, and that is about $52 million per year, and there is no expiration on that, that set aside. there is a small set aside of payroll tax some taxpayers can elect to have a small portion of their tax bill set aside for essentially graffiti abatement and other neighborhood beautification projects, and then, finally, the hotel tax. according to local code, it is allocated to a variety of cultural and housing and convention-related activities. every year, i would just kind of said way into this next slide, which shows in more detail -- i would just kind of segue into this next slide, which shows in more detail -- chair chu: revenues that come in, and majority of that being services, puc, water, airport, and about $3 billion, almost half of that is general fund revenues that come in. what would you say is the percentage of that amount that is restricted? >> the $216 in tax set asides, and in addition to that

he was the mta director on our mta board for quite some time, made a significant amount of contributions to that board, and we always know how difficult it is often to serve in the body, so i do want to adjourn in his memory, so i think we could make that on behalf of the full board. supervisor chiu: there were a number colleagues wanted to do that, so without objection, that will be the case. supervisor chu: we are embarking before they've month -- the month before the budget submission comes was, i request to talk about their policy objectives, over all, what the goals of each department would be, and primarily, the largest general fund apartments, including with the submissions to the department have been so far. this is really an effort to make sure we understand what those submissions are and can have earlier conversations with their departments ahead of the budget. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor kim. supervisor wiener. supervisor wiener: thank you. i have an in memoriam for peter nardossa, known as pg to his friends, also a district 8 residents. he was a new york transplant. h

and come in particular, more predictability, and so i called for this hearing so we can hear from the mta about what is the situation with the j-church, what are some of the causes of the challenges that the line faces, and what are some of the things we can do in the short run in the long run to make the line better? so thank you for being here and doing double duty today, mr. hailey. i know you have given a lot of thought on this, and we appreciate it, and i look forward to hearing your thoughts today. >> thank you. it is nice to be here, doing double duty. i will not spend a lot of time on this, because i know you have familiarity with the line, but just on the overview of the line, a couple of points to make, because there are some things, basically three things, that make the j line unique. the first one is that this is a shared line, shared in the sense of the m line and the f line pull out at balboa which can affect the service. secondly, this is the only one of the rail lines that historically for a variety of scheduling principles, we have scheduled dp had weight of somewhere bet

in the past couple of years, i have been in discussion with the mta to extend the 14 line all the way through the daly city bart and using that as a mode where transportation for people who are on the southern side of geneva. if those folks wanted to take of 14 and transfer at geneva to balboa park, that process can take a number of minutes, potentially 45 minutes. add that to your train ride downtown, and it is about one hour. if we were to extend the 49 to daly city bart, we could make a better connection for people going straight to the bart station and then downtown, reducing the time to about 25 minutes. with the changes being presented by the mta, particularly in the park merced, the m line, this could turn out to be a much larger transit hub then and is currently. it would make sense to provide this service who are more on the southern part of san francisco, who i represent. i appreciate the work that the mta has done so far on this, transportation authority, jose moscovich is here to speak about it. i know there is a long way to go, but we had a commitment from mta last year t

it is really fungible from the perspective of the mta, that together add up to 1.96% of discretionary revenue, and you can see the numbers, about $175 million from the budget. and then the library has the other base line, -- baseline, $44 million. we see what actually comes in, and we will transfer these as a final percentage to those agencies. the other requirements in the charter are the children to baseline, of which -- are the children's baseline. this would be $95 million in fiscal year 2010-2011. part of that funding has included the board's decision to provide rainy day money to the school district, which is a children's baseline eligible item. the public education in richmond fund -- education enrichment fund, known as prop h, and i have another slide of that coming up. they also have a baseline which is point to 9% of annual discretionary revenue. -- which is 2.9% of annual discretionary revenue. this is out of the $1.90 billion of the aggregate discretionary income. and here is some more discussion, just a little bit of history on the requirement on the public " -- public en