Municipal Transportation Agency - Regular Meeting

regular meeting of the Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors and Parking Authority Commission to order. Secretary Silva, please call the roll.

On the roll, Director Felder.

Present.

Felder, present. Director Hemminger. Here. Hemminger, present. Director Henderson. Here. Henderson, present. Director Hinzey. Director Hinzey, I see you in the Webex. You are muted. We'll come back. Director Kahina. Here. Kahina present. Director Chen. Chen present. Chair Tarloff. Present. Tarloff present. Let's come back to Director Hinze. OK, Director Hinze is here. I expect that she's perhaps having some issues with her computer. And for the record, I do note that Director Hinze is attending this meeting remotely. Director Hinze is reminded that she must appear on camera and throughout the meeting in order to speak or vote on any items. Places you on item number three. The ringing and use of cell phones and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. The chair may order the removal from the meeting room any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone or other device. Places you on item number four, approval of minutes for the April 7 regular meeting.

Directors, are there any changes to the minutes? Seeing no changes, we'll now open public comment for item four, the minutes from our last meeting for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There'll be a warning at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers can come up to the podium at this time to provide comment on the minutes.

Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests. Thank you. We'll now close public comment. Colleagues, is there a motion and a second? So moved. Second. Sorry.

Secretary Silva, please call the roll. On the motion to approve the minutes, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson.

Aye.

Henderson, aye. Director Hinzey. I think Director Hinze is still having an issue. Director Kahina? Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff? Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. That motion passes. Thank you. Please call the next item. Places you on item number five, communications. I have none. Thank you.

Please call the next item.

Places you on item number six, the director's report.

Good afternoon. I have a relatively short report today because we have a healthy agenda. But I did want to talk about Earth Day and our climate work, as well as the 19th Avenue Caltrans Paving Project. This week is Climate Week in San Francisco, and tomorrow is Earth Day. So much of what we do at the SFMTA contributes to keeping our environment healthy. When people take Muni or walk or bike to get around the city, instead of using a private vehicle, they're reducing air pollution and climate emissions. So all the work we're doing to make it more appealing to ride Muni, walk, bike, and roll is work that's contributing to a cleaner and a greener environment. We're also helping to make it easier for people who choose to or need to drive to transition to electric vehicles by expanding curbside electric vehicle charging to complement the extensive network of off-street charging we have in our public garages. Last week, the city released its new climate action plan. And as in years past, transportation is a major focus of the city's climate action efforts. Transportation continues to be San Francisco's and the nation's largest source of greenhouse gas emissions. I think we're just maybe 1% below housing and buildings as the other kind of key areas to tackle. About two-thirds of those emissions are generated by privately owned cars and trucks, and only about 0.01 percent of climate emissions are generated by Muni, which you know has the greenest fleet in North America of any major large city. The current data doesn't reflect Caltrain's electrification, but that was also a major step forward in the last year. Over the coming years, we'll be doing everything we can to help the city achieve the transportation goals that are laid out in the new climate action plan, which are kind of two parts. One is we want to reduce the vehicle miles traveled by cars and trucks by 25% from 2019 levels by 2030 and by 30% by 2040. I'll also share that that goal complements our street safety work, which also looks to reduce vehicle miles traveled as a key safety strategy. We also have a goal to increase the percentage of cars and small trucks in San Francisco that are zero emission to 25 percent by 2030 and 100 percent by 2040. You can learn more and read the entire Climate Action Plan on the San Francisco Department of Environment's website. And I just want to thank them for being such great partners and conveners. This was truly a multi-city effort. The second thing I wanted to cover is the 19th Avenue paving project. As I've mentioned at past meetings, Caltrans is repaving 19th Avenue between Lincoln and Holloway. Even though this is a Caltrans project, not an SFMTA project, we're working closely with Caltrans on it. We really wanted to figure out how to minimize the impact of this work on the people who live around the area and who rely on 19th Avenue for their mobility. Thanks to a great collaboration between our transportation engineering team and Caltrans, we were able to get the construction down from 40 days to just 10 days of work. I really want to thank Brian Dussault, Daniel Padilla, and Nina Levine for working so hard with Caltrans to get this amazing result. The paving work is going to be happening on three long weekends, Friday morning through, like, very, very early Monday morning, the weekend of April 24th to 26th, which is this coming weekend, the weekend of May 8th through the 10th, and Memorial Weekend, the weekend of May 22nd to the 24th. During the construction, one lane of traffic will be open, but it's going to be moving really slow, and no parking will be allowed where the construction is taking place. SFMTA parking control officers will be supporting this project. They'll be out directing traffic to avoid the construction and to take alternative routes. The Muni routes that run along 19th Avenue will be rerouted for at least part of the construction. I think we're going to learn a little bit as we go as well. Our website will have a page showing the reroutes and where there'll also be signage at the Muni stops. This is still a major construction project, and it will inconvenience people who travel on 19th Avenue, but we are thankful that the project will take far less time than was originally planned, and we know drivers and community riders are really going to appreciate the smooth ride they'll experience after the repaving work is done. That concludes my report.

Thank you, Director Kirschbaum. Before I open public comment on this item, I'd like to remind members of the public that they may provide comment on the topics Director Kirschbaum shared. Those were Earth Day, Climate Week and the City's new Climate Action Plan, and the 19th Avenue Caltrans Repaving Project. If you feel the director missed addressing a topic, you may comment on that during item nine, which is general public comment. If you're here to speak on an item later in today's agenda, please wait to make your comment until that item is called. With that, public comment on the director's report is now open for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds, a warning at 30 seconds, and a chime when the time is up. Speakers can come up to the podium at this time for the DOT report. Go ahead.

Good afternoon, board. Griffin Lee here representing ConnectSF staff and membership. Two things. I think the whole idea of climate week is positive, and especially all the different activities happening throughout the city in an effort to build on climate change is positive. But I just want to state here, be mindful of the 25% goal of vehicle miles traveled by 2030. I do like the metric of a number tied to a goal, and we do. We like numbers and outcomes, but the fundamental theory of that item specifically I think warrants an agenda to be run in future days and months ahead. Cars are still a very critical component to getting from point A to point B in San Francisco for all people. Families, low income, middle income, high income families across the board, laborers, workers, et cetera. So please be mindful of that stat and what you're working toward to get there. Secondly, on the 19th Ave initiative, we do appreciate the quick turnaround time to condense the time to limit the burden for west side commuters to three weekends. I think the coordination that is showcasing here between MTA and Caltrans is very positive. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item? Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests.

Thank you. Public comment is now closed. Colleagues, any comments or questions for Director Kirschbaum? I do have one little thing, very tiny, but you were saying it's 10 days. And so I deduced from that that it's Friday, Saturday, Sunday for the first two weekends, and then Memorial Day weekend will include the Monday, and that makes it 10. Did I get that right?

Thank you for that clarification. Yes, it will include Memorial Monday. Great.

Adds up to 10. I guess that's everything on that item. Thank you for your report, Director Kirschbaum. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Places you on item number seven, the Citizens Advisory Council report. We have no report. Thank you.

Please call the next item.

Places you on item number eight, new or unfinished business by board members. Colleagues, any items to share?

Very good. We'll close this item. And Secretary Silva, can you please call the next item?

Places you on item number nine, general public comment. Members of the public may address the board of directors on matters that are within the board's jurisdiction and are not on today's calendar.

I would like to open public comment on this item for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime in when the time is up. I do have one speaker card for Patricia Vaughn.

Patricia Boy, Marina-Kelholla Neighbors Emergence. Julie, when we were at Fort Mason, we discussed having a meeting at the end of this month concerning Chestnut Street, and I set it up for 3 o'clock next Tuesday. The reason why I did it was I think that I would like for us to go back to having a collaborative with us working together instead of not. And your attendance would be greatly appreciated. It would be about a 30-minute meeting. We have a compromise on the red zones that some of the merchants have not seen. And I wanted to make certain that they saw them before I said yes. And number two is we could spend about 30 minutes in the 2200 block and look at the issues there so we can start the process and work together on having a cohesive situation where neighbors and the department work well together instead of having an altercation and reactions. And I've done it before, and I think we can do it and make it better. And I'd appreciate it if you were there just so that we can get it started. I already sent it to Sophia. And we've got a lot of things to do. And we were short 150 parking places in 89. We've lost 178 parking places on Lombard and Chestnut because of changes that were made that did not shock the neighbors and the merchants, and I want a viable solution to this stuff. Thank you. So then possibly a prototype for the rest of the city and make it work.

Thank you.

This is not me being angry.

Thank you, ma'am. Your time is concluded. Thank you.

I'm just trying to solve it. Thank you.

Any other speakers for general public comment?

Griffin Lee, again, connect to the staff, representing staff and membership. One, do listen to Patricia. All the merchants love her and respect her on Chestnut Street. I know that firsthand being I've been in conversation with the merchants on Chestnut, and they all love Patricia. Secondly, why I'm up here though, is I just wanted to put this on record. April 22nd, 2025 budget workshop, there was a deck with a pie that illustrated combined muni operators, maintenance staff, and car cleaners, a total of 4,021 full-time employees. Fast forward to two weeks ago, April 7th, 2026. In a slide, it represented or illustrated 43- Mr. Lee, I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Are you hoping to comment on the budget? Because that's an item later in today's agenda.

I don't think this is illustrated in the actual budget deck today, but it is a budget-related item.

Yeah, perhaps you could reserve your comment until that item later in today's hearing. Okay, all right. Thank you.

Any other speakers for general public comment? Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests,

We will now close public comment. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Directors, that places you on item 10, your consent calendar. These items are considered to be simple or routine and will be acted upon by a single vote unless a member of the board or public requests that an item be taken off consent and heard separately. For all speakers providing comment, please identify which item number you are speaking to. item 10.1 approving various routine parking and traffic modifications listed under 10.1 a through r in the agenda item 10.2 amending transportation code division 2 to streamline sections listing vehicle weight restrictions commercial passenger vehicle restrictions transit only lanes and speed limits in order to save SFMTA staff time and resources and to make other conforming changes and transferring the existing $108 fine for stopping standing or parking in an area of the street designated for public transit buses such as transit only lanes from a violation of Transportation Code section seven point two point three nine to a violation of California Vehicle Code section two two five zero zero M That concludes your consent calendar Thank you

I would like to open public comment for the consent calendar for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers for the consent calendar can come up to the podium at this time.

The board director's chairman, Julie. Listen, I operate the 49 Monday through Thursday. And of course, they have fines, I mean violations going from traffic TO VEHICLE CODE IS GOOD, BUT HOW ARE WE GOING TO FORCE THAT GOING DOWN MISSION? BECAUSE MISSION, YOU HAVE VEHICLES, BIG TRUCKS, DOUBLE PARK ON EACH SIDE, GOING INBOUND, OUTBOUND, AND IT'S HARD FOR A BUSTER TO GO AROUND. OF COURSE, YOU KNOW THIS, THAT WE CONSTANTLY HAVE TO GO OVER THE WL LINE QUITE A BIT TO GO AROUND PARK VEHICLES. the special red carpet red carpet is for people picking up passengers it's for trucks that that work in the city that red carpet lane is not for the buses so we can force that that'll be great thank you thank you any other speakers for the consent calendar seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests

Thank you very much. I just have one question related to the consent calendar, not to take an item off of consent, but to just highlight something I think I noticed, which is that there were a number of items related to one of the merchant corridors where I believe we've recently been meeting with those merchants as part of the merchant walkthrough program. And I just wanted to confirm that perhaps with Director Weiss.

Thank you for that. Good afternoon, Chair, members of the board. I'm Victoria Wise, Director of Streets. And you are absolutely correct. This work is actually part of our overall goal of working with the merchants and partnering with them to do some very targeted curb improvements to really facilitate access and to, again, elevate our business community and work with them together and build trust. That's one of the goals we all have at the board and through Director Kirschbaum. So we've been working on that ad hoc since, 2024 and we've been meeting with different merchant associations through requests from the Board of Supervisors or through merchants themselves and walk in a whole bunch of different corridors, Castro, Market, Union, Noe Valley is another one that's probably about up to 10 at this point. working with them to very targetedly look at the curb and figure out how we can make adjustments, especially post-COVID because business needs have really changed or adjusted and maybe we haven't looked at some of those corridors in a long time. We've been meeting with the merchants and better understanding what their needs are, in light of also at the same time making sure we have safety in our streets and keep Muni moving. So all those goals combined figuring out how the curb can be used better. Some examples of the things that we've done are changing the hours of the yellow loading zone and giving back some of the general meter parking spaces, perhaps not till 6 PM, but till only 3, or maybe even till noon sometimes. So this is very good and targeted work with our business community to make sure that people can have access to it. Now, we've been doing it ad hoc, but very recently have really formalized this program as the merchant walkthroughs. We are currently working in the Bayview and just recently met with them to understand better their needs and have a proposal that we're working at at staff level, which I'm sure eventually just like this will make it to your consent calendar in the future. And then the couple of corridors that we have coming up are going to be mid-polk, I think the upper Fillmore and there's one more. So now it's a very uniform program where we're working very deliberately with the merchants again in the spirit of gaining that trust and making sure we support the economic development of our small businesses and commercial corridors.

Thank you very much. It just came to my attention because I live in that corridor, and I saw the public notices about it happening. And so anyway, thank you for indulging me, colleagues. May I have a motion and a second to approve the consent calendar? Second. Secretary Silva, please call the roll.

On the motion to approve the consent calendar, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson.

Aye.

Henderson, aye. Director Hinze. Aye. Hinze, aye. Director Kahina. Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff. Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. The motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Directors, that places you on your regular calendar. Item number 11, presentation and discussion regarding job vacancy reporting for Assembly Bill 2561.

Good afternoon, Chair and directors. My name is Kimberly Ackerman. I'm the Chief People Officer here at MTA. And I also want to acknowledge Shana Dines, who is here with me today. She is the Senior Manager for Employee and Labor Relations. And what we are going to do is to give you a very brief overview of Senate Bill 2561 in terms of what we are mandated to require a report out on is job vacancies. This law applies to all public agencies. If you all recall, we reported out on this last August in 2025. We're required to update you all on this annually. We're also supposed to do it as part of the budget before it's adopted, so that's why we're here today. And we'll be covering some detailed information in terms of vacancy levels, recruitment and retention. We're also required to talk about if there are any obstacles in the procedures, recruitment activities. But essentially, we have to report out on any classifications that have a higher than 20% vacancy rate by union. We also are required to reach out to our labor partners to let them know we're going to be presenting this. And if they want to make any public comments, they can. We did that, and we did not receive any responses that they would like to speak to this. So we're going to cover what are the reporting requirements. We just talked about that. What our hiring challenges are, the vacancy and recruitment data. So you all will know those classifications where there's a 20% higher vacancy rate, and our recruitment and retention efforts. So what are our hiring challenges? I don't think this would be a surprise to anyone here, and that is the budget. We have had a hiring slowdown. The hiring has been very strategic and been focused primarily on positions that are revenue generating. And just to really give you an idea of how our slowdown, what it looks like in terms of numbers, in 2023, we hired 1,143 employees. So far, year to date, so that's quarter one, quarter two, and quarter three, we've hired 220 employees, and we have 140 positions that are in the recruitment process. So that'll put us at around, if we go through all of that by the end of Q4, that'll put us around 362. So that's about a third of what we hired in 2023. So it's definitely been strategic. We definitely have been slowed down. We've had this phased hiring approach since really 24-25, where we showed the number went down drastically to 632. We also removed 500 vacant positions from the budget last year. And again, we really have focused on revenue-generating positions as well as public-facing positions. OK, so what does it look like? This chart here shows you, on this table on the far left-hand side, it shows you the bargaining unit. It shows you the budgeted FTEs for that particular union, and then the percent filled, and then the very far right-hand column is the percent vacant. So it's compiled by bargaining unit. There are 12 citywide unions. And we have eight service critical unions that are specific just to MTA. So the same as last August, we had three bargaining units that basically had a 20% or higher threshold that met it. And that was local 250A for the transit fare inspectors, local 39 for the stationary engineers, and then the 856 for the Teamsters. And I do want to mention, if you look at the note at the bottom of the table, this data is compiled through December 31st, 2025, so it reflects Q1 and Q2. Okay, so I'm going to go through each one of those and what that looks like. So right now for our transit fare inspectors, we have 59 filled, we have a 78% filled, and 17 vacant. Right now our goal is to fill all 17 of those vacant positions, and we'll start on that in Q4 of this fiscal year. We have made some improvements. I did just want to mention we had 21 vacants and a 28% vacancy rate when we reported out in August of last year. And then the second union is a Local 39. You can see the table above. It shows, again, the number filled, the percent filled, the number vacant, and then what that vacant percentage looks like. A couple of things I want to point out of importance. One is the eligible list. We put that on here because that's one of the things that Julie has emphasized to us and the hiring team is that we really want to continue to build and keep our eligibility list current and up to date because we want to be in the position when we can hire, we're ready to hire because that process can take a while. So I thought it was important that we mention those. The other thing that I want to mention, you can see the three bullets for hiring projections, but I want to point out the 7473. or getting ready to hire two employees in the 7473, that trainee program is two years. So they can only train two people. It's two years. And then, of course, after they complete that, then they can go into the 7472. So I just want to mention that. For the 856, the parking meter repairer, we had 16 filled. We have 73% filled. This is showing six vacant and with a 27% vacancy rate. There are a couple of things to update you here, is that we have reduced the vacancies down to four, and then we're going to hire one parking meter repairer in Q4. Okay, so that's an overview of where we are with those classifications that have a higher than 20% vacancy rate. And then what are we doing in terms of recruitment and retention? I just want to mention the pipeline development. These are partnerships that maybe not everyone knows about, but it's important to mention, and that is our internships and our apprenticeships. As you can see on the left, we have pre-apprentice automotive mechanics as well as student design trainees. And we also have our youth development programs. We have 17 public service trainees and 8 muni ambassadors. In terms of retention, what is it that we do at MTA? And this is, I think, just a brief highlight. There are a lot of more things that we could include on here. But a couple of things I want to mention. We're going to be approaching bargaining toward the end of this year. We'll start developing that. And obviously, with bargaining comes improvements, right? Improvements to wage increases, bonuses, incentives, all those things that we did last bargaining that we consider to be incentives. We've done some unique things for our classifications as well in terms of overhead line sign-on bonus and referral incentives, which have been very positive. And we'll continue to work through bargaining and to develop and craft other incentive programs for employees. We also have a robust health and wellness program for our employees, and I think that's really important. One of the things that we did this year is we used to have a program where employees could go three times a year, and that was it. We've increased that to five, and it's for the employee and each one of their dependents. Typically, if you have a utilization rate of five or more, it's considered very good. Last year, in 24, we had a 4.72% utilization rate, and this year, a 5.08%. So we're definitely seeing an increase on employees utilizing those services, which we support, as well as our peer counseling that we offer all of our employees. We have employee recognition programs. We have just a couple here to mention, but we also have a lot more. The Station Agent of the Month, we have Safe Driver Awards, and we also have our Years of Service Awards. We give out service awards every five-year increments, and believe it or not, up to 45 years have employees who've worked here that long. So it's pretty incredible, and it's nice to recognize those employees. And then also, I just want to mention promotional pathways. That's something we definitely encourage employees for career advancement and to promote from within. So next steps, we're going to continue to focus on those positions that are revenue producing and also public facing. We're continuing to hire our operators and then other key positions as needed. We'll continue to keep our eligible list maintained and up to date so that in the event that we can hire, we're ready to do so. We'll continue to work on hiring efficiency improvements. We're working on a review and update with the public facing the website on hiring process and make it more available to applicants and candidates so that we're ready to move forward when we can. And also, we're relocating our HR staff to other business teams in HR that maybe are not focused on hiring right now. So that's really an update in terms of AB2561 and where we are with job vacancies. So thank you.

Thank you very much. Let's open public comment for this item for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers can come up to the podium at this time to provide comment on item number 11. Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests.

Public comment is now closed. Directors, any comments or discussion on this item? Director Chen?

Thank you, Chair. So I think my quick takeaway from the report is that our high priority vacancies are being filled. And we are actively working to improve our processes. I think a year ago, maybe a year ago, there was some discussion, I think, around the city about the average time to hire being a very long time. And I forget exactly the number. And I think there was some discussion working with our labor partners to improve our processes. And I want to give you a chance to kind of explain some, in addition to, I think, what you've talked about, about making sure that our lists are fresh, other things that the department is working on.

Yeah, sure. Thank you. I appreciate that question. There are things that we are doing internally. Obviously, our exempt positions don't take as long to hire as our civil service positions do, but we're doing things internally to make it easier for managers, the requisition process. It used to be extremely laborious, but it's much easier now, I think, for managers. And just really trying to reduce the time, like you said, time to hire, and make it more customer-oriented for our managers and for our candidates.

Thank you.

Director Hinze?

Yes, just a couple of clarifying questions. When did you say these numbers were pulled again? Where are they from? When are they from?

I'm sorry. I didn't hear that question totally.

These numbers that you gave us, when are they from again?

From? Oh, period of time. Through December. They're Q1, Director Q1 and Q2 for 25-26. So through December 31.

OK. Would you have updated numbers? Because December's from a while ago. I'm just curious.

Yeah, we can definitely do that. The thing is, when we have to produce the report and put it through e-routing, that's like end of March, early April, and it doesn't give us time to really compile and aggregate the data for Q3.

And then when you say Q4, I'm assuming that's by fiscal year? You're referring to Q4, the fiscal year?

That's correct, yes.

Okay, so this is by fiscal year, okay.

Yes.

Thank you. Thank you. Those are my only questions.

You're welcome. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Kahina.

Thank you, Kim, for this report. Just a suggestion for future reports. A lot of the stats that are in the stack also remind me of some of the different sort of metrics that we're tracking for the racial equity action plan as well. And so I want to see if there is possibly a way to merge these two presentations or to give us A little bit of flavor of what's going on with that plan as you give this update since they're also tracking hiring retention Recruitment and promotions and things of that nature.

Okay. Thank you. We're looking to that.

Thank you Thank you very much directors, I think that concludes this item Secretary Silva, can you please call the next item?

Directors, that places you on item 12, the Capital Improvement Program and Consolidated Budget. Item 12A, approving the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency's fiscal year 2027 to 2031 Capital Improvement Program, CIP, for $2.5 billion, and fiscal year 26-27 and fiscal year 27-28 capital budget in the amount of $655 million in fiscal year 26-27, and $546 million in fiscal year 27-28, including 157 recommended projects within five major investment areas. At item 12B, approving the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency fiscal year 26-27 and 27-28 operating budget in the amounts of $1,515 million and $1,616 million respectively and the capital budget in the amounts of $655 million and $546 million, respectively, for a combined total appropriation of $2,170 million and $2,162 million, and taking related actions, including or as listed under items A through I in the agenda.

One of my favorite parts of these meetings is Secretary Silva's ability to read incredibly long and complex things gracefully. Thank you for that. Before we delve into this item, I did want to just take a moment to thank our finance team, and all the staff that worked with them to get us to this moment. There were some weeks we weren't sure we were going to get here, so taking a pause is, I think, important. They've worked late into the night last week, to get all of our budget numbers updated so that you can vote today on our next two-year budget. This has truly been the most challenging financial crisis for the SFMTA since I've worked at this agency, and it has not been easy to come up with a balanced budget. And I know we brought you all a lot of hard choices, and I appreciate all of the feedback and consensus building that helped to get us here. I also want to thank our communications team who really helped make sure that the public had a voice in this process and could bring you critical feedback on priorities. There's certainly still a lot of work to do. We are going to need to keep up our efforts to stretch every public dollar by doing our work as efficiently as possible. And we're going to see whether both ballot measures are placed on the ballot and if voters approve the two measures in November. But I still want to appreciate all the work that has gotten us to where we are today. And with that, I will bring up and turn it over to our CFO, Brima Hoarder.

Good afternoon, directors. My name is Brima Horder. I'm the CFO of the MTA, and I'm here to present to you our final consolidated operating and capital budget with the help of Rob Hockes, our capital budget and grants manager. I think the length I want the award for the longest agenda title for the year. I think I'll clearly win. And I think the length of the title reflects the complexity of all of the work that you all have done over the last few months. It's been a long journey. We've met nearly 10 times, starting in November, coming all the way through today. And each one of those meetings has addressed either a thematic subject of the budget or delved deeply into a policy choice for you all to make. And we're going to kind of... re-walk that path together so you can see the whole story arc from beginning to end, and that members of the public who maybe haven't been tuning into each one of those meetings can understand the whole story from beginning to end. We started off this cycle with a pretty large budget deficit in each of the two years, $307 million in 26-27 and $344 million in 27-28. And we worked together through the Muni Funding Working Group and last year's budget workshop to develop a strategy that we've been calling the three-legged stool model. to close this budget deficit. And the three-legged stool has, not surprisingly, three legs, the first of which is a regional revenue measure, which we'll talk about a little bit later, a local revenue measure, which we'll also go into greater detail on, and then the third leg of the stool is the agency's own capacity to become more efficient over time and provide the same level of service with using fewer resources, as well as increase our own revenue sources in places where we have control. Before we dive into the larger story arc, I do want to give you a quick update since the draft budget in March. At the time of the draft budget, we were looking at spending a pretty significant amount of contingency reserve to close in year one and fund balance in year two. And I'm happy to report that over the last four weeks, we've had some positive changes on the revenue side, meaning revenue went up. We've had some positive changes on the expenditure side, meaning expenditure went down. And so what that means is that we've met somewhere in the middle. And we only need $17 million of one-time sources in year one to close and no dollars from one-time sources in year two to close. So the revenue improvement mostly came from improvements in the general fund. And the expenditure improvement mostly came from reductions in the estimates for how much retirement would cost us, as well as a lot of reconciliation and hard, deep financial work on the part of my team to find additional savings in small places throughout the budget. I think that it's really, really good news to say that in year two, we don't need one-time sources to close the budget. That's a really significant improvement and shows that revenue and expenditure are matched without additional outside help, and we're living within our means. But unfortunately, the story has a little bit more nuance than that. It's good news, but it's not all good news forever. Because, as we've talked about many times in the past, expenditure grows at about 4% a year, mostly because of coal line inflation, and revenue only goes at 3% a year. So even though we have a balanced budget in 27-28 with no one-time sources, over time, we still have a long-term budget deficit that is in the hundreds of millions when you look at the out-year period. So it remains critical that we stay on this multi-year path to become more efficient over time. And I'll be coming back later in the spring to talk to you about what the changes in this year's budget mean for our long-term financial health. Some budget outcomes that I want to highlight. I am really proud to say that consistent with our customer feedback and our public input, there are no changes to either muni or paratransit services. In terms of service quality, we do plan to improve service quality in 27-28, consistent with the revenue set aside in the local measure to do so. And we are also really proud to be able to maintain all of our discount programs. That includes programs for youth, seniors, people with disabilities, and people with limited incomes. And I think kind of like if you were to walk away with one idea from this whole budget cycle, it would be that this budget is our first step in correcting a long-term structural deficit and puts us on a path to bring expenditures into alignment with revenue over the next five years. So as I mentioned, we have a balanced two-year budget. And we grow in 26, 27 over last year's budget by 4%. And I know that 4% is a big number. But I would note that COLA is 4.5%. Inflation is 3%. And retirement benefits, which are about 20% of our budget, went up between 7% to 9%, depending on the benefit. So what that means is that growing only 4% means that we made, with your help, other hard choices that mitigated the impact of those increases that are due to outside forces that are outside of our control. And in 27-28, we increased by 7%. And again, that's the combination of the impact of health care and retirement, negotiated wage increases, and inflation. So I think all things considered, that's a really reasonable increase given the pressures that we face. So looking at our budget by category, I think the primary takeaways here are that we are using a state loan in year one to bridge the difference between when the money is needed and when money from the local and regional revenue measures start to flow. And we do use $17 million in fund balance to close. I would note that that is a change from what I presented to you when we last met on April 7, where we used the contingency reserve. But in this case, because we use so little one-time sources, We're reverting back to our general policy of using fund balance to close small amounts rather than breaking into the reserve, which is more of a precedent-setting policy choice. And then in 27-28, we begin to see the revenue from the regional sales tax as well as the local parcel tax begin to flow. And as I mentioned, we don't need any one-time sources to close. I do want to note that these revenue numbers do reflect a lot of policy choices on behalf of the board. It's about $30 million in year one and an additional $15 million in year two, so $45 million across the two years in policy choices that improve our revenue picture. The regional revenue measure, again, is a sales tax. It's across the five Bay Area counties. It'll be a half cent sales tax outside of San Francisco and a full cent in San Francisco. And it funds operating deficits for the region's transportation carriers, including Caltrain, BART, AC Transit, and San Francisco. So it's really a regional approach to keeping regional transportation strong. We also have the local revenue measure, which is a parcel tax that would be levied just in San Francisco. And it would be an annual tax on parcels of real property. And that property would be assessed based on the size of the parcel as well as the type of the parcel, so commercial versus residential. And residential is further split into single family versus multifamily. Back to the policy choices that you all made and how those impacted our transit and our parking revenue. On the parking side, I think we made a lot of common sense choices in parking revenue that increase our parking revenue while continuing to maintain prices at a reasonable level that supports our local economy and people's ability to travel around the city. Citation late penalties will go up 10%, consistent with the good government ideal that if you get a bill, you should pay it on time. We would be increasing meters 25 cents in fiscal year 27-28, which is consistent with what we did in 25-26. So it's essentially a 25 cent change in the base meter rate every other year. And I would note that we did not see any negative impacts on quantity of meter hours when we did that 25 cent increase. So we do believe that this is a reasonable increase that can be accommodated by demand. We're also increasing our construction and temporary no parking permits. Consistent with the increased revenue that we're seeing at the meters, we're passing through online credit card fees for people using credit cards to pay at parking meters. And then also consistent with good government, we have a select number of fine reductions that make sense when indexing over a period of years has made the price of the citation such that it's no longer consistent with the negative impact that the infraction has on the community. On the tourism side, I think perhaps one of the more significant policy choices you all made was an exciting chance to simplify the cable car fare media, as well as bring the price of the ticket more into line with the $20 a trip cost of providing cable car service. So we'll be eliminating the three and seven day cable car tickets, leaving only the cable car single ride ticket, which would be $12 and increase over $9, and adding a new pass, the Cable Car Plus Pass, which would be priced at $18, which is $2 less than the cost to provide the service, but would also include riding all muni services throughout the day, and acknowledging the impact of that price on families would allow two youth to ride free with each adult paid fare. On the daily rider side, we'll be eliminating the Clipper discount in 26-27 for those who ride Clipper and that ride paying with Clipper, and that's consistent with the implementation of Clipper 2.0 and the ability to tap to pay. We'll be indexing in 27-28, so returning to our policy of annual indexing according to a factor that's composed of COLA and CPI. And then also in exciting policy news, we'll be implementing fare capping, which means that once you tap twice, the remainder of your rides for the day will be free. And that is intended to drive ridership and just make life a little bit easier for people who are trying to ride the system and don't want to fumble around and have to buy a new ticket every time. All of these fares have been reviewed by our team that does Title VI analysis and have been found to have no adverse impact according to the federal guidelines that are required of this analysis. When we looked at the bigger picture of the revenues, we saw that there's a state loan in 26-27. And just to recap the details of that loan, It does need to be repaid within 12 years. The first two years are interest only. The interest rate is set at Smith, which is essentially the cost of not having and investing that cash to the state. So we're basically paying the carrying cost of the state not having access to that cash. Once we enter the 10-year repayment period, then we need to start beginning to repay principal as well as the interest rate. And we are assuming that that is going to cost us about $30 million a year for 10 years. And when I return in a couple of weeks to talk about the five-year projections, you'll see that as one of the costs that drives our cost profile up over the next five years. In terms of one-time sources, we We just talked about the state loan. As I mentioned, we are no longer using contingency reserve. And we are using previous year savings, also known as fund balance, in the amount of $17 million in year one. So having covered all of our revenue sources, let's move on to expenditure. As always, labor is the largest source of cost in our budget. And among labor, the largest source of cost is our transit operators. who make up the vast majority of our positions. And that makes sense because most of the people that we employ are in a vehicle driving people who live, work, and visit, and shop, and come to do business and play in San Francisco. I think one of the biggest stories that we're telling on the expenditure side is not as much about individual things that were cut in order to meet a savings target, but it's more about creating a culture of efficiency and being really thoughtful about the way that we do our work and finding ways to achieve the same amount of output. but with less toil and struggle on the behalf of staff, which will ultimately result in savings. Because less toil means you need fewer resources to do the work. So we've been participating in a number of programs to start to begin to think about what this will look like over the next five years. One of those things was the regional efficiency work that was outlined in the Connect Bay Area Act. And MTC in early March released a report that showed how the five major regional operators in the Bay Area have lowered their cost profiles. since fiscal year 19-20. We've also been working with external efficiency experts to look at best practices that are observed in other transit agencies and understand how we can implement those here at the MTA. We've done a lot of work on looking at our NTD, or National Transit Database, metrics to understand how those metrics compare to other transit agencies of similar size and composition to us, and what we can learn about how we can drive those metrics to reflect the same amount of service at less cost. And some of that is what we shared with you at the workshop earlier this year. We plan to prioritize cost containment during our upcoming labor contract negotiations, as well as when we renegotiate our major non-labor contracts over the next two years. And we also continue to refine our tools for maintaining internal control and making financial projections so that we can be really transparent of where we are making, saving, and spending money. So in this budget, we've achieved a number of efficiencies. We've deleted almost 90 vacant positions. And while that doesn't create a budget savings because those positions were vacant, it is a cost control measure that prevents costs from increasing in the future. We've also offset the kind of pain caused by that 7% and 9% benefit cost by making approximately $20 million of changes that reduce our materials and supplies and work order costs, and also investing to begin that efficiency work. As I mentioned when we talked about revenue, we've generated $30 million of revenue from our own sources, parking, transit, and other in 26, 27, and an additional $15 million in 27 and 28. And we minimized the use of one-time funding to balance both years, which I think is an indicator of the improving financial health of the agency. We have a long way to go, but we are a lot better off than when we started this process nine months ago. And we are really keeping our eye on that five-year prize. The sooner that we act, the more time those changes have to take root and the more savings that we'll see sooner, which really helps us get a leg up on that five-year problem. To detail those positions a little bit more, as a reminder, in the last budget cycle we deleted 529 vacant positions, and this year we deleted an additional 89 positions. The majority of those positions were in the operating budget, although we did also delete some of the positions in our capital budget. Those are positions that are funded by capital revenue, but they do have impact on the operating budget because work orders are allocated by budgeted FTE. And so even when those positions are not in the operating budget, they do add cost to the operating budget. So deleting project-funded positions is an important part of fiscal control. And you'll notice in 27-28, no additional changes to positions were made. Positions by type, where that leaves us is with an overall position count not including those held vacant for budget savings is about 6,300 positions, which is down from the 6,400 positions of last year. And now I'm going to turn the PowerPoint over to Rob Hopkins, who's going to talk about our capital budget.

Thanks, Bri. Rob Hawkes, Director of Capital Budget and Funding Strategy. As we discussed at the last meeting on April 7th, the CIP is the agency's primary tool for translating long-term capital needs into a financially constrained plan. Today's presentation builds on that foundation with a focus on how current assumptions shape investment priorities and delivery over the next five years. The board's role is not only to approve the budget, but also provide policy direction on how we prioritize across competing needs. With that context, I'll start by grounding us in the overall scale of the program. The CIP totals approximately $2.5 billion, with about $1.2 billion in the first two years, which is the two-year capital budget. This is slightly lower than the prior cycle, reflecting more constrained revenue assumptions. The key point is that the program continues to represent a significant level of investment while requiring careful prioritization across years. The next two slides illustrate how investments are organized from a policy perspective. These categories provide the policy framework for organizing capital investments consistent with prior presentations and organize our capital investments based on how they impact people traveling within San Francisco. They reflect a balance between maintaining the system, improving service delivery, and selectively expanding capacity. In this CIP, most investments are focused on maintaining and improving existing assets given current system needs. The street safety and system security categories reflect the agency's continued focus on improving conditions for customers, employees, and all street users. These categories are essential to advancing broader agency priorities. Together, all five categories ensure we are addressing both core system needs and targeted improvements to how the system operates. With that framework in mind, I'll turn to how the program is funded in the near term. The capital program continues to rely heavily on external funding sources, particularly federal formula funds and competitive grants. There is some variability year to year, especially in competitive funding and one-time sources. Local sources provide an important foundation but are insufficient to support the capital program on their own. Overall, the funding mix requires ongoing coordination and active management. This slide shows how resources are distributed across major capital programs. The distribution reflects where the agency's most significant capital needs are concentrated. Fleet and fixed guideway represent the largest share, driven by asset condition and replacement cycles. Other areas, including streets and transit optimization, continue to receive meaningful investment aligned with operational and policy priorities. Overall, this is a needs-based allocation that supports system performance and reliability. I'll now shift to viewing the same investments through the lens of the five policy areas I discussed earlier. The CIP is primarily concentrated in reinvestment in the system, as I mentioned, reflecting the scale of ongoing state of good repair needs. Other categories, including street safety, optimized services, and expand capacity, represent targeted investments alongside that core focus. The reserve category reflects timing and uncertainty associated with certain funding sources, which affects when projects advance. This leads to the broader takeaway for the capital program overall. Overall, the CIP reflects a disciplined and prioritized investment plan aligned with current funding assumptions. The program emphasizes maintaining system reliability, supporting safety, and improving performance while sequencing other investments over time. As with prior discussions, capital needs continue to be significant, which requires ongoing prioritization and strategic pursuit of additional funding opportunities. Staff will continue to advance funding strategies and advocate for new resources to support the agency's highest priorities. Taken together, this CIP positions the agency to deliver meaningful investments while maintaining flexibility as funding conditions evolve. I will now hand it back over to Bree.

So we've been on quite a journey. And this is a major milestone in finishing the process. There are a few more things left to go. Once we get, hopefully, your approval today, we'll be submitting our budget to the mayor on May 1. And the mayor will submit the budget to the board of supervisors. The board of supervisors has the opportunity to act on the budget. If they take no action and the budget is passed, If they take an action, then the budget is fully rejected. And they have to submit an alternative budget. And there are no line item budget changes available. It's a 100% yes or no vote. There is the possibility. The city's budget process is still in action and really begins to heat up between now and May for the final submission of the mayor's budget to the board on June 1. So there are things that can happen in the city's budget cycle that can ultimately impact us. So there may be some need to react to those changes. I hope they will all be positive, like, the general fund increase that we saw that helped us reduce our need for one-time uses in this budget cycle. And again, I want to emphasize that this is just the first step in a really long path that is a multi-year strategy to bring our expenditure in line with our revenues. which is reflected by this third leg of the stool that's highlighted. And before I ask for questions, I do want to highlight this is an enormous project coordinating the expenditure needed for an agency of over 6,000 positions. And it requires an incredible amount of coordination with the divisions and then an incredible level of attention to detail, technical technical expertise and the soft skills of getting everyone rowing the boat in the same direction. So I really want to say thank you to the two managers who've been in charge of all of this, Fisher Zhu and Rob Hawkes. You've already met Rob. And Fisher is here, I think, in the room.

There he is.

And Fisher should have a team of seven, but he has managed this entire budget cycle with a team of two. So that is really a testament to how hard his team works. The incredible technical work that they've managed to achieve in the past nine months is truly amazing. I also want to thank Jarden Ito, who I...

There he is.

who is the manager of the capital budget, as well as many of the analysts who are here. Oh, and Alvin, the operating budget analyst. And many of our other capital analysts are here. Jason Chan, Gigi Lam, Ellen Huang, Young Nguyen, Sarah Mueller, Yvonne Zhang, and Henaniel Siraji. some of whom are, about half of whom are here. So none of this work would be possible without the hard work of this team. And then also not in the room but definitely meriting a thanks are the division budget liaisons who pull together all the budget information for their divisions so that my team can assemble the bigger agency picture, and then also the CIP program managers who do the incredibly detailed work of figuring out the expenditure needed for all of our 300-plus projects in the CIP. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much, CFO, and I'd just like to echo your thanks on behalf of the board to the finance team that did just untold hours of work to prepare this budget for our approval today. I'm sure we will continue to have a robust conversation around the budget. It is an ongoing thing, but we have reached a milestone today. And thank you very, very much, everyone, for all of your hard work. And for us, understanding a very complex budget and being able to make significant policy choices around how it's constructed is something that we need a lot of support, and we really felt that, I believe, every step of the way. Also, CFO Mahorder, there's one point that I feel like really needs to be emphasized, and this is something my colleague, Director Hemminger, brought up at the very beginning. We have a budget here that is balanced only in the sense that it will be achievable if we have new revenue sources that are approved by the voters this coming November. And I certainly don't want to bring up a difficult topic, but we had a whole hearing that explain to us what will happen if one or both of those measures do not pass in November. And I think the most important takeaway is that, yes, we would have a... Significant is not a good enough word, but let's just use it, reduction in our service in terms of Muni and this will be a very significant change for the whole city. And we have responsibly projected out what that would look like. And so I think that would be important to look at today. And I believe you have a slide on that.

There we go. Thank you. OK. As we mentioned at the workshop, I think if either one or both of the revenue measures don't pass, we will be facing some really, really significant and very, very difficult choices around how we can provide service with approximately $300 million less money than we have today. And what that means is we're going to be making hard choices in four areas. We could need to cut up to 20 muni routes, which would mean essentially going back to the level of service that we saw during COVID. So significantly reduced and really on our most major corridors. We are looking at potentially double wait times. So that means wait times going instead of 7 to 10 minutes from 14 to 20. And that is... that becomes even more significant for people who are waiting to transfer between buses, because it just really lengthens the journey. We could have to end regular service as early as 9 PM, which means we would be running very limited OWL service from 9 PM to 6 AM, which would really impact those workers who get off after 9 PM, because they potentially work in jobs in the hospitality industry that often get off after 9 PM. And we might have to consider either reducing or cutting our historic service, which refers to both the cable car and the F market that goes down Market Street and around to the wharves. So these are the areas that we would look at. And if the revenue measures don't pass in November, we would immediately begin thinking about how we would make choices across these four areas to, depending on the outcomes, either reduce $300 or $150 million worth of service to make sure that our expenditure balances with our revenue.

Thank you very much. All right. I would like to open public comment on this item for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers can come up to the podium at this time to comment on items 12A and 12B.

My name is Anthony Ballester. I'm a 9163 transit operator. I was listening into the meeting on April 7th in which Bre did talk about paying back the state's loan. The first two years will be interest and after that will be so many millions. And of course I know that's got to be factored into the budget also. And the patrol project. When the patrol project is done for the next 30 years, the agency has to pay to maintain the building. And that could be, I think, 10 or 20 million. Before, when they were going to build apartments on top, the housing on top, it's going to be over $40 million a year to maintain it. But then, of course, I know the agency came up, hey, listen, let's use our own people instead of outsourcing or getting another company coming in, which is good. And as far as service reduction, I mean, we got to come up with something else. Because right now, it's pretty bad. You cannot have passengers wait twice as long for a bus or a train. Because right now, it's hard with the headway we have right now. The six, seven minute, 10 minute headway, it's kind of hard already. It gets packed in the morning and afternoon. Because I operate, I start my run at, 6 19 in the morning and I'm off at 5 26 I get a one hour split so I'm out there pretty much all day and we have to come up with something because service reduction is not the answer all right thank you thank you next speaker

Good afternoon, directors. I'm Dylan Fabris with San Francisco Transit Riders. And this was a tough budget year. And while we don't agree with every decision, we appreciate that this budget protects the core of what riders depend on. Preserving muni service, maintaining discount programs, and introducing fare capping are meaningful wins. And we're grateful that SFMTA worked with advocates and community partners to help avoid devastating service cuts this year. That said, I want to highlight a few concerns for the years ahead. First, on affordability, we continue to urge you not to raise the base fare to $3.10 and to instead keep fares at $3. A fare of $3 and a dime would make muni fares more expensive than any other agency in the country, while adding unnecessary complexity at the fare box. Instead, the agency should increase the cost of the day pass and keep single fares low. Second, we're excited to see daily fare capping included, and we urge the agency to pursue weekly and monthly fare capping as soon as possible. Third, cable cars are not just a tourist attraction. They're an important part of our transit system. We urge you to keep fares simple and family friendly by allowing all children to ride free instead of just two. And we also urge caution on fare increases for cable cars and ask the agency to really closely monitor ridership after the new rates are introduced. Because so many of the cable car costs are fixed, if the higher fares reduce ridership, we could actually be looking at a decrease in revenue per rider as a result of this change and an increase in cost per rider. Right now, it's actually, finally, we're concerned about reducing fines for drivers who misuse parking permits. The agency wants to protect fairness. It shouldn't create a double standard by reducing penalties for drivers cheating the system while cracking down on people right in transit. But thank you so much for all the work that went into making this budget. I guess that's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, directors. My name is Rachel Clyde, senior community organizer with the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. First, I want to say thank you for preserving the capital funds for street projects, which despite being less than 1% of SMTA's budget, makes a huge impact on saving people's lives and preventing serious injuries on our streets. I'm also happy to see the $23 million in dedicated funding for implementing the biking and rolling plan. Since the plan was approved over a year ago, we've seen little movement on implementation, and we need to start closing gaps in the bicycle network. This is Climate Week here in San Francisco. April is Earth Month, and tomorrow is Earth Day. It's one of my favorite days of the year. And last night, I went to the Goldman Environmental Prize, and I was so inspired by the work of activists across the world. I think it's really important to remember that the work that we're doing here, the work that SFMTA does every single day, is also climate action. Building sustainable bus fleets that transport millions of people every year, building a walkable and bikeable city is also climate action. And while our federal government is failing us, we need to be doing more. We need to stop stalling bike projects like Arguello or Brotherhood, stop delaying life-saving projects that will move us closer to our climate goals, and implement the biking and rolling plan Use the agency's quick build toolkit to be decisive. The data doesn't lie. Both the 2025 quick build update and 2023 Safe Streets evaluation reports say that quick builds across the city have proven to increase safety for people in active transportation and don't cost much to implement. Quick builds are successful and the agency should double down on them. I'm really looking forward to the Oak Street quick build being built this summer. I'm planning to throw a huge party in the panhandle to celebrate it being done, and you're all invited. For now, thank you to the SFMTA staff for your work on this, and please approve the CIP today. Let's build more quick builds more quickly, and let's make San Francisco zero emissions. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, directors. My name is Jan Macera. I'm a senior and an avid Mooney rider. And I just wanted to make a comment about the cable cars. I have access to the cable cars through my senior monthly pass, and it is invaluable. There are many parts of downtown that are non-negotiable for people who cannot walk up those very big hills. and the cable cars ride on streets that buses do not and make that possible. I also agree that the cable cars are a tourist attraction, and I speak with a lot of people on the cars, and they're so excited to ride on them. But I think we need to be mindful that it can be very expensive for families, and we want to be sure that ridership doesn't decrease because of fare costs. And that's it.

Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, board. Griffin Lee here at Connected SF staff, representing staff and membership. I'll start with the positive. I think one thing I saw today was the one-time costs went down from 74 to 17 mil. I think that's positive, given there's interest tied to those costs. But really, the hard truth is we're still at... the same budget deficit we were at six, eight, nine months ago, $307 million. I've challenged the board and staff to do as much more possible cutting unrelated to service critical functions, and we still stay at that same amount today. In the charter, service critical is specifically around operating a transit vehicle, whether or not in revenue service. Transit first. Transit is bus muni. The average cost per hour to operate a vehicle like a bus or muni is the second highest in the nation today. We need to look at further reductions without having to cut service. I do agree. We do believe in transit first, but all the other mumbo jumbo. does not resonate nor align with service critical in the charter. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

I'm Jonathan He. I represent Chinatown TRIP. And we would just like to say that Muni MTA has done a great job of reaching out to the community agencies, stakeholders, and merchants concerning this whole budget thing. I mean, from starting from August of 84 when we knew of it with the Muni funding group to the roundtable to this point where they're at, we ask that you just approve it. They've done their best not to cut safety or service. And we support their budget. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Plus one to that guy. Hi. Board of Directors, Claire Mobley, Director of Advocacy for the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. I'm here today to support the Capital Improvement Program. I want to thank directors again for preserving the capital funds to only be used for capital investments. As you can see in this presentation and the last hearings presentation, the improved street safety investment area accounts for less than 1% of the agency's total budget. This tiny percent is responsible for the infrastructure improvements that save lives and slow down speeds on our streets. We are encouraged to see $23 million in dedicated funding for the biking and rolling plan implementation. It has been over a year since the plan was adopted, and it needs to be implemented, starting with slow school zones and closing gaps along crosstown bicycle routes. The community action plans do a really good job at identifying where the gaps are in their respective areas. A gap identified by Podare that I experience every day is the harrowing left turn onto Liel from Arlington Street. This is the only route for people biking into the Excelsior and Outer Mission. Many gaps along the North Star network can be addressed through the agency's quick build program. These projects, they don't cost very much to implement. They encourage people to mode shift, and the data shows us across the city that quick builds have increased safety for people on active transportation. The three corridors that we hear negative feedback about consistently are Arguello and 17th and Valencia. A bike lane is only as safe as its weakest link, and all three of these have a mix of protection, pain, or nothing at all for bike lanes. Finally, speeding remains the leading cause of traffic fatalities and serious injuries on our streets, and SFPD doesn't have the resources to be everywhere all the time. The speed camera and red light camera program must be expanded across the high injury network to change driving behavior. So thank you so much, staff, for your work on the CIP, and we encourage you all to approve the budget today. Thank you.

Next speaker. Hi. My name is Carol Yenny, and I've lived in Noe Valley for 50 years. And for 35 years, I've owned a small business. MTA needs to recognize the likely permanent loss of riders in San Francisco on over 60% of the lines since COVID due to the seismic shift in work from home. something i see even in your organization where are the five to seven percent cuts promised last year and to regain the public trust you must quit spending money on projects that negatively impact the movement of people and goods the transit first policy with little or no return on investment but where harm has been done to our small business communities in addition The future is here as more and more San Franciscans choose rideshare, autonomous vehicles over buses and trains. Why? Because of safety and convenience. to continue to ask citizens for more tax money to maintain the status quo, as if rideshare and Waymo didn't exist and COVID never happened, is missing an important opportunity for you to create a new future, a future where SFMTA becomes viable, sustainable, and a good transit option for San Franciscans. Thank you. Thank you. Any other speakers for this item?

Yes, my name's Deborah Murphy. I'm a native San Franciscan and president of the Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods. And I want to say I agree 100% with the last speaker and with Griffin Lee. There has to be further cuts to get to the position of being over $300 million in the hole. And then taxpayers, you want more of our money. And what's going to happen? You get the money, and then you're in a hole, and you want more. There's not it's not a hundred percent that you're gonna get the money in November from these things so I think you have to have at least the five to seven percent cuts that were promised and Probably more. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item?

Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests Thank you public comment for this item is now closed colleagues Questions and comments from you. We'll start with director Heminger

Thank you, Madam Chair. And Bree, oh, there you are. You were hiding behind the podium. Brie, I wanted to dig a little deeper into the reserve and fund balance issue. And as you point out, and I actually got the old chart from two weeks ago, what we were looking at two weeks ago was a shortfall of $106 million that you fixed with $74 million from the operating reserve and $32 million from the fund balance. And what we have today in front of us is just 17 million from the fund balance and nothing out of the reserve. Now, as you pointed out, I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth. And the fact that you found additional funding, I think, is to be commended. But the swing is about $90 million. So can you give us a little more color commentary about what that is composed of?

Sure. So the general fund baselines improved consistent with, sorry, the general fund baseline means the amount of money that the general fund by formula contributes to the MTA. That improved consistent with overall higher city budget projections for the general fund. So you may have noticed in the paper that the city's budget deficit shrunk similarly over the last couple of weeks because of higher than originally thought revenue projections. And then also, as I mentioned, retirement is a really significant piece of our budget because it composes of not only our pension obligation to every employee who met their pension requirements at the MTA, but also our retiree health care, which is over $40 million a year. So that's the health care that we pay for people who are vested once they retire. And those projections went down during the same time period. So it was kind of revenue went up, expenditure came down, and then we met in the middle.

And was it meeting in the middle, or was it 60-40 or 70-30? I mean, I'm trying to get a sense of where this

I would say that the retirement change was about $30 million. The general fund was about $15 million. And then the remainder is the fund balance that we still continue to use.

Well, and I know you'd agree that the general fund is sort of double good news. Because on the one hand, it means the economy is improving. We're liable to get more riders and more fair revenue that way. And it also means that the general fund itself is growing, which we get a piece of, thanks to some foresighted forebears who changed the way we do budgeting in San Francisco. And that continues to pay dividends. The other point I wanted to ask about on the reserves and the fund balance, and I'm trying to remember whether we may have some work on this underway or not, I think what we discovered when we were examining the use of the operating reserve is we weren't necessarily comfortable with the language that accompanies that reserve and how we're supposed to use it. And I thought maybe you or Julie or the chair, some combination of the three of you, were examining, now that you have all this free time on your hands, now that the budget's done, what you could do in terms of putting down on pen and paper a policy that we could live with, not that requires us, for example, to pay back the loan five months, but something that would really help us out. So is that something that is going to be underway? I know we've got sort of two budget years behind us almost, but we ought to take the advantage, I think.

Yeah, we are very interested in looking at both how we build the reserve and also what the overall size of the reserve should be. We'd very much like that to be a 2027 discussion. We want to get through the November and really be on stable footing. But the city, for example, if I understand correctly, they add to the reserve during strong years and maybe are less focused on building it on tighter years and have a higher overall reserve. So we just want to look at what are our peers doing, what is the city doing, and bring you all some options. We are very grateful for the CFOs of past who may or may not be watching this meeting, FOR CREATING THE RESERVE.

ONE OF THEM I KNOW IS. THE SAFETY NET IS INVALUABLE.

I WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT TRANSIT ONLY EXISTS POST-COVID BECAUSE The federal government provided billions of dollars of one-time money when all of our revenue sources evaporated overnight. And while it is nice to have Some good news versus you know bad news I think we are still in a period of uncertainty We are still in a period where our costs are exceeding Our revenues and you know, we we really look at this budget as the stabilizing and allowing us to do the hard work to come. And I think a thoughtful discussion on the reserve we see as a piece of that.

Well, and if I'm remembering the numbers right, on this question of the structural deficit, what we're showing in the first year of this budget is a 4% increase in expenditure. And in the second year, it's 7%. And we just can't sustain that under any kind of scenario. So that brings me to my second point that I wanted to talk about. And we've got this three-legged stool that we're used to. seeing. And in my experience, the third leg of a stool is always the hardest one to screw in there because people think they can just get along with two. And you can't. And holding on to these efficiencies that you've identified, I think, is really one of our key tasks. And if we have to do more, we'll end up doing more. We haven't done those yet. We've identified them, but we really, and I think a lot of the advocates on both sides of the question, figure that those voters will sort this out and we don't need to worry about additional revenue. And that leaves aside the question that If you don't have those efficiencies, you don't have a three-legged stool. And so we need to make sure we hold onto those. And whether the voters pass it or not, we need to make sure that we're running an operation that's consistent with what we need in this city. Madam Chair, you quoted me, and maybe I want to retweet you now, because I think you put it quite well. The budget is balanced only because we're on the edge of a fiscal cliff. And the cliff isn't gone. It's sort of lurking off camera over there. And I think we have to count on the voters to keep it there, to keep it at bay. In my own view, the answer of those four little containers that you put up at the end there, that can't be the answer. It just can't be the answer. We could do the math. We could figure out how many bus routes you want to cut and all that stuff. But that can't be the answer. So we're in the hands of good people in San Francisco. They have voted repeatedly in this city and in cities around California. to help themselves and that's what we're doing the federal government as julie indicated was there when we needed them they're not always there when we need them but in that case they were a lifesaver but we need to do the rest of the job so i again join my colleagues in thanking you for all the work you've done and you've got plenty of work to do after that But, you know, maybe today you could take the day off early. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Director Hemminger. Director Henderson?

Excuse me. Thank you. And really quickly, I just wanted to say thank you, of course, to everybody in the whole cast, because it was a long list of people. And I echo the point that the budget is built on some real big assumptions and what ifs. I think one of the things that I found very striking was an IG post from the agency earlier this week maybe that was also said you know what if all these people were all these people that were on a bus platform were in cars or were not able to take this bus and you know it's a ton of people and it was like explaining how um how many passengers the 60 foot buses can take and all that and it very it was very striking and i think that that's a big what if too that um that is that the city streets and the passage of goods and services and things like that are also impacted by that what if those people are not passengers on the bus, but instead finding some other set of wheels to take them, like a car or or otherwise. And so I wanted to just make sure I brought that up because I think that that's where we are. We will be faced with finding somewhere or some way for those people to travel should this precarious situation not work out in our favor. And I did have a question for you, just thinking about all the free time that you have now that the budget is coming to a close. Do you plan to build out some sort of options or plan CDEFs, even though we are getting to the point where the budget will hopefully be passed through here and through the board? How does the process work? for the other options?

So I think right now we're really focused on what we can do to be transparent about our financial need and keep the focus on making sure that the public understands what the implications for service are should the revenue measures not pass. That being said, In the background, of course, we know that these are our four big buckets. And we have started talking about what those service implications are. but we don't plan on coming out with a formal alternate budget. We hope that in November we'll be talking about how we can improve service and how we can use that $10 million in the local revenue measure to make community service better. So we're really hopeful that we're, while planning for the worst, we're really hopeful that the best case scenario for transit is going to come to pass.

Very good. Great. I hope to be there too. And then my last point, I want to make sure that I take this opportunity to to mention this because I have gotten a whole lot of comment and feedback about it recently. And on slide 12, you talk about Title VI and fair equity. And I just want to say that in addition to fair equity, I think that I would like to also consider a fine and sort of enforcement equity. And I appreciate the work that the team is doing to work with the community and talk to the community where there has been some sort of increase in enforcement. And I... I am all for safe and orderly streets. And I think that the approach that we take to get there is as important as the end of getting to those. And so I just want to point that out, because I've gotten a lot of feedback. And I talked to Director Wise about this. I get that we have to maintain the streets in a safe fashion. I think that the approach and the distribution of that enforcement mechanism should be done in a way that does not feel like it's the agency's goal to increase revenue using that lever. So I want to just put that out there and make sure that we continue to have this public discussion about how we can do both, how we can have safe streets, and then also how enforcement can be balanced and feel also equitable to the different neighborhoods and communities. And that's it. Thank you. And congratulations for getting us to this point. Thank you.

Thank you, Director Henderson. Director Hinze.

Thank you, Madam Chair, just to join the chorus so that we're all united and speaking with one voice here. Just thank you to everyone who contributed to this budget on your team three and on other teams. And also to all the members of the public who weighed in throughout the various engagement processes that our teams held. Just to reiterate that I think in a way you could say that this budget is balanced sort of conditionally the two ballot measures that will hopefully be on in November. So that'll be a huge day for public transit as a whole in the region, even though what is presented to us today is a balanced budget. there are a couple of large assumptions there. And so I just wanted to double down on that. But I do also appreciate all of the work that the team has done looking under couch cushions. And the fact that we received some good general news is, of course, positive. I just wanted to add that. So we're speaking with the Unified Voices board members. And at the time when we're done with comments, I'll go ahead and move the items to proof.

Thank you, Director Hinze. Your motion is noted. I don't know if other directors have any comments. I do have one thing that I wanted to just delve into a little bit further regarding revenue sources for the capital budget. And this is just an area for learning for me. Thank you, Mr. Huckes. Regional state formula funds, I just noticed between the two fiscal years have what I would describe as, I mean, there's a lot of movement between the years for all of the things. It's my understanding that this revenue source has had more volatility in recent years and it's a changing landscape for that revenue source. Would you mind just telling us a little bit more about that revenue source?

Sure. So from a high level, the regional and state formula funds is a blend of formula funds that we receive at both the state level and from grant through the SFCTA. I would have to get back with you on the exact detail on those sources. Some of them are fairly stable year to year with slight growth projected, while others are every other year. There's a mix of things that goes on with that fund source.

OK. Yeah, I think that this is something that I would, maybe it's a separate briefing outside of the hearings, but I would really like to understand more about what goes into some of these revenue sources where you're Your office, your team is really dancing around a moving target with this. I think it would be really interesting to learn more, so thank you. You're welcome. All right. We have a motion to approve items 12A and 12B. Do I have a second? You can second it. Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the roll.

On the motion to approve items 12A and 12B, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson.

Aye.

Henderson, aye. Director Hinze. Aye. Hinze, aye. Director Kahina. Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff. Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. The motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. Secretary, let's take a break. I have five minutes till let's reconvene at 315. 315, thank you.

SFGov TV. San Francisco Government Television. SFGov TV, San Francisco government television. SFGov TV, San Francisco government television.

you

Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Directors, that places you on items 13, 13A and B. Item 13A, authorizing the Director of Transportation to execute the First Amendment to contract number SFMTA 2023-08, with the Community Youth Center of San Francisco, CYC, to support outreach and staff the Transportation Resource Center for the Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood as part of the Our Community, Our Shuttle Bayview Hunters Point Equitable Mobility Program, increasing the amount by $249,300 for a total contract amount not to exceed $663,300 and extending the term by 19 months through January 15, 2028. Item 13B, authorizing the Director of Transportation to execute the First Amendment to contract number SFMTA2023-09 with the San Francisco African American Arts and Cultural District to support outreach, lead a youth-led community tour program, and oversee community congress for the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood as part of the Our Community, Our Shuttle Bayview-Hunters Point Equitable Mobility Program, increasing the amount by $224,670 for a total contract amount not to exceed $360,070 and extending the term by 19 months through January 15, 2028.

Good afternoon, directors. My name is Jonathan Chain. I'm the Parachat Manager here at SFMTA. I'm here to introduce Jovan Garcia, who's the Project Manager for the Baby Shuttle. And we're excited here today to talk about these two contract extensions with the San Francisco African-American Arts and Cultural District, as well as the Community Youth Center, to not only continue, but also expand their role in the service. These partnerships are an integral part of the continued growth and success of these services. And without further ado, I bring Javon.

Great. Thank you. Good afternoon, board members. I'm super excited to be here and to share a great opportunity for the Bayview Shuttle and Bayview Hunters Point as a whole. I'm Javon Garcia, as Jonathan mentioned, the project manager for the Bayview Shuttle, which is an on-demand microtransit service serving the Bayview Hunters Point community that launched in November 2024. As Jonathan mentioned, I'm here seeking approval of two contract amendments for two of our existing community partners, Community Youth Center of San Francisco and San Francisco African-American Arts and Cultural District, both of which would increase the contract award amount and increase the term length. Both of these are critical elements to correspond with the extension period granted by the California Air Resources Board grant extension. OK, great. And just to take a pause and highlight the great news that that is, it's taken a lot of dedicated SFMTA staff time as well as time from CARB and community advocates to get us to this point where we can fully fund the shuttle service and other program elements until November 2027. So just to continue, our presentation outline today is to go over the recommended actions for the service, provide some project background, funding, service performance, and then next steps for the extension. As I mentioned, today we're seeking approval for two amendments to CYC and SFAACD contracts. The CYC contract will support ongoing outreach and engagement efforts, as well as allow staff to operate the Transportation Resource Center, which is an in-community one-stop shop where community residents and the public can go to get any transportation-related questions answered. This is an increase of $249,300 to the CYC contract. And then there's also an amendment to the SFAACD contract, which is for a total increase of $224,670. That would support ongoing outreach and engagement efforts, help SFAACD to develop and launch a community tour program built in collaboration with community youth, and to facilitate ongoing quarterly community congress meetings. There is one other contract amendment that is not before you today, but we do anticipate that it will come later this summer. And that is the contract for the third party operator, VIA. They have a later expiration date. So that will come to you a little bit later this year. But all three of these amendments are very critical to the extension period and for us to receive the full remaining grant award from the California Air Resources Board. Next slide. Just to provide some quick context of the program as a whole, the Bayview Shuttle was built in direct response to SFMTA listening to the wants and needs of community residents and delivering a high quality service. So the Bayview Shuttle improves equity and access for an equity priority neighborhood that SFMTA identified. Bayview-Hunters Point is a culturally rich, vibrant, and a very welcoming community, but it's also faced its own unique challenges. The community itself, portions of it have very steep or hilly terrain. It has a non-grid street layout, and it has a physical barrier of Highway 101. that makes the community feel geographically isolated from the rest of the city. This has meant that it's sometimes difficult for us to serve the community with consistent and reliable fixed route transit. On top of that, decades of disinvestment, exclusionary zoning, and redlining have compounded some of those challenges. So not only residents feel that. Some of these transportation challenges and isolation are felt, but also have led to a sentiment that residents feel disconnected from the rest of the city. As identified in the community-based transportation plan, Bayview-Hunters Point has a poverty rate two times that the rest of the city and an unemployment rate five times that the rest of the city. And despite that, a lot of community residents have the need to drive. Bayview-Hunters Point has more than half of the households have one or two vehicles, almost double the rate of the entire city. In the D10 mobility study, which was finalized in 2018, as well as the 2020 community-based transportation plan, they took a look at all of these challenges and identified one common solution. And that was a community shuttle that could provide connectivity for residents to key destinations. So that includes grocery stores, regional transit hubs, as well as other health resources. And so we as SFMTA staff listened to over 2,600 community residents to hear what they wanted, and we built exactly that. As shown on the slide, this is kind of the criteria that made us eligible for the Sustainable Transportation Equity Projects Grant, which was awarded by the California Air Resources Board. So when we heard this from the community, we wanted to make sure that we could deliver an on-demand microtransit service similar to what the community asked for, but made sure that we were not competing or compromising with any of our fixed-route resources. And so we looked at grant opportunities across the state, and the California Air Resources Board STEP grant allows us to... allowed us to be awarded these funds, which were awarded in 2020 for a total amount of $10.5 million. To meet the narrow requirements of the CARB STEP grant, there are a few requirements that not only the project itself had to meet, but also the community as a whole. And so really, this project was driven by very strong partnerships with the community. Also, residents had to be involved in the decision-making process. and the geographic scope for the grant itself. 50% of the project area needed to be within the top 25% of the CalEnviroScreen score, which is a statewide score that evaluates pollution burden as well as socioeconomic characteristics for certain communities. As shown in the image, Bayview, Hunters Point, Census Tracts actually all fall within that top 25th percentile, making it eligible for the CARB STEP grant. We're super grateful to CARB not only for the initial opportunity for the award, but also for the extension period. So hopefully we can keep all of this going until November 2027. Next slide. All of this has been really built in collaboration with community. And so these are some of the program goals that we settled on. This has been built in strong partnership with all of our community partners. Just to name them, Amplify Impact, A. Philip Randolph Institute, the Bay Area Community Resources, Bayview Hunters Point Community Advocates, Community Youth Center, Hunters Point Family, Mission Neighborhood Center, San Francisco African American Arts and Cultural District, VIA, and Young Community Developers, as well as the countless community residents and community advocates who made this service possible. On top of the core program goals established through the service, this also helps a lot of SFMTA's own identified goals. There are three. One, to help with disproportionate outcomes for communities, deliver equitable services, and also reduce greenhouse gas emissions that this service helps to solve. Now, you are probably familiar with the actual service itself. But just to highlight the community planning that went into this, a lot of the fabric of the service itself is really built off of community design and community input. So you'll see the core service area that the community themselves helped us define. But the Bayview shuttle is an on-demand microtransit service, as I mentioned, that operates seven days a week. So weekdays from 6 AM to 8 PM, weekends from 9 AM to 6 PM. accessible for folks with limited mobility, seniors, or anybody that uses a wheelchair, and does allow for multilingual booking options, either through the phone or an app. These are the four main components of our overall project structure. Community shuttle service, workforce development, community congress, and the transportation resource center. I do want to note that in June 2025, we actually responded to a lot of community feedback, heard from the community, and actually expanded some of our service areas. So we expanded north to include Cesar Chavez Street, which includes Rafiki Coalition and other important health resources, as well as expanded some of our service hours that really helped us improve in some key service metrics, including productivity and cost per ride. This is just a quick highlight of all the work that's been done since we launched the service. Obviously, I can't share all of the great feedback that we've heard from the service, but here are some of the notable metrics, including one, we've completed over 69,000 trips since we launched in November 2024. I'll go over some specific metrics of how ridership has grown, but that's a really notable number. Community Congress. We've met with community Congress delegates, as I've mentioned, to not only improve the service, but make sure that we're being transparent and accountable with the community. And we actually have our next community Congress meeting tomorrow. So if anybody wants to join, it's at 530 at the Southeast Community Center. We'd love to have you. And then the Transportation Resource Center and Workforce Development are also integral components of the program. We've helped over 130 clients with direct services, helping them understand the transportation resource terrain here within the city, and have hired 21 people for the service. That includes 11 current Bayview residents, which is a remarkable number. Also, as I mentioned, we have seen continuous ridership growth. So on the graph on the screen, you'll see kind of our growth quarter over quarter so far throughout the service. From December 2024 to our current period or last period of January through March 2026, we saw 141% growth in monthly ridership. On top of that, as mentioned, we've seen increases to productivity numbers, which has reduced our cost per ride for the service. I think it's always important for us, and especially when we're talking to community members, that we're contextualizing Bayview shuttle ridership across other modes. As I mentioned before, it's really important for us to acknowledge that we're not competing or trying to compare ourselves to existing muni routes. As the graph shows, these are all of the current muni routes that connect within the Bayview. um the bayview shuttle although we've seen tremendous growth since we launched we're averaging about 137 rides per day as shown on the graph other rides other lines including the t line as well as the 44 do provide and carry more passengers per day meaning that they are more cost effective to the bayview shuttle this is something we always remind community residents of and members of the community whenever we do presentations to make sure that We're very forthcoming about the agency's financial picture, but also the comparative cost analysis of Bayview Shuttle compared to other modes. This provides a quicker snapshot of what that looks like for the Bayview Shuttle compared to other modes. So as you can see, some of our fixed route services, as shown on the slide, are more cost effective, meaning that they carry a lot more passengers over the same amount of time compared to the Bayview shuttle. However, one important note that I have some pride in and shows just how when we listen to community and value their feedback, we can actually make really positive impacts and benefits to the service as a whole is that since our June 2025 expansion, we did see that our average cost per trip is lower at $23.69. This is something, future analysis though will allow us to understand exactly how we can shift potentially certain riders from more expensive modes to maybe the Bayview shuttle as we move forward. This shows some ridership data so far throughout the service. You can see the top destinations of the service, not only through the size of the circle, but also the color. 24th Street BART station is our number one destination by far, connecting residents not only to the city as a whole, but also to regional destinations. A lot of community residents have used this as their daily commute. taking it to work every day, we see peak hour demands early in the morning and then when people are returning home from work. This data will be incredibly valuable not only for us to refine the service throughout the extension period, but for our overall transit network. So we can understand demand and ridership patterns for riders, which could help us improve other muni routes beyond 2027. On top of that, I think one of the best points of pride for myself and probably for Director Kirschbaum is the 4.9 out of 5.0 ride rating, which we've maintained throughout the entire service. Riders are constantly providing positive feedback, not only about SFMTA's role in the project, but also our drivers. It's definitely a hit that most of our drivers are hired from the community and have that community knowledge that is super beneficial for the service. One of the riders said, I love the service for the community. I experience safe and pleasant rides with extremely courteous drivers. And so that's something that we hope to continue through the extension period until November 2024. To kind of talk about next steps, there has been strong support for the extension so far. So as outlined in the contract amendments, there are some elements both continuing ongoing staff support for things that were originally in the scope of the contracts, but also building out some new initiatives that were built directly in collaboration with community partners and community residents. So through our community congress quarterly meetings, 50-plus outreach events, and special committee meetings where we work directly with community residents, they helped us shape the extension period and the contract amendments. So the core shuttle service will continue with VIA, but the extension period goes further on several fronts. As I mentioned, the Transportation Resource Center will continue to be open and staffed by CYC, but we do hope that they can actively connect with current Parrot Transit users to hopefully shift some of these users to the Bayview shuttle, which would reduce costs for both programs. Dedicated funding throughout the extension period will also support street safety improvements. that help to deliver on some of the initial plans outlined in the community-based transportation plan. Community governance will also continue through the community congress, as mentioned. And perhaps what I'm most excited for, a new youth tour program will bring visitors into the Bayview, using the shuttle as a connection point to the neighborhood's rich history, turning a transit program into a civic asset, and developing skills for community youth at the same time. Next steps moving forward is hopefully today the board's approval of both of the contract amendments, which is a critical next step. Without it, we are at risk of not receiving the full remaining grant award from CARB. Once approved, we are expected to receive The remaining CARB funds next month, and with that funding secured, we can focus on identifying what comes after 2027 and hopefully identifying some long-term implementation plan, either for the Bayview shuttle or improvements to our overall transit network. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Garcia, for your presentation. I'd like to go straight to public comment for this item. Public comment is now open for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There'll be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers can come up to the podium at this time.

Good afternoon, Board of Directors. My name is Sharif Nguyen, and I am a community engagement coordinator for the San Francisco Bike Coalition, but I'm also a Bayview Hunters Point resident. I am someone who has actually had the pleasure of taking the Bayview shuttle. And through riding the shuttle, I was able to have more of a community engagement and build relationships, especially with some of those drivers. I've also heard many conversations either on the shuttle or throughout the community about how they appreciate the shuttle and how the community hopes that it's not taken away from them. Also knowing the fact that this shuttle brings jobs and resources to the community and it's an impact that is deeply valued. I lead the organizations in street safety advocacy in the Bayview through a collaborative with San Francisco Transit Riders and Walk SF. We're known to be called Better and Safer Streets Collaborative. The Bayview shuttle is very important to my neighborhood, especially for our youth, our aging population, and our disabled populations. This shuttle offers more transportation options to residents and reduces the carbon footprint within our neighborhood. This shuttle has been highly beneficial to residents, particularly in a transit and a pharmacy desert. I've spoken to many residents who depend on this shuttle, and especially since the Walgreens within our community has closed. More and more residents learn about the Bayview Shuttle and its usage, and also with the increase of its usage, with a positive rating of the 4.5 over the 5%. When the Euless Creek Bridge starts construction next summer, all forms of transportation will be disrupted for an estimated of two years, and traffic will be diverted to Illinois Street. I just want to make sure that we use this time for the Bayview Shuttle's essential making residents know about the shuttle, and please prioritize permanent funding for the shuttle. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello again, board directors. I'm Dylan Fabers with San Francisco Transit Riders, which is a colleague with SF Bike and Walk San Francisco on the Better and Safer Streets collaborative in the Bayview. And I'm asking you today to approve the continued support for the Bayview shuttle program and also start planning for the future of this program. The idea for the baby shuttle came from the community and the community loves it. Every time we hear anybody mention it, the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. It fills a gap in an underserved community and is addressing real mobility needs in that community. So the board should absolutely vote to approve this extension today and should continue finding sustainable ways to fund this program for as long as possible. But because current funding is not sustainable in the long term, and there's no long-term source identified to keep this program running, there also needs to be planning now for what comes next. Allowing this program to lapse after the start of 2028 would turn this major win of a program for the SFMTA into yet another disappointment for the Bayview. So we need to be asking, what are the pathways to long-term mobility solutions for the Bayview once this funding runs out? The agency should look at the data that's been collected so far. So what is the ridership data showing? What lessons can guide this next phase? At the start of the program, we were told that this data could help inform adding additional service, including new fixed routes to better serve the community. So how do we make that a reality if and when the Bayview shuttle runs out of funding? to make sure the SFMTA isn't just pulling a well-loved resource from the community with nothing to replace it with. If done right, the agency can use this program as a foundation for broader transit investments in the Bayview and other underserved communities into the future. But if done wrong, it could betray the trust of this community. So let's make sure it's the former and not the latter. So we urge you to extend the contract today and start planning on what's next for the long-term future. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, directors. My name is Jennifer Gaydon. I'm the director of operations for the San Francisco African-American Arts and Cultural District. I'm here today in strong support of the proposed contract amendment to expand the Bayview Community Shuttle through a youth-led internship and community tour programs. This initiative is more about, excuse me, this initiative is about more than transportation. It's about creating access, building workforce pathways, and uplifting the cultural identity of Bayview-Hunters Point. Through this program, local youth will be trained in storytelling, research, marketing, and project management while helping design and lead community-based tours that highlight the neighborhood's history, culture, and small businesses. It gives young people real tangible skills while positioning them as leaders and ambassadors of their own community. In addition, we will continue leading the Community Congress, which is a critical space for ongoing community input and engagement. This ensures that the shuttle program is not just serving the community, but it is shaped by the community, with residents helping guide its evolution and impact. So at the same time, this work strengthens the role of the shuttle as a cultural and economic connector, bringing visibility and foot traffic to local businesses and community spaces within the Bayview. This is a practical, community-rooted solution that aligns with the city's goals around equity, mobility, and economic opportunity. So we respectfully ask for your support in approving this amendment so that we can continue building something that is youth-centered, community-led, and built for long-term impact. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Next speaker.

My name is April Spears-Mays, and I am the executive director of San Francisco's African American Arts and Culture District. And I've had the pleasure of partnering with SFMTA and their wonderful representative, Javon, and others. I'm just ecstatic about what the Bayview Shuttle has brought to our community. It has connected long-term residents to businesses on the corridor that have been on the corridor for years and decades even, and having an opportunity to have almost door-to-door service connecting community with the businesses on the corridor. It has allowed us to build economic stability, and it has also provided an opportunity to hire community members to either be tour guides through our tours of the cultural district, which we utilize the Bayview shuttle, to move people around community. And it also has provided an opportunity for people to take pride in their communities. Because when you get on the shuttle, you recognize the driver. I know the drivers. They are very informative about the community because they're born and raised there. So to have that in our community that it makes it a safe form of transportation. As far as like our seniors and others that are kind of straying away from the traditional forms of transportation, this has given them an opportunity to say, hey, I have a right to BART that feels safer to me. Hey, I have a right to the local businesses on the corridor. Hey, I have a right to BART to get me to other places in the Bay Area which we didn't have. And so continuing this program will continue to offer a way for community to connect, to build, and to sustain economic development within our community. So I encourage you all to really think about the continuance in supporting this effort because it has really... Is that my own timer? Okay. That was my second beep.

Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, everyone. And my name is David, and I will be presenting CYC Community Youth Center, working under Transportation Resource Center. I would like to share why it's important for the Transportation Resource Center to continue expanding its service in the community. Over time, we have seen many residents come directly to our office because they found it is easier to get the resource instead of going across the city to the headquarter in Venice. And for many community members, especially the seniors, families with limited transportation options and individuals with busy schedules traveling for long distance can be a real barrier. Having service available closer to where they live makes the meaningful difference. It helps people get the support they need faster and is less stress. By extending the transportation resource centers that present in neighborhoods locations like ours, we are improving the accessibility, increasing the participation, and making sure transportation support truly reach the people who is needed the most. We strongly believe that this continued and expanding the local service model will benefit many more residents and strengthen our community's connection and essential transportation resource. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item? Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests.

Thank you. Public comment for this item is now closed. Colleagues, questions, comments for Mr. Garcia and Mr. Chang? Director Henderson?

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the team. Thank you, Javon, for your presentation. I told the team this last week, but the baby shuttle is one of the highlights of the time that I've been on this board. I think that it is... Part of the work that I do in my day job is to help think of local solutions for housing that best meet our needs. And so I think that this shuttle is an example of MTA being able to listen to the community, figure out a solution to a very localized community need, even. I mean, it's down to just the topography of the neighborhood is part of the driver or the reason for even considering something like this. And so I think that this shuttle is the thing I talk about all the time to whoever will listen. I really appreciate the work that you all have done also to listen to the feedback and make sure that there are adjustments that are made to expand the program to have a broader reach beyond the transit issue but also now supporting workforce development and sort of career pathways for young people and You know, I think it's great and I do want to Ask a question just so that you can clarify this especially given the item that just came before you the extension of the the amendment of the contract and the extension of it is are captured all by the grant from CARB? Or is there any sort of expectation that our budget will be impacted by this?

Yeah, that's correct. 100% of both the contract amendments before you, but shuttle service operations and SFMTA staff time are covered by the CARB grant.

Got it. OK, so now moving forward, then the work really ahead is to be able to figure out how to, one, say thank you to CARB for the past two years or two-plus years in the next extension, but also that hopefully available long-term source that is out there from another entity that will help us meet the climate goals, but also the community needs that we've heard. I appreciate the point that you made that moving this forward will now help the team move on to thinking about the long-term plan. I do want to acknowledge the public comment that came in about that as well, figuring out how to to identify a source, an external source that will be able to allow the agency to continue to meet the community needs. So thank you. I see that there are other comments, but I would like to move the item should we get to that point, Chair, because this is my, I'm telling you, it's my favorite thing from MTA. And so I appreciate the work that the team has done. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Henderson. Director Chen?

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much for this presentation. It's very cool to see this thing happening in the Bayview, where we're trying some new things out. I want to make sure I understand fully about the budgetary side. So there is a one-time grant from CARB for this program of $10.5 million. The extension is not new money from the state, but it is so that we can use the existing money. Is that correct? Correct.

Correct. Yes. The initial grant term was supposed to expire March 31 of this year. We were granted an extension for us to use the remaining grant funds till November 2027.

And that's because we have been responsible with our money, and we have not been spending it willy-nilly, and we actually are able to keep this program running with the grant that we have. Correct. Correct. And I... In terms of for the future and also for the board to understand, the current program, what is the rough annual cost? I assume that there are some startup costs that went into building everything up. And then we have these revenue providers numbers. But then I'm not sure if that captures the full cost of the program.

Yeah. So obviously, the ongoing operating costs definitely depends on the service design. Our current contract with VIA, who is the third party operator, is about $2.1 million annually. Obviously, future contract amendments and negotiations will happen if the service is extended.

Got it. And then we also have these community outreach contracts, right? And that's separate from the service delivery

Correct. Yeah. So, yeah, the two amendments are for other supportive tasks for the program as a whole, but do not cover shuttle operations.

Got it. Sorry. Now I'm trying to figure out what roughly the support contracts are in terms of the annual amount.

So yeah, CYCs is $249,300 for an 18-month period. Quick math, that's like 1.5. I'm not sure. And then $224,000 for SFAECD for the 18-month period. Also for 18-month. So roughly $3,000, $4,000, $100,000, I think, if that's...

Yes. Yes. I have the calculator on my computer and let's see. Yes, I think roughly 300, give or take. Roughly. Okay. And let's see. Okay, so then supposing we approve this contract and the service continues until December of 2027.

November 30th, 2027.

November 30th, 2027. And that gives the team some time to think about, hey, like, you know, after this CARB grant is fully expended, what comes next? And that's still very early, I assume.

Correct. Yeah, I think the 18 month extension period provides us two opportunities. The first is really to refine the service design. So try to bring that cost per ride down as low as possible. You know, we have positive signs with ridership growth, but definitely that's one thing we're focused on. And then the second is, as you mentioned, finding a long term financial model that would support the service.

Well, wonderful. Yeah, thank you. I'm really excited that we've had the opportunity to do this program and really excited to learn what happens next. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Director Chen. Director Hinze.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to echo, I think, mostly what Director Henderson said is that everybody who I talk about this says it's the greatest thing we've ever done. And the popularity out there is very high. I do just want to flag that it's entirely grant funded and short term at the moment. And so I do just want to note that. I hope that we've communicated that to the community and that they're collaborating on whatever is next for the program. So especially considering the item that came before this one, that we are going into even this extension. And it's great that we have this extension with eyes wide open and that everyone's clear that this is short-term funding while staff is kind of thinking about the next phase of the shuttle. Because it's great that this is grant funded, and probably why I'm going to support this today is because it doesn't have an impact to our general fund budget. So, yeah. And then also, I did just want to end down, our first public commenter sort of referenced this, about how there's going to be a lot going on around the construction the Islayas Creek and then we approved like a third street pathway project. So how does like this project and this extension align with what else is gonna be going on in the Bayview? Can you shed any color on that?

Yeah, I think just to highlight kind of the first point you made, we're super grateful to CARB for the extension and for continuing to support the community Congress. So I think there's been definitely a positive relationship built with community that we hope to continue. For this latest Bridge Creek replacement, that is something that we're making sure we're coordinating internally. So we do have a SFMTA project team focused on the Bayview that meets on a monthly basis to discuss different projects that are ongoing. Right now, I don't have an expected start date for the bridge replacement. But we're making sure that the Bayview shuttle, as well as other projects, are well coordinated to make sure that we can mitigate any issues that come up for the community.

I think that's really, sorry to jump in, Director Hinzey, I think that's a really great framing. The Islayas Creek Bridge is an urgent state of good repair project from Public Works, but it does not have funding. So while we want to be ready, you know, if and when that project moves forward, we also do not have a very definitive timeline.

Yeah, I was just thinking, because conceptually it would be great if this shuttle was around during that. Ideally, the shuttle would be around during that project, but we'll see. We'll see a lot. A lot still needs to be figured out, but supportive of the item today. Excited to hopefully see there'll be stable funding for after this extension, but supportive of the item today.

Thank you, Director Hinze. Vice Chair Kahina?

Thank you so much, Chair. Thank you so much for your presentation. Mostly wanted to comment just to really commend all the work that has happened. I am truly very appreciative of the programmatic design in this particular program. What jumped out for me was how it was built with intention, and it understands the context in which we're working within community. and how you're bringing in different pieces of the issue, really, of the isolationism that has happened in the Bayview for so many years. And you're trying to create a bridge through this program, through transportation. This just speaks to the power of transportation. And so I just really want to commend you for having that lens. and the team, generally, for having that lens as you're crafting this particular program. Because that's meeting the moment, and that's really answering just this call to action that has been present in the community for some time. I do want to also, as I was listening to your presentation, we also have data that really speaks to the isolationism in the Bayview, particularly The information we saw recently from Jessica Garcia when she presented information about just travel times across the city and how difficult it is for folks in the Bayview to get to the marina, for instance. It's more than an hour. And so having a service like this that can connect folks to quicker service like BART or some of our lines I think is super essential. for all the reasons that Director Henderson already mentioned and folks that gave public comment. As an Excelsior kid, one of the shuttles that I see often is the Brisbane shuttle that goes from Brisbane to Balboa Park. BART station and wondering if, as you're looking at more permanent funding sources, if that's a model that you're analyzing, trying to understand how does that get funded and how do we start advocating internally to pursue those same sources or similar sources?

Yeah, thanks for all of your positive comments. Yeah, we definitely, I think through the extension period, as I mentioned, we'll be looking at other shuttle models to see how they are funded and operate. I think there's a few ways for us to kind of address that over the next few months or 18 months. As I mentioned, reducing overall cost per trip and just improving ridership growth. I think within the service design as well with the ridership patterns that we see from our current riders, we definitely can fluctuate and I guess be flexible to adjust to demand. So as I mentioned, a lot of our riders currently, our peak ridership is around peak hours. And so potentially in the future as a way to save costs for the shuttle, we can reduce some of our operating time as well. So I think to your point looking at other shuttle service models across the city as well as the nation working um in collaboration with via our partner who has deployed you know similar on-demand shuttle services in different markets can definitely help us tailor and adjust as needed and i think one thing that's really beneficial and impact of the the programmatic design as a whole is our strong community partnerships, as mentioned, that can really help us making sure that we are reshaping and designing the service in a way that fits community needs. And so I think we didn't build this in isolation. And I think throughout the extension period, we don't aim to do that as well. We want to continue to keep working with community residents and our great partners that are in the room today to make sure that whatever service model or service design we have fits the needs of residents, but also aligns with overall MTA goals.

And just to ground me a little bit on timelines, it seems like it's going to get approved today. But once this extension gets approved, when's the next tranche of analysis happening so that we start creating stepping stones to understanding the more semi-permanent solution, if not permanent solution, for this gap in service?

Yeah, great question. Well, the work has already begun. We're definitely having conversations internally about what the shuttle looks like beyond 2027. But as mentioned, we will have a contract amendment coming before the board again later this summer for the VIA contract. And I think that would be another great opportunity for us to kind of rebound on some of the conversations we're having internally and thinking about what the future beyond 2027 is. So I think for you, that will maybe be our next checkpoint. But just know that the work is happening with SFMTA staff and with community on a quarterly basis.

I know we have financial constraints right now that we're grappling with. And we just passed a budget. Our last item, I guess, was that. So this is an interesting context to be deciding this next step. But the intention behind this, of course, was not just to fill a current gap in service, but also to create a pathway towards filling that gap in a more permanent way. And so I'm going to toss this to Julia. Actually, not to you, Mr. Garcia. But Julie, my hope is that we're still going down that path. And I'm sure our current budget situation has kind of shifted our hopeful timeline on that. But I just wanted to give you an opportunity to speak on that a little bit more. understand, is there a pathway in the next few years, not in the next couple years, but in the next few years, to start thinking about, do we have a similar service like the 37? Or what are some of the options that we can think about for this community? And how is this program helping us get there?

Thank you for that question. I'm so grateful to the team and to CARB for the extension because it extends our runway and I think allows us to explore a robust set of options. We do, at the current cost per rider, see this as needing to be a grant-funded service. It is just out of proportion with our... even our kind of more expensive muni lines. But we've also had weeks or days where the ridership has broken 200. Mm-hmm. 200 riders per day. And so there is, I think, first and foremost, we are trying to learn. And I think as we learn, that will give us a sense of what our options are. I think we are also not the only program that CARB has funded that has tremendous community benefit and support. So I think they're one place that we're going to be looking to think about how this service is sustained. We also have a broader challenge where a lot of other neighborhoods would like this type of service, which is very understandable. It is a very high quality service. I think Javon really spent a lot of key time upfront emphasizing that there are some really specific factors at play here. The combination of the historical disinvestment and structural racism along with the topography, really is, I think, why the community pushed for this and not a muni route. So we're going to leave no stone unturned. But we do think grant funding, at least to get us through the next several years, is the right next step. And we're so grateful to the community partners because it's their support, it's their supporting letters, it's their testimony to CARB, and the fact that this was a community-generated plan that even made us eligible for this funding.

Thank you for saying that, Julie. Is the method by which we're bringing down the cost per writer, or cost per write, I guess, through trying to, like, are we just trying to achieve a critical mass of folks taking the service? Are there more marketing dollars, or more, like, how could we support that work stream, or how could that work stream be supported?

Yeah, I think as we saw, we've demonstrated ridership growth as quarter over quarter. And that's definitely something I think our main goal, just to bring down that cost. Very grateful for the community partners in the room today just for the outreach and engagement efforts that they'll continue to do. As mentioned, one of the goals for the Transportation Resource Center in particular is to reach out to seniors and folks with disabilities to see if we can potentially shift some riders from some of our more expensive modes, like paratransit, that would result in cost savings for both paratransit and the Bayview shuttle. So we do have some thoughts about that. And then just generally, seniors, people with limited mobility, often are late adopters for a service like this. like this that's on demand. It's new, right? And so people are definitely getting used to it. And so making sure that we're doing targeted outreach to those folks to make sure that they know about the service is kind of our two main focuses.

OK. How are our youth members looking on the service?

Youth love the service. Yeah, definitely. Get the kids out, folks.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Kahina. Director Felder?

Thank you. Wonderful service. And I think it's, as you can tell from the questions and comments, I think the primary concern is trying to really think through things to understand what it will take to maintain this or a similar service moving forward. And I guess to that end, one question is, do you have any sense of what sort of, if the service were to be fully optimized, meaning if it were to continue to be able to deliver service at the 15 or 20 minute sort of interval that is currently delivered or expected, what would the cost to provide the service be under that scenario, under a fully optimized scenario? Do we have any sense of that, if that question makes sense?

Yeah, I think that's why it's valuable to work with certain partners like VIA. So we are comparing a lot of our key metrics to other markets that they work in. Average cost per rides for other services does range from like $15 to $20 for kind of an optimized or a service with really high productivity numbers. So that is what we're looking at, which comparatively is still higher than other modes for Muni.

But it's a very different service. To me, that's the key, is that it's trying to get to a point of understanding what optimization for this type of service would be. Because Muni doesn't really, with the exception of the paratransit realm, offer an on-demand service of this type. So I mean, I see it fundamentally differently. But anyway, thank you. That's very helpful.

Thank you, Director Felder. All right, I think we have a motion, but before I ask for a second, I just want to highlight some of the things that I heard that are really striking, that in this neighborhood, the poverty rate is two times the poverty rate in other parts of the city, unemployment five times. And yet, vehicle ownership is still two times. And to me, what that sounds like are people who are burdened with an expense that could be spent elsewhere that would improve their lives. And also, those issues need to be addressed, the unemployment, the poverty. And so I really appreciate that despite those rather daunting realities, we're moving forward with a solution that the community has identified. And the fact that it is being created under the umbrella of our paratransit model and all the lessons that we've learned over the many, many years of that program. gives me a good feeling about the future and what was said in public comment about the danger of not succeeding in being able to continue the program at the level that the community expects is a real danger. And based on what I've heard today, I have a great deal of faith that we will get there and we are on the road. So thank you very much for the presentation. We have a motion from Director Henderson. Do we have a second? I can second. Thank you. Secretary Silva, can you please call the roll?

On the motion to approve items 13A and 13B, Director Chen?

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder?

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger?

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson? Aye. Henderson, aye. Director Hinze? Aye. Lindsay, aye. Director Kahina? Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff? Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

That places you on item number 14, discussion and vote pursuant to admin code section 67.10D as to whether to invoke the attorney-client privilege and conduct a closed session conference with legal counsel.

Thank you. We will now open public comment for item 14 for two minutes each.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment will have two minutes each. There will be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. I do have one speaker card for Mark Gruberg.

Thank you, board members. Mark Bruberg, San Francisco Taxi Workers Alliance and driver for Green Cab. Some 700 San Francisco cab drivers bought taxi medallions, most of them for $250,000. 300 of them have lost their medallions to foreclosure. And close to 300 others are still paying them off. We estimate the average loan balance is close to $140,000. And because of the fixed price of a medallion, none have sold in the last 10 years. This agency and the San Francisco Federal Credit Union have been haggling over the medallion program for most of those 10 years. But the only people with a personal stake in this matter are not in the room, and that's the medallion purchasers. You should have received a letter from our attorney, Dan Wheeler, making a request for public records relating to the settlement that you are presumably going to be discussing and possibly approving today. And we're asking you to hold off on that approval because we need the ability to find out what's going on here. We need a seat at the table. We need, at the very least, a peek in the door. if medallion owners don't have a chance to participate in these discussions, there's a grave injustice here. And so I would ask you to hold off on this for now. Thank you. And by the way, I have a hard copy of the letter, if that is of any help. I'm sorry, I only have one. OK, thanks.

Any other speakers on this item? Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests.

Thank you. Public comment is now closed. Colleagues, may I have a motion and a second to go into closed session?

So moved.

Second.

Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the roll.

On the motion to go into closed session, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson.

Aye.

Henderson, aye. Director Hinze.

Aye.

Hinze, aye. Director Kahina. Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff. Aye. Tarloff, aye. The motion passes unanimously, and the board will now go into closed session. It'll take just a moment.

SFGov TV San Francisco Government Television

you

sf gov tv san francisco government television

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

SFGov TV San Francisco Government Television

SFGov TV. San Francisco Government Television.

On item number 15, the board met in closed session and provided direction to staff. Places you on item number 16, motion to disclose or not disclose the information discussed in closed session.

Colleagues, may I have a motion and a second?

Motion not to disclose.

Second. Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the roll.

On the motion to not disclose, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger. Aye. Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson. Aye. Henderson, aye. Director Hinze. Aye. Hinze, aye. Director Kahina. Aye. Kahina, aye. Chair Tarloff. Aye. Tarloff, aye. The motion passes unanimously and concludes the business before you today.

Very good. Thank you, colleagues, staff, and members of the public. We are now adjourned. Our next regular meeting will be on May 5th, and there will be a Vision Zero committee meeting on May 6th. Thank you.