Municipal Transportation Agency - Regular Meeting

I'm now calling the June 16, 2026 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 Chen.

Present.

Chen, present. Director Felder.

Present.

Felder, present. Director Hemminger.

Here.

Hemminger, present. Director Henderson. Here. Henderson, present. Director... CHAIR TARLOV? HERE. TARLOV PRESENT. WE ARE EXPECTING DIRECTOR HINSEY AND DIRECTOR KEHINA TO JOIN US SHORTLY. ITEM NUMBER 3, 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. ITEM NUMBER 4, APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE JUNE 2 MEETING.

Directors, are there any changes to the minutes? We'll now open public comment for item four, the minutes, 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 that want to comment on the minutes can come up to the podium at this time. I'm seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests.

Thank you. Public comment is closed. May I have a motion and a second?

So moved. Second.

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. Chair Tarloff. Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously.

Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Places you on item five, communications. I have none.

Thank you. Please call the next item. Places you on item number six, the director's report.

Good afternoon. It is my pleasure to start this report with a special recognition. I'd like to call up Andrea Contreras, our acting chief equity officer, to the podium.

Good afternoon, board. Andrea Contreras, acting chief equity officer. I'm very excited to be here to recognize several of the young people who have served on the SFMTA's Youth Transportation Advisory Board, or YTAB for short. I'd like to ask all the current and former members of YTAB who are in the audience to please stand up and be recognized. The program aims to allow young people ages 14 to 18 to experience some of the inner workings of the SFMTA, create networks and friendships, and have fun. YTAB explicitly and intentionally elevates the lived experiences of young people from across our city to better inform the SFMTA's policies and practices. YTAB members advocate not just for policies that affect youth directly, but for all services that promote equity in our transportation network. Over five years, YTAB cohorts have taken on many different types of projects. This past year, in collaboration with some of our YTAB alum who we are also recognizing today, the group hosted the San Francisco Youth Commission, the District 1, 4, 7, and 9 Youth Councils, and the Lowell, Washington, and Lincoln High School Transit Clubs. They joined Director Kirschbaum to inform young people throughout the city of SFMTA's current financial situation and how this may affect young people and their families. They also hosted a youth transit roundtable that included many YTAB students, as well as students from several of the youth advocacy groups I just listed. YTAB students also volunteered at community events like Sunday Streets, Muni Safe Day Out, and Carnaval, and they plan to participate in the upcoming One City Day. After the Youth Transit Roundtable, several of the YTAB students switched gears and continued to meet for about four hours a week to prepare a presentation to this board in April. They made recommendations to improve the experience for future YTAB cohorts as part of their April 7th budget presentation. They recommended that we amend YTAB policies to allow for more YTAB engagement with the public. One way we hope to get YTAB members more involved with the public is through our Safe School Connections Plan. Members would join us to hear directly from school communities about their needs around safety and connectivity. This would help create safer conditions getting to and from school. And it would also give YTAB members valuable planning experience. Another thing we're working on in response to their recommendation is elevating youth voices on our social media platforms. The YTAB members also made a proposal for schedule efficiencies, such as connecting muni routes that have nearby terminals. In the future, we're going to have a transit planner join some of the YTAB meetings to educate the group about transit planning technicalities. We're also going to have a member of YTAB serve on the Muni Equity Working Group. Again, I really want to appreciate all the time and effort that the YTAB members have put in this year to engage with young people throughout the city and bring their perspectives to the SFMTA. Many of them are not able to be here today, but I want to read their names. Audrey Lee, Edward Nacer, Frank Ouyang, Julian Gregor Klyman Riddick, Kaylee Luck, Leah Mordechai, Linda Wen, Phoenix McNabb, Quinn Luck, Sophia Shen, Vikas Goburi, Wendy Yu, and Zulema Sarceno-Bravo. And now I'd like to invite the YTAB members and alumni whose work went above and beyond their regular YTAB responsibilities to come up to the podium to receive their certificates of appreciation. First, Sulema Sarsena Bravo. Next, Mason Goh. And if we have Vikas. Is anyone else here? And that concludes at least giving out the physical certificates. And now Sulema Sarceno-Bravo is going to say a few words about her group and YTAB participation.

Hello, board. My name is Zulema Sarseno-Bravo. I am one of the speakers from April who presented one of two proposals that we had prepared for you. And on behalf of not only YTAB, but also the other five individuals whom I worked with closely to draft and write these proposals, I would like to say thank you. All of us are youth. Most of us are high school students. And you all gave us the amazing privilege to come speak before you, and we could not have been more grateful for that opportunity. We thank you for this commendation and for recognizing the work that we were able to do this year. Because I'm not only speaking for myself when I say that we appreciate all the support everyone has given us in helping us to plan and execute all the events and outreach initiatives that we were able to carry out this year. YTAB truly was able to achieve so much, and it is wonderful to see young people work together in this way. But truly, it could not have been done without some of the amazing adults that have helped us throughout the whole process. So thank you, Director Kirschbaum, for allowing us the opportunity to present to this board. Thank you, board members, for being so willing to listen and be supportive of our ideas. And of course, thank you to Lawrence for a year's worth of encouragement and assistance. We truly could not have done this without any of you. And we look forward to the work that YTAB will continue to do in the following months. Thank you so much.

I would like to just chime in here. Ms. and Mr. Goh, thank you so much for being here on behalf of YTAB. I know from experience that it's actually a pretty large group of but here we are a week or two into the summer vacation, so I completely understand. And also, you know, and I also understand from the appearance of your group members several months ago, that a really great showing came during the school year, which is pretty incredible. And I just want to thank you so much for all your work on behalf of the board. It really adds to what we get to do here. every month to help the agency and to help Muni serve our community and very, very importantly, the youth of this city. So thank you so much.

Thank you again. And for anyone listening that's interested, we do have our application process open right now for next year's YTAB class. If you go to sfmta.com and search for YTAB, the application is currently open. Next, I want to share some good news from the June election. San Francisco voters overwhelmingly supported Measure A, the earthquake safety and emergency response bond, with more than 80% of voters voting yes on the measure. The bond will fund earthquake safety projects for the emergency firefighting water system, fire and police stations, and for our Potrero bus yard. Potrero Yard, which we closed in February, is 111 years old and is one of our most vulnerable facilities in an earthquake. $200 million of the bond will help fund replacing Potrero Yard to a seismically safe, state-of-the-art trolley facility. This will ensure we're able to provide transit services following earthquakes and continue to play a vital role in the City's emergency response efforts. I want to thank Mayor Lurie and the Board of Supervisors for placing Prop A on the ballot and the community leaders and labor partners who advocated for its passage. I also want to thank San Francisco voters for prioritizing earthquake safety. I next want to talk about this summer, where three transformative capital improvement projects will begin in Chinatown. Portsmouth Square Park, the Chinatown Public Health Center, and the Chinatown Library. These projects are led by Reckon Park and the Department of Public Health and the San Francisco Public Library, with construction managed by San Francisco Public Works. But we recognize that these projects, while strongly supported by the public, will have substantial transportation impacts on the Chinatown community. And we have identified dedicated staff to work closely and continuously with public works and community stakeholders to understand these impacts and to minimize traffic and transit disruptions as much as possible. I'm also really pleased that there is a Public Works Project Coordinator, Christina Olea, for all three projects, who is the lead point of contact for stakeholders and will ensure that these projects are coordinated and their collective impact is addressed. Construction on all three projects is expected to start this summer, with completion anticipated in the summer or fall of 2028. The Portsmouth Square Park renovation project will include removal of the Kearney Street pedestrian bridge later this summer. The project also includes new sidewalks surrounding the park and sewer work along Walter U Lum. The Chinatown Public Health Center project will require the full closure of the Broadway Tunnel for two weekends and a partial closure for 14 months. While the exact schedule is still being finalized, these closures are expected to begin this summer or early fall. And we'll essentially take the Broadway tunnel from two bores with two lanes in each direction to a single bore with travel in each direction. And that is because the hospital is directly on top of the tunnel. I want to encourage members of the public to go to the Public Works Chinatown Improvement Project web page to sign up for construction updates and learn about upcoming community meetings. We have a dedicated Chinatown construction page where we will post and amplify construction dates provided by Public Works and share information about traffic and transit rerouting as it becomes available at sfmta.com slash GoChinatown. I'm also grateful for the community leaders that are taking time to meet regularly with myself and Victoria Wise and really understand how we can continue to serve and support this dense and heavily traveled area. Thank you.

Thank you, Director Kirschbaum. Before I open public comment on this item, I would like to remind members of the public that they may provide comment on the topics that Director Kirschbaum shared. As a reminder, those are the special recognition of the Youth Transportation Advisory Board. Is that correct? the full name, and the passage of Measure A and updates related to Chinatown construction and transit impacts. 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 and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers who would like to comment on the director's report can come up to the podium at this time.

Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests. We'll now close public comment. Colleagues, do you have any questions for Director Kirschbaum? All right. Well, thank you for your report, Julie. Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Item number seven, the Citizens Advisory Council report. We have no report today. Thank you. Please call the next item. Item number eight, new or unfinished business by board members. Colleagues, do you have any items to share?

Raising through the agenda. Secretary Silva, 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.

We will now open public comment for general public comment.

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 and queue on the TV side of the room. Sir, go ahead.

My name is Alan Jones. And last week, I sent to this board's secretary my concerns about public electric wheelchair charging stations. On this subject, I've been working for the last four years to get it going in San Francisco. And I learned that SFMTA is working with the Office of Disability Accessibility and Reckon Park to install these stations. However, what I tried to get ODA to understand, they went the opposite direction. which will be causing a fire hazard for those of us who use electric wheelchairs. I would appreciate it if you would review the information that I sent you. It comes with a 900-word essay, if you will, on this subject. This is moving. I know it's going to happen. But what ODA is recommending is not safe. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for general public comment?

Good afternoon, board. Griffin Lee here, representing Connected SF, staff and membership. Understand we recently just passed a budget. And I know there's internal things you have to do to continue progressing on activities to come up with that budget. I will reiterate, we're still in a budget crisis, a budget deficit within the agency. There needs to be clear action plan on a backup in case one of the two measures does not pass. At ConnectedSF, we believe in a robust functional transit system, but we do not believe in lack of transparency and financial mismanagement. I will end by stating that there is still a request out to have the agency come out with the exercise and experiment around what is the right amount of full-time employees to run a muni and bus system. These numbers are important for the public to know when you're asking for additional taxpayer dollars this November. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any other speakers? Go ahead, sir.

Hi, I'm Bob Feinbaum, president of Save Muni. We were as disturbed as I'm sure you were with the Air Resources Board's decision to drop funding for transit. Last night at our Save Muni meeting, we voted to write a letter to David Chu to ask him to see how the city could intervene to recoup that funding. I hope that you're also working with City Attorney Chu to do the same thing. But it raised another issue, and that is about Prop L. Prop L was passed in 2022 with 28 rigid categories for expenditure for capital funds. Now, I don't know about you, but this is going to extend to 2052 whether people can really understand everything that will be necessary in 30 years. I don't think so. So I urge you to at least look at the possibility of another initiative to amend Measure L so that it allows some flexibility for emerging capital needs. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for general public comment? I'm seeing none in the room. I do have one. Oh, I have one more in the room.

Is this public comment for any issue being heard today?

No, any issue that is not already being heard today.

Oh, OK. Sorry.

Any other speakers in the room for general public comment? Seeing none in the room, I do have one accommodation request. Speaker, you've been unmuted. You have two minutes for general public comment.

Herbert Weiner. Now, what I would like to see is some collaboration between seniors and students who take public transportation. Now, I can appreciate the grievances that students have with public transportation, but elderly persons do too. And decisions that are made in favor of students should also consider the impact on elders. This is only fair because public transportation is for everybody. So I throw this out as an invitation to student groups who use public transportation to collaborate with seniors who also use it. Thank you very much.

Thank you. No other speakers. Thank you.

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 public comment, please identify which item number you are speaking to. Item 10.1. requesting the controller to allot funds and to draw warrants against such funds available or that will be available in payment of the listed claim against the SFMTA or for the SFMTA to accept funds based on a collection effort. It's listed under item 10.1a in the agenda. Item 10.2, approving various routine parking and traffic modifications, listed under 10.2A in the agenda. Item 10.3, retroactively accepting a gift of goods and services valued at approximately $13,500 from the Civic Joy Fund, a program of the Civic Space Foundation, a nonprofit organization, including several logs and tree stumps, arranged for seating and child exploration to activate Gamble Park, an SFMTA property near Carl Street and the Anjuda Right-of-Way. Item 10.4, authorizing the director of transportation to execute four contracts for as needed specialized vehicle engineering and other related consulting services for various projects, including the implementation and completion of transit vehicle and transit related equipment procurements, maintenance of way projects, operational scenario model projects, asset management projects, service planning projects, transit system projects, and rehabilitation and replacement projects. The first three contracts with Hatch Associates Consultants, Jacobs Engineering Group, and STV Incorporated are in an amount not to exceed $5 million with initial terms of five years with an option to extend for four additional years. The fourth contract with WSP USA is limited to an amount not to exceed $3.8 million and an initial term of one year. It has an option to extend for four years, but the exercise of the option would require the approval of the Civil Service Commission. That concludes your consent calendar.

Thank you. We will now 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'll be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. Any speakers who want to comment on the consent calendar can come up to the podium at this time. Seeing none in the room and no accommodation requests. Oh, did we have speakers for the consent calendar? Oh, we're not yet there. This is item 10. Okay. No speakers.

We will now close public comment for item 10, the consent calendar. Colleagues, may I have a motion and a second to approve? So moved.

So moved. Sorry.

Second.

Thank you. 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. Chair Tarloff? Aye. Tarloff, aye. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

Please call the next item.

Directors, that places you on your regular calendar, item number 11. Adopting as formal policy a set of specific strategies identified in the final Phase 1 analysis required by the 2025 California Senate Bill 63, or SB 63, or Connect the Bay Area Act, and adopted by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's SB 63 Financial Efficiency Review Independent Oversight Committee.

Good afternoon, Chair Tarlov and board members. My name is Shruti Hari, and I serve as the project manager for the Financial Efficiency Review on behalf of MTC. Now, before discussing the review itself, I was requested to provide an overview of SB 63, which essentially established the Financial Efficiency Review requirement. Before I get into the slides, I do have a brief disclaimer courtesy of our Office of General Counsel, and I'm going to read it out verbatim. Because SB 63 is a complex statute involving multiple public agencies, today's presentation is intended to provide an overview of the statute and MTC's roles and responsibilities under it. I am not speaking on behalf of the Public Transit Revenue Measure District, which is a distinct organization. I also want to note that while MTC is aware of the potential citizens initiative and its processing, MTC's role is limited to providing fair, accurate, and impartial information regarding any measure. And for that reason, I will not be able to answer any questions regarding any specific initiative, campaign activity, or advocacy efforts during today's presentation. So with that, I'm happy to get into the presentation. Over the next few slides, I'll provide a brief overview of SB 63. We have the first slide on here. SB 63, as you know, was enacted in response to the significant fiscal challenges facing the region's largest transit operators following the pandemic. The statute authorizes placement of a regional transportation funding measure on the November 2026 ballot across the five counties served by AC Transit, BART, Caltrain, and SFMTA. Now, the measure would be funded through a 14-year sales tax projected to generate approximately $980 million annually. And important for today's discussion, SB 63 also establishes several accountability mechanisms for the operators receiving this funding, including the financial efficiency review, which is the focus of the remainder of the presentation. Next slide, please. So this slide here, I just wanted to provide or give you an understanding of the approximate distribution of funding to the four subject operators under the SB 63 expenditure plan. BART is estimated to receive approximately $310 million annually. MUNI, $155 million annually. Caltrain, $17 million. AAC Transit, $15 million annually. Now note that these four operators would receive 60% of the annual funding generated by the measure and 95% of the dedicated transit operating funding in the expenditure plan, reflecting the scale of their deficits. It is important to note here that a successful measure may not close the projected deficits for some operators. And I mention it and that reality is important because it explains why the legislature paid potential funding with accountability requirements, including the financial efficiency review. Next slide, please. So SB 63 assigns several responsibilities to MTC. The key ones I've summarized on this slide. We were responsible for conducting a ridership study that was due in March, which has been completed and submitted to the legislature. And of course, more relevant today, MTC is responsible for conducting the financial efficiency review, which occurs in two phases. Phase one takes place this year and is now complete. And phase two would only occur if the measure is approved and would involve a more comprehensive examination of long-term financial sustainability opportunities. Then, if the measure is successful, MTC is responsible for allocating the funding and monitoring compliance with the various accountability mechanisms as a condition of allocating funds to the various transit operators. Next slide, please. So moving on to the financial efficiency review now. As I mentioned on the previous slide, SB 63 requires MTC to conduct a two-phase financial efficiency review. Phase one, which we just completed, was intended to show measurable steps operators were already taking to improve efficiency before asking voters for new funding. And as a result, it was focused and time limited. There were three key things in the scope for phase one, which are listed on the slide. First, it needed to document cost-saving measures operators have already implemented since 2020. Second, it needs to identify practical service and customer experience improvements that can be made within existing resources. And third, it needed to conduct a preliminary review of operator real property assets. As I mentioned before, phase two would only occur if the revenue measure is approved, and it would involve that broader analysis of cost-saving measures and long-term cost structures. So in a nutshell, phase one was intended to establish a factual baseline and identify practical near-term opportunities for cost savings improvements. And by contrast, phase two, if triggered, would examine longer-term, more structural opportunities to support a financially sustainable business model for transit in the future. Next slide please. So this is an important governance slide. One of the features of SB 63 is key features is that it does establish some clear separation of responsibilities. The analysis itself was conducted by an independent third party consultant that MTC brought on board for this work, Nelson Nygaard. The independent oversight committee was set up for overseeing this review. And they were responsible for reviewing the work, directing revisions, and ultimately adopting the report. MTC's role was to administer this entire process, manage the consultant contract, and transmit the final report once adopted. And then operator boards, including this board, retain responsibility for determining which early action strategies to adopt and implement. So they basically decide what to implement. And that distinction was important throughout this process for MTC to help ensure that the review remained independent while also grounded in operational realities. Next slide, please. So the final phase one report is the culmination of this fairly compressed process established by SB 63 for phase one. The statute had some key milestones for phase one. The consultant was required to transmit the phase one analysis to the Independent Oversight Committee by April 1st. That was in the statute. And secondly, the operator boards were required to identify and formally adopt their early action strategies by July 1. And so to meet those deadlines, MTC brought Nelson Nygaard on board in Jan 2026. And MTC staff, as well as Nelson Nygaard staff, worked closely with the operator staff through a series of structured working sessions to ensure that this analysis reflected operational realities and agency-specific circumstances. Following the delivery of the draft report on April 1st, the Independent Oversight Committee reviewed the analysis, received public comment, provided extensive feedback, and directed revisions to the report. The consultant team then incorporated the feedback, and the committee ultimately adopted the final phase one financial efficiency review on May 22nd. So the final report delivers these four principal outcomes. So in short, it fulfills the phase one requirements established by the legislature and provides the basis for the operator board actions that are now occurring across the region. Next slide, please. Following adoption by the Independent Oversight Committee, MTC was required to transmit the final report to the legislature, the subject operators, CalSTA, and the participating county transportation authorities. That was already done. The next major milestone, as I mentioned, is July 1, by which date each operator board must identify the early action strategies it commits to implementing and adopting those strategies through formal policy or board actions. which brings us to today's discussion and SFMTA Board's consideration of the strategies being presented by staff in advance of that statutory deadline. Before turning it over to SFMTA staff, I wanted to just spend a moment on what the statute contemplates beyond phase one, should the regional transportation measure ultimately be approved by the voters. This is the final slide from me. This slide is included simply to provide context for you all on what would occur if the measure passes and phase two is triggered. As I mentioned, phase two is that deeper analysis of longer term, potentially more structural cost saving opportunities along with the development of implementation plans. If the measure is approved, MTC would initiate a separate procurement shortly after the election is finalized. Phase two would begin in early 2027 and culminate in operator adoption of formal implementation plans in August or by August 2028. But again, phase two is not before the board today and for today's purposes. Focus remains on phase one and the early action strategies that SFMTA staff will now present. With that, I'll turn it over to Jillian of SFMTA staff. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Tarloff and board members. My name is Jillian Johnson. I'm the Director of Finance Administration for SFMTA. So I'm here to present, as mentioned, the early action strategies that were recommended by the SB 63 Independent Oversight Committee, of which Director Hemminger sat on. Do want to note that there is an error at the bottom of the staff report you all received on page two that says we are not recommending all the strategies. We are, in fact, recommending all the strategies. And the resolution does list all the strategies as recommended. So I just want to make that note. Please ignore that line at the bottom of page two. OK, next slide. So as you heard from the MTC, we're now at the point where you, our board of directors, need to decide on the early action strategies you want to adopt as policy or budget actions. What's not on this timeline is our budget. You see the timeline here of the work we've gotten done over the last five years, actually, in terms of cost savings, as well as of work that the oversight committee did. What's not on our timeline, though, is our budget. You all just adopted our two-year budget in April. But as you'll see from the rest of this presentation, the recommendations we'll be looking at are very much in alignment with the budget that you passed and built on that budget.

Next slide.

So the SFMTA is proud of the cost savings we've achieved that were documented in the SB 63 Independent Oversight Committee report. The report also documented the cost savings of three other transit agencies that are all included in the SB 63 legislation, as previously mentioned. So together with AC Transit, BART, and Caltrain, we achieved over a billion dollars in operating cost savings between fiscal years 2019-20 and 2024-25. Next slide. According to the report, SFMTA had operating cost savings of $300 million over the reporting period. We also saved $389 million in capital costs over that time period and we enhanced revenue by $37 million. The efficiency gains were largely structural, meaning they helped us to address the future fiscal challenges that we see. And an example of that is the elimination of the 500 vacant positions in the budget a few years ago. And part of these efficiencies, we still prioritize customer experience through things like transit priority upgrades. Next slide. In terms of the operating cost savings, I want to give a little more detail on the breakdown of that. So the bulk of these savings have been in the last couple of years from hard decisions we've made to hold positions vacant, as you can see by that $170 million figure at the top of the table. There was also more than $50 million in savings that came at the very beginning of the five-year period when we shut down the muni network during the worst part of the pandemic. I just want to note sometimes you might be hearing us talk about $250 million in efficiency savings, And I think that's been confusing because it is different than $300 million. That's just removing the service reductions that we implemented. So that's the difference. Next slide. So beyond documenting the Bay Area transit agency's cost savings, the Independent Oversight Committee identified 10 early action strategies for SFMTA and also early action strategies for other transit agencies to pursue to reduce costs and become more efficient. According to Senate Bill 63, by July 1, we must identify the specific early action strategies that we're going to adopt as formal policy or budget actions. Of the 10 early action strategies recommended for SFMTA, there are three categories. One is enhancing revenue. Two is increasing ridership and enhancing the rider experience. And three is containing costs. To enhance revenue and the rider experience, the committee is recommending that we improve fare compliance and enforcement, that we enhance parking revenue, and that we expand the Clipper Bay Pass program to more institutions and employers. And to contain costs, the committee is recommending early action strategies that include examining schedules for efficiencies, improving the speed and reliability of service, right-sizing the fleet to match demand, identifying and capturing cost savings in larger contract renewals, offering incentives to improve staff attendance.

Staff attendance.

And evaluate.

And evaluate.

What's happening?

Sorry, maybe try one more time. We might have had somebody unmuted in the WebEx meeting.

And evaluating the zero emission bus transit program for cost efficiency. Most of these strategies are core efficiency work that we've been doing. In terms of the zero emission bus transition program, this is a program of the California Air Resources Board, and we would have to work together as a region to ask CARP to reconsider its timeline for the program during this crisis period that we are in. Next slide. So we are recommending that the board adopt all of the early action strategies identified and recommended by the SB 63 Independent Oversight Committee and have begun work on many of these strategies. And I just want to give a few examples of the work we've done to date. So we're already acting to improve fair compliance and enforcement. On May 5th, we launched the fairs for our future campaign, which includes a public education campaign reminding riders it is cheaper to pay the fare than to pay a fine. We have a plan to hire more transit fare inspectors. And we're taking actions that will move us away from invisible forms of payment that don't require riders to tap, which I think has been confusing for folks. We're also doing more to help people learn about and enroll in free and reduced fare programs. And thanks to all of the fair compliance work that we started even before the Fares for Our Future campaign, our transit fare revenue is projected to exceed budgeted levels by $14 million in fiscal year 25-26, approximately $5 million of which is attributed to fair compliance efforts. Another highlight is that we have been enhancing parking revenue. You all adopted several parking revenue changes in the budget that we just passed. And because of other parking revenue increases you approved prior to last year, the fiscal year 25-26 parking revenue is projected to exceed budgeted levels by 14 million this year. So that's a big accomplishment. And the final example of the work we've been doing that aligns with early action strategies is improving the speed and reliability of service. Our Muni Forward program has delivered 100 miles of transit improvements that have made Muni service faster and more reliable. We are already reinvesting our savings from this work back into Muni service, and we are beginning Muni Forward work on additional corridors at the moment. So with that, we are recommending the board adopt all the recommended early action strategies as SFMTA policy and direct staff to pursue them. And that's what the resolution states. Any questions?

Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Hari. I'm going to take public comment on this item. But before I do, I would like to ask Director Hemminger to update the board from his perspective as a member of this committee that has approved this item to send to us for our approval. and take another opportunity to thank you, Steve, for serving on the committee. I really appreciate it. We all do.

It was my pleasure, Madam Chair. You've heard about this efficiency study at a couple of different meetings. And so today is the action item. And it might help for me just to give you a little color commentary. And the overall approach here, I think, that the legislature laid down in the statute is that it authorizes the creation of new revenue if the voters approve, but it also seeks to institute reforms to the revenue that we already collect and try to improve the customer experience, again, with the revenue that already exists. I would highlight four particular areas of activity. The first, as you've heard, is the very considerable cost savings achieved by the operators to date. I think we're so used to around here big numbers. We left millions at the at the train station a long time ago. So we're in billions, and we now have a trillionaire. So that's the state of things. But I did want to emphasize that I would still say that a billion dollars is not chump change. And that is essentially what we're talking about in terms of cost savings since 2020, essentially since the pandemic. Another purpose of this activity was to propose early action strategies that would deliver an enhanced customer experience. That's anything from muni forward to fair discounts. I think, again, the theme here is that it's not as if the transit operators haven't been pursuing some of these activities. They've been pursuing almost all of them. And I think the question here is, how much more priority can we give them? Because there's always more work to do. The third one I'll mention, and it's clear that somebody in Sacramento thinks we've got a lot of real estate to do cool things with. because that was requested as a very specific activity to put as much focus on real estate and transit-oriented development. If you look at the data, this is mostly a BART game because they've got so much property. But Muni is right in there behind it, and I wouldn't mind if Muni caught up. What we need, again, I think is priority on these kinds of activities so that we can make some progress going forward. And as you know, getting folks into the trains, into the buses, one of the best ways to do that is to make sure they can live near them, because they'll tend to walk or bike to them and do the hard work for you. And finally, as you've heard from the staff as well, this is phase one of two phases. And two phases will happen only if the voters say yes. If they don't, we've got much bigger problems than this analysis. But that's essentially what we're doing. Phase two, I think, if I could speak for the authors in Sacramento, I think for them, phase two is where the big game can be hunted. because that's where the structural changes, if any, to our current setup with public transit in the Bay Area could be evaluated and possibly pursued. So that's the four. And I was happy to serve as your representative. We had a unanimous vote. at our meeting. And I believe this will be the last vote, and I hope it's positive, by the four transit operators. And then we can go back to doing our other work, and the voters will work their will. So that concludes my remarks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Director Hemminger. I will now 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 who want to comment on this item can come up to the podium at this time.

Hi, Bob Feinbaum from SAVE Munich. And all of these recommendations from the Oversight Committee are fine. I hope you adopt the measure, the resolution today, and you follow through on all of them. However, the Oversight Committee, as far as I know, did not have any citizens on it. And although I believe they've come up with great recommendations, I think for phase two, there is also an oversight committee or maybe even two oversight committees in the regional measure and also in the city measure. And I would urge, I have not seen any language to specify who should serve on that oversight committee. But I believe that on both the city and the regional oversight committees, you must have citizens from organizations such as, say, Muni. I'll put in a plug here. who are knowledgeable about transit and care about transit, but also have an independent observation about transit. And I would like to ask maybe the MTC representative to perhaps share with this board how the oversight committee is going to be selected for the regional measure. Because as far as I can tell, there is no specification in there.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item?

Good afternoon. Board, Griffin Lee here representing Connected SF. I want to start by stating We appreciate the audits. This should be something that's a line item within SP63. But for the public to know, in the charter, it states that there should be audits consistently ongoing within the agency unrelated to SP63. Secondly, in terms of some of the recommendations. First, in terms of improving fare compliance, we're totally supportive of that. Our economists project roughly, across all fare collection, roughly $100 million could be gained back from fare collection. That includes fare evasion. We appreciate the ongoing work there. I could go on and on, but on the second part, enhancing parking revenue, Yeah, that's the second largest line item in the revenue category behind the general fund. Stop closing roads. Stop making it harder to drive and get from point A to point B versus vehicle. We appreciate some of the ongoing work as well to more balance that act between all modes of transportation. But let's not continue down that road of closing roads. I could go on and on again, but we appreciate some of these actions. But the last thing I'll state is executive management has got to show more teeth. It's a mixture of strategies, but that may include cutting. Cut, cut, cut. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, good afternoon, everyone. I'm actually here for another item. My name is Bob Allen. I work as a policy director for Urban Habitat. And since Steve was speaking, we've been talking about doing a regional measure for probably longer than we all want to even acknowledge. But I appreciate the work. I just wanted to say, It acknowledged the work of over 1,000 volunteers, I think, who collected something like 60,000 signatures of the over 300,000 for the measure. Having worked on measures for San Francisco and others around the country for transit, I think it bodes really well. for the future. And I think people are really excited to get out there and support what's going on with the regional measure as well as the measure for SFMTA as well. So I just want to thank the volunteers, the organizations who built the campaign. And I know we're looking forward to, as Steve said, the proof is going to be at the ballot. But I'm hopeful, given what happened in the North Bay and the strong support that's demonstrated in ridership, your improvements for the quality and the satisfaction with Muni riders, and especially acknowledge all the workers who've been working under difficult conditions, the workers from Muni and SFMTA. So we look forward to kind of getting the campaign going this summer. And thanks to Julie, the staff, the board, and everyone who's been supporting this and keeping things afloat while we bring in this revenue. No matter what we do around reform and restructuring, we're still going to need more money, I think, over the future to build the system that I think everyone in the city wants. So thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item? Seeing none in the room, I do have one accommodation request. Speaker, you've been unmuted. You have two minutes. It's for item number 11.

Herbert Weiner. I have to admit, I'm overwhelmed by the presentation. There's a lot of bureaucracy involved in it. My only hope is the service improves, we get more buses, we get more drivers, and we get a better public transportation system out of it. I mean, this business of fighting to preserve what we have is really flawed when we should be expanding services and lives in an increased population. So, I don't know, this is sort of hold what we have and if really not looking to address an expanding population with increased need for services in the form of more transportation coaches and more drivers. Thank you.

Thank you.

No other speakers. Thank you. Public comment for this item is now closed. Colleagues, questions, concerns?

A lot of motions.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Very good. Very good. Secretary Silva. Secretary Silva.

My apologies. My apologies. OK, there we go.

Call the roll. Please call the roll.

On the motion to approve, Director Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson.

Aye.

Henderson, aye. Director Hinze. Director Hinze.

Aye.

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

Thank you.

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

Directors, that places you on item number 12, approving traffic modifications for an 18th month extension from April 1, 2026 to September 30, 2027. of existing dead end street closures at four intersection locations on cap street between 18th street and 22nd street and two mid block locations on shotwell street between 19th street and 21st street and to extend various turn restrictions to complement dead end street closures at 18th street and cap street and intersection diverters at two intersection locations on shotwell street at 19th street and 21st street and making findings required by the California Vehicle Code for the 18th month extension.

Hi. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, board members. My name is Bryant Wu, senior traffic engineer at the SFMTA streets division. And I was here 18 months ago, and a little over 18 months ago, and I'm back again to talk about the item before you today, which is to extend the existing closures that we have on Capp and Shotwell streets. I want to first go over a little bit of history. The closures that we have on both streets were installed at the request of SFPD. And we have here today to answer any SFPD-related questions, Lieutenant Antonio Flores, who's the head of the Special Victims Unit at SFPD. And we installed these closures starting back in 2023 to address chronic criminal activity related to sex worker traffic. And so the first rollout of this closure was done on February 10, 2023, on Cap Street. It closed at four intersections between 18th and 22nd. using the authority guaranteed by the California Vehicle Code. And how we did that was we installed Type 3 barricades and fan bags to temporarily close the street. Those barricades, as shown in this photo, were quickly defeated within 48 hours. And in response, a week later, we installed, in lieu of those Type III barricades, concrete barriers across the street, which significantly improved quality of life. But the barriers that were installed certainly impeded SF Fire Department access to those streets in the event of an emergency. So those concrete K-rails were removed and installed with the fire department's input. We installed collapsible bollards, steel bollards that you could see. They had a specific lock and pin that could be removed by the fire department that allowed the bollards to be tilted down so that the fire department could respond to those affected blocks from both directions if need be. Well, as it turned out, those bollards were easily defeatable. And so the residents understandably took it upon themselves that they liked the results that they were seeing in terms of quality of life. And so they took it upon themselves to install planters and other devices to reinforce, shall we say, or keep the bollards upright on those blocks. And what we've also seen from a more organic standpoint, locations where the bollards were installed became, depending on the time of day, we've seen car washes or we've seen food trucks or other folks park along the bollards occasionally. The Fire Department understandably is and still remains concerned with the devices behind the bollards. But back in 2024, we were exploring other devices to install on the street in lieu of the bollards. And what we came up with was what we call a modal filter. This was a raised rubber curb that you couldn't install in the street. It would discourage regular cars from driving through the street, but still be low enough to allow emergency vehicles, garbage trucks, or other type of tall vehicles to be able to access the street. And so we thoroughly tested this with the fire department back in 2024. to their satisfaction. And so that experience was rolled out, specifically on Shotwell Street. We had received complaints and concerns that the criminal activity had migrated. from cap street onto shotwell street and in concert with the fire department the police department and the mayor's office back in 2024 we extended first where we renewed the closure that was on cap street and we extended the closure onto shotwell street And those barriers were put in on Shotwell Street in concert with some public safety cameras, as well as an SFPD Dear John letter effort, specifically to help curb this kind of criminal activity. And this photo shows exactly what the modal filter on Shotwell Street looks like. It comprises of rubber curbs in the middle of the street with delineators in the middle, as well as K-rail on the side and slots on both sides specifically to allow bicyclists to travel on Shotwell through the barrier because Shotwell Street was already a slow street. This is what it looks like when it was new. And we also installed, as a part of the barricades on Shotwell, we installed some traffic diverters specifically on Shotwell at 19th and 21st Street to discourage traffic from turning from the side streets onto the closed streets. So we've gained quite a bit of experience over the last 18 months, and I've tried to choose some representative photos regarding the issues that have been raised or concerns. First off, certainly whenever you install a device or assign It's an opportunity for graffiti. And so we've seen the signs or the K rail routinely defaced. We've also, because these are rubber curves that we were trying out, and heavy vehicles by design must travel over these rubber curves. Certainly the rubber curves have been like a Timex watch taken a licking. And they keep on ticking, but they still require quite a bit of maintenance in order to keep them in a decent state of repair. This photo shows probably some of the worst barriers that we've seen. Some of them have gone missing and they require frequent replacement. And these are the estimated costs that we have to replace devices that are on CAP and Shotwell. Most of the cost is related to MTA labor. because the materials themselves are actually quite reasonably priced. So from a traffic engineering standpoint, the devices are doing their job. From the PD's perspective, at least on the closed streets, They are doing their job as well in terms of discouraging that type of criminal behavior. We have seen quite a few emails, and we've received quite a bit of feedback regarding how the criminal activity has migrated from Cap and Shotwell to the adjacent streets or some of the nearby east-west streets. And certainly, that is a concern that we take. But we also know that the police department has taken that fully into consideration when requesting that the SFMTA extend the closure for an additional 18 months. So today's action item is to do just that, which is to extend the existing closures and devices that we have on Capp and Shotwell for an additional 18 months. Specifically, extend for 18 months the existing dead-end closures on Capp at 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd Street. also to extend the mid-block closures that we have on Shotwell between 19th and 21st Street, and to continue for an additional 18 months the traffic diverters that we've installed on Shotwell at 19th and 21st Street. That concludes my presentation this afternoon, and certainly welcome any feedback or questions. And any criminal activity or those type of quality of life issues, PD is here to answer as well.

Thank you. I will open public comment for this item now 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. I do have speaker cards, so I will be calling out names about three at a time. Please queue up on the TV side of the room as I call your name. Jason Chalasche, Joyce Furman, Laurel Coco.

Thank you, Board. I've been a resident. My name is Jason Schlockett. I've been a resident on Cap Street since 2008. While there's always been an element of sex work on the street, the longstanding tolerance has let it escalate out of hand during the pandemic, causing a real crisis requiring our neighbors to self-organize and demand intervention by the city. For this intervention, we are grateful. Just before the bollards were installed, living on Cap Street was a nightmare. Being woken up in the middle of the night to the sound of women screaming for their lives, bumper to bumper traffic, a dozen women per block walking in the middle of the road, stepping over discarded used condoms, and intimidation from pence. When the bollards were installed, there was an immediate and effective change. Cap Street instantly became a residential street again and used by residents and guests, remaining peaceful at night. This order is what we expect in a residential area. I strongly urge the board to continue these street closures on both Cap and Shotwell Streets to maintain order. They have mitigated decades' worth of momentum of illicit activity and auxiliary crime that comes with it, like garage break-ins. However, there's still work to do. The ends of the closed streets are, as the gentleman earlier said, marked with red curbs to allow enough space for vehicles to turn around, but have become de facto parking lots, obstructing access and attracting garbage. City agencies must reassert these red curb zones and keep the ends of these streets clear. Beyond this, there is still active sex work, as mentioned before, in our residential neighborhood. While we cannot ask for every street to be closed, the residents of the Mission District deserve a peaceful and respectful residential environment. There's one thing I've learned as a Mission District resident is that the moment deterrents are removed, illicit activity returns quickly. Please renew these effective street closures. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello.

Hello, my name is Joyce Furman. I live on Shotwell Street between 20th and 21st. I'm a 74-year-old woman living alone. My experience since we've put in these street blockage has been finally I'm able to sleep at night. Again, even with earplugs and my windows closed, double pain, I was not able to sleep. The minute we put in those bollards, things quieted down. In terms of my personal safety, I feel much safer walking home at night. Prior to these bollards being put in, I actually had prostitutes come up my stairs and engage in sexual activity on my front yard and side yard. So that was very frightening. At one point, I asked them to please be quiet and leave my property. And they threatened me and threw a full beer can at my head. There were also fights breaking out between prostitutes and their pimps on the street. So it's not just sex work. It's also violence. It's noise and extreme traffic noise that went on basically from 9 o'clock at night to 3 in the morning. So I strongly urge you to continue protecting the street and making it livable. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few more speaker names. John Bove, Brian Kuttner, R. Aparcio. Go ahead.

Members of the board, my name is Laurel Coco. I live at 18th and Shotwell. I'm speaking for a unified coalition of residents and business owners. Two days ago, I emailed video evidence to your inboxes. And I hold every member of this board personally accountable to view this evidence before making a vote. Your traffic choices have made living on our block unbearable. When you installed bollards on Southern Shotwell, we warned you that you would simply displace the market. You ignored us. And you transferred a public safety crisis directly to our doorsteps. Since October 2024, we've been trapped. We are routinely solicited walking home and kept awake at night by the noise. And the danger is real. I was recently stalked to my home by a pimp. Two days ago, my husband was physically assaulted outside our front door by several sex workers and their pimp. It is heartbreaking to witness the exploitation of women and underage girls outside my window, but SFMTA must take responsibility for the displacement that your infrastructure has created. City engineering should not protect one block by sacrificing another. Rather than blindly extending this pilot, we demand equity. Delay this vote. Direct staff to develop comparable traffic interventions for our block. Physical barriers, nighttime turns, restrictions, retractable bollards that go down or up at night, or other solutions. Study the problem. Be creative. Commit to a solution. The evidence has been in your inboxes for 48 hours. There is no excuse to vote without viewing it. Please do not perpetuate this inequity. We demand immediate traffic solutions to address our block along with coordinated multi-agency response. We've been asking for this for two years. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, members of the board. My name is John Bovee. I live near 18th and Shotwell. I'm here to ask you to postpone the vote to extend the cap and Shutwell barriers until the city publicly evaluates this pilot and develops a plan for blocks absorbing its impacts. A few nights ago at 1 AM, I was doing exactly what law enforcement has asked us to residents to do, documenting severe noise and activity across from our home. There were approximately eight to 10 women gathered across the street. Two crossed the street toward me. My phone was knocked from my hand. I was pepper sprayed. And as I retreated blindly towards my house, a man who had been accompanying the group followed behind me and threatened to knock me down. I share this because it illustrates what displacement looks like when it lands on another block. It is not just a line on a map. It is residents, families, and businesses absorbing the consequences of a narrow intervention. In October 2024, Shotwell project engineer Bryant Wu justified the Shotwell barriers by citing displacement from Cap Street. Yet during that same process, the city maintained there was no evidence the new barriers would cause further displacement onto surrounding blocks, despite written warnings from residents that this was likely. That contradiction has never been resolved. At the conclusion of the 2024 Shotwell vote, a board member stated this program would return for review in six months. Did that review occur? If so, where is it? Now the city is being asked to extend this pilot for another 18 months without presenting a public evaluation of what happened beyond the intervention area. Many affected people only learned of today's hearing because someone noticed signage within the barrier zone. The women involved are no better off today. The underlying problem has not been solved, but simply displaced. Relief inside the barrier zone is not the same as resolution. Before extending this program, please require a public evaluation of the pilot and a plan for the blocks absorbing the displacement. If those do not exist today, this vote should be postponed. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Brian Kuttner. I currently live on Shotwell Street between 19th and 20th for the last nine years with my wife and now five-year-old daughter. And you're going to hear from a lot of my neighbors today about the quality of life improvements that have come from the improvements. And so I won't spend my time reiterating those for you here. What I will point out is that much of the damage that you saw earlier in the slides on those barriers on Shotwell Street have been caused by collisions with impaired drivers coming down the street at 2 to 3, 4 o'clock in the morning, hitting those well-marked barriers at a high rate of speed. And so there's a lot of factors to consider here. You're going to hear a lot of them today. But the one that I think that maybe simplifies the argument the most is that There is a higher rate of impaired driving in this part of the city, and the barriers are absolutely doing a great job at protecting both private citizens and private property from damage from those drivers. So I would encourage that those barriers remain until those kind of rates of impaired drivership reduce. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few more names. Ira Woodhead, Mark Babson, Jessica Raya. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name is Reynaldo. The reason I'm here is in support of extending these barriers on our block, which is the 20th, 19th Street and Southwell. We are now elated with the fact that those barriers have actually made it possible for us to sleep at night. and also realize that they're now coming back. The prostitutes and the pimps are again moving in, and we need you to actually get them away from our block. Our kids cannot play in the street because these people are out there, and they are menaces. They have no way to be dealt with, but we ask them to leave. And in regards, they actually want to fight and so on. The ones that are here that have spoken can actually testify to the fact that we now need them to be again put up. These I ask your name. Thank you much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name's Ira. I've lived at 20th and Shotwell Streets for 17 years, approximately. The barriers have improved our lives enormously, and I'm in favor of keeping them. I also believe all of my neighbors, the ones to the north and south who have felt the displacement of the street activity negatively impact them to the extreme. I believe them and I believe my nearer neighbors who find the barriers, the modal filters, very beneficial. I am in support of extending the barriers, and I also urge you to consider expanding this program to the north and south on Shotwell Streets. Thank you.

Thank you. If we could please have the phone silenced from the audience area. Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, Commissioners. I'm Mark Babson. First of all, for those of you who were on the Commission 18 months ago, thank you so much. Our life is so much better. I've never seen an infrastructure improvement that if there's a before and there's an after. We live right at one of the barricades between 19th and 20th. We have two 10-year-old daughters. Before, we'd come home from gymnastics at 9 and there'd be three women wearing like nothing in the driveway to honk in order to pull into our driveway. All the yelling, the screaming, the violence, the barriers work. Displacement is a different issue. Maybe they can be extended further down 18th and 19th. We're all for that. We're all for getting it out of the entire neighborhood. But just as a data point, it completely works between 19th and 20th and 20th and 20, 21st. The sex trade is great. We see some, a couple over here, a couple over there. It's not like the density or intensity of before. It works beautifully. Please extend it. And also families. Families were moving out of our neighborhood, families with young children. And San Francisco has a dearth of families with young children. And that movement has stopped out, at least anecdotally. I've only seen one family leave and others come in, whereas the couple years before, it was like an exodus, all these young families leaving. So please extend for another 18 months. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few more names. If we could please minimize the disruptions. Thank you. Bradley Dunn, Hugo Eccles, Andy Ogilvie.

Go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Jess Correa. My husband and I live on the 500 block of Shotwell between 19th and 20th Street, and we've been there for just over eight years. I fully support the Mid-Street Barrier Program. I hope you will extend it for us today and for everyone else in our neighborhood as well. I hear everybody's pain, and I've lived it, so I understand. Sex work on Shotwell Street has been a decades-long problem, which I'm sure you're all aware, and one that nobody in this city thought it could solve. Then you have helped start to solve it with some simple barriers. This is amazing. And I think we should all acknowledge that a huge step forward has been taken here. You've not only effectively stopped sex work on our block, but you've changed our lives, and you're hearing it today from people who are living this. You've given us back our safety, you've given us back our sleep, and you've given us back a street we love. The only thing I would change about this program, on top of extending it further out to others in our neighborhood, is to make it permanent. But until that happens, I'll be back every 18 months to show my support. So thank you so much. Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, Chair Tarulov and members of the board. My name is Bradley Dunn, and I'm a lifelong San Franciscan. And one of the things I'm most proudest of is the five years that I worked for the SFMTA on streetscape projects, including Folsom Howard streetscape project and the Pretoro Yard project, doing community engagement. I also live on Cap Street between 21st and 22nd with my wife and our cats. And I'm deeply supportive of continuing the dead ends and partial street closures. These bollards are essential for safety, combating those driving from outside our community to engage in illicit activity that benefits everyone that lives in the Mission. The bollards use environmental design that also limits police interactions that can escalate similar to the car chase that crashed into a parklet on 24th Street in 2025. We have more kids with riding their bikes in the neighborhood, people walking in the neighborhood, and patrons supporting the taco truck that parks at the dead end. That's been a great addition as well, rather than people cutting through at speed that don't care about our neighborhood. I would like to point out that many of the speakers who are concerned about spillover impacts are asking for similar interventions. The SFMTA and SFPD should work with those neighbors to install additional barriers and do targeted enforcement where barriers cannot be placed. I strongly encourage the SFMTA board to approve item 12 and begin a community-based transportation plan similar to the Bayview CBTP. A CBTP is the best way to focus on equity and include those who, beyond those of us who can take a Tuesday off and come and comment and include the entire community in a planning process that could include SFPD and address the long-term future of these streets. I strongly encourage us to look at a permanent process to include these street restrictions permanently and make sure that the spillover effects don't negatively impact the neighborhood as a whole. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi there. My name is Hugo Eccles. I live on Shotwell Street between 19th and 20th. We've lived there for eight years. This scheme has completely transformed the street. It's quiet, it's safe, it's pleasant. Beforehand, we could have a situation where we might have up to 20 sex workers on the street. at a night, plus all the associated cars, noise, threats of violence from the workers themselves and from their pimps. And actual violence, we had a drive-by shooting. We had a stabbing. So I support extending this scheme. But I also, in parallel, support expanding the scheme to support our other neighbors who have given very emotional evidence, which is obviously very real and very upsetting. So please extend, but also please expand. Thank you.

Thank you. I will read a few more names. Matthew Blackshaw, Ayman Farahat, Hashal Vid. Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon. Thanks for hearing our voices on this. My name is Andrew Oglesby. I'm a 27-year resident, Shotwell between 19th and 20th. I just want to echo what I've heard from my neighbors today and say that this program has been an overwhelming success, life-changing for many of us. And just to speak quickly on what why interaction involving both SFMTA and SFPD is required. And I just want to reemphasize that the sex trafficking And criminal activity that happens in our neighborhood originates with people coming into the neighborhood who don't live there. That's been my lived experience for the entire time. And that has to do with, obviously, people driving in, pimps, prostitutes, johns, all seemingly live outside of the city, outside of the neighborhood. And so hence the traffic. This solution has worked great for us. I urge you to maintain what we have, but also expand upon it. I feel for my neighbors. I didn't know how badly things had gotten for them. It's part of a bigger problem. We were living exactly the same way as they currently are. It's not tolerable. It's not equitable. And as leaders in the city, you need to work to find a better solution overall. But I urge you to keep the barriers in place and expand the program and work with our neighbors for a good solution. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. I also would like to just ask members of the audience to minimize any disruptions. If you would like to express agreement or disagreement with a speaker, you can show us visually, maybe with a thumbs up or a thumbs down. It's important for us to maintain order. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Matthew Blackshaw. My partner and I lived on Shotwell Street at 19th for about a decade now, and then the mission for another seven or eight years before that. A little context on me. I grew up in New Zealand for the first half of my life, where sex work is legal and decriminalized. And it has, before the law was passed, created a very safe environment for these people. And to me, that is the solution that really does work here. However, having observed both, what existed in our neighborhood and on our street really showed how people could be exploited. Those sex workers could be exploited and it created an unsafe environment, not just for the people who lived on the street, but for the people who were actually engaged in the work. And so since the barricades were installed 18 months ago, there have been remarkable changes. We feel safer. We feel safer coming home. We're planning to have several kids soon. We were considering leaving the neighborhood. But because the changes have been so significant, we think we will stay now. And so that really has made our neighborhood better. We've also heard that shifting the barricades does move the problem to other parts of the city. So this is not a long-term solution, but I strongly encourage you to renew the barricades for the sake of our neighborhoods while at the same time exploring longer-term solutions that can create a profession that is safe for not just the residents here, but also for the people who engage in this kind of work. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, my name is Ayman Farhat. I've been living in the neighborhood for about eight years with my family. And one of the experiences that we had is that when our son used to go to school every morning, we would see scantily dressed women. So this is an experience that a 13-year-old had to go through every day going to school. We had a horrendous attack by a sex worker on March 31, 2024. And in spite of every effort that the SFPD did, nothing worked. The only thing that worked were the barriers. Now we can sleep safely. Now we can walk our streets. Now we have our neighborhood back. I do understand that there has been concerns about displacement, but that this is not a reason not to approve it. This is just like a judge refusing a restraining order against a sex offender because this sex offender might turn around and attack someone else. It's logically incorrect, morally irreprehensible. I do support our neighbors everywhere. I do encourage you to take effective measures, but I don't believe this is a valid and reasonable argument to even consider, let alone express. I strongly urge you to approve the barricades and extend them for an additional 18 months, but also at the same time take serious action to encourage and work with the SFPD and various agencies to make sure that any displacement is limited. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few more speaker names. Sandra Esperanza Apario, Bob Allen.

Hi, everyone. My name is Harshil Vaid. I live on Shotwell Street between 20th and 21st Street. I've been living there with my wife for six years. I strongly support extending the street closure. We are a young family thinking of having kids and I just can't imagine raising a family with the street conditions that existed prior to the street closure. So I really encourage because the streets feel safer and nicer. And yeah, we love the mission. We want to stay. And if the street conditions stay like what they have been for the past 18 months, there is no reason for us to leave. Since the six years that we've been living here, we've only heard of sex work in Cap Street and Shortwell Street. So while I fully support extending, I also support expanding the street closure to the south and north, if needed, on Shortwell, and then see where does that go. Because until now, I've only heard it on Cap and Shortwell. So thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Sandra. I live on Shotwell between 20th and 21st. I'm born and raised on Shotwell. We've been here there for 50 years. My family's been renting there. And so I just want, I have two concerns. And again, I know I got a lot of my neighbors back here and my concerns are a little bit different and I'm not against anything that any of my neighbors are saying because I believe their concerns are valid. But I've seen it all on Shotwell, because I'm born and raised there, and so has my entire family. And right now, my main concern is emergency crews. I don't care what anybody says, but those emergency crews are getting to locations at slower paces. That little thing, that little video, I know this guy because he's coming around on his bike. I actually live right in the middle of one of the barriers. And I have video, which I don't know who I should email to, where you could see somebody that has been transported and picked up in an ambulance while the ambulance is trying to rock back and forth to get the person out of Shotwell. And it's taking them a minute to take off because they're stuck in between the barrier. And I live across the street from Victoria House. Victoria House is a rehab center of those who are mentally ill. We support that program. public place being there because it's always been a place as a mental institution to support people in the community. They call the ambulances there, you guys, and the firefighters almost every single day. My mom, exactly a year ago, we called the ambulance. It didn't get there at a time that we would have liked for it to get there because I think there was confusion on which street to get into. And when they got her in there and we felt like they had stabilized her, they had trouble getting out. My mom passed away a few months ago. We'll never know if her heart weakened because of the response time. We love that there's a quick response time with ambulance and emergency crew. I don't think that that should be threatened because of this issue that is not adequately being addressed by the city. Again, I have that evidence. Bikers do not stop. They go extremely fast on this street, causing all kinds of near accidents. My car got hit. I have to read really fast. It blocks traffic. I've seen honking, yelling, fights. I've seen it all because I sleep in the front room. Thank you, madam. I just want to say real quick, this requires a multi-agency effort. It did not stop sex work.

Madam. The issue is you're putting a lot of these young women at risk. Thank you.

Your time is up. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Ma'am, your time is up. Thank you. For fairness, everyone gets the same amount of time. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hi, good afternoon again. Bob Allen. I live on Shotwell between 20th and 21st. I think the previous speaker raised some of the questions I had. I want to acknowledge that we're right back to where we were when we started this process. And one of my disappointments in terms of the process is we didn't have kind of an evidence-based approach we didn't come back six months later and evaluate that and i work with mta and the other staff and i know there's a lot of competing priorities i don't think it's fair that you all are being kind of held responsible for single-handedly dealing with this through street improvements um that's just incredibly naive if we think we're going to fix a systemic problem that's been around for decades by you doing just street improvements the previous speaker said if we're serious about the problem We'll have a multi-agency approach. We can bring the community in. We can try to take a more comprehensive look at what's working. I just haven't seen, I don't see the police sitting here talking about what's working. I acknowledge for the people on my block, the improvements that they've experienced in their lives. We also, and I teach public policy at San Francisco State, I would be embarrassed if my students, at the end of the semester, when I asked them for an evidence-based approach, if they took this tact in bringing on back and just said, we want to extend this. Again, I will acknowledge that some people have felt some benefit from these interventions. But we haven't looked at the totality. You heard other folks. expressing exactly what some of us were concerned about was the problem would be moved down the block and now they're being impacted. So I want to, again, I really want to acknowledge the full range of things that are going on in the neighborhood and with my neighbors. But it's very difficult to have an honest conversation, which is if we want to try, and it's going to be a try, we're not just going to solve it. It needs to be multi-agency. We need to look at the systemic approach. If what we're saying is I just want it off my block, then that is endemic and really, I think, symptomatic of so much that goes on in the city of San Francisco, which is I just want this incredibly difficult, challenging problem to go away. I get the impulse. I'm not going to chastise people for having that reaction emotionally. But then we cannot pretend that we're actually trying to address the problem. We're not going to snap our fingers and solve it. But this can't just be we voted to do this and we solved the problem. That's magical thinking. And even if it makes some of us feel better in the short term, it's not a way to do public policy. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few names. Roberta Chavez, Marsha. Any other speakers can start to queue on the TV side if I haven't called your name.

Good afternoon. My name is Roberta Chavez, and I've lived at the corner of 20th and Shotwell for 16 years with my family, including my 15-year-old son. I'm here to express my support for extending the barriers and to express my support for my neighbors who are sharing the very real impact of displacement. I hope that you hear them today, and I also support the idea of a multi-agency approach to addressing this problem throughout our neighborhood, not just on the block I live on. Thank you for hearing me today, and thank you for your work.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Marcia, and I live in 18th Street in Chowell, near to Chowell. I am here to support to put the barriers. Since the barriers, we have seen a lot more activity. often see 10 or more people, women, making noises all the night since 8 o'clock in the afternoon to 7 o'clock in the morning. A lot of traffic in the cars, the parking in front of my house, too, with a lot of music, making noises, drinking, using drugs. And I have two women, one 88 years old, and the other is 83. My brother and I, we have to wake up early, too. And we cannot sleep all night, every day, every single day. It's a lot of terrible. And this is making to us very sick. I just ask you to please allow the panel to include neighbors. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Sean Case. I live at 688 Shotwell, which is between 20th and 21st. I've been there since 2011. And just to make sure everybody knows, the prostitution didn't just move to Shotwell recently. The prostitution was there when I got in the neighborhood in 2012. looked right down onto the street, onto the corner at 21st and Shotwell. One, there was gridlock, you know, more traffic on a Tuesday at 10 than there was during, you know, rush hour. And I might see four or five, six ladies standing on the corner right underneath the streetlights because that's where they're best seen. So, you know, this was just, so, and I worked with some other neighbors back then and we tried this whole approach, multidisciplinary. We were talking with David Campos, and then, of course, he turned out, and Hilary Ronan. We talked with Bevan Dufty, and Muhammad Nuru, and consultants in the sex worker organization in St. James Infirmary, and et cetera, et cetera. And nothing ever came of it. Dozens of meetings, hundreds of hours spent by the community. The barriers have been the only thing that have worked. I know they're not perfect, and these other concerns about the spread of this and how it's not really attacking the core of the problem is true, but at some point, you know, this is generational, how You know, the people on Shotwell and CAP, you know, have been dealing with it for decades and decades. And they're tired of it. And we understand other people. It's not a good thing to move it around. But that's what we've got right now. And that seems to be the best solution. And we do hope that the city will take up something that is a little bit more comprehensive and take it seriously.

Thank you. Any other speakers in the room for this item, item number 12? Seeing none in the room, and I do have one accommodation request. Speaker, you've been unmuted. You have two minutes. This is for item number 12.

I am not a resident of Shotwell Street or Cap Street. And I really can't pass judgment on this. I'm sure that an agreement should be struck to all parties concerned, because if you kick it down, if you place barriers on Shotwell Street, the problem is going to travel to Potrero Street. And so a solution really has to be arrived at. And I don't know what kind of solution you can have, but since I'm not a resident of those streets, I really can't make a statement for a solution. I respect the testimony of those who have testified. Thank you.

Thank you. No other speakers.

Thank you. I would like to thank members of the public today for coming and sharing your experiences with us. We take what you have to say very seriously. And I would like to acknowledge that the matters that we are discussing today touch on very serious criminal matters which are under the purview of the San Francisco Police Department and that SFMTA has endeavored to be of assistance to the police department in this issue. We do have a representative from the San Francisco Police Department here today. And I wonder if you might share a few words with us.

Sure. Good afternoon. My name is Tony Flores. I'm the acting lieutenant with the Special Victims Unit. I oversee over several other disciplines, but the main objective is human trafficking. So I am born and raised in the city of County San Francisco. I've been with the police department about 44 years. And like everyone here has said, this problem has been decades. It's constantly has been. So we sat in numerous meetings regarding this issue on Cap Street initially. Shotwell Street wasn't that. that had that much activity back then. We knew that it was going to get pushed. We knew that it was going to go a different direction. When the ballers and everything and the barriers went up, it went almost down to almost nothing. And then we said, we need to keep up enforcement regarding these things. January of this year, we just got back the law of lording for the purpose of prostitution. Those are for the buyers of sex workers. That just came up this year. So we've been enforcing that. We've also been enforcing other cases regarding focusing more on the pimps and the traffickers out there. Working with the district attorney's office and getting those cases filed has been tremendous. We've actually probably made about over 20 or 30 cases involving pimps that have various sex workers that are out there working not only in Shotwell, Caps Free, but in that area, somewhat in that area citywide, involving not only adults but also minors. This is something that I've taken very seriously, constantly. I am operational today. We've been operational probably at the beginning of this month because of FIFA. We'll probably be out and about. We were out there on Monday making arrests. We arrested a pimp that was out there trafficking a young lady that basically we had contact with her before, and she basically saw us, and she said, thank God you guys were out here. He was going to take me to Las Vegas. So I want to work with the community. I want to work with these folks, these other residents in San Francisco, and also kind of come up with a different answer, different solutions. I'm always open minded to those things. It's not just going to take the ballers, but it's going to take everything. And the hard part is we put these cases on the individuals, and the district attorney's office files on these individuals. But then it comes down to the justice system, and sometimes these individuals will have maybe two or three cases on these individuals, and they'll let them out. They'll let them out. And so we have these individuals that are still doing that same pimping, pandering, and also trafficking of individuals. So hopefully, again, I will share my information with those individuals, how to contact me. My email is antonio.flores at sfgov.org. Again, that's antonio.flores at sfgov.org. I'm very open to actually sitting with the community that stands behind me because I know they're helping me also.

Thank you, Lieutenant Flores. Are you in Station to Admission Station, or is there a special address?

No, I'm in that old building called 850 Bryant Street, which...

Yeah.

It's an old building.

I'm familiar with it. Well, thank you for your work, and thank you very much for being here today. Clearly, there's a great need for the residents that are impacted in this area. I think SFMTA is glad to assist any way that we can. But the spillover concerns, I recall, were raised when this was initially brought to us. And indeed, that was correct. If you could stand by, my colleagues may have questions for you or for Mr. Wu. And I'd like to ask Director Kahina if you have thoughts.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your presentation, Brian. And Lieutenant Flores, thank you so much for being here with us today. I appreciate all the public comment we heard today. I know it's a very difficult situation. It's not easy on a Tuesday afternoon to come out here and be vulnerable with us and share what you shared with us today. So I just really want to appreciate all of you for taking the time to do this. It does seem, based on public comment, I could completely appreciate that this intervention has improved the quality of life for some folks, but not for all. And I heard from you, Lieutenant Flores, and also from Brian, and during a briefing I got this morning, that there is a real intention to work with community. But I do wonder how we have worked with community in the past 18 months. and if that has happened. And so wondering if you could speak a little bit more to that. What has happened in the last 18 months and how have we worked with our community partners in the Mission District?

Well, every other month I meet with individuals from around the Bay Area and we talk about these same problems. We talk about what Oakland has, what San Francisco has as far as the, as they're known as tracks. In other words, where sex workers kind of hang out and we talk about different strategies. And those strategies have come out some good plans as far as lighting conditions and those things like that. I know I've worked with Mission Station. Mission Station is where the Shotwell and Cap Street are located. So I'm constantly in communications with them. We made sure that we trained those individuals to recognize the signs of human trafficking and also pimping and pandering, but also emphasizing those things when they're out there. If they notice that an individual is loitering for the purpose of prostitution, take action on that and cite that individual. Once that individual is cited for the loitering for the purpose of prostitution, we advise them that most likely they're going to get a letter in the mail sent to their home especially if the vehicle is registered to them, and that is done. So we constantly are working together as far as with the folks and individuals at the station. When they tell us about incidences that have somewhat a type of maybe pimping or pandering or trafficking activity, that is brought to our attention also because, again, we work out of 850 Bryant, not out of it, and we're citywide. So we're constantly dealing with not just mission, but every place in the city. We watch trends. We kind of watch at those incidents. Again, I did hear about the incidents about the assaults, and I'd like to talk to them afterwards about that, about what was followed up on that case and kind of make sure that they have my contact information. That's why I gave my email out. I work with a lot of non-government agencies, like the San Francisco Coalition Against Human Trafficking. I work with the mayor's office regarding victim services, with the DA's office regarding victim services, to provide that information to some of the sex workers when they want to get out. But that is a very difficult task, because I'm trying to build rapport with these individuals that are out there on the streets constantly. And it's a trust issue.

So it occurs to me that there's a prevalence of violent acts that are related to sex work and are not related to sex work. And I wonder, and I heard this a lot in public comment, that there's this desire to try to understand if there is a multi-agency and maybe even a multi-departmental approach within the SFPD to explore solutions for the area. Within the last 18 months, have you all Conversed about that, thought about that. Is that something that has come up for you all?

Well, as you all know, the police department is shorthanded. So we've also our partnership with the district attorney's office to start a human trafficking task force, which we are bringing other agencies, like the sheriff's department, BART, our federal agencies, the FBI, HSI with us and that is going to help us out that we are at the final stage of the MOU to get finalized and then our team will be much stronger, much bigger, much larger.

Brian, I don't know if you could step up for a little bit. So curious to understand how we've also been working with Department of Emergency Fire, different emergency responsiveness in that area. I did hear that also come up for some folks. So just want to see if over the last 18 months you've seen something there or something noteworthy or we've made changes to try to accommodate those issues or address those issues.

Yes. Regarding emergency response, that one of the slides that I showed showed just one ambulance going over it. But when we tested the devices that were ultimately put on Shotwell, we actually had a full ladder truck, two fire engines, three different ambulances, and two battalion chief SUVs test the devices thoroughly before actually rolling it out on Shotwell. And roughly about a month, I have a photo in my drive, roughly a month after devices were installed, I saw an ambulance actually go and serve Shotwell and actually go over the curbs, thus confirming that there was no impact that the devices had to emergency response, at least on Shotwell. uh for cap uh the bollards when they remain upright of course uh fire tries not to uh mold them down and so they essentially go around the block to serve that block and that's easier on cap to do because it's a wider street so we haven't had any significant complaints about the emergency response thus far on cap or shot well but certainly there's an opportunity to replace what we have on CAP with some things more permanent, more robust, and something that doesn't require the SFMTA's limited resources to constantly maintain them. And so we've been working with the fire department to see if we can come to some type of lessons learned and more robust device to put on CAP and incorporate that as well on Shotwell as a part of the Slow Street program.

Operationally, how are we getting feedback from the community?

I've been getting a lot of emails directly, not just before the devices were installed but afterwards. I've received emails from many of the folks who are present today and some of the neighboring blocks too, both good and bad, about how they've been doing.

Are we doing any surveying? Are we working with key community partners? Any of that going on?

No, we haven't been doing that.

All right. OK. What I'm seeing just from public comment presentation, also hearing from you fine gentlemen, is that there is a real need for us to have better metrics to evaluate this pilot program. And what I'm also hearing is that We did actually have in our the last time that we approved this a request for a six-month evaluation report and a presentation to this board and and that also did not occur and so I I do have some reluctance to approve this as is, given all of that. And so I do have an amendment to propose to this legislation. I'm happy to read it into the record if that works for folks. But I think the deep need that I see here is that, yes, we are addressing a very acute situation on CAP itself and on Shotwell itself. But the feedback loop from the community is not there. And the way for us to evaluate success is not there. It's very one-off, anecdotal. There are a series of senior-serving community uses along CAP, whether it's Mission Neighborhood Centers, Bethany Center, Victoria House, we heard all this. There's the American Indian Cultural District. There's all these different folks that have the eyes on the community that would really benefit us just to understand, are we implementing this the right way? Do we need to work with community to look at a more expansive approach? What does that expansive approach look like? And I really want to make sure that We are really meeting this moment right now, and not just addressing this with a Band-Aid solution that we're seeing is creating spillage in other areas. So the amendment, it's in a resolved clause, and I'll read it into the record for my colleagues to consider. Resolved to request staff to evaluate additional transport transportation related metrics including those in the slow streets program transportation code 207 and urge the SFPD to develop metrics in consultation with community to quantify the success of the closure from a safety standpoint and to consider using both sets of metrics to evaluate whether the city should consider another 18th month closure and a more permanent solution and approve as amended. I understand that this is really supporting the folks on CAP and Shotwell in this moment, but I am hearing that there are a lot of different issues that are unintended consequences of this that we also need to be mindful of. It's important that this board is responsive to those things that we're hearing. And I'm very conscious that we're not hearing from the whole community or a good subset of the community right now today. And that also concerns me. So I do hope, colleagues, that you do take these amendments to heart and approve as amended. Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Kahina. Director Hemminger?

Thank you, Madam Chair. Lieutenant, I just had a couple of questions for you. Have we done this anywhere else in the city, closed a street?

No, we have not. Not to my knowledge. Cap Street was the, I would say, the experimental part of this. I know we did used to have, believe it or not, we used to have three different tracks in San Francisco. The first one was on Polk Street from Ellis all the way past California Street. Then we used to have Union Square. Union Square, during the pandemic, I think literally shut those two tracks, as we call them, down. And especially, I would say, If you take the area of Union Square where there was literally no traffic down there, that was probably why that really kind of closed that out. So if you talk about barriers shutting out criminal activity, that's exactly what had happened.

We've talked quite a bit about the infrastructure solutions out there. We haven't talked much about... the role that you would play, the PD would play. And just for starters, do you have a set patrol schedule that you're out in that neighborhood visible?

So if you're asking about my team, when my team is out there doing enforcement stuff, we'd like to stagger because the folks out there, they tend to know our schedule for actually at the district station. They know when the shifts are changing. So we tend to off-site that shift. So we'll work earlier. We'll shift our hours around a little bit on stuff like that. We've also noticed that, again, as you mentioned, that you talk about other things, is that most of the girls are getting picked up by cars and they're driven to another location. even further out, to Hampshire Street, to Dolores Park. So just because they get picked up there, you can see that activity. And I would really hate to see that activity start up at another neighborhood. So as far as for us, we're constantly doing that enforcement, not working just with the mission station. But then when we started talking about Cap Street, when we first started looking at that, we looked at everything. And when we're talking about the lighting condition to everything to the enforcement of traffic out there, and we noticed that we really kind of almost put a halt to everything out there.

And finally, I have to say I'm quite sympathetic to what we've heard from the other neighbors.

Me too.

You're fixing the problem over there and you're dumping it on us.

I totally understand.

Do you have any advice for us about where do we draw that line and when do we stop?

Again, in my perfect world, there would be constant enforcement out there as far as for the loitering for the purpose of prostitution. Again, this was a tool that was used for us that was taken away. And then the community, all of California heard this. And they said, no, we need this. And I understand. putting cases on the sex workers out there. So we said, yes, that's a good thing, but possibly there are times when those individuals need to be on notice also, that not everyone's being forced to be out there, not everybody's And you've got to kind of recognize that. So like I said, I've been with the police department for 44 years. I've seen a lot of different trends. I've seen a lot of different activities. If you all remember, those of us that have been around for the Tenderloin on Leavenworth Street, O'Farrell Street used to be the big track. And the activity on Cab Street was very minor. So as we start closing these areas down, we're going to see them pop up in different areas.

So we're going to keep chasing the problem around town.

I think the technology has definitely helped us out now. I think of all these things that come to play is, I'll tell you right now, when I'm out there sightseeing, I'm constantly being asked. We're talking about our cameras, our flock cameras out there. I go, hey, that's not catching what I need to catch at that moment. Working a lot with our other units out there that basically we kind of put this thing all together. So, again, this is a new concept. The technology out there that we've been using, you can see that it has a big effect, especially when you're making those phone calls and you're seeing drones go up immediately and then all of a sudden patrol come very quickly.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Director Heminger. Director Hinzey.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Sort of doubling down on Director Heminger's line of thought here, Lieutenant Flores, do you have like a specific plan to deal with the overflow folks that are now being displaced? Do you have like a plan for the displacement? So, yeah.

Yes. Continue the enforcement. And then offer services for those individuals. Keep working with our partners as far as our non-government agencies, our federal agencies, our state and local agencies. I think that's going to be the big plan. Again, we talk every other month about strategies, about what works and what doesn't work. And we take those ideas and basically apply them to us. Now, San Francisco is very unique. We all know that. It's different. But we've got to recognize that because we're such a unique town that we need to adapt to those things.

And your current level of staffing, are you able to do the level of enforcement in those displaced, affected areas that is you consider sufficient, or do you feel like you need to step that up?

No. Again, with our partnerships that I have currently right now with the FBI and the Homeland Security, BART, and the Sheriff's Department, we're getting more support as far as doing the enforcement that we need to. Like I said, we started a week ago on Monday, last Monday, and we were very successful with that.

you'll continue at the at that current enforcement level you think i'm going to keep trying to keep trying you're going to keep trying okay i i think colleagues i think the the where i'm at is i think the the testimony in favor of keeping the current barricades uh was compelling uh we've heard from several residents And I think that their testimony regarding their own quality of life issues and how these barriers helped to address those are compelling. I am, like the rest of my colleagues, particularly Director Kikina, very sympathetic to the sort Displacement issues, this is one of the chronic issues in our city that suffers from this type of displacement, but I am very sympathetic to the issues, to the displacement, because we're sort of playing whack-a-mole here with this issue. So after comments, I'm happy to move Director Keenan's amendment and then move the item as amended.

Thank you, Director Hensley. Thank you, Director Hensley. Director Felder. Director Felder.

Thank you. Thank you. I am generally going to make comments that are consistent with what my colleagues have said. I have a couple of questions for Director Kahina about her amendment. But overall, the two issues I think that I'm most concerned about are A, how we address the potential displacement issues and whether or not there is an opportunity to be incremental in terms of what we approve today such that we can address those issues effectively. The second thing is just in terms of infrastructure. A number of people have touched on the infrastructure and how it's important that that infrastructure not in any way inhibit emergency and other necessary vehicles from being able to access streets. And it does strike me, and it struck me before even the testimony today, that we do have inconsistent infrastructure between both the streets that are being discussed today and across the city through the the Slow Streets program, which obviously has different intentions, the reality is we have a lot of different infrastructure. And it's my belief that having consistency will allow for a more consistent response when it comes to emergency vehicles, more familiarity with the infrastructure. And so I would hope that as we look at this and that the amendment might help us address that inconsistency and get to a point where we have the best, most effective infrastructure in place that is also most easily circumvented by emergency vehicles. So I guess those are the things. And in terms of the amendment, I just want to clarify that the amendment anticipates approval, but with incremental requirements, in essence.

Right, so it anticipates approval and it establishes a request from SFMT and SFPD to create evaluation metrics for the program. So currently there are no real evaluation metrics that we're using to evaluate if this is a success or not. We're really just relying on being responsive to a handful of community feedback that we're getting. And there is no real way for us to get – there's no feedback loop that we have with the community right now. And so if we are to approve this in the future, I really do think we need to make data-driven decisions. This is not a data-driven decision right now. We don't have any data to really support that this is actually working outside of public comment, which is really effective in this room. So thank you so much. But we need more. And we need to understand that this is actually working for folks throughout. So the resolution does not establish what those metrics should be. It really does put the onus back on staff and on SFPD to work with community to figure out what those are. It does create a baseline for us that we use already with our slow streets model to evaluate how on the transportation side our interventions are working to evaluate it as like a pseudo slow street. But I think that the main element here that we're using to push forward this legislation has a large safety component attached to it. The California, the traffic code that we're using to establish this pilot program has a safety component inherently in it. And so we need to have safety elements or metrics to evaluate this program if we want to push it forward.

And I guess my request would be that we be clear about why we have those metrics and that we be clear that part of the intent of having these metrics is so that we can evaluate whether we should be making modifications to the infrastructure and modifications to the extent of the program. Because that would address the two issues that we've heard testimony about.

Yeah. Would you like to add to the language? Or is this a, sorry, Susan?

Yeah, thank you, Director Felder. I think at the end, I know it's hard to hear the whole amendment, but Director Kahina, at the end of the amendment, does say to use both sets of metrics to evaluate whether the city should consider adding another 18-month closure or a permanent closure. So I think maybe just adding to evaluate whether and how or something like that works.

Yeah, I think that's fine. I think as long as it's that broad, we can obviously include those qualifications within our assessment.

Should I restate it for the record? I think. Do you have it? Yeah.

I do have it. I can read it into the record if you'd like.

Thank you. Thank you, Christine.

Okay. So the proposed updated amendment would be a motion to amend the resolution to include resolved to request staff to evaluate additional transportation-related metrics, including those in the Slow Streets Program, Transportation Code Section 207, and urge the SFPD to develop metrics in consultation with the community. to quantify the success of the closure from a public safety standpoint and to consider using both sets of metrics to evaluate whether and how the city should consider another 18th month closure or a more permanent solution and then to approve it as amended.

Thank you very much. Before I ask Director Henderson to weigh in, I would just like to maybe provide a little bit of context to your amendment, which is that, just in case it's not clear, The SFMTA board has authority to direct SFMTA staff to take certain actions and in this amendment we are doing that by directing our staff to provide us with some metrics regarding the success of this. program continuing. We do not have authority over SFPD and that is why the language is to urge SFPD to engage with the community and provide us with some metrics that will help us in the future. I would I have two things about that. One is I don't know if it's going to be possible to receive a commitment or a response to our urging today. But it would certainly be nice to hear that. And then the second is if the evaluation could also include the impacts to adjacent areas. Because I personally was very moved by the testimony of people that are impacted in adjacent areas. So, Lieutenant Flores, I'm sorry, you are the person here.

That person? Yes, you are that person. Okay, I'm used to being that person. As far as the commitment, I don't think there should be a big problem. If there is, I'll go back to my bosses, say, hey, this is what they would like. I'm pretty sure we could come up with something to share with our colleagues and everybody else to get a snapshot of it. I was whispering in his... Does this also include the areas that don't have the ballers, which then those workers tend to move to that area where that baller, that's going to be a different one. So I think so. I have in my head what my vision is. So I have this one particular area at 18th and Shotwell where there is really no ballers except for further down. So in that area, you're going to see a lot of activity. But then where the ballers are, you're going to see maybe minimum activity. So the enforcement that we do is we're going to notice this, and you'll see very slight activity where the ballers are. Does that work for you folks?

I think for the purposes of this particular legislation, the door is open right now to work with community to establish those metrics. So I don't want to kind of force you to pick one or two. I think that the effort is to try to see with the community what are the metrics that resonate the most. with folks that have been directly affected by the crime issues that have been occurring in these two streets, and then developing metrics accordingly. And so it could be something that is squarely into some of the purview that you have, but it could be something that's within the purview of your other colleagues, too. So we definitely invite you all to be expansive as you work with community just to establish those metrics.

I just want to be able to give the board a good snapshot of what it is that we see and then what the community sees. And some of the stuff the community never sees is these individuals being picked up and taken to another location. And that's where a lot of the enforcement happens.

OK. And perhaps, I don't know, Julie, if you all have worked with SFPD on other similar sort of projects. And perhaps you could speak to kind of the process that you all take when you're establishing these sort of metrics that go cross-departmental, these cross-departmental metrics or evaluation points that you guys have.

Sorry, I was having a hard time finding the on button. I think perhaps parallel would be the one agency approach that we've taken to street safety. And while road design plays a key role in enforcement, the public health data also all factor in. We will sit down with our colleagues, and we really appreciate you being here and sharing the police perspective on this and make sure that we bring back information. to the board a process for the partnership that is ongoing between our two agencies, but then also brings in the community voices that you're asking for. Thank you, Julie.

Thank you.

Director Henderson?

It's OK. The point that I wanted to emphasize was just the inclusion in the evaluation, the spillover impacts. And so it sounds like we're covered with the amendment. So I'm OK.

Okay. And I would just say that the thing that's still lingering as a question is the timing for evaluations. And if we approve this today, it's an 18-month extension. And the evaluations, there's been talk of a six-month evaluation that was supposed to occur with the last extension or the implementation and extension from CAP Street. When should we expect an evaluation? It seems to me that 18 months is not quite urgent enough for some of the issues that we're hearing today.

CHAIR TARLAW, VICTORIA WISE, STREETS DIRECTOR. UNDERSTOOD COMPLETELY ABOUT THE 18 MONTHS. I THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR FOR US TO GIVE IT ANOTHER SHOT IN SIX MONTHS. I PERSONALLY WILL MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS. We own the fact that it didn't. And I apologize for that. But I think we can be back in six months. And I think that puts some urgency into this work. And I think it's actually commensurate with some of the work that PD is undertaking right now in the mission period. So I think it's very timely in that way.

Thank you. And Director Kirschbaum, your comments about the one city approach I think are very apt to this. Director Chen, did you want to weigh in? Very good. So we have a motion to approve as, well, I believe that Director Hinzey's was prior to the additional amendment. So perhaps we need a new motion. And should I ask Secretary Silva, can you just read that one more time with the amendments?

Very good, yes. A motion to amend the resolution to include Resolved to request staff to evaluate additional transportation-related metrics, including those in the Slow Streets Program, Transportation Code Section 207, and urge the SFPD to develop metrics in consultation with the community to quantify the success of the closure from a public safety standpoint and to consider using both sets of metrics to evaluate whether and how the city should consider another 18-month closure or a more permanent solution and to approve that as amended.

I'll still move.

Thank you. Secretary Silva, please call the roll. On that motion, 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.

Directors, that places you on item number 13, amending Division 2 of the Transportation Code to establish the Community Corners Program, the program, a two-year pilot registration program for sponsors to adopt and enhance daylight intersections with planters and or street murals in painted safety zones as part of the SFMTA's Safety Zone Program, of proactive capital improvements and community placemaking, authorizing the director of transportation to implement the program and issue rules and regulations, registration conditions, and design requirements for the program, and establishing a registration fee of $50 for the program. Great.

MONICA MINOWICH- Good afternoon, Chair Tarloff, directors. My name is Monica Minowich, and I'm thrilled to be here with you all today presenting on the Streets Initiative pilot program, the Safety Zone program. Street safety is at the core of all of our work here in the SMMTA and in the city of San Francisco. Our broad and innovative toolkit spans from speed safety cameras to capital projects on the high-energy network. And this work has been supported by our city's leadership through recent policies, such as Mayor Daniel Lurie's Street Safety Initiative and Supervisor Melgar's sponsored and Board of Supervisors adopted Street Safety Act. At the foundation of this work is our safety daylighting citywide program. Daylighting is a proven low-cost safety measure that improves visibility by clearing the space at intersection approaches. And we've been daylighting intersections for a long time, for many years, even before the current state law, AB 413, was adopted in 2025. And so far, we've focused primarily on high-priority locations. Daylighting establishes a consistent city safety baseline at intersections, and we've already completed about 65% of locations across the city. But it doesn't stop there. There is an exciting opportunity to have this space do more for our communities than just getting intersection approaches clear and visible. The safety zone program that we're here to discuss today builds on the safety requirements statewide by creating new pathways for more functional and more welcoming streets. The safety zone program aims to improve already daylit zones by strengthening these spaces and creating new opportunities for neighborhood use. The first bucket of work I'll talk about is how SFMTA plans to upgrade these existing spaces with four effective intersection treatments. The second element that is central to this program is the community corners pilot, which gives neighborhood organizations a new way to shape their streets by adding street murals and planters to painted safety zones. This specific new program requires transportation code changes and board action today. This program, the Safety Zone program, goes further than our existing initiatives, our existing spot treatment program, our existing capital program on the Hydra network, and existing pilot Slow Streets mural program by doing this and also expanding to proactive treatments across the city using four main tools in a data-driven way, as well as this new community-led initiative to put corner murals in the street and corner planters. Depending on the needs of a location, upgrading already daylit spaces will be assessed for these four main treatments. First, painted safety zones. These are the white painted road areas where pedestrian crossings become more visible to people driving with the outline and delineator post, white plastic posts that further reinforce that the space should be kept clear. The second component that we'll be looking to deploy citywide are on-street bicycle corrals. These are racks placed in the roadway where there is high demand that's not met on the sidewalk alone. And these can accommodate 8 to 12 bicycles in a single space. The third treatment in this proactive city-led component includes concrete islands. These are physical barriers that are built in daylight zones to restrict parking and stopping. And because of the planning and design and construction required, these are typically more permanent and more expensive. And then lastly, to know as part of this deployment citywide and this new capital budget line item would be turn safety treatments. And these consist of installing waste high level vertical delineator posts and small rubber speed bumps and paint to create enhanced center lines and force wider turns and make them more slow. I mentioned these would be deployed in a data-driven, intentional way. So we would be looking at locations of highest priority and most vulnerable road users by looking at locations specifically on the high injury network, specifically where there's collision history, overlaying with important vulnerable land uses like proximity to schools and senior centers, proximity to the bite network as well. That's really important for our bite corral deployment. So all of this work would be mapped and assessed and put online on a new sort of consolidated portal, the Safety Zone Program portal and website, which would consolidate and bring together a lot of our safety elements across the agency into one place. and have these maps visible so the community knows where we're headed, which is around approximately 50 locations more or less a year with this program, depending on treatment type. So now to pivot to the community-led element of the Safety Zone Program, the Community Corners Pilot. Even before the mayor's office and the board of supervisors adopted their policies last year for the development of this important work, we've been hearing from communities across the city about their eagerness to be part of the solution. Upgrading daylit zones can better reflect the character, identity, and creativity of a community. The program being brought for adoption today includes these main components. It's being proposed as a 24-month pilot. This would enable staff to assess how well the framework and the design requirements are serving its intended use of keeping the space clear and well-maintained and beautified. evaluate how accessible it is to make sure that the lower barrier to entry that we're proposing as part of the registration process and that I'll talk about momentarily meets community needs and we have sufficient kind of interest in establishing things over the 24-month pilot. Eligible registrants would be limited to organizations for this pilot. And this is because we understand that insurance and some of the requirements can be a lot for an individual, for a resident outside of a corner. And establishing that the registrant must be an organization, like a nonprofit or a CBD, community benefit district, merchant association, that hold an insurance policy sufficient to cover the responsibilities under the program are met. We worked very closely over the last year or so with our city attorney and risk management in consultation on this requirement and understand that given the registration process being very streamlined, which again I'll talk about momentarily, but does not include this middle of a site plan that's reviewed by an engineer. It doesn't review that back and forth inspections that are Typical for a permitting program, registration is streamlined, but that also means that there's an increased need for registered accountability. Other elements include that participation will require a $50 nominal registration fee and a maintenance agreement. Ongoing maintenance is a large component of a program like this, and there's a lot of responsibility on the steward and the sponsor. So part of the success that we'd be looking at over the 24 months will be how ongoing maintenance is met. Like, for example, one important design consideration in the design requirements will be that plantings are kept low. We love the idea of beautifying the space, but the intended use is for it to be kept clear. So that's one ongoing maintenance need that the registrant would attest to, as well as a whole breadth of requirements in the staff developed design requirements. Lastly, another element to talk through as a component of this program would be that eligible locations are already daylit zones. We are not looking to remove additional parking. And as part of the intake process, we would have the opportunity as staff to review for ideal locations on a case-by-case basis. So ideal conditions are typically stop control, calmer streets, near side, not obstructing bus zones, not obstructing adjacent commercial loading zones, utility, and other things in the right of way. So this would all be part of the intake and assessment process after someone proposes a location. I think one last design requirement, and then I'll walk you through the intake process, is that a painted safety zone, the white line marketing the area, will be required for this beautification, as it serves as the envelope for the community to install their mural and planters. So the registration pathway, which we've developed in consultation with legal and community input and subject matter experts across the agency and city partners, would include what I'm showing here, which is specifically for when there's a painted safety zone existing. which we understand there's already over 500 across the city and another 30 to 50 a year that could be deployed as part of the new capital safety zone element of the program. So a lot of locations to choose from. So an organization would request to upgrade a corner. They would attest to following the rules and design requirements. So no site plan like I mentioned before, but they would be attesting to meeting these requirements. And they would pay the registration fee, provide a certificate of insurance, and then the city would review for those conditions that I mentioned previously for the design considerations. A mural would also have to go through the SF Arts Commission. That's an existing process. And then they're free to beautify and start activating the space. They would submit photos for our records after the fact. And then they would be obviously maintaining as we go per a maintenance agreement that they would be attesting to when they register. While it is generally more straightforward for a community to register a location where there's a painted safety zone already, we also want to be responsive to community feedback to provide flexibility for communities interested in improving corners beyond those currently planned by SFMTA's safety program and where we already would be installing painted safety zones. To support this, we are proposing an additional pathway for, again, non-SFMTA safety locations that have not had a painted safety zone anyway and are not on slow streets. And these locations could allow communities to hire and fund a licensed contractor to install the painted safety zone and then beautify with a mural and plantings once that's established. In conclusion, this new partnership model delivers both safety and neighborhood benefit. We deliver protected spaces and communities enhance them to create community places that reflect local character and pride. Establishing the community accordance pilot requires amending division two of the transportation code and what is being brought for adoption today. If the board decides to adopt this new pilot program, the next step will be to launch a new community portal, which again would include these maps so we can see where there's painted safety zones existing, where we're going to be deploying new enhancements across the city, and a more streamlined and consolidated web page. Additionally, we are thrilled to be supporting the community through Mayor Daniel Lurie and First Lady Becca Prowda's July 11th One City Day. We know the community submitted some pilot locations for this day of service, and we'll look forward to that next month. And with that, I thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions and public comment.

Thank you, Ms. Munowich. Let us go to public comment first. I'll open public comment for two minutes each on this item.

Members of the public wishing to provide comment, we'll have two minutes each. There'll be a warning sound at 30 seconds and a chime when the time is up. I do have speaker cards. I'll read names off about three at a time. If you could please queue up on the TV side, we'd appreciate it. Rachel Johnson, Patricia Huey, Doug Thorogood.

Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rachel Johnson, and I am a resident of Lower Knob Hill and also serve as a board member of the Lower Knob Hill Neighborhood Alliance. When we found out about the Community Corner program, we were very excited to support it. And we appreciate the staff's work bringing this item forward to the board. Lornaub Hill is one of San Francisco's densest neighborhoods and one of its most park deficient. We have thousands of residents, heavy pedestrian activity, and no open space. At the same time, many of our streets are part of the high injury network that carries significant traffic volume. Bush and Pine are essentially highways, and the rest of our one ways that crisscross through our neighborhood are high volume capacity three lane vehicular corridors. For us, the community corridors are not simply decorative improvements. They are an opportunity to improve public safety while creating small improvements in the public realm in a neighborhood where opportunities for new open space are extremely limited. We have a few requests. First, the insurance and fee requirements create a financial barrier for participation in the program. For some neighborhood organizations, such as ourselves, we rely on donations. And communities with fewer resources are not in the greatest position to obtain commercial liability insurance, which the program requires. So the neighborhoods that could benefit the most from this program may be the least able to participate. Second, we support allowing community organizations to install required striping at their own expense. Third, we encourage the board to focus on expanding eligibility rather than narrowing it. Criteria such as low vehicle counts, stop control requirements, and other restrictions may unintentionally exclude locations where both safety and placemaking benefits could be significant. And at this time, community corners may be the most cost-effective public realm investments available for us. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker, please. I'll read a few more names as well. Janice Greenberg, Peter Kantz.

My name is Doug Thorogood, and I agree 100% with what she just said, 100% across the board. That said, I was asked in 2022 to help uplift the voices of the hundreds of elderly, disabled, low income, LGBTQ plus neighbors in my community of DuBose Park, DuBose Triangle, because they don't have the same equitable safe access to the park or the cafes in the very social neighborhood. And therefore, they don't benefit from the same mental and health benefits of being in a park and the cafes. And this would nail it 100%. Having these, what are they called, corner spaces would be absolutely magical. Because if you look at DuBose Park right now, for example, there are two places for dogs, one for on-leash, one for off-leash. There's a basketball court. There's a kids play area. But there's nothing for the elderly and disabled. And I think this would be absolutely fantastic. And I second the fact of waiving the registration fee and the insurance because, again, there are hundreds of elderly, disabled, and low-income neighbors within two blocks of the park. And why would we ask them to pay a fee like that for the same equitable, safe access? Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Thank you for having the hearing and thank you for your time. My name is Peter Coats and I've been the primary steward for Slow Arlington, the blocks from 100 to 400 Arlington Street in Glynn Park. Since the beginning of the Slow Street project, my neighbors have been extremely excited about Arlington being designated as a Slow Street. Given the increasing density of young families in the neighborhood hosting family events or teaching their children how to ride the bike as I did my daughter along Arlington Street, and the fact that San Jose and Chinnery are both high-volume corridors, Arlington has always seemed like a natural corridor between Noe Valley and the public transportation hub in the heart of Glen Park and subsequent neighborhoods. The community has benefited greatly from the designation as a slow street, and that is not lost on any community member. At the same time, traffic continues to speed through Arlington Street on the way to 280 most recently causing a hit and run and near collisions with pedestrians. Slow streets are most productive in their signage and environmental influences. While the traffic diversions help from intersection to intersection, it's clear that a continual reminder of the fact that these spaces are intended to be preserved for pedestrians and cyclists cannot be achieved without more intentional visual cues. To this end the more visual cues the better the community believes that These cues can deliver Arlington make Arlington a safer Street as Recent as last month community organized a grassroots efforts, but we need more help Please make Arlington as beautiful as the city of San Francisco and support making the community corners program as smooth and affordable by waiving the additional fees for insurance as possible. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read more names. Chris Romosanta, Luke Borenheimer, Robert Ogilvie, Matt Harris. Go ahead.

Good afternoon, chair and board members. My name is Chris Romasanta, and I live on Arlington Street in Glen Park. I've lived there for 10 years. And today I'm here in strong support of the Community Corners program. Arlington Street, as you know, is home to many families, seniors, and children who walk and ride their bike outdoors. And as a designated slow street, it serves as a connection point to the BART station, the Village, and the Crosstown Trail. Over the past several months, like Peter mentioned, neighbors have come together to explore ways to make the streets safer, more welcoming, and more reflective of our community. We've discussed installing planners and creating street murals similar to improvements in other slow streets. although that really needs some technical expertise and navigating bureaucracy. So this effort has strengthened our neighborhood ties. But I really want to ask the board to consider pairing this program with technical assistance and modest implementation resources. And while some neighborhoods have access to established organizations or volunteer capacity, many communities, including ours, have more limited resources. So in recent years, many of the grant funding have dwindled down, and community-led beautification projects have become increasingly difficult to access or are no longer available. So consider TA, design assistance, project management support, access to approved mural templates, and volunteer coordination. We're very excited that this community corners program is being launched, and we're really excited to see it. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name is Robert Ogilvie. I'm chief executive of San Francisco Beautiful, and we are thrilled to support the launch of SFMTA's Community Corners program. San Francisco Beautiful, for nearly 80 years, has championed civic beauty, neighborhood character, and quality of life by protecting and elevating what makes this city unique. And we're looking forward to working with residents, community organizations, and civic leaders to help facilitate some of these community-led improvements. We are growing our capacity as an intermediary organization. We believe this initiative will enable community partners to lead the redesign of public spaces, We appreciate the SFMTA and the city for collaborating with communities on innovative ideas like this, and we are looking forward to working with those communities, especially that may not have the capacity themselves to help them realize their vision for more beautiful community corners. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll read a few more names. Jorge Romero, Brooke Demko, Kieran Farr, and Kyle Grochmal. Next speaker, please.

Hi, board members. Luke Bornheimer from Streets Forward, the organization making it safe, fast, and easy to get around San Francisco. We appreciate staff and community members who worked on this program. And we celebrate SFMTA for installing bike and scooter parking in daylighting zones, a solution proven to increase safety, encourage people to use bikes and scooters for transportation, get bikes and scooters off sidewalks, increase accessibility for people with disabilities, and open space for seating, tables, and other amenities. When the COVID vaccine became available, the city didn't create a program for individuals to provide the vaccine at their expense in their own neighborhood, never mind at a single corner of an intersection. The city created a program to provide the vaccine to every San Franciscan at no cost to them and no matter where they lived. Put another way, the city implemented a systems level solution to a systemic issue. Now, with drivers, Secretary Silva, if you can, do you mind pausing and just projecting? Thank you. Now with drivers parking in daylighting zones throughout the city, we need the city to implement another systems level solutions to a different systemic issue. Streets Forward's Intuitive Intersections Initiative is a three-pillar solution to increase safety at every intersection in San Francisco that includes adding bike and scooter parking in every daylighting zone. This is a simple and equitable solution. It's also proven to get bikes and scooters off sidewalks. Studies show that trips that start in the street tend to stay in the street. When it comes to mode shift, studies show that bike and scooter parking on every block encourages people to switch modes knowing they'll be able to secure their bike close to their destination. Vehicle miles traveled is strongly correlated with traffic crashes and injuries, meaning bike and scooter parking in every daylighting zone will have a relatively large impact on street safety. We urge you to direct staff to create a plan to add bike and scooter parking in every daylighting zone and approve implementation of that plan while working alongside us to figure out what the plan and implementation process should be. There are packets with everything that I presented for all of you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, good afternoon. My name is Matt Harris. I'm a Bernal Heights resident, a parent of two young kids, and a volunteer working on a community-driven street mural on Cortland Avenue. First, I want to thank the board and the staff for bringing the Community Corners program forward, and also for the other street safety improvements that you've been working on since a tragic hit and run on Cortland last year. This community coroner's program really represents a step forward to letting neighbors take ownership of safer streets, and we're grateful to see it launching. I'm here to ask that you approve it today. I want to underscore why this matters, because Community Corners is not just about beautification. Asphalt art and murals in daylighting zones is both a public art intervention and a traffic safety tool. It improves driver awareness. It hardens daylighting zones against illegal stopping. And it builds the neighborhood pride that sustains those improvements over time and, of course, at a fraction of the cost of capital infrastructure. Over the past several months, volunteers in our neighborhood have been navigating city approvals, working across departments, learning the permitting landscape, figuring out what's possible to make this happen. The Community Corners program is exciting because it promises to simplify that path to give neighbors a clear, predictable way to make their neighborhoods safer. So I strongly support approving the program today. And I'd also like to ask that you direct staff to return within three months to address a few items to help improve the program. One, to eliminate the registration fee and those insurance requirements to make this accessible to more organizations and more neighborhoods. And second, to expand the eligibility criteria to include a wider range of acceptable intersections. Regardless, I hope that you'll approve this great program today and send the program back even stronger. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello. My name is Jorge Romero. I am the co-founder and executive director of Greening Projects, a nonprofit organization with the sole purpose of creating as much green space as possible within the built environment. We actually started talking to people about this at SFMTA and actually started talking to Monica a few months ago because we have these sites on Cortland Avenue. We're based in Bernal Heights. We just set up a test site in front of the library at 100 Cortland. It's working great. It's got plants and also tree stumps where people actually sit down after they get an ice cream across the street. We've got nothing but positive feedback. So we're very excited about it. At the same time, we also have a project coming up later this year at 100 Courtland, which is the Gateway Community Garden or Good Prospect Community Garden, where we're planning on adding a flow-through planter that was actually being funded by a grant from PUC, part of the Watershed Stewardship Program. So this program would really help us to achieve both these projects. Also, I am a registered civil engineer. I've been working on civil engineering projects for actually close to 40 years now. And I know that these kinds of improvements really help traffic and pedestrian safety. If you put a tree in an island or whatever, it will enhance it. And right now, we have a big problem on Carleton Avenue and Crescent. I think it's a problem. from all over the city, nobody stops at stop signs. People just fly through them. And it's happened in Courtland Avenue a lot. I think this program will help with that. I actually support the program as is. I think we do need insurance. Again, as a nonprofit, as a civil engineer, I see what can happen if you don't have proper insurance. And I think the $50 fee is actually acceptable. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Brooke Rae Demko. I'm the chair of the Friends of Slow Sanchez. And I'm also a Sanchez resident in Noe Valley. I happen to also be an urban planner by professional life. And so this is my world. I love public placemaking, and I'm doing it for multiple clients across the city. I'm speaking strongly in support of the Community Corners program, speaking for myself as an urban planner. And then on behalf of Slow Sanchez, we can't wait to be an early participant in the program. The one reservation that we have, as has been mentioned before, is the insurance requirement. It is a big challenge for community-based organizations. We also rely, as previous speakers have noted, on donations from community. And so holding insurance like that is a big lift. We're also just a fiscally sponsored nonprofit. So that's a challenge. We want to do good. Our community members want to do good and sort of be the change they wish to see in their neighborhood. One idea on this would be for a client project, I'm working with DPW through their Love Our Neighborhoods permit, which is a new permit. FOR A SIMILAR IDEA, BUT ON THE DPW SIDE. AND THEIR PERMIT ONLY REQUIRES INSURANCE FOR PROJECTS THAT HAVE CONSTRUCTION COSTS GREATER THAN $50,000. SO I'M WONDERING IF THAT MIGHT BE AN INTERESTING PARALLEL OR PRECEDENT. I ALSO HEAR WHAT JORGE, THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER, IS SHARING, THAT SOME SORT OF INSURANCE IS HELPFUL but maybe over a certain threshold of size. I would be happy, speaking on behalf of the Friends of SLO Sanchez, to sign an indemnification agreement or, you know, as part of the maintenance plan or whatever the permit, just to help support the city in that way. But the insurance would be tricky. Thank you so much for your consideration and looking forward to helping pioneer this program.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello. Can you hear me? Great. My name is Kieran Farr. I'm an elected volunteer with the Sierra Club. And I've been working with groups like Jorge's Greening Projects, the Civic Joy Fund, Bernal Beautiful, Bernal Heights Rec Center, Safe Streets Bernal, even the D9 office on some of these experiments on Cortland. And to my surprise, this has been something that has been universally accepted by the community. Very often we've seen street treatments sometimes get pushback, if we think about some safe street treatments with parking loss. This is an interesting example where we're seeing that the business owners, as much as the community members, are really excited. This was previously viewed as kind of dead space for especially some of the businesses. And so to have this be an asset for the community has multiple palpable benefits, and we're really excited about that. Like other folks mentioned, the insurance requirement is a real issue for certain types of organizations. We are concerned about the impact on equity, especially in the southeast neighborhoods where these things are more challenging. There are no CBDs, community benefit districts, or neighborhood associations, which makes that challenging. But we love it. I mean, we really appreciate the time and the effort that the staff has been putting into this, and especially the collaboration with community groups that have that energy, like Monica mentioned. I will also make a pitch for thinking about how we expand this program as time continues, as opposed to thinking about how we restrict it. I think there's a lot of benefits for us to consider how this can truly be something that defines San Francisco and makes it unique in the international sphere, something that we're known for. And it seems like the community wants it. So it's a cool thing. So I really want to thank everyone for this effort, and I encourage the board to approve it. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, board. My name's Kyle Grokmal. I'm the steward of the 20th Slough Street. And I'll start by telling you a little bit about what we've been up to with greening. We first, about a year and a half ago, partnered with Friends of the Urban Forest and had 19 trees planted. We didn't stop there. We then partnered with Mission Verde, that is sponsored by Calle Ventecuatro and started hand watering all the trees with these really cool huge buckets and carts and made sure these are the best water trees in the city. We partnered with ARC, which has adults with disabilities water half the trees. Then we partnered with Muttville to have a place to store all these carts. And neighbors love it. They're stoked. They talk to us all the time. You meet so many neighbors. We're planting seeds in all the tree wells. We have one neighbor who's been maintaining a sidewalk garden for 30 years. She's expanding it. We have another neighbor who's a landscaper. We are probably the best suited for this project. We will maintain everything. We want to do this. We can't. It's not equitable. We don't have the insurance. And I hear a lot from staff about equity, and yet they are taking a position written by lawyers that no one in the neighborhood in the Mission will understand. When we say MTA is too concerned about planters being dangerous, and we see people running stop signs nonstop on our slow street, And quite frankly, another issue here is actually we have no painted safety zones on 20th Slope Street. So it has been very hard to get staff to do any safety improvements. I've been working two years with staff. It took about two years to get three speed humps. It took a year to get some new paddles. I don't trust that we'll get painted safety zones anytime soon. That is an additional cost. I think we should be requiring painted safety zones and the daylighting on all slow streets so that this becomes easy. And once again, if we remove the insurance requirement, this can get done in the Mission. It can get done in the neighborhood. Right now, it cannot be. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, Chair Tarlov, Director Kirschbaum, and directors. My name is Jody Medeiros. I'm the executive director of Walk San Francisco. Every time a pedestrian steps into the crosswalk, there's risk for that person. And that risk translates far too many times in people getting hurt or killed simply crossing the street. And daylighting is one of the most effective and affordable street design solutions there is by creating clear sight lines. We are so happy to see the continued progress in daylighting being painted at all intersections in San Francisco. When this is complete, it's going to mark a major safety milestone for the city. Thank you. Data does show that daylighting is most effective at reducing crashes when it is protected to stop illegal parking and drivers speeding around corners. And so we are very excited today about the introduction of community corners, which Walk San Francisco has strongly supported in a way to protect daylighting zones that make streets both safer and beautiful. But we need this beneficial program to be equitable, and we are asking today for the removal of the insurance requirement. And Walk San Francisco is asking, we don't want the agency to lose sight of the work being done on the high injury network and ask that the agency continues to prioritize the added protected safety, daylighting, and the most dangerous areas. San Francisco needs the three things happening today. We need 100% of the streets painted daylighting. We definitely need protected daylighting, especially on the high injury network. And we're asking the agency today to approve the community corners. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon, board. My name is Robin Pam. I'm here with Streets for All San Francisco. Streets for All sponsored AB 413 several years ago, which established the daylighting requirements statewide. And we've also supported slow street stewards since the early days of the pandemic. So I'm here today to support the community corners program as well as the expanded safety zones program. New York City data shows that daylighting works best when it's protected with physical infrastructure. And both of these programs are going to help expand that in San Francisco. The Communities Corners program builds on years of grassroots work, especially on slow streets, as you heard today, where residents have turned daylighting zones the city has already cleared of parking into something better. They've installed planters and murals that are unsanctioned, and I'm really excited that the city is now formalizing the process for communities to fill these spaces with real neighborhood assets, not just empty curb space. We're equally glad to see the protection coming to the daylighting zones on the high injury network. I think this is really where the city should be investing its resources, in these high priority locations, and then allowing neighborhoods where there is a real demand for this program, as we've heard from so many people today, to supplement the city's efforts with their own protection in lower traffic locations. Like everyone else, we're asking you to reconsider the insurance requirement. There is a precedent for this. The community installed planters could be treated as gifts of safety infrastructure, not a liability. There is a provision for this in the Public Works Code, and now MTA as well, after accepting another gift. I think there's precedent for this. The city ought to be encouraging this kind of creativity and stewardship from residents. It's really exciting that MTA is positioning itself as a leader in establishing this program. I think you're going to see MTA staff and stewards at conferences in the future with urban planning experts talking about how great this program is. As long as we use this pilot period to iron out some details and make sure we can make it work and help it flourish across the city. So I'm super excited to see what happens as this program expands. Thank you for your time, and thank you especially to the staff.

Thank you. Any other speakers for this item?

Good afternoon, board, Griffin Lee, Connected SF. I'm going to refrain from commenting about the actual program, but the concern and frustration around the documentation that is not on the website on the agenda page today regarding the program. I came here with the expectation that this item in the agenda was for a traffic safety quarterly update. This whole hour has been about one specific program and some other minor details, I think, about overall traffic safety. That is not transparency. We just had multiple people just come up and speak that are receiving city funding. That is a conflict of interest. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Any other speakers in the room for this item? Seeing none in the room, I do have one accommodation request. Speaker, you've been unmuted. You have two minutes to comment on item number 13.

This is Herbert Weiner. I think that this plan to modify the streets of San Francisco is going to impair driving. It's going to work to the disadvantage of those who drive a car. I personally do not drive a car, so I don't have a vested interest in it. But you're going to find driving around San Francisco is going to be more difficult. And I don't hear any input from those who drive a car and I don't hear their opinion. And so maybe after all of this is complete, it may be realized as a mistake, and you're going to have to undo it at great expense. So I have grave reservations about this program. And when I did drive a car, I was really frustrated by slow streets. And I'm sure it's going to increase tenfold. It's to the interest of a few and does not benefit the city as a whole. So think twice when you do this project. It may be a real disaster. Thank you.

Thank you. No other speakers.

Thank you. Secretary Silver, perhaps could you address the question regarding the agenda? I believe the speaker a moment ago was talking about the streets quarterly, which is the next item on our agenda.

That is correct. The materials for this item, item number 13, are posted online, the full staff report and the slide presentation.

OK, so for the speaker who wanted to know about that. That will be the next item on our agenda. And also, there was quite a bit of discussion in public comment regarding the insurance requirement. And I wonder if either Director Kirschbaum or Director Weiss, there could be some clarification regarding that issue.

Yeah, I'm going to speak at a high level and then ask streets director Victoria Wise to come and talk about the details. In developing this program, we were trying to identify a balance between not creating, especially in this challenging time, additional financial risk or burden to the agency, not creating a complex, extended, or difficult to navigate bureaucratic process for community members, interested in participating and also not roll something out that wasn't going to stand the test of time and might look great on day one and then look terrible three to four years out. I really appreciate the staff for all of the dozens and dozens of conversations with community partners as well as with staff at Public Works who do require folks, even for their most basic program of putting street furniture out on the street to do require insurance so this this is this is new to us and this is absolutely something that we're going to continue to learn and improve and are happy to come back in the future if we're not seeing this program roll out as quickly as we expected or as high quality as we expected. But what we presented today really does represent our best attempt to balance those competing issues. With that, the actual specifics of the insurance, and when you do and don't need it, I'm going to defer to Ms. Wise.

Thank you, Chair Tarloff, members of the board, Victoria Wise, streets director. That is a very good overview from Director Kirschbaum about all the different trade-offs that we thought about. and many, many, many conversations that we have had about the insurance, both with the city attorney's office and our risk management office. And just on balance, this is where we landed. That being said, I do want to offer a couple of specific things. And that is, if you're doing a mural in the pedestrian safety zone, you do not need insurance. So if folks want to just do a mural because insurance is a constraint, that is one opportunity for beautification of the neighborhood that can be without insurance. If you want to put in infrastructure like planterns, you do need insurance. But I do think that there are organizations in the city that we have heard from and some members have spoken to today that do offer that insurance. So while I understand that maybe a small organization may not be able to have their own insurance, that's understandable. But I am hopeful and optimistic that as part of this pilot, there's going to be partnership between some of the larger organizations, whether it's Civic Joy or SF Beautiful or whatnot, that can help deliver the good quality projects that we are looking for with the community input and their particular kind of community feel that they want to create through these, but with the umbrella of these organizations providing not just insurance, but also know-how, because they've delivered many of these projects in the past, to ensure their success. Because after all, we do want to see that these are maintained and look beautiful and are upheld not just in the first year, but

years to come one of those models I believe is through fiscal sponsorship is that was something I experienced in some community work I've done in the past and I'm it sounds like from your explanation that there are other avenues as well to partner with a larger organization that carries liability insurance and

That's exactly right, Chair Tarloff. And that is how we envision this program. And just to add to this, to the saga of how much we've struggled with this question, we've actually done some research into what other cities are doing. And our neighbor to the east, Oakland, has kind of, I would say, a similar program to this that they, too, are trying and piloting. And while they do not require insurance for their program, they require quite a high level of staff review that adds up to a fee of $12,000. So this goes back to what Director Kirschbaum was saying, like how do we balance different things between having the barrier to entry be relatively low at $50, but then requiring insurance versus something else. So we're taking a different approach than our cousin to the east. But nevertheless, I think for our particular jurisdiction, this is kind of the best of options. both worlds and balancing out a little barrier to entry, but at the same time having insurance.

Thank you so much. And Secretary Silva, do you recall if I closed public comment? I believe I did not. I don't believe you did. OK. So public comment for this item is closed. I apologize for getting ahead of myself. Director Henderson.

I appreciate the presentation and all of the public comment. And a couple of my questions you were able to answer director-wise before I could ask them. Because I think that from what I remember a couple of years ago, there was a lot of cities that would do like sort of public installations in the streets, especially as we were going through the pandemic and some of the protests and things like that. And so I was wondering if there were other cities or sort of best practices that we might be able to turn to to see how they considered the insurance issue, because I do think it's important to to obviously protect the city and protect the neighborhoods in general and the people who are living in them. But also, I think we want to make sure that we are supporting this sort of feels very San Francisco and kind of like, I don't know, it feels cool. And so I just wouldn't want it to be limited because we really can't do it. But I appreciate some of the feedback that you provided about Oakland and other examples.

Yeah, just to speak to that a little bit, Director Henderson, we did look at other jurisdictions. And New York comes to mind. If you've been to New York, you've certainly seen some of this kind of infrastructure that they put in. The city of New York puts it in themselves. And they engineer it. And they make sure it all works and the drainage works. And by doing that themselves, they are able to have indemnity. And so that is an example of the other extreme, if you would, of something New York is doing. We also, I would say, Part of Monica's presentation was setting the context, and the community corners is a part of it, but MTA does have a line item in our CIP that will do hardening for these corners. Now, we are very judicious with our CIP for reasons you all very well know since you adopted it in April, and so we're going to focus on putting in infrastructure in daylight corners like bike racks and corrals and things like that that are more a little bit more transportation-focused rather than beautification, because that is how I need to spend my limited, our limited resources. So there's some combination of MTA doing very proactive measures at these corners and putting in pedestrian safety zones, painting them, putting in bike corrals, and even, in short order, trying a bay wheels station in the Daylight Zone. So I'm excited to test that out. So we're kind of focusing our effort on that. And then at the same time, giving community the opportunity to do maybe a little bit more fun things like a mural or a planter. And so we've kind of tried to Again, to your point, our version of the San Francisco special on this, some combination of taking a little bit from New York, taking a little bit from Oakland, taking a little bit from some of the things I've seen in Washington, DC, and even in Portland, Oregon, and mixing it together and trying to make it work for us in our town.

Thank you. And I have just maybe a couple of logistic questions. One, I'm just curious about the amount of time that this is. Is this a pilot, or is this something that would sort of be kind of forever, unless we change it?

Yeah. Thank you for that clarifying question, Dr. Henderson. We're proposing it as a 24-month pilot.

Okay. And so then I would ask that if during that 24 months, if you feel like the sort of pace of the registrations is slow, then I would just ask that we revisit the process a little bit because it may be. this insurance issue. It doesn't sound like people would be not interested, but maybe there's some other reasons that make it slow. And then I think on the flip side, if we see that somehow it's able to take off in certain areas but not others, I would hope that we can look at those as examples to be able to see how we might connect those the areas where it's a little bit slow, connect them with the same kind of resources or the same sort of, you know, just, I think that whatever the best practices are, I just would hope that we can spread it out so that we can have the maximum impact from it. Because like I said, I think that this is a very creative way to make sure that we are kind of keeping the neighborhoods funky and unique and giving the community an opportunity to impact the city with the lowest barriers to entry as possible. And so I hope that we can, I don't know that we need to make any amendments to anything, but I hope that we can maybe get an update midstream. And if there's some slow uptake, then we can revisit that and help other people figure out a way to do it in their neighborhoods. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Director Hinze.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple questions. So if there's a patient safety zone existing already anywhere in the city, is it eligible for this program? Or can you clarify that? I was a little confused.

Sure. Absolutely. Thank you, Director Hinze. Not necessarily. We would evaluate on a case-by-case basis to make sure it does meet the program's spirit and requirements. But yeah, big hurdle if it's already daylit. That's the first one. And then obviously, if there's already a painted safety zone, as you're noting. But things like adjacent utilities or bus zones, like I mentioned before, certain slopes or like very, very high volume streets, like a 19th Avenue is not necessarily something that we're looking at these spaces to be more community centric. So it's not automatically a yes, but that would be part of what staff's assessing. And also just maybe a quick clarification that we wouldn't be allowing seating with this pilot. It is just murals and planters. So it was just a reminder to me of how things that we look at in high volume streets. And that's made me think about why that is an element, the risk that that introduces. They're supposed to be beautified with passive elements.

And then sort of on the vehicular requirements and such, are those just to be viewed as guidelines? Should communities apply if they think they have a painted safety zone or area to be painted? Are we going to be enforcing those guidelines pretty strictly?

Absolutely, yes. Those are guidelines. Thank you for asking that question so I could clarify. They are not restricted line in the sand. It is just sort of a guiding spirit of lower traffic-calmed streets, but staff will assess on a case-by-case basis.

Director Hinze, you'll have to unmute yourself.

Excuse me. The guidelines as put in the staff report does seem to include the neighborhood, so it's good to hear that those are just guidelines. Could you talk a little bit about the community agreement that will be signed, not necessarily the insurance part particularly, but just keeping these in good order and what they might be asked to do.

Absolutely. We have a lot of great examples to draw from. For example, Public Works Programs, Love Your Neighborhood, Shared Spaces has maintenance agreements as part of their program. So that would outline very specific conditions that the registrant would be attesting to for the ongoing liability. I gave the example of planting height earlier. That's just one very specific thing. free of debris, drainage kept clean, paint refreshed, soft hit posts replaced if that is required. Murals wouldn't require soft hit posts. So those are just a few other top of mind things. But yes, all of that would be very clearly laid out and part of the agreement at the time of registration.

And then enforcement. I know for like shared spaces, for example, sometimes people snap photos and sort of that requirement. And I know a photo is going to be required for at least additional submission for this program. But are we going to require, what sort of enforcement, if any, are we going to have here?

Yeah, absolutely, Director Hensley. We will rely on complaints primarily. So we don't have enforcement or inspection that's part of the process. That is, again, lower barrier to entry, different from sister programs like shared spaces, which are inspected upon permit issuance. But with that, there are very clear parameters within the legislation and in the code that the Director of Transportation has that Ability to revoke registration if compliance is an issue of revocation is needed So that is kind of clear about what's accountable and what the agency is able to do and maintain under the authority of this program And we will just have we will see and test it and see how it goes if that model is enough to keep on top of the maintenance agreement and kind of complaint based Okay

And then if there is a complaint, are there staff that are gonna be able to go out there and look, or how's that gonna go?

Absolutely. Yeah, our planners are in. We do site visits and field work all the time. Obviously, a little different than what it would look like a public works. They have inspectors that can issue citations. That's a little different than us here at MTA. But certainly, we can respond and follow up on a condition and verify and communicate to the registrant about their maintenance agreement and requirements.

okay and then just to weigh in on me for me personally on the insurance uh requirement um i do think it's important to have an insurance requirement just to protect the city and we never know when things will happen in the right of way etc um so just be um like looking out as you know uh responsible board members to the city um it's something that i think would begin to have a weakness test, as my colleagues are saying, as we move forward in the pilot. But yeah, I hope that this is a successful program. I'm not going to hold it up in any way. I appreciate the community worked on it, but I am interested to see how and if community is able to maintain these. And I do support, you know, there are lots of fiscal sponsorship models and perhaps an organization could sponsor community, et cetera, with the insurance. So I think there are ways to get around the insurance question for groups. But yeah. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Director. Thank you, Director.

Vice Chair Kahina.

Vice Chair Kahina.

Thank you, Chair Tarloff. Thank you so much for your presentation. I am so excited about this program. I know we talked about it at length at our vision through our subcommittee. And so I just really want to thank staff for being responsive to this request that we had at the subcommittee level where we wanted to find ways for folks to really embrace daylit areas and see them as their own and instill community pride in their particular neighborhoods. And so I just really, really want to thank you all for taking the time to figure this out. We presented this challenge. We said, hey, can you guys come up with something? And you did. And so thank you for taking the time and effort of researching this, looking at sister cities, looking at what we have already, working with city attorneys, working with community partners to inform this. It's a lot of work. And it's very much appreciated. I'm excited to see this landing page that is going to come out soon. And so I would definitely encourage folks to take the feedback that we heard today and find ways for this landing page to be useful for folks in more ways than just this is the program, here's what it is. I was looking at our community challenge grant program in the city and how that was a huge resource for me when I was executive director of the Excelsior Action Group and doing community projects. And we did a lot of projects with that resource. And I know that there may be other resources now that I might not be aware of. that the city also has to support these sorts of projects. So in that landing page, if there is an area that says funding, and it talks about these resources that we have within the city already, I think it'd be great to just point folks in the right direction. Something that the Community Challenge Grant landing page also does really well is that it even just supports folks and even thinking about what does a fiscal sponsorship model look like and what should you consider when looking at a fiscal sponsor. And noting, you know, these are the insurance requirements, these are for planters and yada, yada, like these are things to consider and conversations to have with your fiscal sponsor I think would be a good, just good guidance for folks as they're going through this. Think about the user who's considering this option for their neighborhood. It's probably folks that are interacting with the city for the first time, don't know how to navigate our bureaucracies, don't know kind of the inside baseball lingo that we have about the city or that other community partners have. and just guiding them to do something really creative in the neighborhood. But understanding these steps, if you know the language, it's not that complicated. But you've got to know the language, right? So consider those things as you're building this out. But honestly, just really, really excited about this. One clarifying question. The areas that can be muralized, I guess, that could have murals painted on them, is it just the daily areas within that 20 feet, or can it wrap around the corner as well?

Thank you for that question, Vice Chair Kahina, and thank you for those remarks and those ideas. I was drawing them down, and they're wonderful. Painted safety zones can come in many different types. They can be wrapped around the corner, and they can be shorter and extend just to the crosswalk. For beautification, we would primarily be looking at a footprint that does not extend around the corner. So it would not obstruct traffic control, the crosswalk itself. So it is sort of thinking more about, I like to say, 20 by 7 foot space. I think in meter reports and shared spaces. But pain and safety zones are actually more like six feet in dimension and width. They can vary. But to your question. site-specific, depending on the unique street configuration, but primarily would not be looking for the beautification piece, murals and planters, to extend around a corner for the pilot.

Got it. Well, I definitely want to echo what Director Henderson said about just coming back and giving us feedback and to see how it's going. Would encourage maybe the Streets Quarterly as a space where that could happen. But I'm excited to see what happens. So thank you so much.

Thank you, Vice Chair Kahina. Director Chen.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much for the presentation. It sounds, it's promising. I know there's a lot of challenges. I think echoing, I think some of my feedback from my colleagues, being able to see the list of applications just showing either already in public, right, on the website, or as a report, or as a regular report to the board or through the streets update. Just something that we, so that as this goes through, it's 24 months, right? At a six-month check-in, every six or nine-month check-in to say, okay, well, are people using this program? How many of these projects have gotten to gone through the pipeline of application, the process, approval of Arts Commission, final installation. So that's something I think we are all very excited about and just want to make sure that we have some visibility into how things are going. Thank you. And then my other question is just making sure the approval process, the Arts Commission is involved because the city charter, I believe, is it the city charter? They're required by law to approve art installations on public property. Is that correct?

Oh, Council may be able to find the legal parameter around it.

Yeah. That's generally correct. Yes.

Generally correct. Thank you.

So I think the legislation says where the other approvals are necessary, then those approvals are not waived by the program. So if Arts Commission approval is necessary, that would be a requirement. And in general, yes, the Arts Commission has jurisdiction over public art in public places in San Francisco, with some exceptions. Thank you.

Thank you. And then, in terms of the SMTA side approval, in terms, we do have certain we do have certain bodies like engineering, public hearing and, and I don't know if color curbs still exists. But in this would be mostly a staff decision. And would and would not go through I think the the other channels that except for where needed the Arts Commission. Is that correct?

That's right. And yes, CurbZone program, rebranded, shifted, still exists, but in a different format, not a public, in that previous public virtual condition. This would not be a body like that, so it would be staff review, also similar to shared spaces. There's not like a body or that it goes in front of staff department review and approve an application.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, and thank you, colleagues, for your excellent questions. I am left with only two. They are related to the maintenance agreement, and perhaps I missed this, but is there a timeline associated with that, or is it completely open-ended? Are there milestones, or is there any more specificity around that?

Yeah, thank you, Chair Tarlow. If I understand your question correctly, registration is for a year. That's defined in the proposed Transportation Code amendments. So the maintenance agreement would fall within that same period.

So what happens after the year? Because my hesitation around this, frankly, is the long-term upkeep of these spaces. And I know that with the best of intentions, things can change sometimes.

Yeah. It's a great question. So what would that renewal look like? I envision we would develop a protocol and process that the registrant would be required to say can validate that they want to continue sponsoring the zone, submit photos and documentation so that we can verify as part of the process, and then extend for another year within the 24-month pilot. Or I guess less, depending if it is somewhere within the 24 months. But yeah, there would be a need for them to communicate, engage city staff, demonstrate photos and compliance, And that would be an opportunity if we heard complaints throughout the year, not that we can't be addressing it in between, but to reconsider if that is maybe an organization that should still be sponsoring a zone within that year period. OK.

And then I share Vice Chair Kahina's enthusiasm for the launch of the landing page. Is there a schedule for that at this time? Or you're waiting for this approval before you get to work on it?

Thank you. Yes, our efforts have definitely been a critical path getting to this legislation today, and we will be sharply pivoting and aim to launch it this summer.

Okay. Unless there are other questions, I would entertain a motion to approve.

Motion to approve. Second.

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

Aye.

Chen, aye. Director Felder.

Aye.

Felder, aye. Director Hemminger.

Aye.

Hemminger, aye. Director Henderson. Aye. Henderson, aye. Director Hinzey. NZI, Director Kahina?

Aye. And Chair Tarloff? Aye.

Tarloff, aye. Thank you. That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. I think we are ready for a break here. It's 4.45. Let's reconvene at 5 o'clock. Very good. 5 o'clock.

Thank you. SFGov TV San Francisco Government Television

music music

SFGov TV, San Francisco Government Television.

Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Place you on your last item, item number 14, presentation and discussion regarding a streets division quarterly update.

Good afternoon, Chair Tarloff, Vice Chair Kahina, directors, Victoria Wise, streets director, and I'm very glad to be here to give my quarterly report. I will do my very best to keep it as short as possible given the hour, but also try to cover a lot of what streets does, which is a lot of work. So just bear with me. Right from the start, I just want to stress that the hard work we're doing in streets It's part of a pretty comprehensive strategy that me and my staff have. And we're focused with our efforts on bringing together all of our limited resources to make, of course, San Francisco safe and accessible for everyone. So today I'm going to cover our top priorities driving this work and the impact we're making for local communities. I'm going to talk about citywide safety investments first and foremost. Then I'm going to do a little bit of information about school trips and foreshadow a presentation that you are going to get towards the end of the summer. Then I'll cover some of the exciting ways we're actually partnering and being more responsive to communities, including our small businesses and merchant corridors. And finally, I'm going to give you a 90-day look ahead. So first, our citywide safety work. It has two main branches, I would say. One is making very strategic investments around our capital program, of course, in particular. And then on the other side is doing the critical, what I call, bread and butter work. So that is think about repainted crosswalks, think about new stop signs or stop signs that have better reflectivity because they're old now, signal time adjustments, and so on. That first branch, the strategic investments, is prioritizing, needless to say, our high injury network, which, as you know, we just published this past spring. And I'm happy to say that 62% of the streets on the new HIN are already funded for upgrades through the capital improvement project that you approved in April. And every project in this program prioritizes safety. Of course, it goes without saying, but I also want to highlight the fact that it considers other factors that include community responsiveness, connectivity, economic revitalization, and agency efficiencies. So we're really working to keep communities safe and help them thrive through upgrades, not just to the HIN, but other areas in the city as well. I want to take a little bit of time to just give you an update on daylighting. We all know why it is very, very important. It provides many safety benefits. And by the way, we've been doing daylighting for a long time before it was the law. But now we're really focused on delivering it all throughout the city. As of May, as Monica mentioned, we've daylit 65% of all intersections in San Francisco and 2,300 of them around schools. Next, we're moving on to parks. We're moving on to libraries, senior centers, community centers, and the new published high injury network. And I do expect that most, if not all, of the city intersections will be done in 2027. Plus, you just heard about and approved, thankfully, our safety zone program. So I'm really excited for this new chapter, seeing how we can take daylighting to the next level and make sure that it is protected in as many places as possible. And our shops have been so, so, so productive doing everyday safety treatments, again, that bread and butter work that I talk about. So as the host of a podcast called Marketplace likes to say, let's do the numbers. From January to March, we daylighted 2,500 red zones, replaced nearly 300 stop signs, and installed nearly 300 continental crosswalks. We also upgraded traffic signals and put in more than 100 speed humps. The work is citywide, but I'll share with you it is also quite personal to my staff and very personal to the people that we work with in the community because it feels so good for them when they get out and their crosswalk is refreshed. When they get out and they notice a new sign that says, hey, there's a playground here, slow down. So I also want to share how quickly and effectively our teams are responding to safety concerns. This is a photo that you see here of that very sign that I just talked about. We heard from the community. a number of concerns around safety, around a playground, and a community center. And it just wasn't feeling great to them. And so we sprang into action and did everything we can. And we installed like a jumbo, I literally mean jumbo stop sign. I had to order it special. We don't have a lot in stock. This playground sign, we did additional daylighting. So it's just like one of many, many examples of small things that don't get elevated to the board level on every day, but that we're constantly working in neighborhoods to do little things like this, the bread and butter work, that do all cumulatively add up. I want to spend a minute on traffic calming, something we've also talked about at the board before. We all know why traffic calming is important, as it slows down speeds. And speed is the number one predictor of how severe an injury will be. And so I'm happy to say that we're making good progress on the backlog. If you recall, during the pandemic, we had so many more traffic calming applications than we'd ever seen before and we got backlogged with them. So on the slide it lists some information about how we're doing on that backlog and you can review that. All that is to say is we're trying to crank through it and at the same time trying to envision what the program will be like in the future. We're currently focused on thinking that it will be a more proactive approach and I will be bringing to you a proposal for this sort of revamped or new traffic calming program by the end of this year, calendar year. I want to turn to transit now because access is a huge part of the work streets does as well and we want to make sure people have options for getting around the city. When we do projects that make transit more reliable and streets safer, we really, again, try to focus on working with our communities. And a good example of that right now that's happening is on the 22 Fillmore and on the 1 California. We have over 1,000 survey responses during outreach for these projects that, again, is happening right now. And by the way, portions of these projects touch on the high injury network, so that is also good. We've worked directly with schools, senior centers, community-based organizations, and are doing the kind of thoughtful outreach that this board expects from us and that we want to do. and really hearing from people what they want from these projects. And then we are going to take that back and design the projects with that in mind. And we'll be bringing those to you for updates this coming winter. Speaking of access, I'm going to spend a little bit of time on this one because so many of you have asked me about e-devices. E-devices is a very important and hot topic and huge portion of where I spend my mental energy these days. To back up a little bit, I want to say that e-devices are really important because in a hilly city like San Francisco, they help people get around, and it is a green way of traveling around. So we definitely want to support the benefits that they bring, but we also want to be very responsive to the safety concerns about which we are hearing a lot. The MTA already has strong compliance oversight over the scooter share program with requirements for where they can and cannot park, where they can and cannot ride. But there are many, many, many different types of e-devices right now on our streets. And we're even trying to parse out how many and which kind and what are all the different requirements for each. And what is the jurisdiction that we have or most likely do not have over them? What is the regulatory authority? Which I think is limited but we'll talk about that more and so right now we're working as a city to better understand what can be done to address all of the different devices issues that we are seeing and this is a key part of mayor Street safety initiative and And the mayor's office, in substantial collaboration, I would say, with us, is going to publish something called San Francisco E-Mobility Safety Strategy in short order. I will preview that with you just a little bit now so you know where it's headed. The strategy is going to focus and really lead with education to let people know what's safe and what isn't. We're finding that people sometimes don't even know the rules of the road. It will have absolutely an enforcement piece and closer coordination between different agencies. We're also going to stay engaged on the bills that are moving through legislature in Sacramento. And we're going to continue to be focused on design and infrastructure. We'll keep doing the work to help people bike and roll safely in the ways that don't conflict with safety on the sidewalks. And I will be returning to this board with an informational presentation to update you on that strategy and the next steps of that essentially probably shortly after recess, so sometime August, September time frame. All right, I want to talk about school safety, a top priority for our team. We have so many great school programs going on, and now we're building stronger connections between them. And I think this slide, next slide, kind of shows it all. I'm thinking more holistically about everything we're doing for schools, and we're doing a lot. We have the crossing guard program. We have the free menu for youth. We have a traffic calming walk audit program. We actually have a dedicated engineer that works with schools to make sure that loading works in the morning and in the afternoon. And you can see from the circle that we touch schools in all kinds of multitude of ways. And so I'm bringing all of this together structurally by having a colleague out of my director's office coordinate all of this work for schools together. And as part of that, we're launching something called the Safe Schools Connection Plan. It was briefly referenced today during special recognition. So I'm going to expound on that and share what we have in mind. for it. The Safe Schools Connection Plan is actually a direct product of the Biking and Rolling Plan, which set three early priorities, safety, connectivity, and school access. If you recall, when you adopted the Bike and Rolling Plan, you asked us to come back with, you called it something else, but we're now calling it the Safe Schools Connection Plan, essentially how we're bringing the schools into the Biking and Rolling Plan. And it's about essentially creating a safe, accessible, and seamless connection from the schools to the citywide biking network. We'll be using our existing resources and programs in a more effective way and coordinated way. And I expect to share the draft plan with you in the summer. I think it's coming to the board in August. But in the meantime, just want to highlight some of the key elements. And as you already heard, we're working on a really cool opportunity to involve the youth directly in the outreach aspect of this plan. And we're finding ways to go to school with the youth, Transportation Advisory Board members. And I got to tell you, no one can be a better ambassador for safe transportation than the kids themselves. Hard stuff. So on the school plan, first, we're making a change to the way our school walk audit program works, which has traditionally focused on traffic calming. These are walk audits that we do with members of the school that work there, parents. and other community members to really identify what can be done to make the school safer. But we're going to expand that and make sure that we also focus on asking them how to connect their schools via bicycle facilities to the network. So expanding a little bit what we want to do and how we want to address the school walk audit program to make sure that we're staying true to the biking and rolling plan. We're also using a proven toolbox for school safety in that same plan. It focuses on daylighting, school speed limits, and safe street design. Slowing down speeds near schools is critical, again, for various reasons we've talked about many times. So I'm happy to be able to move on the new state law. It means more school streets are going to be able to have lower speed limits. And if you review some of the consent items coming to you closely. In short order, you are going to see some of those coming through. And then, of course, the toolbox also has a number of other design features. I think a great example of the toolbox approach is the project that we are doing in Mission Bay for the new school that is opening this year. It brings school signs, crosswalk stop signs, and bike lane markings all together, and we're going to complete that work before the school opens in August. This is the bucket of schoolwork that deals with physical infrastructure on our roadways. But we also do a lot of work around education and access via muni. We're all about teaching the next generation. It's so, so important for the kids to feel confident on the bike, in a crosswalk, taking transit. And that's why our Safe Routes to School program and staff teach the four fun ways to get to school. That's, of course, walking, biking, and rolling, taking transit, and carpooling. And yes, these lifelong skills are great in their own right, but our teams really do make it quite fun for the kids. For example, they hold student art contests during Bike and Roll to School Week. And I'm going to pass around a packet of the art we got this year. So Christine, if you wouldn't mind sharing that with the directors, you can take a look for yourself. I keep this packet on my desk for when I have a really tough day, so don't let me forget it here. And even when we've done, we've done other cool events like teaching kids how to ride Muni from branch to branch of the library, for example. So this kind of work might not have what I'm going to call tangible widgets of how many crosswalks did I do, how many daylighting zones did I do kind of outcomes. But it is very, very important because it has direct and proven impacts on the kids' health, their ability to pay attention in school, and their overall autonomy in the world, which this day and age is pretty important. All right, next chapter, community needs. So we're also doing really good things in neighborhoods to support them and businesses. I mean, what makes San Francisco special is our neighborhoods and our small businesses. That's really it. That's why people, besides the bridge, that's a lot of why people come here. And so we're working to make them better. And that starts with being even more responsive to them than we've been in the past. I've talked to you about our merchant walkthrough program. And that's a really big part of our strategy. It's brought our neighborhoods across the city with us so we can hear directly from merchants and to better understand specifically their curb needs, their loading needs, their parking needs. And so we've been working with them pretty diligently. And every quarter, I mention it because every quarter we create more and more adjustments to the curb spaces to generate either general parking meter spaces or different loading hours or sometimes just white loading zones because a new business moved in or whatever it is. We've rearranged a lot of the curb. And I think while that's an exciting work, I do want to say it is hard work because we're trying to balance what the merchants want and need with the overall needs of the transportation system and making sure that we're giving the merchants what's needed and yet making sure that there's no double parking so our buses can move, for example, like on Stockton for the 30 and 45, which carry an incredible amount of people on the daily. And that just requires a lot of compromises between all of us. As part of that work, we've created more general parking spaces recently in Noe Valley, in Chinatown, in Union Square, in the Castro. And we'll be working in the Fillmore next. We are also going to be working on Ocean Avenue, continuing to work in Chinatown. And we've recently met with quite a few merchants in the Bayview. And so you also will see at some point legislation in your packets to create additional parking spaces and change the curb in the Bayview based on the feedback that we have already gotten. So all that is to say that's in the service of strengthening our partnerships and growing trust. I always talk to you about our 311s every quarter because that's a reflection of community service as well. When people call in about their street issues, we always triage them and take care of safety first. Any signal issues, any stop sign issues, anything safety, we typically take care of within that same day or shortly thereafter. But what I want to point out in this slide is even though our workload is growing, our shops are actually closing a significant number of 311 cases. What the stable is showing you is that our paint shop saw a nearly 16% increase in case closures from the prior fiscal year, despite open cases growing nearly 10%. Similarly, our signed shop saw more than 8% increase in case closures despite a nearly 7% increase in open cases. And we've talked about previously why we think we're seeing more 311s filed, including some new technology that allows for people to do that easier. But I think the point is we're really not only trying to keep up with increasing workload, but actually managing some of the backlog that we have accumulated over time. And we're doing that through a number of different ways, including optimizing our operations. Like on Friday, it's just dedicated to 311 day. So we're just like go and crank it out. And even this month in June, we strategically opted to focus on 311s to try to clear some of the queue and balance that with some of the project delivery and work orders that we get otherwise. So that is good news. But I also want to share with you that we continue to struggle with maintenance and state of good repair. That's a common theme, and we're trying to figure out how to manage that. given our resources and how to optimize our operations to try to catch up on that as successfully as we've done for 311s. As we've all been seeing, San Francisco is making a very exciting comeback. I hope you all feel that too. And we, of course, are helping to drive that story by getting people around on Muni and on our city streets. And our temporary sign work is critical to this as well, supporting festivals, events, and big commercial movements. And so we are behind some of this comeback that you're seeing. And Mayor Lurie just announced that that those big summer concerts we helped support last year in Golden Gate Park generated $193 million in economic impact to the city and $110 million in wages with over 1,000 jobs. So I think it's paying off to have all of these events. But they come with a cost, and that is basically increased work for our sign shop. The total signs posted in our sign shop from last to this fiscal year went up 18%. And on an annual, we post 145,000 temporary signs per year. So no joke. But we're deeply committed, of course, to making all these special events happen. And we're keeping up right now, even though it's a little tough. And I think it's a sign of our work to drive efficiencies, pun intended. All right, let me look ahead 90 days. Quick snapshot of what's coming. On the theme of special events, summer is popping with events all across the city, truly. And you know from our temporary sign shop that we're ready for it. Sports is going to be huge. FIFA already started, but we're also going to have Giants games and Valkyries. Pride and Juneteenth, people have come and visited, are going to come and visit. Not only locals, but visitors, of course, come for that. We're going to hear some fabulous beats during the Stern Grove and Fillmore Jazz Festival. And yes, there's even something called Pokemon Go Fest. I kid you not. So that's fantastic. Apparently not only for the kids, lots of people like that. And the mayor just announced that we're going to have fireworks on the Golden Gate Bridge this year, in addition to the usual spots to celebrate the semi-quincentennial birthday of the United States of America. I'm going to say that again, semi-quincentennial. It was a new word for me. And behind all of these events are, of course, dedicated staff from MTA waking up early, staying up late to make it all happen, managing traffic, operating transit service, putting up signs. So we're ready for it. I just highlight this for you because that's another area where I'm devoting a lot of my mental space to make sure that things go as smoothly as possible on top of some major construction projects in Chinatown that Julie, for example, mentioned during her director's report. Lastly, here's a sense of what crews will be building over the next 90 days. You can see just how many projects are under construction. I think you're familiar with all of them, either through approvals or past quarterly reports, and I'll just highlight one of them, which is six new red light cameras coming online this summer. We also plan to release more speed safety camera data this fall. And the school safety priority, I can't mention enough. It's coming up for two hearings. One is going to be the speed limit changes that we talked about. And another one is the Safe School Connections plan coming in August. And we're also excited to launch a number of programs. Obviously, the community corners that you just approved. But then if you recall, you approved the EV curbside charging program earlier this year. And that's going to launch in the summer. And so we're also going to bring to you the revamped traffic calming program as well. So lots of construction site stuff happening, but also lots of programs are kicking off and are coming to you for input. FINALLY, I DO WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE TO SHARE THAT AT THE LAST DIVISION ZERO COMMITTEE WE DISCUSSED CHANGING THE NAME OF THAT COMMITTEE TO STREET SAFETY COMMITTEE. THIS IS TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE STREET SAFETY ACT THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ADOPTED LAST YEAR AND THE MAYOR STREET SAFETY INITIATIVE EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE THAT HE PUT IN PLACE IN DECEMBER OF 2025. The name change does not reflect, I just want to be clear, a departure from the goals of Vision Zero. And everything we're doing is consistent with national best practices for Vision Zero as well. We just think that at this point in the maturity of our program, it's best to call it street safety, as that is part of Mayor Lurie's lexicon, an overarching priority for our streets. And the committee actually voted unanimously to recommend to you the full board THAT STREET NAME CHANGE AT OUR LAST COMMITTEE MEETING. I THINK THAT THE COMMITTEE IS SERVING A VERY GOOD PURPOSE RIGHT NOW AS WE WORK THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE MAYOR'S INITIATIVE BECAUSE IT JUST STARTED ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, SIX, SEVEN MONTHS AGO. AND IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK THROUGH HIS DIRECTIVE AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR STREET SAFETY ACT IN DETAIL WITH THAT COMMITTEE. AND SO WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS ON THAT AND DISCUSSING IT AND WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IT IN DETAIL AS WE GO ALONG. And then this board, at some point, I think we're going to have a conversation whether this ad hoc committee continues to meet in the future beyond 2027. So I'm raising this now because this summer we expect to bring to you the proposed name change, most likely. You're meeting in July, July 21st, and perhaps on consent. So I just wanted to give an opportunity for you to mull that over and for any other committee members to speak to that if they so wished. So hopefully that was fast enough, Director Hemingway. I am done. Happy to take any questions.

Thank you, Director Wise. 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. Speakers can come up to the podium at this time.

Good afternoon, directors, Jody Medeiros, Walk San Francisco. First off, I do want to thank the MTA staff for this presentation and the important work that they've outlined and the commitments to street safety. We've already lost far too many pedestrians on our streets this year. And the recent crash on Geneva was the third pedestrian that was killed on Geneva in the last three years. Thank you so much to the agency for pursuing the solutions to keep drivers at safe speeds, to increase visibility and protection at intersections, and to fundamentally redesign our deadliest streets. And I definitely want to give a kudos to the speed camera program, which was not mentioned in today's presentation, but we can't forget that that is doing the good work. It's great to see today's update on the residential traffic calming program and especially the city's commitment to reform this program to be equitable, proactive, and data-driven. Like speed cameras, we need speed humps at the scale needed for the problem because nobody, particularly neighbors, want people speeding in their neighborhood streets and Walk San Francisco and the public are eager to shape this robust program. Lastly, I do want to flag for you that while biking and rolling should be ideally part of the SFMTA's school walk audit program, this program is already woefully underfunded and behind in delivering safety fixes that schools have asked for. Walk, San Francisco requested the MTA do an internal audit of the school walk audit program So it doesn't over promise and under deliver in protecting our kids as it expands in scope Thank you for keeping safety on our streets front and center. So we see more solutions faster that all keep us safe.

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

Thank you. Public comment on this item is now closed. I would like to ask before we move to other board discussion if Director Hinze as the chair of the committee would have anything to say about this quarterly presentation, but in particular any thoughts to share around the name of the committee that she chairs.

sure thank you madam chair and i'll be quick since victoria covered um the bulk of it um i do think that in order to be in alignment with both uh mayor lori's uh current executive directive that is called as victoria said the street safety initiative and um We can't forget also about Supervisor Maldonado's Street Safety Act. I do think for the sake of alignment in our work as an agency and to promote sort of a one city approach here, I do hope that when the name change comes to us, I do hope that you do approve it. I think it shows, like I said, a one city approach. And again, the committee did approve it at our last meeting.

Very, very good. Thank you, Director Hinze. Director Henderson.

Thank you. Quick question for you, Director Wise. I saw that you said that there's going to be some new red light cameras that are installed or made operational. And I'm curious if those are in addition to the ones that were in that first batch. Is this the new ones? Or this is just sort of the last phase of that first, I think it was about a year ago that they first launched.

Thank you. Through the chair. There are two different types of cameras that we have on our streets. One is the automated speed enforcement cameras. That was what was launched last year. But then before that, we also had red light cameras for running the red light. And so the six cameras that are brand new that I'm talking about is for the red light. I'm sorry. Yeah, yeah. I know. It's hard to keep track. We have lots of different cameras. So 33 locations for the speed, and then six brand new ones for the red light running.

And so the speed, I mixed them up. So my apologies. But the speed cameras are the same ones that were passed at the state level. We don't have any new ones.

I wish we did, but I'm just done.

Yeah, that's really what I was wondering, is there potential for us to maybe slow down some traffic using the cameras on other streets?

Yeah, we're hopeful that at some point in the future we'll get authorization to do more and hopefully sooner rather than later.

Got it. And then in terms of the this all just your report seems so that the scope of it is just so broad and very ambitious. And I just wonder, is there you know, what is the. Given our constraints, what are the biggest capacity challenges that you see that would impact being able to accomplish all of this?

That's such a great question. And when I think about it, the capacity challenges are mostly first and foremost reflected in the maintenance aspect of it, maintenance of our signals, maintenance of more infrastructure that we put on our streets. And while we're absolutely excited to do additional bike lanes, additional safety corners, additional pedestrian safety zones, all that is just like one more safe hit post, one more something, one more something to maintain, right? So it all adds up, and that's the challenge that I have, is how to maintain the existing infrastructure that I have. I don't think Streets is unique to that. We have that challenge all throughout the organization. So I'm trying to figure out how to make efficiencies. So first we're trying to tackle the 3-1-1 efficiencies, and then We're trying to figure out collectively, are there efficiencies that I can do in the maintenance side of the house so that we're not so far behind on the infrastructure? So that's a really big challenge. And then just taking on any new program. Community Corners is a really great example. Would I love to be in New York City and do that kind of stuff all throughout on MTA time without requiring insurance, without requiring payment? Yes, I would, but that's a perfect example where I'm constrained and I'm just focusing on the safety aspect of it where I have data and I need to protect the daylight zone and then the community has to fund the rest of it. which I know is hard, but I believe in this. So it's a perfect example. And then taking on any new programs we're being judicious about as well. Like a really maybe good example is how do we take on a program, make it a successful, and then pull out the large vehicle program that we've talked about before is a good example of that where we're actually making a lot of progress in partnership with other city agencies. And so at some point, I've devoted a lot of PCO resources to that. But at some point, I'm going to need to pull back.

Very good. Thank you. Excuse me. Very good. Thank you. And then lastly, just in hearing some of the public comment, I just am curious about about the safer schools. Because I think that we have the Y tab and their feedback. We've had, I think, some school and some folks come and talk to us about the transit side a little bit more when they're coming to provide some board comment. But I just wonder, do you anticipate that you'll be able to work with the community to move forward

safe what is it called the making school trips safer for yeah the walk audits um thank you for that question uh and it's a good one and i appreciate um waka staff's executive directive's perspective on that certainly um so i'm gonna have to digest that which is why i'm glad you know that we're having this public engagement I think we will be OK, but I'm going to go home and do some more homework on that. That's fair.

And what I would ask is that if there's a way that we can be, or that I and others can be helpful in terms of increasing the level of community engagement to be able to support the work that you're doing, to raise awareness and to also hopefully get some people power behind some of the efforts that you have, then please do keep us informed about that. Because I think that that will hopefully, I know it won't fill the gaps in terms of the staffing and just the folks that you need to do this work. But I think that it's so broad. There's so much. And so I want to make sure that even with the community corners, it is a good example of being able to use the public to do some of the work that we just don't have the resources or capacity to do at the level that we would normally. And so I think to the extent that we can increase that awareness, I hope that you will bring that to us and help us spread the word and lighten the load a little bit.

Thank you for that generous offer. I will take all of you up on it, even though not all of you made it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Henderson. Director Felder.

Thank you. I have a couple of questions, actually, which are maybe a little bit beyond the realm of the presentation, but one is on the camera systems. I've noticed that there are a number of cameras around the city. I mean, I can give a couple of specific locations, one on Church at Jersey, another actually at Lion in Pacific, which they appear to be the same cameras that we use for the speed enforcement, but they don't have the light for flash, are those our cameras? So that's more just a curiosity. And then a second question, and we've brought this up before, but just when it comes to street safety generally, and particularly the green carpets and the dedicated bike lanes, what's the status of the increasing challenge associated with keeping the commercial mopeds and delivery bikes out of those lanes?

All right, let me start with the cameras. We have lots of different cameras throughout the city. Some of them are ours and some of them aren't. For our cameras at SFMTA, it's not just the speed safety cameras and the red light cameras. I also have something called SFGO cameras. Those are cameras that see live traffic and help us manage the day-to-day traffic and actually very useful during special events because I can see very key intersections and adjust transit and PCO deployment. during them because it's basically eyes on the street. There's also cameras that police department has. So in recent times, there's been a proliferation of those. So overall, there are many different cameras in the city. Caltrans has cameras on Lombard, 19th Avenue. So just because you see a camera doesn't mean it's ours or it could be somebody else's. And each camera serves a different purpose. So it depends then what software is in the camera, what it's able to do. So that's on the camera. And then your second question Sorry, I forgot suddenly. My bad.

The commercial use of the green. Yes, yes, yes.

Thank you. The e-devices. So it's complicated because there's so many different e-devices and some of them. And in fact, when I come in front of you next time, I'm going to show you guys a chart of all the different types of e-devices, which, by the way, can be modified very easily to run above the speed limit for which they're sold. and the associated rules for each one. Some of them can be in the bike lane. Some of them can't. Some of them require a license. Some of them don't. On some, you have to wear a helmet. And on some, you don't. Some have an age limit where you have to be 18. And some don't. So it's like a big soup. spaghetti soup of all different kinds of devices that we're trying to parse out and figure out, OK, which ones can go where. But I think fundamental problem with the e-devices is just, if I'm being honest, what I'm seeing on the street is they're just not following traffic laws. and whether they're riding on the sidewalk when they're not supposed to, doing U-turns, riding in spaces where they're not supposed to be. And when I talk with my colleagues in New York, they are experiencing a very similar problem. And it literally, at the end of the day, is just not following traffic laws is kind of what it boils down to. So that's why part of the strategy is how do we communicate with, I think, a really good example is the DoorDash Uber delivery drivers so that they even understand what the laws are. Because when you go to other countries, you can do whatever on these devices, and maybe that's the impression. But not, you know. the way we have our traffic laws set up. So not unique to San Francisco. New York is grappling with this as well. So we're trying to figure out what we're going to do next and how we're going to address it through, again, education, enforcement, more collaboration, pushing for state legislature that needs to happen, and again, our physical infrastructure.

Thank you, Director Felder. Vice Chair Kahina?

Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much for your presentation, Vic. It seems like you're doing a lot. And I so appreciate how you're packaging the work around schools. And I think that's so important to just understand. And I think it speaks to your time as the head of this department, just seeing where there's areas where you can, through efficiencies, kind of bring the team together and start packaging everyone's work. So I just want to call that out, that it is a little bit of a manager level, just looking at everything from a higher level view and seeing where there's some connections that need to be made. So appreciate that you're doing that and that through your leadership are identifying places where this can happen. So with schools in particular, I think it's very wise, pun intended, that you are packaging this in such a way where you're bringing different folks within the agency that have oftentimes worked in a siloed approach and engaging school administrators and different school stakeholders, and in some ways creating just like a think tank of how to manage these different issues that are emerging in any given year. One of the things that I hope you can speak a little bit more to is the public safety element of safe travel for youth. And so a lot of what you expressed in your presentation talked about the engineering components, the design components, but there are moments that where public safety, lighting, different things like that can be a barrier for students and caretakers and different folks. from taking transit, from taking their bike, from walking even from their school to a bus stop, right? So I wanted to give you an opportunity to speak more to that.

Thank you for that opportunity. And yes, absolutely, safety is important and lighting is important. And I think we are testing out doing a little bit of lighting around our bus facilities. And Sean Kennedy, who's in charge of project delivery, he's left. But he's working very diligently on seeing where we can increase lighting. I think there's also something to be said about the quality of our facilities that make it feel safe. The perception of safety is really, really important. And so as an example, the next fix it that we're doing is on the T line, where we're going to really clean up the T3 platforms. We're going to motorize for a couple of weekends and then essentially make sure that the facilities look good, that they're fixed, and that creates a perception of safety as well. So that's not specific to schools like you're asking about, but nevertheless, it's part of the component of just making our transit system safer. So those are just some of the things that we're doing. And then I think just as part of that education, teaching kids how to ride and how to walk safely, not just physically on the road, but hey, like when your gut tells you something's not safe, leave the situation, like trust your gut, see something, say something, right? That kind of thing. So these are just some of the ways that our agency touches on safety for our kids and the kind of safety I think you're talking about.

Yeah, and I would definitely encourage, as a team is defining different work streams a little bit more and just trying to get feedback from different stakeholder groups, to see what folks are saying about safety solutions and moments where these barriers are more prominent. Is it when they're waiting for the bus? Is it getting to the bus? Is it just trying to get a sense of where these hotspots are in their journey to see if there's anything in our toolbox that could be a solution, or if not, again, the one city mantra right now, seeing if some of our sister agencies can support us with addressing some of these concerns. Again, I just applaud you for taking this approach of a more holistic view of how to work with school sites and packaging kind of all the different work streams that we have under one umbrella. I think that's very smart. I did want to give you an opportunity to speak a little bit more about some of the recent collisions that we've had. There was one recently in the Excelsior, and I have seen a lot of different collisions that have come up in the last few weeks or last couple months. Are we seeing upticks? Is this pretty standard for where we should be this year? Is this just part of the trend? I just want to give you a moment to speak on that.

Thank you so much. We are on par, or last I looked for May, we were on par with kind of standard 24 annual fatalities year to date, give or take. Not great news. I am relieved that we're not like we were the year before. But still, it is too many in either case. But we're running at about that average of 24 or so as of May. So that's general statistics on fatalities. It's just so interesting because the circumstances of each one is so unique. Even the very last one that we read about in the paper where there was a chase, right, and stuff happened. So each one is kind of different. And sometimes we have mental health issues, and that's why we have a pedestrian fatality. So, and that's part of, I think this is like what interests me the most probably about the work that we're doing now and trying to do with the Department of Public Health post-publication of the High Injury Network is digging in and trying to understand like are there patterns that we're seeing or are there different things that, for example, is it happening, like we know geographically where they're happening most but Is there a time of day component to this? Are they happening at night? Or what's going on in each one? And it's fascinating to just understand, oh, someone had a medical incident and that's what happened. Or the fatality of a young man off the freeway speeding. And yes, it didn't technically happen on San Francisco streets, so it won't count. for a vision, 0% are numbers. But someone still died, right? So just digging into each one and trying to figure out what's going on. But to your point, all I can really say is we've had too many, and we're in par with where we were the year prior to this.

I think it would be great as you work with DPH in looking at those trends, perhaps in a future quarterly, if you can just highlight those for us. I'm super curious to see what's been going on and what's coming to the surface. And again, just seeing at a policy level if there's anything we could do to help with the situation.

Yeah, and I think I'll probably bring it to the Vision Zero Committee first for a deeper discussion and then work it into the quarterly.

Thanks, Rebecca.

Thank you.

Thank you so much director wise I Really appreciate these quarterly updates there. They're very very helpful and each time I feel there's a new element that's just increasing our understanding of the incredibly broad work of the streets division I'd like to ask if you could spend a little bit more time talking about the How the agency is developing in its approach to working with the commercial corridors and the merchants there, I am very encouraged by this new work stream. I mean, I think this has come up just this year, and I really appreciate you and your colleagues for going into it. in a very assertive and robust way. So the merchant walkthroughs are one aspect of that. There's other plans. I don't know how much you're able to talk about yet, but in terms of staffing resources that are dedicated to those relationships. Is there anything that you're able to kind of talk about at this point?

I'm happy to share high level, if that's all right, with Director Kirschbaum. So yes, absolutely. The walkthroughs are kind of the bread and butter of what we're doing right now. They started organically, but we formalized the program. And that really meant not just like whichever commercial corridor asked for it, but we have a program of where we're going next. and kind of order of things. So I think that's going relatively well. And I'm hoping that over time, we're going to revisit some of the curb designations that have been in place for a really, really long time and just probably don't work anymore. But we're also, in the past, have had a group of folks, merchants if you would, that we partnered with closely. And I think because the pandemic happened, some of that just naturally fell apart because the businesses were trying to survive and couldn't focus on, we're going to attend a meeting with folks at the SFMTA. But I think it was, in its high day, a very worthwhile kind of place that represented different merchants from different neighborhoods all throughout the city. And it gave an opportunity for us to foreshadow some of the work that we were doing in advance when it was still being conceptualized, which is what I often hear from merchants that they want. Like, please come and share with us what you're thinking on particular corridors so we have an opportunity to engage early on. So that was its value at that time and the intangible value of actually building relationships through those meetings like them being able to text me or call me and say, hey, I have this really small problem. I need a temporary sign because I need to move in some big equipment from my restaurant or whatever it is. Help me out. So building that relationship and giving advance notice of what we were thinking and taking some feedback were key aspects of that group that I think went a long way. And so we're trying to figure out how to reconstitute something similar post-pandemic. That is going to be an avenue, I think, for a variety of merchants to engage with us in a very systematic way, not ad hoc, like I know somebody and I'm going to call, but through agenda setting meetings and things like that. And I have dedicated a staff person form a lot, to form that, figure out how it works, because I think it's an important aspect of our work. Again, just to bring it all together to your, sorry, I'm talking a lot, but I'm excited about it, because I want to tell you guys that it's kind of bringing it all together. And there's disparate pieces that we're doing all over the place, and how do I hug it all and have a comprehensive approach and narrative about whether it's schools or commercial corridors or Chinatown or Mission Bay or whatever it is.

Well, I really appreciate that work. I think it's very, very important. I think that there's a lot of difficulty in those relationships, and there's been a lot of work toward it, but I would say that the general... feeling among merchants on the corridors is that MTA's desire is to take away parking versus, and I'm just talking about parking, and I would say that that's the chief thing that I'm guessing you hear about. But with these merchant walkthroughs reallocating the curb to appropriate uses for what's actually happening today is bringing more parking back. I hope when that group is convened that there'll be discussion around the use of technologies similar to what we saw in Hayes Valley in our last hearing, how we manage the parking proactively to the benefit of the commercial corridors because these businesses thriving is a really important part of the quality of life for everyone living in San Francisco and also is the source of livelihood for these folks. So I appreciate I appreciate the new approach and I hope it's really, really successful. Okay, so we are, I'm going to skip ahead because it's really getting late here. I didn't hear any thoughts from my colleagues about changing the name of the committee to the Street Safety Committee. And I would take that as everybody likes it. If you don't like it, this is a good time to say something. All right. Okay. So if that comes...

I do think people are going to think we're running away from Vision Zero, whatever the alternate name was. We just got to be prepared for that.

Yeah, there was a comment that we heard at our Vision Zero subcommittee where someone did note that, that there is a Vision Zero network nationally even, and that changing the name might signal something to those that are part of that network and that see us as like a partner in that. I want to surface that just in case that makes someone feel a certain way, but it did come up during the subcommittee hearing.

All right. With that concern noted, I hope that provides you with the direction that you needed. So thank you very, very much for the presentation. And Secretary Silva, please call the next item.

Directors, that actually concludes the business for you today.

Thank you, colleagues, staff, and members of the public. We are now adjourned. Our next meeting will be on July 21st.