Interference and the board requests they be placed in the off position. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting. Do i have any Public Comment . No, madam chair. Do i have a motion to approve . Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Any opposed . Hearing none, minutes are approved. Item 5 communications i have none for you for this meeting. Item 6, introduction of new or Unfinished Business by board members. Thank you. I would like to im sure you are all aware we lost a fellow commissioner, i believe it was last week. Shirley brier black passed away. And malcolm vicechair heinicke was the only one that served on this board with ms. Black. She was an inaugural member of the San Francisco m. T. A. Board. She was appointed by mayor brown in 2000. She served as a member of the board for 10 years retiring in 2010. The native San Francisco, she always used public transportation. She worked for sieu1021 for many years and president from 1988 to 1991. Having reached her centennial just last month she was known for her commitment to workers rights. Shirley always stood up for what was right so we will adjourn our meeting in her memory today. She will be missed by a lot of people in the agency and the city. Directors, do i have any new or Unfinished Business . No. All right. Seeing none. Thank you. Item 7. Districdirector report. Good afternoon, members of the board, members of the public and staff. Start by wishing everyone a happy lunar new year. Wore a little red to bring good luck to this board meeting. I do have a number of things to update you on. I will start with vision zero. Just one item of note. Last week the San FranciscoPolice Conducted a special enforcement operation that was focused on bike and Pedestrian Safety. And im told our very own chair brinkman was present during the operation, not issuing citations but just observing. Nor were there reports of her arrest. [laughter] there were 16 citations issued to drivers at the event. Which was the third in the series of seven targeting distracted driving. The police have issued 95 citations for people texting and driving at the three events held to date. Vision zero outreach staff were on site at the event and distributed materials highlighting the risks associated texting while driving. To drivers who receive the citations as well as the people walking through the area. This is an on going part of the education and enforcement aspect with vision zero. Funded by the National Safety council and will be continuing these efforts is and the goal is not to Issue Citations but to raise awareness and change behavior such that people are not letting themselves be distracted when theyre out on the streets, no matter how theyre traveling. Glad to see that work moving forward and thank you for being there to support it. That same day, muni riders, particularly those who use uni metro had a difficult time throughout the day getting in and around the city. I just wanted to give the board and the public an update on what happened. We had the Subway Service had four different incidents that impacted the service. First, we had a train control failure at west portal station, which impacted the opening of the rail service. This happened early in the morning. There was a cross over track near castro station that failed twice during the day for two different reasons. Which prevented us from being able to make Service Adjustments in the subway or send empty trains to crowded platforms. We often use that castro cross over to adjust service. And then the switch failed and the switch that allows the js and ms to branch off the main line to get up and out of the subway and back into the subway. So four different incidents all on the same day, all impacting the subway, which which know created a lot of inconvenience to our riders. So on the plus side looking at the incident, our field managers and transit supervisors worked to manage the Service Disruptions and the gaps where possible. Our signal maintenance staff resolved the Train Control Program before the end of the morning commute and they overhauled two switches and replaced another switch before the start of service the following day. So while the switch issues hampered us throughout wednesday, our folks worked really around the clock to get them resolved in time for thursday mornings commute. And we also had mobilized folks from across the agency, particularly our planning and communication staff to get out there onto the platforms so that we could direct people so we had a large showing o large amount o direct people where they can find alternative transportation or just to let them know what was happening. The service was running. It just wasnt running as well as it normally would. Despite what worked well as always in these incidents, look at things we can improve in the future or things that didnt go as well as they should have. We have reviewed and improved our emergency procedures as a result of this incident. One example is for an incident or series of accidents like this in the future, we will a point someone to serve as an Incident Commander who will be in charge of all aspects of the service. We didnt really have a single point of contact and single point of accountability for this series of incidents that we think would benefit us going forward. Not just to manage the service but to manage the communications about the service. Weve also been focusing on a number of vehicle issues that have exacerbated problems like this and did a lot of work this past weekend to make sure that we have the right number of vehicles available for service and we keep them in service. Finally, we normally have tighter communication with bart and bart control center when we have incidents on muni. Since a lot of people transfer between bart and muni that bart staff can communicate to their riders who might be our riders. The communication didnt happen the way it should so well tighten up that protocol as well. We apologize to our riders and everybody else who was inconvenience. It was an ex extraordinary confluence of issues that happened all in the subway all on the same day that were unrelated. But from a riders standpoint its a big difficult day. Hope we didnt spoil anyones valentines day. But one other thing happened on that day, one other unfortunate incident i wanted to let the board know about. We have had a construction inspector, this is uni transit supervisor who is assisting construction project and this is a service that we provide, not just for our own Construction Projects but for other agencies, public and private, street construction, projects in San Francisco that have an impact or require interaction with muni so we dispatched someone to get the muni buses get around the construction site and help coordinate between the construction site and the muni service. February 14th, they support a public works led project to replace some sewer pipes up at the northern ends of vanness, not related to our other large van he iness. He informed the construction personnel our overhead Line Department would be a arriving shortly and they couldnt they needed to wait until our folks to come and begin work. There was somehow miscommunication and a truck in the area started moving, struck inspector castenada and sent him to the emergency room with some serious injuries. The good news is that ken he has moved out of the intensive care unit and is showing improvement and is stable but will have a long path to recovery. He has had multiple surgeries and will continue to monitor his progress. Weve reached out to his family and our thoughts will be with them towards a strong recovery. But i wanted to let you know it happened. Well be working with the other agencies, public works, the contractor to review this incident to see what went wrong here. We have pretty expensive training from our staff. They were a full personal protective equipment to make themselves visible so this is certainly a preventable incident that we will work on preventing in the future. On to some projects, specific issues. Before i do that i should mention in terms of the incidents, one other one, which is happening now, late this morning. We had a Network Issue with the sfmt network that impacted Traffic Signals in a large part of the city, largely concentrated in the south of market area. Those signals are largely in the process of being restored by the end of the meeting they will all be fully restored. Weve not yet determined what the root cause of the issue is. Our signal folks and our i. T. Folks were on this quickly and were quickly on the path to getting those signals back into operation. In case you are getting messages about that as were sitting here, i wanted to give you that update. On a couple of projects, at our last meeting, we were requested to provide an update on the sixth street Pedestrian Safety improvement project. This is a project that has been before you in a number of times over the years. So, we continue to conduct proactive Public Outreach for this project. Weve gotten recent feedback from organizations north of Market Street as well as the chamber of commerce, the San Francisco travel, San FranciscoHotel Council and others not right in the media vicinity but concerned about some of the traffic impacts associated with the original project design. So as a result of that feedback, we are exploring modifications to the project as originally proposed, which you may remember, would take the four lanes of traffic and reduce it to two widening out the sidewalks. So based on some of the feedback that weve gotten, were exploring some modifications to our proposal. Recognizing that any modification we would make on sixth street, given how important the corridor is for vehicle circulation and recognizing its very high level of pedestrian activity. Those are the things that well need to balance what we can do to make the street as safe as possible without creating an untenable burden on on traffic flow. Its been part of the high injury network. Its seen disproportionate amounts of pedestrian crashes so whatever we do, well need to make sure that we keep the integrity of the safety improvements intact as we move forward. We have been taking a number of steps waiting for this full project to come to fruition. To address pedestrians safety in the meantime, such as new signals, painted safety zones and removing peak hour tow away which opened up the pipe and we think perhaps led to speeding. There have been a number of changes that we made but were still seeing safety issues out there, were still seeing people get hit and hurt by cars on sixth street so were committed to engaging the community on ways we can improve safety as quickly as possible. So we are still working towards bringing a recommendation back to this board. That has community consensus, that will fix the issues on sixth street but will continue to work with various stakeholders in the meantime. Moving on to another project, i think that the board may have seen some communications about this. One of the benefits we get in this agency of having the traditional transit functions and transportation functions together in one agency, as we have here uniquely at the sfmta, is the ability to really redesign our streets so they work for the safety of pedestrians and the general flow of traffic. But for the safe and reliable operations of muni, one tangible manifestation of that is that Traffic Circle on mcallister and lion that is part of the five rapid muni forward projects you all legislated probably a couple years ago now that construction is happening and the Traffic Circle is complete at this point. We had seen issues regarding the Traffic Circle, while it was under construction. In part because of the the way the barricades were placed and in terms of the timing during which they were removed and striping and signage was put in place. But well monitor this change carefully. Theres more coming on that corridor and there is others coming in other corridors and these Traffic Circles came up to propose Traffic Signals that wid proposed here. Well monitor this to see if its safe and its having a muni reliability benefits. I wanted to to know its out there. You can check it out mcallister and lion and the next is mcallister and steiner will start soon. In terms of activities at the federal level, last week was a big week in terms of the news coming out of the federal. First is that the administration has nominated a woman named thelma drake, to be the federal transit administrator. The f. T. A. Has been without an administrator for a year now. So welcome news to see someone appointed and nominated. Shes a former republican member of congress from norfolk, virginia. She was a member of the Virginia House of delegates. Head of virginias department of rail and Public Transit department. And her nomination seems to be so far being well received by the industry, she seems like a professional who has good experiences that will bring much needed leadership. Its been since january 2014 since the fda had a confirmed administrator when the previous administrator left there was an acting administrator towards the end of the Obama Administration and continuing acting administrators and the last year. So hopefully the f. D. A. Will have leadership in place soon. Which would be good for us and the rest of the country. Also last week, two major pieces of Initiative Came out of the white house. The infrastructure package and the proposed federal budget. I wont go into a lot of details. To give you a high level view of the infrastructure package, it was proposed 1 trilliondollar package of which 200 billion would be direct federal funds, although a Funding Source was not identified. The idea is those federal funds would leverage the remaining 1. 3 trillion from private sector investment. There are some the range of Infrastructure Projects is not just transportation, it could be for the Energy Sector i it could be the hospital sector, the technology sector. Its very broad based. It does make some specific proposals in terms of how funding would change or how the rules would change. Such as changing the amount of federal share such as requiring Value Capture financing as a condition of receiving funds from the Capital Investment grant program, though in the other budget, proposed to cut the Capital Investment grant program. As a bunch of Environmental Review streamlining, but basically doesnt address the larger funding issue of the Highway Trust Fund which is you know funded from federal gastaxes which have not been increased since 1993. Congress has suggested passing any kind of legislation like this would be difficult without identifying Funding Source. The democrats, the Congressional Democrats released their own proposal which they called a better deal to rebuild america. Which includes stabilizing the Highway Trust Fund and much more federal direct investment to infrastructure as a federal has traditionally done. With regard to the federal budget, the president also released a proposed budget for the following fiscal year. Fiscal 19 although the fiscal 18 budget has not been addressed. On the fiscal 18 budget, the Congress Passed yet another extension. This time through march 23rd. So they will still have to deal with finalizing the budget for this year. They did with this extension, with this continuing resolution, agree on some spending caps for the next two years as well as deal with other issues like the debt limit, the debt ceiling which should smooth of chances of passes of the fiscal 18 budget if not the fiscal 1. Its potentially good news. But then the president s fiscal 19 budget came out and has a lot of inconsistencies with the action, bipartisan action that congress took. The good news in the president s budgets is it supports the fast act funding levels for the core Transit Program or transportation program. So these are the formula funds that we, as the sfmta use for state of good repair investments and our Critical Infrastructure and fleet. So that is fully funded in the president ial proposed budget. But it includes nearly 20 cut in the discretionary grants that come from the u. S. D. O. T. Including any future grants under the Capital Investment grant program. And so if you, this is the program that funded big chunk of this central subway that is funding a big chunk of cal train electricification that would in the future be funding the extension of cal train and high speed rail to trance bay transit center, the final extension of bart to san jose. Portion of better Market Street and gary d. R. T. The extension of the smart train to larksbur so a lot of projects within this region, if things continue as they had been would result in a lot of federal money to support these Major Projects that leverage or are leveraged by local and regional dollars. The president s budget proposes funding no more of those except the existing grants such as central subway and call train that have a grant agreement. So interestingly, if you add up. 200 billion proposed new federal funding for all infrastructure in the country, compared to what the federal budget proposes, theres nearly the amount of cuts just from transportation funding that would offset this new infrastructure funding that would be spread out over all types of infrastructure. It seems at best to be a pretty significant cut. In cunning for transportation. All that said the conventional wisdom is that the president s budget look largely ignored and they will work and adopt a budget that keeps those discretionary Grant Programs in place at one level or another. I told you after i was in d. C. The last time, i was assured by Staff Members from both sides of the aisle that that would be the case. Here locally, i wanted to just flag a couple things for you that will be on the ballot here in june in the state. Or in the region. So there are a couple of propositions that voters will be considering in june that are a result of a legislative negotiations on a variety of topics. Two of them regard side deals from some of the biggest things that happen last year. The 52 billiondollar transportation funding bill sb1, as well as the reauthorizization of californias landmark cap and trade law. The first one on the ballot is prop 69. This would be an amendment to the california constitution that would ban lawmakers from diverting either new diesel sales tax revenue or new vehicle registration fees away from transportation efforts. These are source thats were both part of sb1 and it reflects a concern by some legislate to bees in thtolegislators,that tho the states general fund to deal with larger state issues. This proposition would seek to change the california constitution to really lock in those funds for their intended transportation purposes. Prop 70 will also be on the ballot. This will also be proposed constitutional amendment that would set the stage for a showdown by 2024, over money collected from Companies Seeking extra room under the capandtrade system, which governs the emissions of grown f Greenhouse Gases. This is one of the Landmark Projects under cap and trade and of course california high speed rail project that we here have received 86 million of cap and trade and amounts were seeking additional funds for that. So these two measures will be ones that well be watching closely. Well keep you current. Also on the june ballot the board of supervisorrors voted last week to authorize putting it on the ballot in San Francisco. That will be happening around the bay so we will see that in june as well. Sorry, this is a long report. Just a few more things. This is one that i wanted to make sure to bring to your attention. Its something that i think has flown somewhat under the radar screen. It has to do with Transportation Network companies. In a hearing that was held by the California PublicUtilities Commission a couple of weeks ago. Up at this cpuc, this commission meeting, was a resolution to reduce the user fees collected from various transportation modes, including the t. N. C. S, the fees were reduced from. 33 to. 25 . So its a good sized decrease. And these fees are collected on a quarterly basis and used towards expenses occurred in regulating as you know is the exclusive jurisdiction to regulate, since the state asserted that jurisdiction for the state and preempting the local jurisdiction, such as San Francisco, from regulating the t. N. C. S. As you know, the regulations that he subsequently put in place are fairly minimal but even at that, theyve been largely unenforced, leaving the induce tremendous from i would say a practical perspective unregulated. Both the sfmta, we sent a letter as did the county Transit Authority from chair peskin as well as the los angeles director of transportation our own alumni selena renalds. We all sent letters in advance of the hearing the cpuc delay taking action on this item until there was a robust and transparent public process in place in terms of accounting to understand how much money has been collected, what that money has been used for. It was mind boggling to us given that what even cpuc staff would acknowledge is the inability to adequately regulate that they would take the resources they have to do so and voluntarily reduce them. There were a number of folks who came to speak at the meeting although i dont think it was widely sub la sized. Folks from the Mayors Office on senior disability action network, Taxi Workers Alliance spoke in opposition of lowering these fees. While we still trying to understand the impacts of the roadways and Transportation Network. One of the points we raised was that there was an inpen indepent all the with the transportation enforcement branch, which is charged with doing this enforcement. That audit found that the unit is severely understaffed and under resourced. Given that finding from the state, it seems just more surprising that they would chose the further under resourcing themselves. We urge enforcement on t. N. C. S or redirect funding to those who could enforce. Such as local entities. Weve often offered to work with them on joint enforcement. But we also ask that fees be used to support Disability Access fund to support on demand transportation to wheelchair users. Because as you know, the proliferation of t. N. C. S as adversely impacted the taxis that we have out on the streets. So the response from the c. P. U. Commissioners, which came after they already voted to approve the fee decrease, disregarding the Public Comments as well as the written testimony presented, was that the revenue wasnt going to be collected because there are so many t. M. C. S and theres a large fund balance on and the c. P. C. Is working to get legislative authorization to spend it. That they have a multiyear planning effort to implement improvements from the audit. And that the commissioners do have a concern about disabled access on tmcs. So, that was extremely surprising and disappointing. I did want to let you know that thats the state of affairs at the state. They are still in the midst of their rulemaking process and will continue to submit formal comments though as you know to date, are comments of not really resulted in any positive changes in their proposed regulations. And i think this hearing was just kind of another representation of how that process is going for us and other cities in the state generally. So then finally, to close, just to let you know of two things coming up. One is that the American PublicTransportation Association marketing conference is happening here in San Francisco next week. It is conference that we are cohosting with bart. Its a fourday conference to focus on all aspects of marketing communications, media relations, customer service, social media rider initiatives and best practices in public transportation. Well have a number of staff participating and speaking and leading panels and it would be a Good Opportunity to share our work and learn from our peers. And then, finally, this saturday everyone hopefully knows is the annual Chinese New Year parade. This is something that is a very significant event in terms of its impact on the transportation system. So a lot of folks from our agency do a lot of work to prepare for and support and then clean up after this event. Its something that folks enjoy doing. We also have people who participate in the parade. We will have our Department Operations center activated to communicate with the other city agencies. We will have our ceremonials motorized cable car with decorations with some Agency Representatives participating in the parade. But its a big event for the city. The sfmta plays a big role and one were happy to support. So that concludes my report. Thank you, very much. Dr. Riskin. There was a lot of useful information in there. I dont want us to lose the opportunity to send our best wishes to the construction inspector who was injured and hope that he does enjoy a full recovery from that. Thats always horrible when one of our zone injured in the line of duty like that. The sixth street, im pleased to hear well work with the community and move forward to making that a safer street. I know that that will be an on going process. I do theme we manage to keep the bike lane in the southbound direction because thats a lovely connection for that buffered like bain on golden gate for people coming out of the neighborhoods crossing Market Street and heading south of market. The Traffic Circles i went by one on the bus today and saw it under construction on the five lines. I think thats going to be a really good treatment to use where neighbors prefer not to have a traffic signal but we have muni buses going through and we can use something new to address the efficiency of the buses. Directors, do i have any questions . Any comments . I have a question about the cpuc fees. They enter an appeals process when they make that vote . I dont believe so, no. Thank you. I believe we have some Public Comments. Lets go ahead and have Public Comment. Well set it at two minutes. I just one for this topic mark gruber. Thank you directors. Mark gruber the San FranciscoTaxi Workers Alliance. I was present at the cpuc meeting where the dnc fees and did testify. We were ignored and you were ignored, which is par for the course at the cpuc. They made a absolutely incomprehensible decision to lower the amount they charged the limousine industry for enforcement when they do next to no enforcement at all. The only way i could imagine you could rational eyes it is to say since were not doing enforcement anyway, why charge anybody for it . The Limousine Association actually came out in opposition to the reduction of their own fees. And that obviously too was ignored. So were dealing with a state agency that i dont know how to describe and i probably should not in public. Another topic i wanted to bring up as to do with the vision zero. The enforcement efforts which certainly are necessary for vehicles but also you have to do something about pedestrians behavior on the streets. And this is gotten much worse in my opinion since the advent of d. N. C. S because people just oblivious to traffic. Sometimes defiant of traffic and just starting across the street. This is not simple jaywalking. Im from new york where jaywalking is a birthright. People put their own lives in danger and that behavior needs to be changed. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anymore Public Comments. No, madam chair thats the last person who has indicated they would like to address. Public comments is closed. Well move on. Item 8. An Advisory Council report. I do not see the chairman of the c. A. C. Here so well move on to general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the board on matters that are within the jurisdiction but not on todays calender. First speaker ted jordan followed by mohammad desmolchi 7774502. I. I was here and i know the sign has been approved so im not here to opposed it but there was a lot of consequences and i i you need to be made aware of. The first is, as i said last week, you have to block section of twoway stop signs and all of a sudden you put in a fourway stop sign. I know you have the tab on the bottom but a lot of people dont notice that. How will you alert the subsequent blocks that these are still two way. Youve got these yellow cross traffic does not top sign. The other thing is its a steep incline and my survey of three bikes were coming down at very quick speed. I dont think the stop sign will make them stop. Even though you have two 10foot red zones on the south side, i mean, im sorry, on the west side of that street, that were put in a couple years ago to clear obstructions coming up. You d dont have any on the eastside. Now that you have pedestrians, children, they think its top sign theyll run out and a bike will jam into them and something will happen. But not just a red zone up there. Not just a 10foot red zone. You need a toll way with red zone. As you did two blocks away at vienna and avalon, and because as it is right now, you already got that red zone and every day, in fact today coming to this meeting, in broad daylight there was a guy parked across the red zone and into the handicapped zone. Your meter maids dont know its dangerous because they dont enforce it unless someone calls and we dont call. So thats why its a dangerous intersection. Thank you, very much. Thank you. Next speaker please. Thank you. I am the name of the god. We have been seeing in this city of San Francisco that drivers are suffering very badly. They dont make more than 10 an hour. It has been hurting them very bad. Through the sfmta and s. F. O. These people have caused troubles for all the drivers. Very good drivers. Theyre very nice people. They have a clean heart. I have brought this issue to the new proposal for 7 million. That 4. 7 million is good because i fight for it and i got it so that goes to all the drivers. That is very good. That is the point which i was trying. Now we got it. That money goes to all the drivers. Thats nice. The new proposal im giving to you guys, that 4. 7 million should be given to the driver in a manner for the business, not to put the money i put in their pocket tomorrow they go buy chocolate and that money is finished. Thats not a good way. My father is in iran and i have been working his shop until i finish mien inger ook degree. This is not a business to give the money to them and say go buy chocolate and tomorrow do 4. 7 million is gone. The right way is to give the money to the taxi drivers and let them borrow 12,500 and return it back in four months. After four months, they return the money and the money is still there. So they can have their own car, they can buy their own car and their own insurance, and they can buy every other thing which is needed as as independent. So that is where every cab driver making over 1,000 on us every single month so we escape giving money to the cab company anymore. We dont want the cab company in this city anymore because they are making more than 1,000 on us. Thank you. Thank you very much for your time. Tarik mabude. Good afternoon, directors. Taxi driver. So taxi medallion was sold and they came back to the federal credit union. More are still on the way every month, 10 or 12 medallion is because theyre not refinancing anymore. Similar to that, s medallion issued to the drivers with 30 years working drivers, and sfmt started taking back the medallions, theyre collected half of them back and the remaining will be back to sfmta. That is creating a crunch of the medallion in the market and these drivers will be forced to pay 100 get fees to the Cab Companies to drive their cars. And just make 100, 40, 30 a day. That is causing a lot of families in extreme troubles so you should look into that s. Medallion with 30yearold drivers although its free but you want to make money. And sfmta is throwing out their 8,000 cities medallion for 700 a month. That is unfair. That game of collecting money for user medallion should go away and there should be free medallion back into the system for the future. But history now on forever. Must only new taxi stand on the taxi stand must go and half taxi when the sign is and behind than is all uber and lift signs. So we have no parking there and location where the public is coming out, 9 9 public is coming out and our parking is on the third street side so weve got zero customers at the conventions. Thank you. Next speaker please. Daniel followed by mark gre grewburg. Hello. Im daniel and im a San Francisco native. Ive lived in my current apartment for 20 years. I really just want to express outrage, which im not alone in this if you ask within the community, which i have done. You will find that 98 of the people are just fed up with these tech buses and the selling out of our city and the corporatization of what was a beautiful diverse rich city. The destruction of the mission, the increase of gents ra indication, we live in the Mitchell Ice Cream building. The mitchells have expressed over and over you are damage their business. Theyve been there since the 50s, you are showing great disrespect. You put a bus stop that has 61 buses smoking into my window every morning. We cant stand it. Our neighbors cant stand it. Our neighbors had to put up a fence so you cannot enjoy the only private accessible garden in the whole city pretty much. We used to all enjoy. That people got their ice scream and enjoy the garden. Cant anymore. He cant rent his apartments because the buss are shaking his building. We have disabled people there. We have elderly there. This is a neighborhood. Were sick and tired of you selling out our public roads for private corporate gain and this is a feeling that is reiterated by everyone ive spoken with in the community. I sat down withal, and francesca, they accepted my offer to have a peaceful cup of coffee. Jeff sheehy is nowhere to be found. They broke up the meeting into two things. Things they cannot do and will not do. Id like you to do something. We have a situation theres that is intenable, i cannot live in my apartment anymore. Its awful. And you are just going to have to make a change. With brokenheart sf. Com were looking for a sub system and encourage these young 23yearolds to ride their bikes, have the Companies Pay into our public system, pay into electric bicycles, lick means the transportation and get them out from our front doors because we cannot stand it anymore. No joke. Thank you. Next speaker. Mark grewburg and he is the last person who turned in a speak are card under this topic. Thank you, again. I just wanted to continue and finish some remarks i was making under the directors report. This is with infrastructure with the condition of the streets. Ive been driving a cab here in San Francisco now for 35 years and i have never seen the streets of this city in worse shape. It is simply awful. Im not only talking about those places like vanness lets say where you have a huge construction project that maybe some of that is to be expected. Its all over the city. I know this is not your direct responsibility, but it certainly is something that you must be concerned about because muni obvious obviously uses these streets and from the citys point of you, this may be categorized under the idea of the third maintenance but its continue the third maintenance for a can be driver thats seeing their cab shot to pieces because they have to go over these roads and these bumps and these pot holes every single day. It must be occurring with muni also. And with reference to what the last speaker just said, large vehicles such as muni bus and such as google buses we know have a di disproportionate effet on the streets, on the condition of the streets. On the wear and tear on the roadways. I would question whether the city is getting their moneys worth from these fees these companies are paying on these google buses owing not only to the other kinds of disruptions that theyre causing, but also to the wear and tearing on the streets. Thank you. Thats the last person. Anymore Public Comment on the directors report. Public comment is closed. Well move on. You are moving to your consent calender these are routine unless a member of the public or a member of the board wishes to have an item severed and surrendered separately you have received a request item 10. 5 regarding the mileage limit of next severed from your consent calender but no other item has been severed. Ok. So do i have a motion could approve consent calender minus 10point a. Second. All in favor aye. Opposed. Hearing none. The consent calender 10. 5 is passed and lets hear from the public. 10. 5 amended transportation Code Division to extend the mileage limit of vehicles use is taxis from 375,000 miles to 425,000 miles. One member of the public has asked this be severed. Tarik mamood. Good afternoon, to increase the mileage to 425,000. It used to be 300,000 a long time ago. In yellow cab 500 cab company, there were on average, 200 to 220,000 when the cab will be stopped that moved into a spare by time it hit 250,000, cab will be abolished and not reach 300,000 miles, to keep it good quality of this cost. Then the mileage was increased and now its 375,000, which mr. Malcolm heinicke last time said it should be increased to 400,000. That is 100 wrong. First of all, 2,000 cabs moving in the city out of 2,000 cabs there are 300 cabs sitting in yellow right now, which are already abolished and the name and numbers taken out. Theyre hardly 250,000 miles. So i like to say the same issues. People dont want to drive a car, which is more than 300,000 miles and the roads of San Francisco especially terrible. So based on that, going to 425, why . The person who has been 100 get fees is still paying 100 get fees and big Cab Companies. What is not much used car the wrong idea. The thing is, when one cab is taken out by one driver today, the next day another driver, the next day another driver, it is the same cab up to 300,000 miles goes to the 10 different hand, maybe not double but still going to different hand. 425 will be a disastrously bad car on the road for public and for the driver to pay 100. He should be paying 60, 70 and its ok, not otherwise. Mark grewburg. Yes, mark in support of the change to 425,000 miles. Its true that the mileage has been increased over the years and there has not been any obvious change or difference or deterioration in the safety of vehicles and the public. And the fact there needs to be some limited granted. A well maintained vehicle will absorb far more miles than a poorly maintained vehicle will and maintenance is done by Cab Companies on a regular basis because this is the basis of the business. Keeping vehicles in Good Condition and keeping them on the street and keeping them on safe condition is the business they are in and therefore Cab Companies are attentive to this. We have hundreds upon hundreds of cabs owned and operated by individual drivers and this increase in the mileage will give them, maybe another six months of use out of this vehicle, which is supremely important to someone who is barely, if at all, making a living at this point. So i would just urge you to support this. Its a modest increase. Maybe a little over 10 on the mileage. This is something that is going to be helpful to both individual cab drivers who own their own cabs and to Taxi Companies. So please support it. Thank you. Thank you mr. Grewburg. Do i have any questions or a motion to approve 10. 5 . Im just going to say im supportive of this motion. I would just say that i think the bigger thing from a customer standpoint is how the interior of the cab appears. I think that the streets are bumpy and you have the same problem if you are in a car or on a bus in that regard, but i think the biggest difference is just because it has 400,000 miles, doesnt mean it has to look that way on the inside. Thats one the reasons that people often make other choices about how they ride. So just want to say i support this, move it forward but also say that to the Taxi Companies or to the drivers, keep your interior cab nice if you want people to not know your car has been on the road for 400,000 miles. Thank you. Good point. Do i have a second. And all in favor. Aye. Opposed hearing number item 10. 5 is approved. I want to know in the consent calender, 10. 6, there may have been people who chose not to speak. This was a manning the Companies Code regarding residential parking issued educational institutions. This came up during the discussion around the extension of the r. P. P. Zones in Bernal Heights last meeting, the meeting before. It was a particular request of vicechair heinicke we make those r. P. P. S available to the educational institutions. I know he is not here to call it out so ill just say that that was passed. Is there anybody planning on speaking in favor of that . No. Someone there. Thank you, very much. Public comment was closed because that was on the consent calender just wanted to call it out to everybody. Now consent calender is complete. Well move on to regular. Thank you, madam chair, item 11 presentation regarding the fiscal please stanphysical. Some Good Progress in terms of street safety. Particularly because your adoption of vision zero in 2014 and that is obviously something we want to continue to be a trend so we can get to zero by 2024. Muni service is at its highest levels ever. 70 is not where we strive to be but it is the best weve has since the agency was created and thats a good trend which is joined by the fact that we have increasing share of trips taken in San Francisco by sustainable modes of transportation, something that well have to do more of to reasonably accommodate growth coming to the city. And the flipside of all that, is that Greenhouse Gas emissions are dropping in the city. Though the transportations share of the Greenhouse Gas emissions are growing because the buildings have been doing more than their share. Youll note in the upper right, transit is a small part of the pie. So its really the cars and trucks in the city that are among the biggest drivers now of Greenhouse Gas emissions in San Francisco. In terms of the economy, the city continues to grow pretty significantly just in this Strategic Plan cycle. Weve added nearly 50,000 people to the city, and for the near term, the growth is continuing. Were lower now than what economists say is the lowest that we can get. So were essentially at full employment as economists would measure it. And what that means, as the economy grows, we need to attract more people into the city to work because weve run out of people here in the city it do the work. You see the nonresident growth in terms of jobs in San Francisco has been growing over the years, so its more people coming into the city, more people needing to get around the city. And as i reminded you last time, and i think the city economist did as well, we are in coming close to unprecedented length of post recession growth as part of the recovery. I did attend and hear economists speak last week, nobody is currently forecasting recession. Everyone seems to generally think that current conditions, while they wont grow as fast will continue to grow for the next three years, but everyone who all the economist when theyre talking about the region and the state point to this same data point were this is a very long expansion and it cant last forever. So then, bringing this down to our level here at the mta, the big picture of the starting point is that our revenues are flat. Whereas our expenditures are growing, the flat revenues despite the fact that the citys general fund continues to grow and we just got the 6month report numbers last week, that showed additional 13 million in general fund revenue to the mta, beyond what was anticipated, which is good news. Other of our revenue, such as parking revenue and transit revenues are flat at best and well show you that, but meanwhile, our expenditures continue to increase. This is historically where weve been. You can see the growth of the budget. And what we need is for the blue line to stay above the red line, the initial protections for the next two years because the revenues are growing not as fast as expenditures, as the blue line is below the red line. Thats the gap we have to close. This just gives you a zoomin on some of those of our own revenue sources. You can see that the fares are down. Thats in part due to the free muni programs that we have authorized over the years. Our other parking related and other fees are largely flat at best. So when you put that together, our projections for the next two years on the revenue expenditure side we were initially looking at 43 million twoyear shortfall we needed to close. This is just a little context of