Coalition for clean air that led to the inclusion of a provision that would apply to zero emission vehicles where they would be charged at the one and a half rate for a period of five years. We did here at the last hearing that something who wanted to that, we want to point out that we want to adjust the tax right. And we could, if the board board wants to we could ask ben to the language in a simile built 1184 provided for that as well. I hope this meets with your approval and most importantly, with the voters approval come november. I am available to answer any questions and if it pleases the chair, i will open it up to Public Comment. Great. Is this the report that we will have. We do need to speak with mr. Egan. We will tell them there is a negative impact. Look forward to his report. You switch presentation. The only thing i neglected to say is half of the funds would go to the San Francisco m. T. A. For improving bus and rail servants frequency and maintaining and expanding the f
Second thing going on, which is we are taxing a mode of transportation that is shown to create congestion and using that money to fund modes of transportation that could reduce transportation. There is an economic benefit. Unfortunately, the first of phnom economic impact, with the data to analyse, and the second we dont. When i say, as we conclude in the report, that this is a mildly negative economic impact. That is a result of placing the tax on the consumers and spending the money at the city. It is a fairly small impact of 25 milliondollar reduction to the g. D. P. , which is less then the tax that is raised. We are not able, because of Data Limitations to estimate how responsive t. N. C. Ridership would be to be an increase in fares, although we expected to decline somewhat. The only kind of caveat that we mentioned in our report is about the proposed tax and it also includes Autonomous Vehicles. At present, there are no Autonomous Vehicles doing rides in San Francisco. The case
Related schemes, might be used for the common good of all the people of our city and its environment. Thank you for your work on this important matter. Thank you. Next speaker. Hello, supervisors. I am a pastor at First Mennonite Church of San Francisco and i live in the mission. Im also a leader with faith in action. This sunday, i am preaching from the book of amos, and you are welcome to come, everyone is welcome to come, where the prophet gives warning to those who trample on the needy and bring ruin to the poor. He is mad because the wealthy are turning everything into a commodity and using false measures to turn a profit. As a pastor in San Francisco, it is sadly quite easy to make the connections to what is happening today. In a way, it has been happening here since the 17 hundreds, way more than three decades ago. It has been happening to those who are not in the owning class. First in the name of the Spanish Mission to exploit the people inland, then in the name of the United
Course, that revenue will go as supervisor peskin said to the San Francisco m. T. A. And the San Francisco c. T. A. At the same time, there is a second thing going on, which is we are taxing a mode of transportation that is shown to create congestion and using that money to fund modes of transportation that could reduce transportation. There is an economic benefit. Unfortunately, the first of phnom economic impact, with the data to analyse, and the second we dont. When i say, as we conclude in the report, that this is a mildly negative economic impact. That is a result of placing the tax on the consumers and spending the money at the city. It is a fairly small impact of 25 milliondollar reduction to the g. D. P. , which is less then the tax that is raised. We are not able, because of Data Limitations to estimate how responsive t. N. C. Ridership would be to be an increase in fares, although we expected to decline somewhat. The only kind of caveat that we mentioned in our report is abou