Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  May 17, 2018 1:00am-2:00am PDT

1:00 am
administrative code. the calendar item caption doesn't say declaring them surplus. i'm not sure that the action is within the scope of what is described here. i was also assured that any disposal of such cars would be consistent with a vintage car policy that would be preve pres to the cac and i understand has not been. the calendar item does reference something related to vehicle policy, i have not seen that document and so i'm making a request right here right now for that document that was referenced in the staff report. again, i note that this is an seqa issue and i would likely
1:01 am
appeal this to the board of supervisors. i have mentioned that the cac disagrees with the staff and, again, i would say unless there's some urgency around this i would suggest putting this off and resolving the issues. this is another one where council and miss jones may need to confer and they probably haven't heard my comments. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. i think that we'll take your recommendation and delay this one, put it off to -- no, we'll wait to hear -- >> madame chair, maybe move on to the regular calendar and allow staff to discuss and come back. >> chairman brinkman: we'll move on to the regular calendar and have staff the chance to discuss this. >> item 11, committing to start procuring zero owe mission battery buses. >> chairman brinkman: excellent. i see mr. haley approaching. mr. haley, welcome.
1:02 am
>> good afternoon. mad dam -- madame chair, board members. i'm here to is you to adopt a resolution that memorializes your leadership in a very important topic and is the topic of zero emissions. i would remind the board that under your vision and leadership we currently operate the electric fleet, just under 300 vehicles in north america. over the last five years we have retired and replaced some 600 diesel buses with hybrid buses that resulted this some 5.4 million gallons of fuel savings or will result over the
1:03 am
life of the vehicles. so these are good steps as we move down that. currently the expectations are far greater and you have urged us to go further and faster if that's possible in moving towards zero emissions. so i'm pleased to say that what we have em bodied in the resolutions is a series of steps that will be taken immediately which will try accomplish at this goal. at the same time i would recommend that in north america there's 5,000 transit buses priced on an annual basis. there's currently 450 electric buses in revenue service. what we are doing hopefully with these actions is helping to drive the marketplace so that we are taking emerging markets and moving it further down the road.
1:04 am
so the initiative that i would like to call out that are in your resolution is are number one last week i had the opportunity to see the first bus coming off the production line which has an expanded battery pack. this is is most significant it will be in san francisco within the next 30 days. it's significant because this will allow us to initiate in the fall something called green zones, which will in fact be running major portions of routes entirely on the battery. it will be quiet, zero emissions and we will get a good bench line and mark to push the technology as it emerges. the second initiative, i would point out also that we are the first transit system and north america to do this, con
1:05 am
semiplai semiplaits -- contemplating converting to as many as 256 of the existing hybrid buses. you may recall during the purchase we had go types of engine series in parallel packages and 256 of those -- if in fact the pilot works out they can have their engine replaced or the power train more accurately replaced with a battery pack. that would be the second initiative. the third one is the purchase in the beginning of 2019. we have put together a plan, we have looked at the -- worked with our colleagues in other systems and some of the manufacturers and it will be purchasing, bringing forward for you to purchase some nine electric buses that we will get from different manufacturers
1:06 am
that we will put into service and begin the process to gradually transform the fleet to all electric. if you adopt this resolution today we ask your support on this. this will put us in a position that by the year 2025 we will only buy electric buses going forward. by 2035 our entire fleet will be electric and i would point out that that puts us five years ahead of the clean air resources board goal of having everything be electric in 2040. also as we have talked about, i ask your support to this resolution, because while it's an aggressive push in some of the battery technology and innovations that we're trying, it also allows us to continue to provide the bus service that is required by some 600,000 trips a day. the buses while we talk
1:07 am
sometimes more about the rail side of it, the buses are one of our services. so this is we think a policy that balances the need to drive us forward and be in the leadership role with zero emissions but at the same time provide and improve the existing service. thank you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you mr. haley. i do have -- i know that we have public comment on this but i want to ask a clarifying question too. we have the purchase of 40 buses scheduled for 2023. this date of 2025 is just beyond that 40 foot bus schedule. what will the scenario be for these 40 foot buses that we are likely to purchase in 2023? >> the 40 foot buses you -- this is the last in the series of the contract. so the -- last in the series of
1:08 am
the contract. the so the buses coming off the manufacturing line with the extended battery pack. >> chairman brinkman: it's my understanding that we will probably be purchasing more 40 foot buses in 2023, is that -- >> let me point out what we have done is also we have a solicitation that we -- for 30 foot buses that will replace the 30 foot buses on the community service line. that was done as a technology neutral sligsation. we have received -- solicitation. we have received two bids. i think in answer to your question, by 2023, for example, if the pilots that we talked about that will allow us to accelerate the timetable. what we are dependent on is an up consolidate of -- a couple of
1:09 am
things, one is the emergence of battery technology and then the second thing is an on going series of adjustments primarily to our infrastructure as a way to prepare ourselves for all electric because our facilities, as you know, as you heard from our plans, are for the most part with a few exceptions very cold. it would be an enormous capital undertaking that we've started already to begin to put charging stations into our existing facilities. that process i mentioned in 2019 that we plan to buy pilot buses and we have already identified a charging methodology, a location at our woods facility and beginning that process from moving forward. so by 2023 clearly we hope to be in a position with less purchases if these are successful. we will continue to move down
1:10 am
the line relying on batteries rather than engines. >> chairman brinkman: just one more question, before i ask my directors if they have any questions, do we have any diesel vehicles if service or is everything we have now a diesel hybrid? >> i'm sorry? >> chairman brinkman: do we have any diesel buses in service that are just diesel, not diesel hybrid? >> yeah. we have -- at the point we will have them all -- they will all be gone by the end of 2018. >> chairman brinkman: by the end of 2018. okay. >> there are between 60 and 70 left in the fleet. that is we have for a number of reasons not related to technology we've had to slow down the retirement, things like twin peaks construction and some other activities that have come up. so all of the diesel buses should be gone by 2019.
1:11 am
>> chairman brinkman: okay. >> we are down to small numbers on a fleet of 800. >> chairman brinkman: directors any questions? those of you on the board for another term or two will be here when this is happening so you should really understand it. director torres? >> board member torres: i want to thank you because -- >> turn on your microphone. >> board member torres: i shut it off because roberta told me to. i want to say thank you for the work that you've done on this issue. as you know, i'm a strong proponent of electric transportation in this state. we are ahead of our time here in san francisco. in large due to leadership of our director. this proceeded me on this board in issuing this kind of direction and vision. you in doing so as well. i also want to thank you for the letter you sent on may 14th because of the people concerned about a pilot program. that was an important step to take.
1:12 am
lastly, the sooner you remove those diesel buses from operation the less time i'll have to spend at home from all the debris from the diesel buses off of route 37. >> chairman brinkman: thank you, director torres. any other questions before public comment? thank you very much. we'll hear from the public now. >> first three speakers. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is paul court, i'm an attorney with earth justice and a san francisco resident. i'm here today to support the proposed resolution to move muni to all electric buses by 2035. i'm very proud as a resident of the regnawed commission to -- as a resident to move away from con
1:13 am
come -- combustion buses. first on timing. buses have a useful life of 12 to 14 years. so this means if we want to get all of the diesel including the hybrid buses off the year in 2045 we need to end them in the 2021/2023 time frame. by the way, this is very doable. this is being done at other transit agencies up and down the state. so the resolution we would ask be amended to direct staff to begin purchasing zero emission buses well before 2025. the nine bus pilot is an important first step and needs to happen right away. muni should be leveraging the 30 foot bus procurement and begin ramping up electric bus procurement so by 2023 it will all be zero emission. second
1:14 am
equity. the resolution should direct staff to fold equity into the decision-making and planning. for example, should encourage staff to prioritize impacted communities as it rolls out this innovative green zone concept. similarly, staff introduce zero emissions buses and upgrade facility staff should prioritize efforts that benefits communities. finally jobs. transitioning to an all electric feet in require commitment and provide great opportunity to provide a pathway to good >> chairman brinkman: thank you. >> the board should direct staff to commit to a plan -- >> chairman brinkman: thank you. we will take the jobs to note. i'm sorry that your time is up. >> thank you. >> emily rush, . >> i'm emily rush, the executive director of the california public interest group based in oakland. i wanted to come here to today
1:15 am
to support the resolution over all. i do want to align myself too with the comments that paul just made about the timeline concerns and the idea that we theneed toy electric buses before 2025. nearly 60% of the nation's 70,000 transit buses still operate on diesel today. i think it's so important that san francisco lead the way on this issue by purchasing electric buses now. there is significant public health for the riders oh of the -- riders of the buses. it's heavy duty vehicles that need to transition to electric as well. i want to applaud the board. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. next speaker, please.
1:16 am
>> thank you very much. members of the board, director, my name is nick jefowitz. i represent the san francisco mayor on mtc and i've been working hard at the regional level to transition our entire region's bus fleet to e leng trick. -- electric. there's good news, recreently allocated $10 million to match the district $10 million grant to provide transit operators in the bay area transitions to electric buses and the grants from the state there was $120 million to help transit agencies in california buy or renovate 156 buses to move them to e leng trick. -- electric. this is in line with a lot of transit agencies in the united states and around the world. l.a. metro has committed to go 100% electric by 2030.
1:17 am
a whole bunch of cities, london, paris, copenhagen, et cetera, have committed only for vision emotion buses starting in 2025. there are 59,000 buses. china has already transitioned 16,000 bus fleet to electric buses and they estimate that by 2025 there will be 1.2 million electric buses in china. so the good news is it's totally achievable to meet the goal of 2035. i applaud you for your -- for your leadership on that. i think the other good news is it's also totally possible to only start -- to only procure buses starting in 2023 so that there are no new procurements that would come out of this agency to procure anything but
1:18 am
electric buses. it's incredibly important and my time is up. thank you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you very much. >> david bill -- david pillpail followed by eddie. >> on this item that was a very interesting presentation by john haley. i think i'm neither in support nor in opposition. i would likely support this but i was not clear from the staff report what is implicated here, whether that he has were existing motor coaches, trolly coaches or some combination. i couldn't tell the term electric high drid -- hybrid vehicles. it's confusing to me. i did not understand how there was supposedly no seqa issue, how this is not a project. it seems to me like this policy change would have positive but
1:19 am
somewhat dramatic facility fleet feel guideway. definitely neighborhood policy and staffing impact on the agency and the city and to suggest that didn't constitute a propresident oba project if you're making a policy choice to procure only a certain type of vehicles going forward and that that doesn't have impact surprises me. so, again, wasn't clear what vehicle types this implicates, how this relates to the fleet plan that's a component of the capital improvement plan and the capital budget. i think that this needs a little more explanation along the lines oh of what mr. haley spoke about earlier and i learned things from the prior speakers as well. just finally, if you do adopt this, the certification line at the end of the resolution, refers to may 15th, 2017. that's the typo. it should be 2018.
1:20 am
i don't understand why these calendar items prepared by staff and many sets of eyes including the attorney and the secretary still have typos. thank you. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. next speaker, please. >> eddie. >> good afternoon, commissioners. eddie albright, non-defense, public policy nonprofit. impacted portionally by the resolution. in support of this resolution and like the comments made by paul and emily and victor. i want to commend director ruskin for his leadership on this issue and push for more time to make sure procurement of the buses are fully electric by the time the districts that
1:21 am
cross highways that are impacted by particular matter and not addressed often enough. maybe one tool to look at the communities of concern ordina i forward to continuing this in the future. >> chairman brinkman: anymore public comments? yes, mr. gilberte. >> thank you. a bunch of changes. electric -- >> chairman brinkman: give us your name for the record. >> tom gilberte. how about the daytime energy packs to rejuvenate the bus cells in the bus? panels on the roof of the garage of the warehouses, wherever we
1:22 am
can get some. it's on the battery size, the battery itself, it's easy transfer of the batteries in and out. a universal standard, what battery is going to hold up the longest and after five years do we have to replace these batteries with other batteries. that is going to be major question when you go forward on this. it's going to be quiet electric buses oh -- on the outside but please relatively quickly find out if these buses rattle on the inside. that is still unacceptable, you know, to let buses rattle on the inside. thank you. good luck. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. do i have any other pun comment? -- public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. director reiskin, the green
1:23 am
zones that mr. haley mentioned, do we have a program about where those would be? i do think that the call for equity on those is a really good one because there are certain neighborhoods that are much more impacted by the buses that are going through. >> that's absolutely our intent with these. if we didn't include in the staff report or resolution but that's our omission but that's absolutely the intent. i think we can make a very direct connection to those areas that are impacted by bad air quality, such as baby owners point and the mission. we do have zero emission vehicles serving some of those areas. we are looking at deployment of the green zones, the clean zones, clean green zones in those neighborhoods so absolutely. >> chairman brinkman: do you think that we need to move this
1:24 am
resolution forward right now? we are saying by 2025 we will be buying only electric and that will put us all electric by 2035 and the questions we seem to be getting is if we are buying buses will we be buying buses in 2022 or 2023 that are still diesel hybrid and those would possibly -- those would still be in use by 2035 date? that seems to be the concern. >> understood. just to reiterate, we are already a leader in that more than half of our fleet is already zero emission vehicles and that's far beyond what any other transit agency in the country is doing. as director haley said, the remaining with the exception of those old diesels that will be gone by the end of the year are electric hybrid vehicles and the
1:25 am
electric hybrid with renewable diesel which has reduced the switch from diesel to renewable diesel has reduced the gas emissions by 30%. we are already the leader. i don't want folks to lose site of that. we did -- commissioner moved to the trcp state grants, the captain grants. we were among those who sought the grants for e lek bus -- electric buses. a lot fewer riders were the recipients of those. there was a project mark. there's funds for these buses. with the regard to the year, the 2023 versus the 2025 what we put in here was first of all consistent with the c city's
1:26 am
commitment that was made reference in public comment. it's -- that is based in part on our best understanding of where the technology is today and the path that we are on. as director haley mentioned, the buses that he -- many of the ones that we have recently bought as well as any that we do buy going forward would be convertible to all electric. so if the state is such that by 2023 we cannot make an all electric procurement because the technology is not adequate at that time, even in that case the buses that we purchased at that time would be convertible to all electric as are more than 200 buses that we have today. we are very hopeful as our -- the speakers that will be in a position that we can do not just technology neutral procurement in 2023 but an all electric
1:27 am
procurement. we believe the resolution as it stands is the appropriate target. we would rather i guess underpromise and over deliver and in the future we can bring that back then that's great. the end date the 2035 date is really the critical one which as director haley said puts us ahead of the state resources board target. >> chairman brinkman: yes. >> one of the concerns is being confined in what we are doing. obviously what we do want to make sure is we have enough buses to meet the needs of the riders and that thing. so i don't have a problem with a proposed timeline as i understand it. as i also understand this plan, this is not a situation where we are going to in any way sacrifice capacity. i mean, because of coursevens - obviously the most important thing is getting people back on
1:28 am
the buses and not in their cars. this is not coming ing with an effect on our capacity. is that correct? >> that's absolutely right. the point you made i think it gets lost as we get in the weeds of what year we should consider the much, much bigger story is that the way that we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the city is to get people onto buses even dirty old diesel transit. right now it's close to 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions in san francisco. it comes from the transportation sector. of those it's less than 2% that come from transit. so there's a, you know, nearly 50% that comes from cars and trucks and to the extent that those in cars can move onto buses no matter what their situation that's where we get the bang from our buck in reduces greenhouse emissions. this is kind of the icing on the
1:29 am
cake. >> chairman brinkman: thank you. that's a very good point. to see steeper grades. it's unlikely but possible there could be a scenario where the technology would be good enough to replace coaches that serve lines that aren't as steep and not yet there. for electric trolleys, we're speculating what the technology is going to be many years from now.
1:30 am
the intent is to get to zero emission fleet. we're already there with half of our fleet. >> directors, any other questions? comments? >> these have a longer life-span, too, the electric buses in theory? >> anything we know about them is only in theory. they've not been in service long enough for us to know that. >> thank you. >> and that sort of brings up a second question. this is somewhat in theory and we're going to be staking bets on a theory. that's fine. that's how progress happens. it's a significant bet. my question is, do we have enough intelligence that we're comfortable making this bet and then more really importantly from the other side, what is the plan with regard to who we're going to partner with to do this and make sure they have significant resources and expertise to make sure that something bad doesn't happen with the technology and if it does, we're not left holding the
1:31 am
bag with that technology. >> well, so, our intel is what has gotten us to the resolution as it's written with the 2025 start date. >> right. >> part of our due diligence are some of the pilots we've talking about, the electric procurements that we're seeking to do and others will be doing thanks to the grant. there are a few that have already been done. they are all part of what we're using to gather intelligence. in terms of the performance of the vehicles, we will structure our contracts just as we do for our other vehicle contracts to allocate the risk between the agency and provider. we don't intend to partner, per se, with electric bus manufacturers. >> i understand. >> but we will have our ready through this 30-foot coach procurement and subsequently we'll be inviting them to compete and working as we have been very closely with
1:32 am
california transit association, which represents all the transit agencies in the state, to be sure that they understand what our requirements are to deliver reliable transit conservative is. i believe the bar will be increasing, and i think the performance, from what i understand of the electric buses, it has been increasing pretty significantly. >> forgive the ignorance, but these buses are produced by manage manufacturers? they can stand by their product? this is new technology, but it's not produced by sort of start-up or -- >> it's somewhere about -- but the industry is growing and maturing fairly rapidly. >> thank you. >> thank you, directors, any other questions? motion to approve and a second? >> yes. >> if i may, before we vote, i want to thank everybody that's been engaged with this work
1:33 am
here. i think that i personally and i think that probably the agency and there's been a lot of conversation about this over the past few, feels like, years, but i want to appreciate the leadership on the part of director and ms. rush and the bright line. everybody that's had the opportunity, they have been pushing the envelope. i don't think this would have come without their advocacy. i want to appreciate director hailey in his work. we met with him and have been talking about making sure that we're pushing the envelope on this as best as possible. i think it's really clear that we all have an interest in getting us to 0 emissions as quickly as possible. i want to make it clear the statistic that director reiskin mentioned about 50% of the emotions and most of those are coming from cars. from the director's point, the
1:34 am
stuff you're spraying off, 3% is coming from you're vehicles, if that. the majority are coming from cars. i think that buses get a bad rap. the diesel and everything is a concern, but the biggest concern is keeping people out of cars or giving them real choices. i think that's the one thing we need to keep in mind as we go about this business. we need to make sure we're delivering reliable service, and i think we're going about this as best we can with an eye to beat l.a., of course, and of course to get to zero emissions as quickly as possible. >> thank you very much for that reminder, director ramos. it is important to not only bring on board electric buses but do everything that we can to make sure that you're bus routes run as quickly and efficiently as they can and, of course, safely. >> to beat l.a. >> to beat l.a. >> i thought that's what you were going to say. >> i have a motion and a second. all in favor.
1:35 am
any opposed? this one passes as well. thank you for all your work and all the people who came to comment. thank you very much, we appreciate your focus on this. some people on this board will be off by the time these deadlines roll around. we'll have to hold each other to our word on this one. i would like to actually, ms. boomer, go back to 10.4 and 10.5 and see if we can close those out. i think ms. jones that's information for us. >> thank you. yes. good afternoon, director. sara jones, planning director at mta took a look at both items 10.4 and 10.5. 10.4 did point back to the statutory exemption determination for the budget. this is the appropriate determination to be pointing
1:36 am
back to because it was an add-on or an adjustment to the budget but captured the same kinds of fee and -- not fair changes, but essentially the same kinds of rates, tolls, fairs, and charges under that exemption. so i think 10.4, the ceqa review picks it up. >> okay. thank you. >> on 10.5, i would like to make some further consultation with the planning department. that's kind of an unusual item and we just want to confirm that that's the appropriate ceqa determination. >> thank you. we will take up 10.4 again and we'll still hold on 10.5 and should you get it resolved, we can act on that one. thank you very much for doing that. 10.4, do i have a motion to approve? >> move to approve. >> a second.
1:37 am
>> all in favor. any opposed? hearing none, 10.4 is approved. now item 12. >> good afternoon, directors. i lead the innovation team in the sustainable streets division. about -- last summer, we brought to you 10 guiding principles for emerging mobility services and technologies. since that time, we've been partnering with the san francisco county transportation authority staff so do an assessment of how different emerging mobility services are living up to those principles. we've reached a milestone where a draft report has been released and with this i would like to
1:38 am
introduce mr. logan with the transportation authority. >> welcome. >> good afternoon, i'm a senior transportation planner for the county of transportation authority and i'm excited to bring this report to all of you. i'm going to give awe brief overview of our report and kind of how it got here today. the first and foremost is that the nexus of this report is that both our board and yours have seen a lot of different services on our streets and some of them we didn't recognize. we want to make sure we're understanding what was out on our streets and evaluate whether or not they are helping us meet our long-range and short range transportation goals. i'll go over briefly what we're saying when we're talking about emerging mobility services and technologies. i'll remind everyone, again, about the 10 guiding principles that both this board and the transportation commission adopted last june. then go into the evaluation methodology that we both worked with the sf mta on.
1:39 am
finally provide recommendations for our side and yours. >> thank you. >> when i say emerging -- am i talking loud enough? i'm sorry. when i say emerging mobility services and technologies, this is covering bike sharing, car sharing, scooter sharing, and sidewalk robots. who knows what will come down in six months. >> who knows. >> last june, this board and ours adopted 10 principles for emerging mobility and these are all based on existing policies, plans, strategies, so as an example, safety is based on vision 0, our transit guiding principles is based on our transit first policy and finally as a last exam, sustainability based on climate action strategies. these are an existing city policy and adopted plans, et cetera. but they are to declare guiding the different services and their
1:40 am
companies towards what our goals are so that it's making clear to them what we stand or and what we're looking for them to do. we use these 10 principles to develop criteria and i'm going to walk through this carefully because it's new. the first is we identified outcome metrics. these are the outcomes that are specifically listed in the guiding principles. in this case, you're seeing safety. safety principle is, of course, related to vision 0. so measure them, we want to see a reduction in the collision rates. this is the outcome metric for collisions. that said, we also, through a series of conversations with community stakeholders and the companies themselves, recognize that there are other ways to measure and understand these different services and their offerings and so we added policy and design features that often relate to the outcome metric we're trying to measure and in some cases, there are other
1:41 am
pieces of the puzzle. you'll see it listed here, whether or not the services avoid messaging related to distracted driving. we know that might have a correlation with a collision rate. so i'm going to stick mostly to high level results. our main goal was to talk about the industry at large, but the report that you have also goes into all the results by guiding principle and by emerging mobility service type. i'm happy to answer questions at the end about any one of those details if you'd like. so here are some results. the first and foremost is that -- i think all of you know that. the companies that partnered with the sfmta provided key experience in data that informed future permit types. those permits are actually able to guide the larger service types, bike sharing or car sharing as an example, to be more in line with the city's principles. that's great news there. the challenge is that what we are finding is that sort of
1:42 am
permit -- pilot to permit alignment pipeline is more informal and not a standardized process. what's happening -- this brings me to the second point -- is that the information that we're collecting is actually not aligning often with itself. one of the major findings of this report is that while a lot of our permitting systems are collecting good data, it is not an apples to apples to apples to more apples comparison. we want to understand how to look at all these across the board and have a bas baseline fr how they are helping or hurting the city's goals. the first finding is that a lot of services are in fact providing service late at night, 24 hours a day, and on weekends. often, in areas that are less served by transit. we want to recognize that some of these services may in fact play a part in filling gaps and that we should look towards that when we think about, again, future pilots or permitting as an example. fourth finding, there are some
1:43 am
impacts on safety that i want to highlight. the first is that when we looked at a lot of the different services the way that they provide training for their operators, whether you, the service operator, or your driver, let's say, it's not standard and safe for a chariot, which is the private transit vehicle operator. no one tests for the operator after they've offered optional training. so one of the things that we're connecting the dots here is that, perhaps, one of the biggest issues is that people who are using these services, whether it's the operator or being driven around, are not used to our streets. training might help that as an issue. the other issue, though, is that a lot of people are aware of this, some of these services are stopping in bike lanes, stopping in crosswalks, stopping in transit lanes and so this also has the impact on safety and we documented all of those in this report as well. that brings me, in fact, to the -- i jumped around. excuse me -- conflicts of public
1:44 am
transit. some of these services have some documented evidence that they're pulling riders off our transit service. that's not a issue for us, of course, being a transit first city. the other areas are conflicts with red carpet lanes. there's documented in here the study that the police department did over in soma where over the last couple of months, early spring, they were able to show a lot of citations were riding in receipt carpet lanes, et cetera. all of those have an operational conflict that, you know, makes being on a bus slower. that's a problem. last but not least, there are impacts on congestion. again, we have reports that there may be in fact more vehicles on our roadways because of some of these services. we just want to document if we're looking at reducing the numbers of vehicles. some of these services might impact increasing the numbers. we're going to look toward that in the future. we have several recommendations
1:45 am
and i want to highlight top level pieces, but again, i'm happy to dive into some of the details if any one of those are problematic discussions. first and foremost, we recommend that the city partner with these different companies before they come into our city ideally. this will give us an opportunity to understand how their services operate, collect data and then inform permitting types. with that, we're recommending providing a framework for future pilots and sort of saying, here are gaps. you help us fill them before you show up. the second is called measure. we want to encourage collecting additional travel behavior information. we want to understand better how people might be using some of these services to connect to transit and then moving forward. the third is regulating and recovering costs. this falls primarily on the sfmta. our recommend here is to harmonize the existing permits you have on your boards and then
1:46 am
also create a framework for future permits so that ideally, it's not one, but there's a larger umbrella we can slide? whatever services we haven't thought of yet. there will be some soon enough. fourth, we want to continue to bridge molt gaps for low income users and people with mobility needs. that's a big issue across the board not just in this city but in other areas as well. we also recommend prioritizing public transit because we're a transit first city, continuing to roll out red carpet lanes and provide additional signal timing as an example. fifth, we recommend increasing enforcements at known hotspots f we know there's double sparking in areas of the -- parking in areas of the city, we can encourage better behavior by increasing enforcement. that said, we recognize that there are not enough people literally in the city to handle that issue sometimes and so we're also identifying ways to automate some future enforcement
1:47 am
capability. last but not least, price, so there are two elements here to this recommendation, which include both moving towards could not justing pricing -- congestion pricing. we haven't looked at how that will look, but we're opening that conversation. finally, moving forwards a comprehensive strategy across the board in the city. i just want to end by thanking several people that worked very, very closely with me at the sfmta. we've spent a lot of time on this project. we have worked very, very closely on all the workshops, bringing the guiding principles forward. i just want to say thank you to these strong collaborative effort that we've brought together to make this happen. >> thank you very much, mr. logan. this was quite a massive undertaking. i know the amount of time it took for me to read through this report, and i still feel like i don't understand, obviously, completely.
1:48 am
this was really huge. there's so much good information in there, and i do come away with it -- my sense of frustration is, perhaps, a bit reduced and i'm hopeful we're going to be able to wrap our arms around it and work towards it. i think that some of the things that stuck out to me was the actual identifying how much of our traffic is tmzs. i think that number that lept out was 20% of the traffic is probably tncs. that to me is just appalling. everything we're doing to make our city move more efficiently and we're getting stymied on every street and important transit corridor. so thank you so much for the work on this. going forward, is this going to continue to be a joint ta mta project as we try and kind of work with this and figure out some options that we can
1:49 am
implement to make things work a bit better? >> i'll let her speak a little bit to that and then hand it off. there's an overlap here. there are recommendations. a lot of them were developed in great part by staff at your agency, which they -- the other part, though, is that there is an emerging mobility strategy that's coming as sort of a call of response to the findings in this report. i'll hand it off to discuss that. >> the strategy is coming next. >> yes. my team had overlapped with this effort, looking to learn, you know, what types of issues or potential solutions are we seeing, and developing a strategy to capture those. we've identified a number of potential actions starting a process to, you know, understand what some of those high priorities were or will be. some of those are likely to show up in the action plan for the
1:50 am
upcoming strategic plan which we'll talk about in august. you'll get a preview of what we look to undertake in the next few years there. >> i'm sure we'll bring in outside groups because there's a big movement in cities or data to flow both ways for the emerging mobility companies to provide us with data, but for city agencies to also send data out the other way. so it's a two-way street. correct? >> yeah. that's correct. we've engaged in preliminary discussions with some companies about their willingness to share certain information, you know. the personally protected information or personally identifiable information is one of the things that often trips us up. so figuring out how we can get the information to help us understand these services without, you know, revealing personal information is one of the biggest challenges, not just this city, but many cities are
1:51 am
facing. >> yes. >> i just wanted to add to the statement that as part of the outreach for the evaluation, we actually submitted to all the companies we were working with an industry survey to help us understand and several of the companies actually provided a lot of helpful information that colors how their services work. so i just want to sort of applaud the good faith effort that several companies did. >> that's good to hear. directors, do i have questions? >> i know you might have mentioned robots and drones, but we heard recently that they might have helicopter-type pickups to take people from point a to about the. in terms of overall flying objects -- i think that's more of the future, sadly, than we're worried about the street space. i don't know how -- what kind of jurisdiction or how that will play for us to regulate, if it's in the air but not in the air. so i mean, that's something we need to be talking, i guess, to
1:52 am
the airport about or -- i'm not really sure who would be dealing with that space. i think that the future isn't on the ground. >> yeah. i think that's probably right. i think these principles would be applicable, but what we do in response might be quite different. i think the faa has asserted jurisdiction down to a certain limit, you about i think it's -- but i think it's unclear and quite low. a lot of us may be preempted at the federal level from regulating. but takeoffs and stud attitudesd b -- andtouchdowns would certai. i've are conversations with others around the state and we would want to engage the airport given their experience and working with traffic as well as the planning department because the use of facility as you may recall, helicopter pads have been in the past a bit of a
1:53 am
point in the city. so i think it's a great point. i think it's an area that is maybe the next frontier after the latest wave of surface transportation options emerge. >> i think with the drones, i think more focus on the delivery of products, not people, but i think we need to think more about that the and changing technology just related to the trucking industry and how goods and services get to people. i know it touches a little bit on that in this report. i think we're focused much more on the individual patterns, but i think we need -- that really will define a lot of the things that happened on our streets. >> so thank you for all this, and i'm glad we're thinking about it. it brings me back to the point that was sort of focused in on in the scooter discussion we had last time. i think, to me, one of the things that we can do as a regulator and we can sort of build into these pilots as we go
1:54 am
forward, is these companies are all using technology and exploring technology to make a profit, which is fine. that's the test of their success in the market. but we don't see the same enthusiasm about using their technology to ensure compliance. and i guess where i come out is that's really going to be the solution to this. for example, if you were going to be a vehicle provider with a very sophisticated gps system that allows you to pick up your customers and know where your customers are, that same system should be able to keep you out of bike lanes or report when you're in a bike lane, keep you out of double parking when you shouldn't be double parking. the excuse that the gps doesn't work that well in the midst of skyscrapers, i've got to say, i just don't buy it. i think if we, as a regulator, say, look, you guys are the technology experts. you figured out a way to serve your customers that's going to be a success.
1:55 am
god bless you. at the same time, you have to figure out how your technology will work with our rules and show us that. we shouldn't be getting into the technology business. we're not going to be as good. we're good at what we do. they're good at what they do. but i think that has to be part of our paradigm for the regulation going forward. here's what we're going to demand of you service provider, if you want a license. you're going to have to show us some technology that's going to enforce these basic safety requirements that are critical. if you can't, one of your competitors is going to, and that competitor is going to get the licenses from us. and i think that really can be a paradigm for how we go forward. i will tell you, i think there are some companies that just are more responsible than others. i will tell you when i drive around, i know who is double parking and blocking muni buses. it's not chariot vehicles or scooters. i don't see that. i think they've built it into
1:56 am
their culture they're going to comply with rules. it's the tncs. they are loaded, loaded with more computing power than the apollo mission had and yet, we can't build in -- i realize there's preemption issues, but we can't build in a reliable system that comes them from double parking and blocking our buses and drivers as well. i realize we don't have a specific proposal before us today, but for me, it's technology that's driving all of this, and i don't think we have to feel the responsibility as an agency to invent enforcement technology. i think we as an agency can require self-enforcing technology these companies have to put it in before they get a license from us. >> that's a good point. thank you very much. directors, any more questions or comments? i do need to go to public comment still. thank you both very much for the work on this. it will be interesting to see this strategy
1:57 am
report that comes out. it's important work you're doing. thank you again, both of you. >> thank you. >> we have two people who have turned in speaker cards. >> good afternoon, directors. i work for a chariot. we're very proud of chariot seeing in the emerging mobility report. while there's still more work to do the results of the report show that chariot today is setting the bar for emerging mobility providers and their alignment with san francisco values. first and most importantly, chariot works with the city of san francisco as opposed to floating city regulations. we're proud. part of the program, chariot is sharing the type of data that
1:58 am
director heinicke is referring to. chariot is paying for the cost of running the program. chariot suggested over 100 stops to comply with permit requirements and to address public concerns. chariot will only design routes that complement public transit and not compete with it. in addition to working with sf mta, chariot invests in the community. chariot employs the entire workforce half of them who live in the bayview. they pay for each driver to complete a commercial driver's licensing program. they pay for the cost of the program and the drivers to sit through the program at $16.50 an hour. we are proud of our partnership with the teamsters local 665 who negotiated good wages and benefits for the members, setting the bar for micro transit in the bay area. they reduce congestion by removing ten single occupancy vehicles per chariot on the road. we're committed to safety as he ca --
1:59 am
accessibility with a fleet of wheelchair accessible vehicles we have and we have an in-app function that you can request a wheelchair accessible vehicle through the app. we're also providing service to areas of -- >> thank you. >> thank you so much. >> thank you, again, directors. i did spend much of the morning looking over this report. i think it's a good first step. i hope that some effective regulation comes out of it. but i wanted to specifically talk about the tncs and has been noted by a couple of directors, this -- the biggest
2:00 am
part of the congestion problem in the city is undoubtedly the tncs. the city has thus far taken the position they don't have regulatory authority over tncs, but certainly you have regulatory authority in so far as it goes -- the general rules, the rules of application that apply citywide to all vehicles or even, i would say, to certain classes of vehicles such as the