Transcripts For SFGTV Transportation 20240703

Good morning, welcome to the october 24 meeting of the San Francisco county Transportation Authority im Rafael Mandelman i am chair our vice chair is melgar. Thank sfgovtv and our clerk is angela, will you call the roll . Yes, chair. Commissioner chan. Present. Commissioner dorsey. Present. Why commissioner engardio. Present. Chair mandelman. Present. Voice chair melgar. Present. Commissioner supervisor peskin. Present. Preston present. Why commissioner ronen. Present commissioner safai. Absent. Commissioner stefani. Present. Why commissioner walton. Present we have quorum. Thank you. I think you have a Public Comment announcement. Yes, thank you. For members interested in participating in this Board Meeting we welcome your attendance in person in the chamber room 250 in city all or watch channel 26 or 99. Or stream it live at www. Sfgov. Org. For those wish to make Public Comment remote low dial 4156550001, access code 2660 908 7338 and then press pound and pound again you will listen in role time of had Public Comment is called you wish to speak on press star 3 to be added to speak. Dont press it again or you will be removed from the queue. The system had the system says your line is muted unmute it. The live operator will advise you allowed two minutes to speak when 2 minutes are up we will move of callers taken in the order which they are received. Best practices to speak slowly, clear and turn down televisions or radios around you. Public ment for items on the agenda will be taken from members of the public and attendance in the chamber and after from remote speakers on the phone line. Thank you. Thank you. Madam clerk before calling our next item invoke 326 to limit total comment per item to 30 minutes for todays meeting. Each speaker will have 2 minutes to speak unless i indicate otherwise at the start of that item. Madam clerk. Call our next item item 2, chair report an information item. Thank you, madam clerk. I want to begin this month with an appreciation for senator feinstein whos service was held here at city hall early 30 month. With her career first the lone and national willfuls the first female burden president and mayor of San Francisco and first to serve senator from california and many first in congress. Greatest for her leadership and condolenses to her family. She served on the environment and public works and Appropriations Committee advocates for infrastructure and the law. Early 30 year she and senate pidela 200 Million Dollars for high speed rail and 30 Million Dollars to transition the bus toward zero e Mission Fleet and left year a raise grant for yerba buena west side bridge project. Senator feinstein worked with senator gill brand of new york to represent the concerns about the safety Autonomous Vehicles on the ad start bill a topic well talk about today. Speak of safety, it was after our citys passage of vision zero policy in 20 then that tom mc guire joined the director of sustainable streets. Now 10 years later we want to take this opportunity to wish him well as he joins the Transportation Authority to lead their bart it Silicon Valley phase 2 project. Tom lead implementation of vision zero street innovations and capitol projects. From the vaness brt and central subway projects to jfk and great highway project to street redesigns like folsom. Parklets and shared streets. He let permitting for scoot and bike share. Provision of taxi and limitation of sf park. It is i long and important list and never easy to shepherd change thank you, tom for your contributions to San Francisco we are happy you are able to celebrate passage of 8645 the speed safety camera bill. We wish you the best. And finally im excited to welcome the annual convening of co, ligz of california 25 transportation sales tax agencies to San Francisco next week. Will be great to share experiences and learn about inclues itch planning. Funding and technology and protect deliver we a thousand atendsees across cam cal a week later we welcome the visitors from asiapacific and home everyone enjoyce our city. Thank you in advanceed Public Transit prirts and street teams to manage all the changes to keep San Francisco moving during this busy time. With that i conclude my remarks. And lets see if well is Public Comments. In the chamber on the chairs report. See if we have remote comment on item 2. Checking for remote Public Comment. And well is no Public Comment. Public comment on item 2 is closed. Madam clerk call item 3 executive directors report this is information item. Madam clerk. In dam executive director. Here we go. Good morning. I begin a quick update from regional level the metro revenue measures 2026, over the past year staff conducting rounds of out reach, stake holder engagement to explore the possibility of a bill that authorize 2026 or beyond measures for transportation. Feedback collected to date indicated that there is interests in some potential expend tours to transit transformation. Safe streets and the like as wells on the table sales tax, payroll or mileage fee among others. Mtc commissioned a second pole of voters with results expected by mid november. In time for engaging with author and state legislator to potential low again carry a bill next year. We will keep you pestod this. In the meantime we have been collaborating with mtc on a bay area travel survey this time together with santa clara vta a major design to learn how people are traveling throughout the area and in San Francisco for us, this will include information about work and nonwork trends and travel, telecommuting Online Shopping and the like. Support a number of efforts in the region come in San Francisco. Relating to congestion management and travel demand management strategies. Again, look forward to those results later this year. In addition, commissioner supervisor peskin and i among others joined the Bay Area Council and the port of San Francisco for great water front tour ever a ferry tour of the waterfront. A conceptual Ferry Network connect the fer building. Mission baker rock, power station, candlestick and Hunters Point ship yard and points further south. The Water Emergency Transportation Agency is developing a shared vision for a potential Ferry Network and across the bay for 2050 including the level of service and operations locally within San Francisco. Services will be a fundation for Business Plan and we participate this will be brought back to the board for consideration this winter well keep you posted that. The first part was network i should mention Treasure Island to support this development as well. Turning to local issues. As you may recall look at studying car pool and transit lanes on the 101 corridor the northbound 280 extension. Touching down on king street. This project is entering out roach phase. Idea to continue managed lanes under development south in the pel anyone slam man mat is studying highway 380 to the county line and pick the corridor up at the county line. We have been working with san mateo and caltrans and sfmta on potential designs and traffic analysis and this fall we will conduct out reach meetings including counsel halls and neighborhood garthings to provide feedback and guide our design and evaluation. Folks learn more turning to project delivery updates had a happy event in late september at the balboa park and upper yard plaza opening celebration. Joined commissioner safai issue treasure fiona ma, scott wean and janice lee with Mission Housing and bart this idea the new transit oriented housing and open place plaza across from the bart station. Home to 131 new affordable units and beautiful new plaza for a transit hub and Public Open Space that will benefit residents and transit passengers alike. The ta was pleaseds to criminalitied 950 thounz and sales tax funds for the plaza a pass to the passenger loading areas seating. Light asking security and land scaping throughout. As well on the update on the quick builds we are fwlad to see sfmta make progress on implementing safety projects the like merced quick build. Hyde street quick build approved by sfmta board in mid october. And mta beginning construction on hyde sloat and lincoln way. Quick builds. Sfmta has also launched a dash board that shoes how a High Injury Network progress map is evolving and folks can look at that at sfmta. Com quickbuild. All of the projects are supported by sales tax and prop d tax funds. Another update page street completed there supported by our prospect a avehicle Registration Fee funds. Sfmta and public works wrapping up the final items on this page Street Project between webster and going constructed sidewalk extensions and traffic calm at page and buick an an streets and slow down turning vehicle traffic improving Pedestrian Safety and comfort. And this built on the page street bikeway pilot complete in the 2020 in upon support of streets. I was pleased help present keynotes at the World Congress remote low in china and i wanted share our experience with the technology to mobility and goals and participated in us. Arpa i workshop the dara back in the day. Initiative using [inaudible] collaborations and applying technology to project research efforts. The defense, energy and public healing sectors they have theiron arpa and this is for infrastructure. Authorized in bipartisan infrastructure lu. We look forward to participating in those efforts nationwide. And with that, im happy to take questions. Thank you, in dam executive director do we have Public Comment on your report . See if we skr any remote. Checking for remote Public Comment. There is no Public Comment. Public comment on item 3 is closed. Madam clerk, item 4 approve the minutes of october 17, 2023 meeting, this is an action item. Do we have Public Comment on item 4 here . Remote Public Comment on the minutes . Checking for remote public ment on item 4. And there is no Public Comment. Public comment is closed. Is this a motion to approve item 4 the minutes moved by supervisor peskin and a second. By dorse. Call the roll. Commissioner chan. Aye commissioner dorse. Aye. Commissioner engardio. Aye. Chair mandelman. Aye. Vice chair melgar. Aye. Commissioner supervisor peskin . Aye. Commissioner preston. Aye. Commissioner ronen. Aye. Commissioner stefani . Aye. Commissioner walton. Aye. The minutes are approves. Call the Consent Agenda items 59. Item 59 the Consent Agenda. Staff is in the planning on to present on these but available for questions. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Moved by melgar and seconded by walton we can take that same house same call without objection the motion passes. Madam clerk, item 10. Item 10 San Francisco municipal Transportation Agency fleet electrification update report this is an information item. And we have bonnie gene von crow. Sfmta building Progress Public Affairs manager. Such a title. Good morning. Im bonnie von crow, Public Affairs manager im theme proviedz an update on the paratransit electrification process. Our paratransit fleet is a van and taxi program. For people with disabilities that are unable to take our muni service. Unlike municipal theruns on fixed routes paratransit is a door to door program. We have been provideing for 40 plus years last year served approximately 500,000 trips per year. Im here before you as part of our funding request circumstance and part of that request is to provide continuing updates on the electrification process for our paratransit fleet. And that looks at vehicle procurement and charging infrastructure at our facilities and maintenance and storage of vehicles. And then funding and other risks. Just a bit of background or paratransit electrification is part of our larger Building Progress Program a 2 plus billion dollars program. Capitol program to modernize and electrify the sfmta facility paratransit fit in that program. We have one pillar is modernization so looking at sfmta aging facilities and sequencing them present low and merrying this with the electrification requirement and regulations for 1 huh zero e missions muni fleet which we include paratransit in this. A pai pillar is public out reach. Our facilities in neighborhoodses in some case over 100 years and planning for the next hundred years. To talk more about the over all electrification program. Pair thanz transit is not a stands alone project there are a number as part of this program. And leading with the kirk clt landiard electrification this will be our first retrofit to electrify the yard to support battery electric bus. Prior, in the run up to the kirkland project implementing chargers, pilots at woods and creek yards. We are excited receive fta funds nothing 30 million are if the pilot programs. And upcoming presidio yard project and paratransit electrification as well. Over all, our paratransit fleet goals to provide service, safe, Reliable Service for our seniors and disabled patrons. And we are looking at transitioning the float to a completely electric fleet. But we want it make sure we have facilities to do so. With the prior funding requests if prop circumstance funding we are able to replace 17 gas powder victims in the last fiscal year that allocation also included funding for one electric van. This is where we are excited procuring that in the next fiscal year. And when we been electrifying the paratransit fleet, we look at the California Air Resources Board guidelines for float electrification they have i requirement that the sfmta work to comply with. To electrify our fleet by 2040 and a certain number of paratransit vehicles fit into this guideline. Or large are 68 ford ev40 universals which are larger group vans, those weigh over 14,000 pound and said be regulated by the guide lines. The veterans that take the seniors to senior facilities or adult day care facilities. The heck facilities those are the veterans we use for that under the carbguide lines however we are look at possibility of electrifying our entire paratransit float and how we fit had in our over all fleet procurement planning and facilitys planning. The past year we have been evaluating our various vehicles on the market today. To date we evaluated the turtle top and ford ev. Both vehicles sit too low to the ground for our San Francisco they scrape the pavement going over hills. We are looking forward to testing the lightning in the coming months. To date we have not found a vehicle this is operational on our unique vipir that is the risks associated with paratransit and the other is price per vehicle. Paratransit electric vehicles are more expensive than gas they run 350 to 375,000 per vehicle met low because currently they are built as gas power exclude retrofited be electric. We do look forward, ford has a vehicle developed from the upon ground up in electric paratransit vehicle and look forward to this bringing price down in terms of cost per vehicle. In february. 20 twooshgs the sfmta completed the battery electric bus Facility Master Planning process this baselined our projects and locked at sequencing for charging infrastructure. Identifying Power Requirements. And looking at that schedule so that we are merrying both our electrification of our vehicles into our facility planning process that existed around modernization of yards. Fair transit is woven in this over all Planning Press. We learned a bit regarding Power Requirements. At our facilities and the sequencing of our yards in concert with our vehicle procurement needs. Look at paratransit where it is today we lease facility in brisbane we have a number we lease there and our goal with the float is to house it at a permanent sfmta facility. We also you that would save us costs and also save cost in terms of service, our vehicles in and out of brisbane now if we bring them to the city that is key for us. We are not look at building a new facility or acquiring new land but looking as part of our facility planning process as we upgrade and modernize and electrify them; where can we identify space for our paratransit fleet. We are looking at a number of options presidio yard is one that is being studied. Our woods yard was suggested for our fleet back in 2017 during the framework Planning Press and we also are analyzing that at the potrero yard. So we are currently reviewing the sequencing and timing of over all planning. And how we ask interweave paratransit the electrification of the paratransit fleet is department on having facilities available that can charge that float and space to store and maintain it. You know risk this is we looked at in the past year and as we were to electrify facilities include the Power Requirements at the facility. Green infrastructure needed to charge our electric buss and paratransit vehicles had would be needod and off site. Looking at pg and e in timing and their capacity. And of course, funding challenges. For the over all program. Nunned fungs advocacy is required. As i mentioned we were granted 30 million in fta bus Facility Grant this is past year at to do the pilots at woods. Which will kickoff what would build on the existing chargers that are at the facilities that serve the pilot battery electric bus vehicles today and allow us to panelled that program. And we am continue to apply for federal funding as well as there will be a number of funding requests for the yards before you in the coming months and those are critical to our paratransit electrification process inform terms of Critical Path next steps the next 18 months the sfmta is hiring a consultant to do a study on markets market and cost analysis. And so we will be looking during this time frame at both the paratransit fleet. Doing that evidence of additional vehicles. And also looking at Design Guidelines for paratransit and looking at location and analysis for where we can put this float in our over all facilitys planning process. As we look out 35 years, we do look at finalizing the specifications. Final iegz charging requirements and then identifying the funding gaps in the program. By the end. This time frame we plan be able to charge up to 20 of the sfmta float. If we have 20 of our float that is Battery Powered we will accommodate that within 5 years based on our facility upgrades. And looking long are term 10 to 15 years, that is the time frame for constructing the infrastructure modern iegz facilities to be able it store the electric fleet and looking at fleet procurement with that press in terms of vehicle requirements. So finally, we have completed the Feasibility Analysis to integrate paratransit in our larger Planning Press and then are work to intgrit this with our float procure am program. Now at the stage of identifying specifics in terms of facilities, locations and needs for the fleet. We. Be coming to this body in part of the 5yp p funding requests for a number of facilities in the coming mont this is is the beginning of a conversation around our fleet electric sxifkz facilitys electricification and the number of the projects core sponld to our electrifying facilities notoriety fleet needs. Thank you and im happy to answer questions. I have other member of our team here to answer specifics as well. Thank you for the presentation. Vice chair melgar. Thank you and thank you for that thorough over view i appreciate temperature i was a quick question. Wonder figure any of the facilities you listed potrero, wood, if those are abc 617 community and make them eligible for state funds to do this transition . Yes, somewhere. Which ones. Woods. Yea. Does this make it more attractive to do it there . I have jonathan here what i say in terms of the facility planning process woods is our later facilities to go in the process. In terms of the modernization it does make it an tractive place i dont know if you want to add. I would add jonathan chief strategy officer. I would like to thank this commission for asking the questions i think this request forced us to look at this comprehensively you got in the presentation. As you know im happy to answer questions. We are what we have done at this point what you saw today is we know we have to electrify the paratransit fleet we are looking at various options and go through a process of elimination. Funding capability, ease of construction. As the board of supervisoris know all of you have been focussed on pg and e and infrastructure that is one of the big of the unknown questions we cant answer with regards to schedule. Funding availability, feasibility of construction and power load are key of decisionmaking. Thank you. All right. Lets open this item to public upon comment. If there is anyone who would like to talk to us about item 10. Please, come forward. Lets see if we have remote public ment on item 10. Checking for remote Public Comment. Hello caller. Good morning this is Barry Toranto i did not heart presenter discussion much how we will electrify the [inaudible] taxi fleet. There was manage like Something Like 40 of them and sooner or later they have to go to zero e missions with the vehicles. There is manage like 70 thundz to buy new gas powered and use a lot of fuel and they also require a lot of maintenance. And the drivers dont have a spare vehicle at this point if the vehicle is out of service. Great to find incentives or subsidies to fund the transification to electric float of ramp taxis. And also whether able to use the charging stations at the muni yards as the presenter had shown and described during her presentation. Great if you someone asked the questions i think taxis take a brunt of the pick ups ramp taxis, they give generous incentives some case its is not enough am i appreciate if the presenter could address how they will incorperate taxis in city electrification program. Thank you. Thank you, caller. There is no additional Public Comment. All right. Public ment on item 10 is closed. Madam clerk. Call item 11. Autonomous vehicle update an information item. We received Public Comment posted on the website. All right. Thank you madam clerk. And i guess we will start with break news. If you look at the chronicle, well is the nows reported this cruise driverless testing is suspended by the dmv. So sort of puts new orleans spin on this hearing we are having. I do want to thank of course, our ta staff and mta staff and former chair supervisor peskin and president supervisor peskin for his diligent attention to this over a long time. We had planned to have and continue with information item on the latest developments with the deployment of driver av in San Francisco. We have presentations by staff from the ta the mta, San Francisco Fire Department i want to thank john paul, julia and deputy chief for being here and your woushg and collaboration. Again i want to thank president supervisor peskin i want to thank the mayors office. Alex sweet the transportation advior this has been the areas i think for the most part the legislative and executive have been able to work collaboratively and report the needs of san franciscans, together we are working with the av Companies State and federal regulators and the sf community how to implimit this new technology and maintaining city goals. We are join bide phil coopman of electric and Computer Engineering at Carnegie University will offer perspectives on av safety after the presentation we will start with john paul valys. Sthk. Chair this present agdz will provide you the board a summary of our experience. Any ahead. Sfgovtv, please, share slides. Okay. We will provide a sum row of our experience in San Francisco with driverless vehicles. And leading up to todays events i hope we will provide a context for the news the chair shared. Again, this is i collaborative work. Beginning with the agencies here represented ta and sfmta and Fire Department. But again also he sf planning and sfpd, support of Emergency Management. And the city attorneya and mayors office. Yes. The section of the presentation we will provide a background of the more than the context that [inaudible]. Operations here in San Francisco. Lets start with local context and goals for San Francisco. You know we have a very advanced urban environment with competing uses for road space. It is very limited. So as a result, local transportation policy is very intentional about leveraging that limited resource that road space to get people and goods where they need efficiently, safely and equitablely. Avs are not the first innovation to arrive to San Francisco. We have over decade of experience intgritting Mobility Service in our Transportation System. In 2017, both the ta and sfmta adopted a set of 10 principles for service and technologies that provided us city agencies as well as patriot mobility ino have aors coming to San Francisco with a set of guidelines and lenses through which the city evaluate the benefit and the impacts of new service. As you see on the slide we are core values safety. Like transit. Congestion. Access ability and things we are looking into. And include accountable. Relevant data with city agencies and also very important low collaboration with city officials. And the principles being well use local policy and regulations to maximize the benefits of Mobility Service. While mitigating the consequence and negative impactless the serves mibring to the our mobility goals. However. In the case of commercial av or robo taxys it is not that simple. Because just like uber and lyft, San Francisco has no direct permitting authority over commercial a very close Passenger Service. Avs at the federal and state levels. The federal lever the national Highway Traffic Safety Administration establishes monitor and enforces Vehicle Safety standards. No binding regulation as of yet but av safety garthing trash information and safety investigations. In california in 2012, state law required the dmv to develop regulations the first set was adopted in 2014 by the dmv for testing av with a safety driver and then in 2018 additional regulations were adopted for permitting driverless testing without a driver and for full Service Deployment to passengers. The California Commission revving lites commercial Passenger Services at large including tncs develops program for a very close Passenger Service in 2018 and 2020 and the permit mirror the dmv in terms of with or without a driver and a testing phase in full commercial phase. Locally sfmta manages our streets and curbs. The t ameasures strategies to manage congestion and sfmta and the ta collect the prop b tax av services and tnc service must pay for operations impact on the city. The board can pass resolutions like the av resolution you adopt in the december of 2012 dp land use policy may affect av operations but we largely play a flow relation to the San Francisco providing input based on our direct experience on the ground. So. The framework has delivered an active seconder in california there are over 40 Companies Testing with or without drivers across the state and 4 approved for driverless deploy am in the state. 2 of those have deployments here in San Francisco. In the country as ln well as internationally. Completed an estimated 7 million driverless mile in San Francisco streets which is rable to put in context there are 3500 million miles driven by all vehicle in San Francisco. Meaning that last year driverless av amounted to 0. 2 of the miles driven in San Francisco. Both companies around 5 million driverless in San Francisco. We identified to the regular well tory fwps in the framework this perhaps were heard to kong receive 9 years ago when regulations were credited you in this we have the benefit experience they are more evidence. I hand it over to my colleagues julia and deputy chief to present. Thank you. I want to take us back a moment to 2017 which was the year when then mayor ed lee and transportation director first identified the development of avs on our road in San Francisco something important to Pay Attention to. The industry working on their systems since this time since before then and the regular structure under develop export at the table with the industry ever sinceful as stewards of the San Francisco streets our mta highest level sfwoel to make sure that avs meet the same standards of professional defensive driving that we expect of prirt in San Francisco. And to ensure this state and federal regulators have their power are aware of had we are seeing on streets and have this Information Available to them. So. Next slide. The first question, what is the role of avs in improving Street Safety were optimistic we see good and safe driving on streets by avs but we have concerns. Of it is important to notice the cutches are in the all the same we have low companies in San Francisco they are doing different engineering to try to achieve this challenge. And they are all having different results. It is very important to note that those differences in engineering may lead to different results. So engineer suggest a factor in a number of things we have been asking over time. Asking them to Pay Attention to pick up pick up and drop off and obviously safe comp pliance with the vehicle code in general. I think one of things we have learned is this the regulators in the early days really thought that avs would comply system always with all prosecute visions of the vehicle code. We found that. Has in the always been case. When i go through the red light it is my mistake. We use our tools to rim prove our roads but my error. If well is a photo driver of i float of 3 or 5 or a thousand that reflects the good driving that the avs are learn and also potential for errors become repeated throughout the float. The effort to measure the driving safety of acs is complex the doctor will address that and can i will enter to further detames must have to the next slide. We are look at injuries and fatality bunkham we use guess tragic events to guide our resources as we seek to make our roads safer and safer and easier to drive safely on. In a word of avs. We think that is not enough to look at the serious injury and fatal crashes the triangle on the right shows that the unsafe acts at the am bottom in the purple band the near misses and turquoise they are more frequent than the injury and fatal collision ands this new technology is developing, we cant wait for 10 combreers is see whether the serious injury and crash rates come the same we have to look low exert Pay Attention to the things happening that may reflect on safety new safety hazards. Thing this is result in less significant crashes. Things that may not result in crashes but near misses. So, there are some important examples of this that we know this the street is look at these. But think it is essential the regulators be look at these events. Lets move to the next slide. As you know, San Francisco the first dense major city where avs had safety operators taken out. That was first with cruise and the summer of 22 and later with later in the year. One thing we militaried noticed was we got calls to 911 complaining about events on our roads. We have been collecting that information submitted by members of the public. Our City Employee where there is either erratic driving or unplanned stops that create hazzards and impacts on roads intrefr with transit and talk about interfear with Emergency Response than i need to be taken account of. We illustrate this not to say that everyone of the incidents is important and predicting the future. Some of them are important. And as of this time no revving later is collecting information about these incidents not gone in serious incidents. And at the bottom right you will since the vo is moving on the top right you will see this interaction with pedestrians that has raised serious occurrence for us. Obviously there was no injury there. This is i perfect example of something this did in the result in an injury we need to Pay Attention to. Because we have to ask ourselves what does this driving say about effort to have safe routes to school . How do parents and elders feel safe in walk happening around in streets . With this driving does not yield to other road users. These are not captures by federal and state regulators. We are grateful that last week opened the investigation into the cruise av interactions with pedestrians and obviously we heard of further actions by the california dmv this morning. These are other incidents where there has not been a series injury or a crash. But where the incidents are signal important things to Pay Attention to. A collision when the cruise vehicle enter the track way, fortunately, nobody was hurt, fortunately there was no impact but this was obviously a huge red energy. I will say that to our knowledge, we are not aware of ray near miss like this recent. We appreciate that cruise paid attention to interactions with rivehicles and we hope we will not see incidentses like that again. On the bottom left we than has not responded and doing work to a new message for communicating to people on the street when can be expected of them. Unpribltdability is a factor this really affected people as they interact with avs on the streets. Unfortunately there is still w to be done. We are a pioneer city. As you see on the bottom right this was not a rail vehicle we saw 2, 38 gear vehicles lineup in 19 minute delay in transit. As a results of this vehicle stop instead roadway unplanned stops impact our Transportation System and need to be Pay Attention to those. Im going to turn it over. We have been you have read in the papers about the men incidents affecting the Fire Department i will turn it over. Good morning chair mandelman and commissioners. Thank you jowlia. So as a brief background of the Fire Departments interaction with av. They were wise when they brought us in early. Details the technology to us and allowed you to be involved in the development of First Respond are interaction plan we moved forward that this would operate like a human driver and interact with a vehicle after a major accident this. Did not turn out to be the case. As time went on. And the vehicles transition from vehicle assist analysis of a driver and test mote and the commercial autonomous we said our escalation of incidents the initial intakz of reporting out the rare instance through our mta liaison. Rampsum. Our chief noticed the dramatic increase in level interaction went to mine. Having a dialogue the level of policies and technology to resolve the problems and the incidents continue today rise. Looking at the problem, we have parse federal to large are categories ins down to 4 problems we are having intfrns. Inability to leave or return. To change our response times. These get to the problem solving source the second is response interactions where the vehicle failed to yield as a response to emergency were just going dead in the narrow roadways. Again leads to dramatic increase in response time. And so this was unacceptable to the membership of our environment. Another is interference in our emergency scenes. This would be the vehicles lit irrelevant driving in the fire crossing over hoses and near missing with important and the last near miss personal and other context they dont seem to see First Responders or pfeifersor Police Officers better then and there involve yens in some cases we needed to address that. So. With the next slide we did manage to gain engagement with people at this Level Technology or policy who could help us solve the problems. And they asked us when our solutions would be. Woman that 4 categories of problems we tried have 4 solutions. That was a form of avoidance or geo fencing and that also kind of drove conversation around dont not driving in emergency scenes or getting in the way of response. So that was our first, our second was figure out a way to comprehend lights and sirens and yield and acts a human driver that is a work in progress the third ask was better way to community with the remote advisor. Or Customer Service they wantedous interact get the vehicle to move if it did manage to obstruct us. You see my chiefs loning in the window of the car the First Response was, use the phone number or qr code. When responds to a fire most are not holding a phone or have a phone i advise against it they did not have this available to them it required a multistep Radio Communication to get in contact with the right person at the company and long and ineffective process. Current press is windows rolled down and a microphone on the vehicle and First Respondeder whether Police Officer or Traffic Enforcement or firefighter or fire officer has to lean in the car to communicate with them to make our needs known on the scene this. Is a waste of resource takes them away from the job and as you see in this was know active roadway not obtrucked by fire engine its could be dang you dont want to lean in this vehicle. Final ask was if all betsure off is there a way to take overnight vehicles and move them. And so the company got to work on these 4 asks. What happened . We have had a number of productive meetings to characterize the meetings at the firefighter hosting with av companies and mta and department of Emergency Management and with parking and transit. It is mostly culture. Their interpretation of efforts they show video and show us their superstition of what happened and when the fix and we help clir foil it. Tell them when we are looking for and interaction with the vehicles those were useful upon another track has been with emergency mmth. Prosecute to set up asunrisance yours and this is active nay receive a page note xifkz avoid areas of the size defending on the complexity weather people number the street. And this process was moving forward i hope tell continue to move forward with todays ruling. Inform thank you for your time. So, you many of you are aware of the incident this took place during outside lands just in mid august. And there were mull pull vehicles stopped in the roadway in north beach this raised a significant questions for us about what the impact of avs will be the resilience will holdup in a context of emergencies whether than i are routine emergencies like lights out. Or more significant emergencies like an earthquake. We are concern body this because we have had quite a number of incidents this was the learning are once. There are a number that affect many av or multiple and therefore have more interference with our roadways. So we are communicating to revving laters we think the Disaster Preparedness issues need to be looked at especially and move to the next slide. The issues need to be addressed. Before we have on streets vehicles have no human control the left are we are seeing today. The industry is moving into the direction of having vehicles on the streets that are larger than i are different safety issues and prosecute file. And these problems i dont have been seeing and learning from need to be resolved before we have large numbers of vehicles like these hard to move from streets if and when than i have a problem. I want to reenforce what deputy chief said. We have been saying for 5 years that we think the potential for avs to improve safety on roadways will really depenos collaborate rigz with the industry and government and our doors are open. We think tell be e special in problem solving as we face the challenges on the roadways. Thank you very much, back to john paul. Commissioner . I can wait. Thank you. Julia. And deputy chief. Next slide. All of the dints and occurrence in the last section have been documented. In numerous filings to federal and state regulators. Advocacy on the issues dates back to 2018. As only grown intensity as seen here on the right side. Av expand the operations are moving to driverless operation in San Francisco. Filings are core mess knowledge remained consistent. We support, v and routing for them to succeed but we also need for them to a line with av regulations with state of california transportation policy goals; evaluate the performance of av providers considering their impact on the streets. Being on the safety of all road users on the functioning of Transportation System and on the provision of providing service in know inclusive wave. A number 3 the Technology Needs to be deployed in incremental manner allowing providers, regulators and city official its learn from operations in small areas with small fleets. And a times of the day when conflicts minimal before granding expansion its larger and complicated areas of the city and complicated areas. Day. Will be granted only if providers meet performance bench markos safety and impact on the Disability Access and at each level of the expansion steps. And they will need to be demonstrate in the public data filings that are submitted timely. Reliablely. Next slide. In spite of efforts and add roindicating an prop to av expansion that supports San Francisco av policy and mobility goalos august 10, the cpu c, warded to cruise and [inaudible] unrestricted driverless commercial operation in San Francisco that is basically all of San Francisco 24 7 and with no restriction on the size of their floats. In response work width cityy attorney office, our agencies filed a motion to stay within a week of that decision from the cpu c and then we filed an application for rehearing on both approvals. In this first week that followed the approval following the august 10 approval, however, cruise had a series of incidents including the 10 vehicle failure in north beach. And then a few days later a crash with a fire truck while the fire truck in route sirens bailiff to attends an emergency. This lead the dmv to snep and agree with cruise they would have their float operating in San Francisco pending an investigation and then the federal level also looked into had incidents. Since then, we have seen legislators step in and ask questions of regulators Speaker Pelosi and mullen of san mateo, file a joint letter seek more data regarding local indebts like described. We had member burner the chair of the Communication Committee in the assem blow with 5 other Assembly Members sending letters to the dmv and puc trying to understands how this expansions were grant in the San Francisco giving the experience this we had. And we had member phil ting convocabulary a meeting with the california dmv on agencies to discuss the events. Next slide. We are expecting a few rule makes opportunity at federal and state levels we hope we can help the existing frameworks. This were slated begin this fall but no clear schedule public low. We are engaging the legislator. And we are settingum meetings with the dmv to understand their initiatives for next year and scheduling briefings with committees in the assembly and senate to share experiences and exchange perspectives. Going forward advocacy with priorities such as developing an are bust framework to find av capabilities to operate on streets. Permits are granted with the providers. Also. To see the ability to issue the moving violations to avs. Adopted. We want to see recommending applicant for expansion and more trans parent data requirements. For increment and performance based expansion. We want to see clear time lines offering accessible av and a greater local role in development of the sector. Our team usament to study the issues in that us to better inform the rule make opportunity ahead and part of that process we are seek to strengthen with industry, and disability leaders and other city in california and beyond. Etch yes. The treasure i land av shuttle integrate third degree summer different type of vehicle and service from when we have focus here today. It is also an av service and operating the low density area. Engaged local Community Since the beginning. Planning implementation the Pilot Service from 9 a. M. To sick p. M. 7 days a week an attendant aboard and the vehicle is wheel chair accessible the service is popular. Funded by dot, mt krushgs and the transportation thurt. In jowlia was staying reiterate San Francisco is ready for a mature framework. All levels based on our perrise in avery close operations. Thank you very much and we are pleased to hand it over to doctor cooperman. I will be im sharing my screen now. You can hear me . Yes. Are you able to seat whole slide it looks chopped to mine we see it. All right. Great. Im phil cookmachine a professor i have been wing on self driving car safety for 25 years in the years we seen it go from a graduated opportunity experiment to capabilities in public deployments. You have all heard the great promises which made promise but hopeful. Im here to give reality check for policy decisions. It is important to make policy decisions based on the truths where we really are. It is okay to look at the promise you have to look at reality. I the go over the hi lights here. Of first, the question is, are robo taxis safer. Y companies say, yes they are the proof is in we have studies. Thats not where we are. There are studies that show promising results on crashes most low Property Damage crashes in early studyos injury crashes. It is preliminary information the companies are reducing fasaulities nowhere near to know how this will turn out. Why is this. In general San Francisco data looks close. Includes the drunk and careless drivers. Thats a lot of miles. In each company has about 5 million miles we are 95 million it go before you are close to knowing how this turns out. And the point is we dont know how it turns out. The studies have alegalities of assumptions we dont know. If you read the headlines what you have is you are running a marathon a mile in you go my times look guild will give myself the gold medal. That is what is going on. That does in the make sense wont dont know yet fr. A policy point of vow it means is you should noted make policy decision based on the will assumption than i are safer rather not knowing how the safety will turn out. Upon one reason is robo taxys make mistakes. In the early days people say well is in way that this thing will hit an object. Because we have cameras and radars. Yea it did run in a car. How did this happen . Between the censors and the wheels moving and steering happening well is a lot of Computer Software and soft weir is not perfect if you are not following safety standard its is heard ton where the bugs will be this is a bug that result in a collision, fortunately noevens hurt. These things will have defrekts. In fact a let of the pictures other mistakes people make they will fail like humans fail. We figure out how this will turn out. And the related thing we have so many rides that were almost every interaction the fire truck. If have you one fastal talitity 100 Million Dollars. It is the one bad my this matters when you listen to the store sxets experiences from a safety point of view how often the bad days happen not the number of good days. The important perspective to keep in mind. Human drivers are terrible computers will be perfect. They are pull out this number 94 of crashes due to human error. This is a misstatement. It is true humans are imperfect but they are good avoiding the worse crashes. They are good we like them to be better i love the number. But in an objective basis it is hard to be good as a human driver. Computers electric common sense when than i see something they are not expected the technology does not know what to do. It works on training and something is an issue. They are going to make mistakes they have software and they have problems with novel. We have 5 Million Dollars miles of testing. 95 more million to go this includes the drunks we have a language road but big numbers are a start not the end. Another one is we follow third degree. How safety is number one and spent engineering and so on and for some of the company its is clear that is trough some there is a question america the reason i that we dont know how good the and engineering is we seat out come. And i key part of this i have done safety design reviews on aviation and Building Systems and chemical processing and in all of the cities they follow their own Safety Standards. People in the industry who know what is when they follow at this time Car Companies dont do this. There are Safety Standards and the kuchlts are not following them. Theyll in the say they are and it is obvious they are not following them. And so we dont know how this will turn out and they are not following their good practices that sounds like a problem to me. Finally, they will argue that future risk improve am justifies taking chances we had a small crash and will fix it and we are busy saving lives give us select. We dont know how the saving lives per will turn out i hope they do we dont know how long that will take. Meanwhile whaled recommend is policies should not be based on saving live its is okay to have harm now that is the wrong idea. Base a no harm deployment strategy. First do no harm as you deploy the technology and you get the benefit in due course no one knows how long that will take. This regulation one thing you will hear the federal government says they cert foil third Degree Technology and it does not mean what you think. The federal regulations have nothing to do with the safety of the computer driver they have to can air bags and headlights and the steering wheel. That is important and it should happen. But it says nothing about the safety of the of actual autodriving function. The fed dos is wit for crashes or reports of bad things and have investigations and recalls. The fact the feds allowed this technology on the ride is not predictive of safety. Same with the state they will issue drivers licenses based on not had crashes during testing and having insurance butt feds and states are saying the companies dont certify they are doing whatever they think makes sense and on the road and we will see how it turns out. You cannot count on the companies having independent intrigz for safety they diagonal when they doll in the face of all the financial and other incentives than i face inform terms of benefit. It is important to realize the benefits come after the alternate mated v save and trusted we have more work to go on those. To work down the sfreet is incredible low impressive taking 25 years or more well is more to be done it get the safe and reliable going. Trade off they will stop a vehicle they are worry body safety and fair enough i rather have it stop or not. But there for a minute or tense of minutesor hours is a problem that affects Public Safety. They should be able to take them and pull them out to the side of the road and the human driver would have done. If you want to be out on the road in public traffic. If you are going on say we will get benefit we should promote this technology, it is fair to ask, when benefit you get when. Not only improved safety on a time line. Great. We hope that will happen. But when about accessibility and equity. California puc sold on the topics but not i requirement for the companies to deliver. Im aware it is a prototype when will that deploy . Will there be enough vehicle its make i difference . If they typeset seat benefits they have to require them from the businesses to spend resource. Promises are nice but requirement is better. Of also, what about public costs had costs will be now . Im not going in detail we have heard about these but there are things that will happen in the near term costs you have to make sure that the prompts and benefits in day will get you there. My last slide recommendations to the city. Require outcome based met tricks. Important fatality system a center peoples [inaudible]. It should in the help move on and talk about the other thing this is is table steaks. Should be reports of injuries, crashes and i have ligszs, emergency responded and disruptions. Than i have to be begin to the city for the city on perform the function of figure roadways. Now the av kufrms trying to be opaque and a lot are not reported they need to be to understand the impact of the technology. Safety and trust from transparency. Technology will not succeed without public trust and we are not doing well on this now. I think good transparency is vetted go i language way to give the companies the trust they need and helping with the success of the technology. Thank you for considering my comments. Thank you. And this is our presentation. All right. Commissioner supervisor peskin. Thank you, chair mandelman i will start by thanking our staff tilly chang and john paul. As well as the staff from the sfmta julia and our Fire Department and raise it up i level, which is to thank chief nicholson who from the get was willing to articulate Public Safety and the interests of the San Francisco Fire Department. Despite a wall of noise from the industry. And i want to acknowledge all of you, colleagues, in december of left year unanimously passed a resolution and i want it acknowledge the mayor who not only sign third degree but have given the space toy jeff tumlin and the mta and the upon Fire Department to stand up for that is right in the interest of Public Safety of the people city of San Francisco. As this technology is being deplayed. I want to start with upon an obvious question. Which is to director chang. Did we invite cruise and others to the meeting . Yes, we did all 3 operators declined to attend this morning, 2 sent letters way mo and cruise. Zusz mentioned they are not testing driverlessly in San Francisco they are with a safety operator they have no further comment. Okay. So i think look. This is obviously and well continue to be evolving field of public policy. So i wanted to do this at a high level and talk about the experience that San Francisco having relative to the role that we dont seem to play as a function of state and federal preemption. And i want to also thifrng and acknowledge the t. A. And mta for standing up in front of the California Public utilitys commission in august. And asking for a very reason sensible approach john paul laid out. Which was an incremental performance based prop that fell on deaf ears at the puc who instead rejected San Franciscos request and argument in whole. And issued permits for unlimited driverless deployment in San Francisco. May be had is to ta staff . And i net that theical cal puc came in being around the issue of regulation of rail. And in a dart period of california history, that weird low enough is repeating now where an industry that was not safe and was immune from any governmental over site lead to the cpu c and jeff tumlin comments often how ironic it is this we relative to our light riin san pran are held to a much higher more exacting standard than the cpu c holds the technology to and if there is any vindication of San Franciscos position. We got it whole hog from the d. Motor vehicles today. All be it. Sad low rather late. These other arguments that our t. A. Staff med to the california puc that fell on deaf ears. My question is, what we can learn about av regulation from how the cfuc revving lites rail transit. You want to take a crack at that . Sure. Quickly it is a complicated subject from the perspect you have of rail transit we do expect our drivers to be defensive drivers. We hold them to the standard of having to avoid crasheseen though they were not necessary low at fault t. Is meaning somebody elses error does in the excuse the error of a transit operator. So just that high level professional driving is a starting point. Having the high level targets. The next thingil say is those things they mentioned down at the bottom near misses we are required look at every near are miss and go over plans with regulators regularly when we have events or near miss. I will say the dmv events action today we have to assume based on their review of incidents. So these are examples of when we can learn there. And um there are things to learn from local regulation of micromobility. Scooters came in town. We had big safety problems from then strewn all over the sidewalks. Set i standard and said you need a device that enabled them to be look exclude monitor them and the use on the walk. I know had everybody is not equal low satisfied with how this has gone we made clear what expectations are. And we established mechanisms to ensure compliance. Variety of tools like these that we would like to see dmv and it is establishing and we know they are working on that. But as john paul said we look forward to working with the agencies on developing an in tour system. Because the system started being bhlt they were a lot of hope and expectation and now we are seeing the performance. And we need the revving laters to independent to that safety of streets depends on decisions of agents. When we have been trying to do the last 20 years is to rebalance our rightofway to reflect our transit first policy a policy about the efficiency of move am on streets. We are trying to build more housing. We need that people who live in house pregnant what we expect to be expanding population to get out in the most efficient way. Putting more cars is not the answer. But our transit first policy is i safety policy as well as combn an efficiency and congest yen policy and we have been trying to build the right of way to make it easier and for people to drive safely and harder for people to commit tlars have injured people that is when we see in quick builds all over streets. That the Vision Zero Program wing on. They are a pos we need to look at. At how our road requirement operates as a whole for everybody. Not just users of a single mode. And you had one slide that i think should be very concerning to all of us. I think you shows john paul shoes slides. The day after the cpu c decision. Was the north beach melt down. Which was bizarre cruise stated the next day that the melt down was a function of something helping on the other side of town at outside lands. Why are 10 cars turning to 3700 pound paper weights 6 miles, way. Cruise said it was because of the cars are autonomous until they stop working. A remote assistant has to operate the car done over a good wireless Cell Phone Technology when this Cell Phone Technology is not working. Until this case in part because they were overwhelmed with cell phone use at outside lands. Or in the case of i disaster. There is in way to move cars you bring that up in your slide will make the 80 ins debts the Fire Department documented seem like childs play the next tliem is an elementa earthquake in San Francisco and our an rat us has to get to burning parts of the city or fire. And cruise response to that was to me, and i believe they said this to the mta they were going to build out their own cell phone net w to combat this. Do you have thoughts about this. That is the most person thing. Big are then and there a fire truck you saw that on the slide. Cant get out of the fire station. Can you poke to that. I can say that this concern is one reason that for years now we have been asking for approvals after performanced is good performance is demonstrated. We are happy to move witness we see the performance. We dont have our regulators dont have clear targets for the industry to reach. So there is not a clear managed for america the companies measure for themselves. There are reason for dmrn this. We thank you it is the right solution. As to when tactors can lead to failures. These are black box it is correct had the capacity of the vehicle is exceeded the will companies have methods for humans to assist the vehicles there are break points the industry is planning for you need enough people to be responsive to the number of. Vehicles you have on the street. And those are real challenges. Know your vehicles can ng manage or a section of the city where every traffic light is out. We than there is a process and courtesy and turns to a 4 way stop. We know the rules. That obviously slows down traffic and we need to know that the, v driverers capable of prit negligent environment this is not the normal environment but an environment that is changed by a power outage or wireless outage. We can talk about this all day there is so much here i appreciate it. This is only the second time other than the resolution from sdhm we a public discussion about. I appreciate and before i ask judge fuel e will be rit on the stuff he said. Just as you touchod this for rioperations. One thing this ismenting here is the states failure to require av companies to report what they have data on. They have on board cameras and gpa systems. Which is short of crashes that they are required report. When than i make illegal left turns or driveway in wet concrow or cease operating we have a term of bricking 91 of this is reports, is this correct. You will start with crashes and again let mow be clear the requirements put in place all the requirements before there was a single mile. We have to learn from the experience. But i think this what the department of merit vehicles participated when they adopted their regulations was that by the time avs were commercial than i valid masters the skilled. California regulations require reporting of crashes had an operator is testing. But dont require reporting of crashes when the prirt is in commercial service. This raises concern we see the technology is under develop export in the reached the level we hope to see. That is an example of i gap that come from the fact it is heard to predict the future. People didnt think there will be crashes of concern noyou we are here we see there say need for crash respecting. Fortunately the biden and hair i was administration very early in their administration adopted a requirement that crashes by ac reported to the federal government. There is challenges how it is available to the public. There are gaps the crash reporting is the best. Buffer get to the next part drilling down in your first, answer it is counter intuitive you would think an, v with a human in the car is safer. Than in the av with you a human in the car. When you are saying is that crashes of a driverless vehicle are in the required to be reports. Almost. Crashes of vehicles in commercial service are in the required to be reported. This was might have the thing at the right time. We,000 the dmv appreciates there is a need now for more robust reporting. Then and there in the requirements today they are slow process. Of we are eatingtory work with them to make it more mature. I like your use of the word, in tour and hope that the companies mature. Let me get to the next part of the question, do you know or believe that there are instance where driverless car in commercial services are experiencing crashes that are not reported . I cant i can say that when we look at the public reports there are discrepancies in reports to the state and the federal government it hen difficult to identify the reason for this. Something were eatingtory work with. Regulatoros and in commercial deployment. Filing crash reports is voluntary it is possible that some are make the decision to file reports. Sometime and not file other times. I think what you said is, yes. You have an aware thanes there are crashes report to the federal government that because of the vol theyre nature of the fully mature regulations are not reported to the state california . We seen discrepancies in reporting. Yes. I will drill down. Are you aware of way mow reporting to the feds and not report to the state . I am not aware of this and i must say our investigation of the not like up to today. And second, has not we have not drilled down to every single discrepancy. But it is we have note thered have been crashes involving cruise a very closeys we have not seen reported to the state and im not aware there are crashes by avs not reported to the state. Cruise is reporting some crashes to the state but not other crashes to the state . We have noted that cruise continues to report some crashes we dont know which crash are reported and which are not and why. Without putting word in your mouth this supervisor will say it appears that cruise is selectively reporting crashes that perhaps are favorable to cruise and not reporting crashes that are not favor okay to cruise. I think that is when i gleamed from this. Become to the billions of my question, which it is, relative to reporting of noncrashes the higher standard the california puc holds rail operators to near misses. So at a high level, and i in a Perfect World the legislator and dmv and puc would adhere to what professor coopman said, which is a do no harm theory. In reality this is a game of catch up not the first time that a new technology deployed we had to play catch up with air b b the scooters. And we are somewhat ham strung given that unlike scooters we could totally regulate on the local level. That is not one of the options that is before us because the state and federal preemption. Some of obvious like it it is rather galling to members of the public, the notion that if you make an illegal left hand turn you get a ticket if a driverless car does there is no provision in state law nor can we legislate locally that car gets i ticket buzz the way our vehicle code was designed is cars dont get tickets humans get tickets and by the way this , has been known at this time state legislator since 2014. In 2014. State, as these things are going to be deployed you will have to catch up your codes that preept every city in every count in california but here it it is than ior streets and the state has not done this. That it is a gap. And i think phil ting is aware and his situated legislators are aware of this, toochlt this has mostly been a San Francisco phenomenon. Im confident this when this is deploy in the los angeles and oakland and other cities the state legislator will have to act. Right now one San Francisco and one fire chief but eventual low regulation will catch up. What are the other regular gaps including data gaps that you would suggest . Mr. Ville dez. Joy would begin with the violation issue. In only again. To the fairness than i have to be ticketed as we. And the california vehicle code. In will be a tool for nows electronic their behavior and understand their performance. It plays both ways. And another important gap is the notion that we share and professor coopman ordered us to the fact the Companies Self certify capabiliies no evaluation or driver test they have to comply with. No third per this assesses. They submit a report and move forward and i think we need an upon byebyesed system for that. And cities the local of deploy am we were impact of their operations dont have a say. And also a core issue this we believe needs to be addressed. We need to be at the table the expansions decisions take place. And then data come to minds but i would let my colleague share some of his thoughts on the data issues. Thank you, john paul. Thank you, commissioners. I julia referred to the issues with the dataasm i will briefly e lab rit a bit. Not just this there are gaps in the did thea reporting. That under permits no reporting is required at all. We could step back. There are many different permits now this are avs are issued. There are by the cpu c. The dmv. There are permits for driverless testing. Permits for driver testing. Testing permit, pilot, deployment permits. Than i have different reporting. It is come least low incoherent and difficult not only to been types of events happening that are not crashes but that are significant and impactful and indicators of issues and other measures like how much miles when we talk about safety, we relate that to the vehicle miles driven. And we canteen get basic information how much miles upon driven in San Francisco. We are supposed to believe they are safe when than i will not provide the public and experts the data to actually know this they are safe. So. They are not Building Public trust. They are doing the opposite. Which seems to be a bad for business model. I digress. Mr. Valdez i apologize for misprosecute nounsing your name. Anything you would like to add . Thats all, thank you. Thank you. I very much appreciate the fact that the entire city is on the same page for the right reason. The entire legislative body, mayor and the affected departments and i think that we are asking the scombis insisting on regulations that everybody in the state and everybody in the country need as we happen to be ground zero for the testing and deploy am. What we are doing is important work and profound. It is frustrating but for the record, i think that the work that the t. A. And mta and fire have done, lead to the decision the dmv did not want to make but than i made today based on the fact that the cruise vehicles are in the safe for the public. Thats how this would not happened without your work. Thank you. Thank you chair mandelman for your indulgence. Commissioner dorsey. Thank you, chair mandelman i want to express appreciation to everybody for excellent presentations and my colleagues for and especially commissioner supervisor peskin for excellent questions. I appreciate that we are being thoughtful and deliberate in doing everything we can to avert sdaft frers, v for not getting the safe guards right. I will be honest im equal low concerned about the disaster lop when we get these get of the safe guards right this is the massive work place displace am. This is coming. I noted that in the principles for mobility and tech from upon 2017 labor and Financial Impact are key well. I think well was a couple references i know prosecute feszor coopman mentioned the ride hail and Delivery Driver displacement. Just looking at the statistic i could find 2016 the Obama White House estimated the total upons sense to e eliminate half to 3 quarters of driving jobs in the u. S. Based on numbers i see that is 23 Million Dollars job done. There was a study showing peek sat operation avs will cost 25 thousand dollars jobs per month, 300 per year fopping out 2 of total emplayment. Im curious in the what we are advocating for is there a place for us whether a county Transportation Agency or a board of supervisors what can we do to advocate for a Just Transition understandsing there is a Financial Impact of local and State Government this is are part of the safety net . Can i ask if there is a place where it is. I,000 is an important to have a conversation about safety but in terms of policies we should advocate for it seems should be a per of this conversation. Director chang. Thank you for the comments, observation and statistics this is per of a learning are conversation x. The policy conversation is include labor you note from the 10 principles both adopted early on. Starting with the initial ride hail wave with lift and uber. We brought the loop project to you all your and pred seszors asked to engage commissioner walon said challenged us if you do this pilot on Treasure Island bring in the Labor Community. Understand the impacts and alls the and terrible trans sxigz w force path. So path ways, are something this we had experience in developing the transifications throughout history and men the professor can address this. The issue come up in the path can be handled well or not well we try it handle it well engage with the Labor Community on the lopped project. From the begin and it is in the uniform. There are many vows we will engage with the team sters and twu and others to try to irrelevant get a sense when are the issues and the opportunity to understand what types of jobers coming with the new industries. Av and ev sense. I hesitate to ask this question because i no one here is from the dmv. I would net this the response this has been posted by twitter by cruise is that you know sort of describe the action that the dmv taken motivated by a single incidentful and very much focussed on this. And i dont finish as benchers, of and people looking at the data awe are in the seeing everything it is dmv