Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    November 1, 2013 7:30am-8:01am PDT

7:30 am
increase transportation into pier 70 and what is that going to lack like when we have $160 million in allocated transportation funds, but the need is it some where between 290 and $350 million and that's just pier 70 and the infrastructure improvement. i see geneva shipyard base, but that can use love. i don't know -- i've heard hearing about it, and we've talked about it but the t-line is a priority. as we build out on the density increase and point as well as in flats rock. that should be number one if not second to the cal trans downtown extension and that's not on here and i guess because there's no one advocating for these types of projects on this
7:31 am
body, on this committee, on the mayor's transportation task force. also i think we can do a better job of publicizing this. i can get my constituents and contribute in the discussion that's happening for these -- for these major projects. love for you to bring back to your committee the t-line as an additional -- a project added to the future funds. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner campos. >> thank you mr. chairman and i'll be brief. thank you for your work. the fact that we have a transportation task force is exciting and it's a wonderful thing that we're doing this. i'm looking at it from the perspective of how do we collectively come together to get something that is going to be successful if we take something to the ballot, some of the proposals you're talking
7:32 am
about are proposals that we acquired. 2/3 of the san francisco voters so we want to get as many people on board as we can which is one of the reasons why i raised the issue about who was at the table. i think you have some pretty amazing people but there are some people that i feel like maybe we need to hear from just off the top of my head looking at -- we have transit worker unions here. i don't know if they were involved in this process. i worry about the small business community. what say do they have. parents, city college, i don't see a representative on this list from city college. we mentioned public housing, commissioner breed. i know that we have carla johnson who is incredible from the community, but i think that having more of a say from seniors and disabled is
7:33 am
important. i think language monolog speakers, we need to think more about that. the other thing that i worry about is the fact that it doesn't seem like we're focusing as much on operations and how to improve services and i think that's a real issue that should be discussed. i know in alameda, they spend a certain percentage on that and we should talk about that because it would be hard for us to convince the percentage of the population that we have to convince, i think, that's not apart of the equation, so i worry about that. i think it's great that we're doing so much -- have a focus on capital project because there's so many projects that we need, but i know when we had our
7:34 am
performance audit on capital projects that you also need to have a strategy for how to contain costs associated with those projects, so i'd like to know whether or not that strategy exists here. to the extend that we're talking about how investing in the projects will lead to better service, i'd like to see matrix associated with that. how much more service are we talking about if we invest in capital project. to be honest i like to see an equity analysis of the entire recommendations. how are these recommendations going to impact not only different communities but also maybe district by district. i think that's important. to the extent that we have anticipated short falls in terms of service cuts, possibly down the road, shouldn't we be thinking about
7:35 am
setting money aside for a rainy day fund to make sure that we prepare for a rainy day so that riders are not, you know, impacted when times are bad to the extent that that has happened before. there's a lot of questions. i look forward to working with the task force and i really think that to the extent that we can involve more community folks, more partners this, the better because it's going to require everyone getting behind this for any evident of this magnitude to be successful. so thank you. >> commissioner mar. >> let me be brief. i appreciate mrs. mudo that the process has a good one since march, but how can we have a
7:36 am
good recommendation. the stakeholders are going to be engaged but that sounds backwards and i appreciate suggestions from my colleagues. i did want to say that as a number of us visited mexico city and one of the things that the mayor said, if the mayor and city don't get behind a rapid network in a city, how does it happen? you can't do a peace meal. we approach the van ness strongly, but we have to extend the rapid network to other parts of the city. that's what they're been looking for, so for the mayor's task force to put little priority of our city's network, that troubles me. it's not looking at the context of the planning of the transportation
7:37 am
in the city and it does seem to show a bias of downtown and connecting with neighborhoods in my opinion. i wanted to go to slide 26, page 13 as some numbers have changed since the july numbers and i know the resurfacing item has gone up significantly because you were trying to increase, is it pci pavement and condition index significantly, but that has gone up almost $200 million and i know that's necessary accident you i did reference he pass the streets and road repaving bond about two years ago and i'm wondering of the planning. why is that going up so much and maybe the neighborhood needs are being under cut by different city wide needs. it's equity to improve city in the under served areas and i support that, but it seems like since
7:38 am
july the task force moved toward road repaving and less towards connecting up of a rapid network in our neighborhood and more equity in the approach. >> the original recommendation was to have what they have a pci of 68, which is less than fair, less than adequate. the bond will expire and there's no ongoing funding to keep it going and there was a commitment by the administration to find an ongoing replacement which is why the jail bonds weren't identified for this purpose because that's a one time, and the pci of 70 is the minimum acceptable among the public
7:39 am
works and capital family if you will to maintain that as adequate. once we fall below that, the amount to pave the streets cost so much more that we start to get to the downward spiral again. so to give it a non funding source to maintain the streets at a category called fair, not good, not excellent but fair. that's the reason. but again this is a choice and the plan is all about choices and if there are differences of opinion here, this is something that the task force will credit consider and the board and the mayor will consider. >> the change from the end of july documents that i saw from what we were proposed today is
7:40 am
very, very different than and especially with some of the downtown core projects but i think that's where a lot of money went up with the street repaving but my hope is with the legislative balance looking at the different needs of the city, we'll look at how the other cities look at it. i think we should repave but i don't think it should be at the expense of the neighborhoods and a rapid network that connects parts of the city that's not connected with a rapid transit city but i appreciate all the work you're doing it and it's a work in progress and hopefully the task force make up and the stakeholder does it in a strong way so we can get more input into this. i want to know the comparisons of the mayor's task force recommendations to our transportation authorities, the
7:41 am
san francisco transportation plan that has been involving many neighborhoods as well and that would be helpful to know for our staff in coordination with you as well. >> the gary street is the one known difference at this point, but we'll continue to work with the staff and to make those assurances once we've confirmed them. >> just to add another plug. gary is the -- that's the most highly used west of the mississippi. it would increase transit from under served area that hasn't gotten its fair share of the west city and an analysis would prioritize the cities that don't have a rapid city, but thank you. >> thank you commissioner mar. i'm supportive in making sure that rapid network can get established as soon as possible. i used to ride the gary bus all the time and it was a challenge. it's worse
7:42 am
than it was when i road it 20 years ago. commissioner chiu. >> just a couple of quick comments. i want to thank you and your colleagues for the work you've done. this has been a difficult process involving a lot of different stakeholders, but i want to thank you for that. i also think your recommendations around the financial options are excellent. in particular i have been supportive of making sure that the vehicle license fee remains an option for our city. 2009, many of our colleagues with the caption of campos and mar, i sponsored of getting that forward and i think that should be apart of the package and i'm willing to continue to advocate for because we've had colleagues who have mentioned projects that haven't been funded, but
7:43 am
it's my hope that he'll get funding of the subway which should be apart of a system that is city wide. i also want to -- i know there's been comments made about who is in the room and who isn't in room. everyone in the room understands that better transportation is important and social justice goal for our entire city. to our colleagues who have not participated in this, that is a common value that everyone shares. as supervisor avalos and wiener and i know because we've participated in these meetings. the room is large. we have dozens and dozens of folks representing the diversity of our city. the meetings have been public and we encourage greater support, but the transportation has been
7:44 am
advocates for parents and disability. i hear our colleagues comments. we can always involve more folks but i want folks to know we've had 50, 60 people in the room and we can always use more, so i don't want the public to have any miss perception that this has been a closed room. it has not been and as mrs. moon known, it has a diversity of opinions. >> thank you, commissioner chiu. >> commissioner breed. >> thank you. i want to thank you my colleagues for their comments and i do realize there has been a lot of work that have gone into this and in the past when the city takes on
7:45 am
endeavors that come in here. they present a plan and often times we don't necessarily always deviate from that plan so from my perspective, i appreciate there's a common value to determine the kinds of decisions we need to make from the task force, but experience and the fact that people who really truly rely on on this service is completely different from my perspective which is why it is attorney who is in the room and who is making the decision. there's people who may be at the center of the task force excepting up to the plate and speaking on behalf of this committee, but it's different when you're the one relying on the transportation and you don't have the means to take a taxi or other means of transportation, so i think it's important to make sure there's diversity and what i'm seeing
7:46 am
are impressive -- this is a very impressive list of people who are experts but when i think about the decisions made for the octavia and oak area, those were impressive people with great credentials, but it has turned into a nightmare and has become one of the most dangerous intersections in our city, so when we're making these kinds of decisions, having a real diverse group of people at the table, it's important. and one of the examples that i'd like to use is the school district is represented by jason court and understanding whether or not jason port has been a student who has attended a school in the san francisco unified district, has jason port got on the bus and dealt with the crowdedness of a bus or the bus passing you by because they're
7:47 am
over crowded and kids not getting to school on time. not to mention that kids are going to school in all kinds of other neighborhoods and clearly rely on transportation and so bringing that perspective to the table, a perspective of a student, a perspective of the those in the youth commission is key in making these decisions because getting to school is important and most of the kids that i grew up with and in our neighborhoods they rely on public transportation to get to school. it's interesting meeting consistently with students from gally high school watching them walk in the room and using the bus as an excuse. maybe they're using that as an excuse, but i've been there when i've met students trying to get to school on time and the bus passes them by. my
7:48 am
point is it's important who is at the table when they're making these decisions. there were a couple of comments and i don't know if there's questions. mr. williams from the rider's union brought up a good point about staff. no one's talking about staff. no one is talking about -- we're talking about system, but general fund dollars or mta dollars or what have you, that needs to be brought into the mix. when we talk about increased capacity, clearly we're talking about increased staff which includes benefits and management, and includes a whole new additional set of people that will need be to be employed and are we planning for that and hiring people at a rapid pace. do we have the money to hire them in the
7:49 am
future. i know this is a plan, but even if the dollars don't necessarily come from any of these particular options, where potentially are they going to come from. how do they fit into this equation. i want to mention something about the vehicle license fee. when i look at this list, i'm not necessarily -- i know it's not just about me and what i believe, but i'm from san francisco and i know the buses and i understand where they go and i think about really the cal tran, downtown extension, the cal tranny lek tri if i cajun and all of these different resources that are going to help make cal tran and the folks who come in a this city, their transportation needs better. i respect and understand that, but my concern
7:50 am
is you're asking locals to pay potentially through a ballot measure, a vehicle license fee and as a person who would be responsible for paying that fee, i would not support that fee. i wouldn't support paying an additional fee when the neighborhoods that would be paying this fee aren't represented in this draft fee. i have a real problem with that and i'm really concerned especially when we talk about sale's tax and there may be some data that indicates that sale's tax is paid by people who aren't necessarily resident of the city, but what bothers me is people who visit the city are increasingly deciding not to visit the city because of a couple of things. the sunday meetings, the sale's tax, the fees at the restaurants for healthy assess and all of these
7:51 am
other things. i constantly hear complaints and these are in the east bay and how oakland are changing their restaurant scene and making changes and people are choosing to stay home rather than visiting san francisco. i don't want us to begin, i guess, nickel and dime people out of wanting to participate in what's happening in san francisco. when we look at sale's tax as a possible recommendation, i have concerns and i don't see any desire for me as a resident to support that as well. and when i talk about -- when i specifically mention public housing resident, as i said before, many of them truly rely on public transportation. when you say that people participate
7:52 am
in this are 100 percent rely on public transportation, again, i don't necessarily -- 100 rely on transportation means you can't afford alternatives throughout the city. i want to be clear about who we're talking about at the table when we specify something about them in particular and i said that before, i know. back to two more things on this draft list. one in particular, the gary rapid transit and the fact that we're looking at potentially less than 50 percent of this project being funded and this is a really important project as we all know. it's something that will hopefully change the landscape of the project -- i
7:53 am
mean change the landscape of the people who rely on this. i see this as a project that needs to more priority on this list because clearly this is a bus that transports people who actually, mostly -- what i believe live in san francisco and so we need to make sure that we're taking care of san franciscans before those from the city. i want to mention the mini fleet which i'm concerned about because of the discovery that it wasn't easy to add an additional car to the injuda line which is the heavy traffic lines in the city and the work that went into adding another train or seat reconfiguration or all of these things, they take time. i
7:54 am
realize that, but if we're making all these changes and we're adding all these different routes and we're brt this and brt that, why are we not 100 percent investing in our fleet. 100 percent and in some cases i see that for certain years there is funds that have been identified but in the case of the state of good repair for -- i don't see the years here, but we're looking at 59 percent funded, i guess that's in the coming year and overall -- i don't want to say this wrong because i don't see the year. it's not completely funded and my point is i'm not a transit expert and
7:55 am
i understand there are a lot of experts at the table, but these decisions don't seem from a perspective of someone who understands the way that transit is in this city, i'm not certain these are the best decisions that truly make the difference necessary in order to make the system mory e - more efficient for those who ride it. >> there's no one else on staff. we can go onto public comment. i want to thank the public for their patient. i have a few cards. we have general public at the end and someone has to leave. he has been waiting. he raised his hands. mrs. sax and i have a few cards i'll read as well.
7:56 am
>> i think that microphone is off. hold on. >> i just want to let you know before you consider this item, this is an information item , but before you put it on the ballot, you have to remember that prop k was passed years ago. it's a 30 year plan and it has to go before the voters in a few years to extend the sale's tax package. i worked on prop b and i worked on prop k, and you have to remember there are projects -- there were the only projects from prop b that wasn't funded is the gary light rail system which is what the voters wanted back in 1989. that's number one. number two, the [inaudible] project which is
7:57 am
funded under this plan, you have to remember that at the board meetings, i don't know if you've watched those board meetings, but there's many people who spoke on cutting this service. what they did was cut the service that was very effective up until december 5th 2009 and it should be taken how the mta is handling their business because they don't listen to the people. they do whatever they want. that's wrong. someone should talk to them about that because people don't like to tap and neither do i. >> i have a few public cards. this is for the task force status update, item number 11. jane martin, price, peter, bob
7:58 am
alan and anyone else who would like to comment can come forward. >> good morning. thank you for the questions that you raised today. my name is with jane and i'm with power. although we reached out we were deliberately excluded from this task force process and not allowed to be apart of it. since then the task force have reached out to us and talked to us, but the outreach has been get on board and support this plan. the needs that you're representing aren't the needs we want to include. so we're deeply concerned about this although our members are the folks that are out on the street corner at night waiting over an hour trying to get back with a baby on on the bus. we want to support more increased transit funding, but we're concerned with these recommendations because we see a need for more equity. when
7:59 am
we talk about equity, we're looking at these measures as being aggressive and san franciscans are going to have to pay a part of their funds to pay for this. when we talk about equity, we're not just talking about where the capital projects happen, although we certainly see a need for more capital projects out in the neighborhoods. we're talking about wanting to fund service. and we understand the need for these capital investments for streets and bike improvements so we're not talking about having all the money for service, but we need a lot of the money to be for service and we need to look for affordable. that's a big issue for our members and we want to make sure the youth program is permanent so that in good and bad budget years that they're not struggling and they have those bus passes they need.
8:00 am
we've opinion working with stakeholders that promotes service standards and cost containment and we want to work with you and the board members and not just those in downtown. >> the next speaker. i called all the cards. if you have the next card, come forward. >> my name is price, third generation resident of bay view hunter's point and lived in the east bay and hunter's bay. >> we have to pause. mrs. price will bring your time back. >> do i leave or stay here. >> we have to have six in the room to have coram and we have it back. >> let's set mrs. price's time back and just let me know