tv [untitled] October 22, 2011 3:30pm-4:00pm PDT
kids, and their significant others. they cannot go wherever they want to go. these spaces are given to them by the board of supervisors, designated by resolution. they have had them for nearly 40 years. i am practically begging you to consider moving that. there are wonderful opportunities to move it to eliminate the traffic hazard situation. you know all about beach street and hyde street, a congested that is. we came up with options. there would be peace in the valley. it would be a win-win situation for everybody. >> carolyn long is the last person who has expressed interest in addressing the board on items raised by mr. murphy. >> a presentation?
>> good afternoon, mr. wong. >> thank you for the opportunity to let me speak. i would like to talk about the john f. kennedy proposed the bike path. thank you for the update, as far as including the people with disabilities and the mayor's disability office and paratransit coordinating council, which i am members of. it seems to me when they proposed this pathway, the bike path is going to be against the
curb. so everybody will have to be going across the pathway in order to get to the curb, the sidewalk. i am kind of concerned about people with disabilities, and families with strollers, having to make their way onto the curbs safely. also, even when people are paratransit users, the lift is so large -- by the time they deploy the left, it is going to be on a buffer. when the wheelchair user gets off the lift, i do not know how far into the buffer zone would be safe in order to pass to get to the sidewalk. it is one of those concerns we had talked about in many of our disability committees.
i just want to bring this up as a public comment. but one of these creative obstacles -- i would love to work with the park commission and everybody to make everybody safe. thank you. >> would anyone else care to address the board? when are we likely to be hearing about this? when is it likely to be at this level? >> it is a project that is not being sponsored by the mta. the park service is going through an environmental process. what we will do is we will come back to you, refer back to you at a meeting soon, with status
of the project. then in advance of when it is going to formally come to you for board review. >> i was thinking the decision of where to place this -- >> we would be it -- they are leading the effort to get environmental clearance for the f line extension. they would be looking to us for how best to make the logistics, such as placement of the platforms, work. we will work with them and the street artists to make sure that we understand what the concerns of the situation are. >> public comment.
>> mr. wong? >> hello again. there is another thing i would like to bring up. it is about communications in the subway. i know that bart has this elevator update to notify people who are basically -- when the elevator is out, they will notify people to either e-mail or testing, sir -- or texting, so that people with disabilities who rely on elevators know the elevator is out of service. i know as the mta is doing a
pilot program, but it is not working very well. it is very spotty. i would really like to see that improve, because we rely on the elevators. in order for us to get these notifications, so at least we can plan our trip -- it is very spotty. i cannot rely on it right now. sometimes, they will notify you that the elevator is out of service, but they will not notify you when it is back in service. i would like to see it greatly improved to be able to serve the community. thank you.
>> we need power for our tape recorders. >> now is the time to say something we would not want to record. [laughter] >> do you have it now? >> charles walker, followed by martin robinson, and then bury toronto -- barry toronto. state your name for the record, please. >> my name is charlie walker. i have to say, like i have said before -- when this agency said they were going to put the light rail on third street, they promised the community they were going to have off street parking.
if you had done that in the sunset district, or where we are building the tunnel, they have off street parking. it has been years since you finished that. nobody has thought to put the off street parking they promised us they were going to do when they put that streetcar down third street. what i am saying is what is the problem that bayview/hunters point is the most neglected community in this city. nobody seems to want to understand it. it is very unfair to us. we ought to build something. you do not do it. i have complained week after week of the unnecessary no left turn signed you will not do anything about. it is just a way for the police to harass black children. a young child coming home at 1130 at night -- 11:30 at night, there is no traffic on third
street, but there is a no left turn sign. they have to go six blocks to turn left. you know they are not going to do that. the police harass them. if they are not shooting them over there, the police are up to someone. -- up to something. it is unfair to the people in bayview. you said you would create off street parking. they were going to look into the no left turn sign, yet nothing has been done about it. what are you going to do about it? when are you going to do about it, ok? >> my name is martin robinson. i am a merchant at third and peru. i want to echo the comments that mr. walker has made. it appears to be false promises that have been made by this agency about construction of the
light rail. they were going to assist some of the merchants who were impeded by the construction phase. not one merchant receive 15 cents from this agency. in addition to that, we are dealing with the social plight and the economic blight that the city and county has not addressed through the redevelopment agency. your agency is part of that because you are riding the rails through the third street corridor. in addition to that, when you come for the approval of the rail going from king street to bay shore and the visitation valley, you came with the promise of jobs. the only jobs received were flat positions for the residents of the neighborhood. it is really making a statement that false promises to get a project approved and cosigned through the community -- it never works out to be the things of the past. we do not have the jobs. we have disturbance, we have social blight, and all the folks
blighted do not affect the mta, but it does affect the residents. comments made before me about the off street parking. we have parallel parking on all the side streets. we have the problems with three lanes going southbound and northbound. we had two lanes and with the bus stop, there is one lane. any time a coach bus stops, there is one lane. you have impacted the neighborhood but not brought any solutions with that. >> good afternoon. i want to say that it was a very touching, sensitive, and wonderful presentation, and i watched on line when you honored that cabdriver, i acknowledge you did honor a cabdriver, and i hope you can do it at least once every three months. it was very touching.
i am almost as excited as when i woke up this morning and heard that carson polymer will be joining us in the bay area. the exciting new system here that he is a very nice person. also to say that i am still positive and hopeful and optimistic that ed will be ramos great things for the organization. -- that ed reiskin will do great things for the organization. also, he speaks extemporaneously sometimes. he does not read from a script. i want to stress that because it shows he wants to talk with you and to you, not at you. thank you. next, i heard there was a proposal to do a trial. they want to take a way a lane going in-bound to downtown during rush hour.
not a good thing. they want to do this trial. it is going to hurt cab service in the evening hours. i appreciate that you ask questions about it before they do this. this would be horrible for cad service. also, i urge you to watch the hearing that was held at the board of supervisors last thursday. i cannot remember which committee, but go online and look at the hearing about the credit card issue. i urge you sooner than later to take on the topic before it goes to the board of supervisors and it will most likely pass. please deal with the issue. the drivers got this meter increase, but it does not offset the enormous cost of having to deal with these credit-card charges. thank you for your time. good afternoon >>, directors. -- >> good afternoon, directors.
the taxi advisory council was established to oversee the taxi medallion sales pilot program and also to advise the mta board of directors, primarily on the progress of that program. since being formed, it has first of all given a preliminary endorsement supporting the pilot sales program. second, we produced a formal report through the chairman of the taxi advisory council, once again supporting the pilot sales program, and finally, we have given -- at the last meeting, we gave a recommendation, encouraging the mta board to immediately reopen -- create a window for potential sellers that qualified under the disability requirements. we also recommended expanding
that age limit from 70 to 60. i want to -- i am year primarily to emphasize to the board the importance of acting on these recommendations as quickly as possible because the program has been incredibly successful. it has given an exit to elderly medallion holders. it has created an opportunity for new medallion holders to invest and buy into this industry, and we are running out of sellers right now, even though we have over 1000 people who would be happy to purchase medallions and people who would love to be able to sell them, the opportunity has been closed. so please consider reopening that.
my times >> started. i have not said anything yet. i have been with yellow cab 23 years. this is my 2011 survey right here, board members. i sponsored specifically for hearings, by the way. you have the 2009 and 2010 crop is, but i see they are not quite complete. the bottom line is cut a little short, and you might need a new copy of those. it cost me about $35 to produce, by the way. it takes me about six hours to catalog them. takes me about four hours to take them together and two hours to cut it. two months to serve a 1000 customers and one of five minutes to fill out a survey appeared readily given, i get a 93% return rate. i would like to thank each and every customer who put up with me during that time, especially the ones who get carsick. even if -- if anyone has any
questions, you cannot ask me now, i guess, but you can e-mail me. i would love to answer any questions you may have. the history of the taxi commission is very disturbing. they never included my survey or reports, by the way, in their hearings or their profits, except for one year. in your august 2 better practices report, there is no mention of either. it mentions something about staff review of available relevant data. i believe this is relevant data. it goes on to mention the taxi survey. i think staff is biased. i think it is withholding pertinent data. how can that be? i like to know if the hired consultant is aware of the existence of this data or
previous data, it takes $1,000 to create what is already -- how many thousands of dollars does it take to create what has already been completed, not counting the two years of time it takes? can customers wait? can the public before redundancy? thank you. next speaker director nolan: please. -- director nolan: thank you. next speaker. >> now, we go back to the story. it taxes director, as we talked about in the previous different meeting, she went with-cab company with the president to canada, and she was slammed with
a credit card charge. now, going to that credit card, driver's are putting in the cabs a message that cash is preferred. it is a continuous fight going on. and 32-year-old cabdriver coming to work every day for 32 years. she has a dispute with one of the customers, and she was fired for not accepting the credit card. that 32-year job gone in minutes. going further, after the drivers' protest, we were put into town hall meetings. 36 hours of town hall meetings, six days, six hours each day.
when they tried to stop us from speaking the truth, what happened? the report came against her. they find an outside consultant, and that consultant is now preparing a report, which can sue them and the people presented to that consultant were single people who have no clue, but they are a friend of hers. we asked this to be addressed as soon as possible. drivers are furious, but said, and we would like you to take a look at it. thank you. then a good afternoon, directors. -- >> good afternoon, directors. i also urge you to bring the taxi medallion issue back on to the front burner. there is an important safety issue that the program was intended to solve, which it did
very well, but it is starting to reemerge. for instance, we had a very long time driver -- i believe he was a veteran of about 50 years. we love this guy, and we really really want him to have an option to do something other than to just keep plugging away into his 80's. similarly, some inequities have arisen. i am aware, for instance, of a relatively young medallion holder with a hip problem. in process, i hope to secure his family's future. we had an 80-year-old medallion holder who came down with cancer shortly after the sign up ended. she died a few months later. her family gets nothing. my understanding is that the sellers pool has been completely exhausted at this point. you have now over 1000 willing buyers.
you have many people who would love to sell, and yet, there is just kind of a hiatus. i would urge you to, even if you have not decided what you want to do long term, at least continue the program and that had been working reasonably well these last couple of years. if nothing else, on a case by case basis allow some of the potential sellers to move through the system. thank you. >> i am the executive director and ceo of two cat litter boxes. i am also a member of the taxi advisory council. all of us are concerned that our recommendations are not being communicated to you. we have four-hour meetings and then, for whatever reason, the resolutions are not going forward. when we passed at our most recent meeting, as people have
said, is to reopen the sales application process to people aged 60 and above him have medallions or who are disabled. it is time sensitive because we have run out of sellers. the estimation is that 300 people will apply if you do this. there is a big public safety problem. eight years ago, there was a $14 million accident. it was a person who got his medallion as a senior citizen, which shows the printing mechanism is 4 to begin with. the gentleman was striving against his will. he has since sold his medallion under the sales program, but currently, there are scores of drivers who want to sell, and there are 1400 people willing to buy and who are being forced to drive, and they put in 10-hour shifts. conditions are ripe for this to
happen again. i believe the city's attorneys office advise staff that you can do this as a policy tweak as opposed to the transportation legislation because you already have a pilot authorizing this. so i hope you do this at your next meeting. thank you very much. >> the last person to turn it speaker card under public comment. >> good afternoon, directors. i just want to echo what dan and charles and karl said. i am also a member of the taxi advisory council. it is baffling that we are at the very end of this pilot program and yet, you have not even been approached with what we're going to do in the future regarding the sales program. i would advise that you take this up as quickly as he possibly can and find out the reasons why it has not been
presented to you in spite of both segments taking the advisory committee to this point. thank you very much. >> moving on to consent calendar, these items are considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single vote unless a member of the border the public wish to have an items considered separately. you have a request that item 10.4 be severed from the consent calendar and that those are the only -- that is the only item. director nolan: the consent calendar minus 10.4. >> 0.4, approving traffic regulations on the muni vehicles. would you like to hear from the
public? ok. [reading names] >> good afternoon. i do not support this proposed conversion. i have requested that the board removed it. my neighbors, both business and residents, do not support this proposal. the lower merchants association does not support this proposal. there are no studies to support any benefits to the proposed changes. these proposed changes are a stab in the dark as to whether or not they will improve efficiency. i think they will not. it certainly will not improve service. it will essentially eliminate numbers 6 and 71 service by eliminating five bus stops within the neighborhood. this plan allows for one bus
stop eastbound between buchanan and hai streetght and van ness and market street. it would be at a very dangerous intersection. the proposal would funnel all muni-bound pedestrian traffic from the hayes valley into this dangerous intersection. this is an ill-conceived and poorly planned project. it is a waste of taxpayers' dollars. millions of dollars. i truly believe that the m.t.a. board needs to be the voice of reason and vote no on this project. director nolan: thank you, sir. next speaker. >> good afternoon, members of the board and chairman. i am its business owner. -- i am a business owner. and you're sort a longtime resident of san francisco, going on 35 years. i do not have a car.
i take my bike everywhere and i have a clipper card in my pocket. i am concerned about the project because i do think it draws an unfair burden of traffic on to haight street. the activity of --, with which i am very familiar, has created a lot of traffic -- the octavia project. i think adding additional bus traffic and an additional lane both west and east bound is going to be even more confusing for the amount of people that come into the city using that exit. it also takes away metered parking. i know that the plan has a net increase of two parking spaces. it could be three. but that is not on our street. that is somewhere else. right now, where do i stop to unload my groceries without being in an opposite direction of oncoming traffic for a bus? they eliminate every single bit of parking on the south side of the street. the businesses -- 100% of the
businesses on those blocks are in opposition of this. even more important to that, i posted a flier on the corner and had 120 of my neighbors stop by my front door and knock on it to say they would like to sign the petition so that the board of mta knows that we do not support this. we have tried to engage the folks at mta, and they have been very good about this, but the grants for the project is limited. it is very limited in scope. we want to work on it. we are not opposed to two-wide bus traffic, but the way the plan as outlined does not solve those plans. what we are asking again is a little more reason about why things are done this way or maybe even the community involvement. i heard someone say -- and i will finish up, i promise -- i heard a very good friend of mine say the other day that a well thought out plan of a bad idea is still a bad idea.