with the mta create the permit? >> next speaker, please. >> 10 years ago, voters greeted a taxi commission because the powers that be convinced them that that would be good and it did not work and then it was thrown out a couple of years ago but the voters did not throw out everything the way it has been construed. i'm saying that the proposition did not eliminate proposition k. the way the taxes were operating under the police department was much the fare. selling the balance is so immoral, illegal, and unethical. there are people waiting on the list many years for their medallion and now they do not want -- they will not get it because the city would like to balance the budget with sales of medallions and revenues which have doubled. [applause] >> next speaker, please. >> the most important factor in determining the caliber of service in terms of our industry, we will not have a world-class industry without the drivers and we cannot keep good drivers if we remove the opportunity to earn a decent living. in less th

i look forward to working under the direction of the mta board, with the men and women of the mta, the labor organizations and leadership that represents them come with the rest of the elected family of the city, with my colleagues across the government's, from planning to the t.a., to the city attorney's office, the police department, working with the city family, working with our other regional states partners. all of them an important part of the transportation system here, working with other stakeholders within cac, within various advocacy groups. and really, the people of san francisco who really deserve to have a transportation system. what i will commit to all of you and to the entire board is i will do everything i can during my time here to make it so that years down the road, when we all look back on the decision of the mta board, we will feel like it is a good decision and we will be happy with the results. thank you very much for coming. it is really an honor. i look forward to serving the people of san francisco. thank you. [applause] chairman nolan: i want to say a word o

supervisor chu: with regards to the mta, this legislation would not necessarily the relevant to the mta? -- not necessarily be relevant to the mta, correct? >> they demanded certain resources, including overtime, whereas the human resources director is responsible for footing the exemptions on the non-mca directors. -- non-mta directors. supervisor mirkarimisupervisor o that a bit, mta. >> we are required to report to the controller on the difference [unintelligible] word to go through. supervisor chu: the ordinance applies that it is a matter of enforcement? >> for the mta we have several classes that are exempt where station agents are given exemption as a class. looking at that level, we have 35 individuals that beat that level. the majority of them are operators or electrical workers. we are very concerned by the safety implications of that much overtime. unfortunately, the issue has been presented under a myriad of reasons. because the service modeled presents vacancy issues and unlike safety staff, the attrition levels of operators, pcr's, those kinds of positions are city departm

>> this would be a question for the mta to address in the deficit. they do not know what the market looks like at this point. the advertising market has not been stable for the past couple of years. in attempting to get incremental revenues, they were not willing to revisit the underlying agreement. supervisor kimsupervisor chu: wo the projected deficit, how have they been progressing at the board? >> this estimate was presented several months ago before the budget started. now i think, a supervisor, everyone is aware that almost every year the mta has similar deficits. we do things informally, like not buying parts or materials. making the formal revenue increases and cuts to the budget, there has always been a deficit. adding to the random service revenue that we have, which frustrates others. i am hoping that we do not do this again this year. supervisor chu: when we do get passed the budget, what was the change that occurred that led to the deficit? , >> one of the items was a garage ordinance to enforce pricing. unfortunately, and additionally,

we continue to believe that it is a bad idea for the mta. the contract is already over for this fiscal year. we believe that every dollar that we can get, we will get over 65% of that. if you experience incremental revenue it will address budget means this year. we are already projecting a $22 million deficit this year. the other point that i wanted to point out, you people also have concerns about approving this and it will be approved based on a contingency that there is a view for annual review on two issues. one, what is the feedback? two, how much revenue are you getting? especially if there is revenue from other sources. those of the two items. to the extent that we were not getting additional revenues, we would not continue this program. amending the agreement on an annual review basis helps with the budget deficit so that we do not have to do things like cut service, avoiding the service issues of the past couple of years. we understand that there are concerns about this not being with merit. unfortunately, we will not be getting incr

-- is the methodology used by bart and the mta from 1987 to 1991. as stated, that is tied directly to the actual number of transfer trips between bart and muni. we totally uncut -- concur with the position that the formula utilize from 1987 to 1991 is preferable in order to tie the feeder agreement payment to the actual number of transfer trips, which more accurately reflect mta's cost to provide feeder services. to illustrate this in a striking manner in the our report on page 5, as shown on page 3, idealizing the 1987 methodology for 2009, 2010, it would have been $15,135,790, $12 million or 473.1% more than the $2.6 million amount that you are now being asked to approve using the sales tax methodology. it is a very significant difference by that change in methodology, which has never been documented. on page 6 of our report, the actual number, the mta now says that they will go back can renegotiate this agreement methodology to provide a clear nexus between the actual number of transfer trips between bart and muni, therefore requiring fewer paymen

why does everything have to be tied to making the mca money -- mta money? a lot of the people who are complaining are not taking advantage of these town halls and try to disrupt constructive discussion. so, i think this demonstration was important. [chime] you cannot forget the cab drivers. >> david posada, last person. >> good afternoon, everybody. if you read it, it is self- explanatory. this one is about identity that was given to me. they attempted one $1,000.104 $40,000. it was instituted by mta. i know the study very well. my experience. i saw the battery happen. what else could i say? [chime] this credit card operation i think is really on healthy, and i do not think it is appropriate -- is really unhealthy, and i do not think it is a proper. chairman nolan: should lead to a five-minute break at this point? we will go to the consent calendar, item 11. thank you. >> you do not have that in many, that many like the castro. the meters go off at 6:00. you get plenty of parking along 24th street. it is ridiculous to go to 9:00 p.m. [wondering if you got en

while they worked on the issue. -- march and mta. we will be renegotiating with bart back to july 2010 for the fiscal year agreement. it is -- the other reason the mta is getting approval is we are holding that receivable. bart has not repaid as. for those -- that is the reason we're bringing fiscal year 10 in today. >> supervisor campos: an agreement has not been made until if the board of supervisors votes on -- until the board of supervisors votes on it. >> the agreement has not come back before the board. i do not know when. when we looked at the agreements and started negotiating, we had discovered that these had not been before the board. this is an oral agreement to continue the fiscal year 2010 methodology. it was taken to the mta board which approved the agreement with the condition the agreement would have new methodology. >> supervisor campos: this is an oral agreement between home? >> the heads of the two agencies. >> supervisor campos: the agency had to play an important role but i do not know that legally they have the a

. >> my understanding is the mta roughly divided the number of potentially eligible schools into half. at the plans and programs committee, some commissioners asked whether there was the ability to shift schools between group two and a group one, and mta said that the crews were already being legislated, but there could be some flexibility to allow certain schools to begin before the others. commissioner mirkarimi: any other questions or comments for staff? any public comment? is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? >> my name is nick, sustainability director for the school district. i have not come to grips with climate change it. on the other hand, in my job, i have done a lot to promote alternative transportation to and school districts. i am mindy appeared to see if you have any questions about our program -- i am mainly appear to see if you have any questions about our program, in general. this summer, we will be expanding a solar power program. we will also be finishing up the bike rack installation that every school by the end of the summer. thi

that is why, a few months ago, the mta, and we, took action for backup. for instance, the state bond funding. with the federal funding, and the mta has been working with the comptroller's office. you may recall that this is the way that it is historically done. i think that this will be funded at all levels requested. commissioner mirkarimi: very good. discussion? public comment? >> i am the planning manager at chinatown cdc. we have been working on this project for a 15to 20 years -- 15 to 20 years and we would like to come to you to ask for support. san francisco is a transit first city. we are all working on transit inclusion and access for everyone. it has been mentioned that federal money is becoming increasingly more difficult to obtain, and that we are so close to the finishing line, after 15 years of work, from the mta, city community, and we want to use this opportunity to lock in the infrastructure benefits for our neighborhoods. lastly, to point to some of the economic benefits and job gains -- one of the businesses that relocated, they moved tw

i would also like the mta to continue making bike improvements. we have seen nearly a 60% increase in the number of people riding their bikes over the past a few years, and the new director should continue the positive trend. finally, the mta should encourage adoption of electric vehicles. as you may have already heard, i myself am now writing in a wonderful chevy -- riding in a wonderful chevy volt. i hope the mta will stay focused on increasing the ev infrastructure for this city. that is quite a bit for an mta board and directed to do, and i want to share with you that as i assist in my role to review with the mta board who they will select, there are a couple of very strong themes that, across -- that come across. we need to have not only a visionary, but we also need to make sure that there is a team approach. there is not just one person that can lead the mta. it has got to be a very dedicated team. i also want to make sure that the person exhibits a high level of collaboration. even the on-time performance is not just muni alone. it has to d

the project. groups into 100 of each. mta has prodded the planning or for phase one and will begin implementation, i believe, in the fall or winter. then phase two design would start after a few of the deliverable are met. these are low cost improvements relative to installing speed humps or other actual road changes. however, to ensure compliance, and used to be an enforcement and education and outreach component, and also of the valuation tools to maximize the effectiveness of using a type of improvement like this. so we have a couple of deliverable for phase 1, construction funds. we have requested that a traffic study be completed before construction begins to give baseline data for study before and after results. for phase two, and it would have established a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness. commissioner campos: i have a quick question. on the list of schools, is there a way in which individual supervisors can provide some suggestion about the timing of where some of these schools are? for instance, looking

the san francisco and ca. -- san francisco and t a -- san francisco mta. supervisor cohen: i just want to put on the record that i am frustrated. once again, southeaster neighborhoods are left off the table, no discussion, no consideration and i will not be voting for this. supervisor mar: i just pulled up the city car share map and it does seem that the southeast sector is willfully -- woefully misrepresented and park side has almost nothing. i also saying around park merced -- it is the southwest part of the city and my hope as you work with the supervisors to look at citywide -- at least in the richmond district, you have six or seven sites, but not in that outer richmond. my hope is by looking a pilot projects like this you can help figure out how to expand and raise the awareness in other areas of the city and not just central areas you currently are located late. i appreciate supervisor cohen's comments. my understanding is with the pilot program, four of them are in district 3 areas where there is clear demand and the others are chosen in areas where

i asked the mta to look into tour bus policies, separate from shuttle services. i hope the two agencies are working together, obviously with the expertise that the ta now has around shuttle services, the mta around for bus services. i cannot agree more with our former colleagues comments. tors buses are creating significant neighborhood and transit and environmental parking issues that need to be resolved in a way that allows tourists to enjoy san francisco, but this is different from the situation involving local san franciscans living in the city and commuting out. we need to focus on both, and i want to reiterate the importance of coordinating at work. commissioner mirkarimi: thank you. i have a question. i noticed what was not in the report was any reference to the commuter benefit ordinance, the mandatory commuter benefit ordinance, and i think, has some relationship to the increase of corporate shuttles. we think for future conversation, there could be some context, since the city is requiring companies that have 20 or more employees to provide for the pre-t

i will discuss briefly the mta staff here. attachment two shows the proposed amended 5y pp. and men and three shows how each of the scores. -- amendment 3 shows how each of these scores. if you approve the amendment this month, during the course of this fiscal year, mta expects to come back for allocation request for each of these projects. this covers planning through construction. this is a complementary project. it has to do with replacement of the signal infrastructure along from mission to lombard. it is transit signal party hardware all along the corridor insignificant corridors throughout the city. it is very good leveraging due in part to the executive director and prior commissioner. it has climate initiatives that we created last funding cycle. our main concern is we're working closely to make sure it is constructed and designed in tandem with the project. the 19th avenue pedestrian signal as part of the 19th ave. signal project, we evaluated 34 traffic signals and identified 18 of them as either a high or medium-priority for installation signals for this. this is

the mta board did this reluctantly as well. after the first year of this, there will be an opportunity for both you and the board to discontinue this after the first year, if the feedback from the public is significant, if we find alternate sources of money. then we will not have to do this in the second and third year. that texas strategy is available in the contract. -- exit strategy is available in the contract. supervisor campos: i appreciate that. thank you. supervisor elsbernd: i came in here thinking this contract will generate -- was going to generate $500,000 before the amendment was made. this is reducing coverage but still produces $500,000? >> $500,000 was a conservative effort. with the 15, we will have to work harder to get to the $500,000. i cannot guarantee we will get the 500 dozen dollars. we will work as hard as we can to try to achieve that amount. $500,000 was our estimate. it was not an estimate from titan. supervisor elsbernd: thank you. i was sitting at the president's dais, so i did not get a chance to e

the mta board was intending to take action if they had not increased the wait time. to increase the mileage by 10 cents for every one fifth of a mile. they can increase the drop rate by 40 cents. that is the reason i will not be supporting this. i believe the intention of the mta board is to offset what that cost would be. president chiu: any further discussion? roll-call vote. supervisor chu: no. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: no. supervisor farrell: no. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor mirkarimi: aye. supervisor wiener: no. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. >> there are seven ayes and four nos. president chiu: given that this would have required eight votes, this resolution is not adopted. >> may i just make a quick comment? i know that this did not technically pass. it is important that the majority of the board of supervisors is on record asking be mta to reconsider its decision. >> why do we not now move to item 54? >> item 54 is an authorization of proposed arguments submitted to voters at the