Street running north to south between beginning at silver and ending at geneva. Cross traffic does not stop at the silver intersection. Nor peru nor currently avalon nor naples nor brazil nor persia or russia or france. Finally eight blocks away at italy theres a fourway stop. Ive lived on naples going on 37 years and i learned quite early that if i want to go north south i dont go on edinburgh. Thats why naples is a main artery. I would imagine the residents appreciate the relative quiet of their streets. You start putting stop signs at every corner, no cross traffic you will get that. By placing a fourway stop here, people unfamiliar with the neighborhood might assume the other stops on edinburgh are four way as well. There is an environmental issue as well. Traffic stops increase gas mileage and pollution not to mention added to the stress of drivers because of the delay making them more aggressive which will turn to more accidents. I did a survey this morning from 7 45 to 8 15 at that intersection. There were 198 cars going down avalon, there were 48 cars going to edinburgh. Ok, so thats the most well trafficked street. At the intersection of two blocks east at avalon and vienna, there was an accident. Thank you mr. Jordan. Next speaker. Shannon wells. Good afternoon. I am shannon wells and i am the district 9 representative to the cta Citizen Advisory Committee wells a resident right by the intersection of avalon and edinburgh. We ask you vote yes to a fourway stop. The accidents and near misses at this intersection including two pedestrian injuries and three serious collisions in the past two years make it imperative to increase safety at this intersection. If you would like to see theres a photo of the most recent one which was the last couple of weeks. The statements of avalon decreases visibility at this intersection and encourages speeding. Also the parked cars make it very difficult for cross traffic and pedestrians to see on coming vehicles withouting the next. Fourway stops being placed irregularly makes drivers actually unsure whether theres a fourway stop and i witness this behavior with my parents trying to drive through the neighborhood. Right or wrong, drivers do approach the intersection from all directions and cross traffic drivers appear to assume it is a fourway stop when its not, without really looking. Ive seen this happen a lot. It does no harm to add these two new stop signs on avalon and will no doubt improve safety. We have, as a neighborhood group, we have applied for a fourway stop three times in three years, including the last two years and its been denied. We have spoken with a dozen of our neighbors in the and one block within the intersection and there is unanimous support for this stop sign. With an increasing number of small children on our block, safer streets is even more important. Thank you. Thank you, very much. Is there a member of staff . Tom, can someone speak quickly to this . I can speak to this. I think the last speaker actually summed it up well. There have been numerous requests for a stop sign here. There have been reports of dangerous conditions or collisions there. Weve had a request from the Supervisors Office to prioritize this. We see no adverse impact to putting a stop sign here which is why weve put it on this agenda and recommending it for your approval. Thank you very much. Do i have a motion to approval. So moved. Second. All in favor aye. Aye. Any opposed, hearing none, 10. 2r is approved. 10. 3c. Melody has asked to speak. Great. Melody, would you like to come up . And this is no parking any time except cityowned vehicles. On the west side at gerald. Yes, melody. Thank you so much for your time. My name is melody and im opposed to 10c. As you know sleep is a primary resource needed to make good decisions and police media strip us of our right to rest. They strip us to our resources to recover from our circumstances. Interrogators in every country know a total of sleep deprivation is a form of torture. My mere existence is breaking the law and this law and these signs are telling me i dont have the right to exist. Since these new parking signs have been posted im thrust to parking where im not safe nor is my vehicle safe. Drug users, urinating around my vehicle loss of time cleaning up after them, ive been broken into, et cetera, im treated by the meter made like im a criminal and im spoken to as if im vermon and they still allow the meter maids to terrorize me and insinuating its for my own good. Allowing this mind set without education nor correction is appalling and though it is my responsibility, im not the cause of my homelessness. And again, i ask that the board of directours for a safe place to park because without your support, i cannot overcome my circumstances and thus i am a scapegoat of societial hypocrisy which demands i overcome my circumstances while stripping me of every single resource required to do so. Thank you so much for your time again. Thank you, we are going to have a larger discussion on this and today and do i have a motion to approve . Do i have a second. All in favor aye. Aye. Any opposed. Hearing none 10. 3c is approved. Lets move on to 10. 9. The director to issue a request for proposal to solicit to develop the garage site into a Convention Hotel and Affordable Housing. Alex asked to speak. Good afternoon again, commissioners. My name is alex lance burg and im a representative. Ive been working with the local Building Trades and this r. F. P. Came tour attention courtesy of our friends at local 2. In reviewing it, and i contacted lee a couple days ago and it may have been too late under the time lines that yall were running on, what i noticed was there were two really missing provisions in there. One, is labor harmony language for the construction of the hotel itself as well as improvements related to anyone who occupies the place in terms of retail done. And something that i think that the commission ought to consider, again, also in its proprietary interest and its electric safety language. Making sure the men and women building this hotel are at the highest caliber of training going through programs and having observe a training and really having the skills in capabilities to pull this job off. On budget and on time and safely. To the first point, labor harmony language when i mentioned it to lee she was dubious or she wasnt quite sure where the City Attorney was on this thing and i just have actually a copy with me. I wasnt able to print it but i have a copy of a letter that s. F. O. Entered into with the San Mateo CountyBuilding Trades. Basically adapting labor harmony language for its facilities. You can incorporate it into the r. F. P. And i was hoping to bring it to you. Second in terms of electric contractor safety language, this is something thats really been getting a lot of widespread use in los angeles. Los angeles county both the city as well as the other cities in the county as well. I forwarded a copy to lee and hopefully she will be able to forward it on to you and other project managers on your side of this thing. Before you approved the r. F. P. I hope you can amend or at least include the language to put those two provisions in there. Thank you. Anymore public speakers on 10. 9 . No. Yes, please come forward, sir. My name is sam soho. My son and i we have a retail store in that facility. We just took over on september this year. And we would like to say that our lease says that when they approved to build the hotel or whatever, we have six months to leave. We understand that but are we would like to take a humble request if we could be accommodated in the new hotel or whatever it is and provided some kind of a retail space. We would appreciate that. Its too early to do that but i wanted to make it like a point. I would appreciate if you can accommodate us in some way. Thank you, very much. Much appreciated. District or racekin, this is in front of us if there were the desire or the requirement on the part of the city to add labor almost on and safety language can it be done at the time of awarding any contract . Well, maybe we can ask staff to speak to the issue of this. I wasnt aware of this issue. I would remedy pending on what staff would say, or one thing you can do is approve this item, the issuance of the r. R. P. And district us as staff to work with the trades to see the extent to which we can incorporate that language. We would want to put it into the rrfp but let me ask our staff to update you on whatever conversations that there may have been. Sure, im ray from the facilities and Real Estate Division of the sfmta. I would echo the comment he made. The resolution that is before you does allow us to subsequent minor changes to the r. F. P. For those kind of requirements for labor workforce requirements, those kinds of things. So we can talk to the City Attorneys office and discuss with the gentlemen who is here at the podium about any additional labor requirements that we can include in the r. F. P. And our guide was question have issues and the solve and real estate but we are interested and obviously having robust labor requirements within the r. F. P. Director. Putting it for the r. F. P. Would you like to speak to that . My colleague from the economic and Workforce Development can provide thoughts on that. Good afternoon director, thank you. Yes, so we did consult the City Attorney about this very question even before alex raised the question to us and weve been advised that weve put sort of the most rigorous amount of labor requirements and workforce provisions in our r. F. P. However, i did double check with the City Attorney after receiving a call from alex. What ive been told by the City Attorney is that we dont take a position on labor piece, especially in our solicitation. It doesnt mean the city cant participate later. If something has been proposed by whoever we select. But at this point its not our policy to sort of proactively include language of that kind. But as director riskin said, if you chose to approve the authorization to release the r. F. P. Today, before we release it, we can have another conversation about that with the City Attorney. Just to clarify, it is the policy of the city and county of San Francisco not to include labor harmony language . I dont want to speak for the City Attorney but im happy to clarify that with him. What i understood you to say was theres a policy that including this sort of language would not be with that policy. Im trying to understand whose policy that is . Ive been advised by the City Attorney its the citys policy. I dont want to misquote. I would rather have the City Attorney come and describe the policy in writing. Where this leaves me as a district or is ill state it would seem to me if its appropriate and within the city policies to state this and its something the agency wants to pursue anyway to include it, but, i also realize that these things arent lightly drafted and that attorneys have been consulted and all that. Im a little bit hesitant to do it on the fly here at the meeting. And rather, if were told this is something that could be done later with amendment power to do that and not hold up the issuance of the r. F. P. For this. So that was my recommend day. Not to try to do anything on the fly. The option again would be to approve with direction to us, to work with the City Attorneys office with oewd and with labor just to explore what language we might consider adding. I dont know if it would be i would guess its a practice than a policy but you know, we certain want to consult with the City Attorneys office and would do so. I know theres also local business, preference and an all kinds of other sort of its firstsource hiring. Other qualifications for other businesses that may not, like Small Businesses that are a retail shop thing that may not be unionized so it might be one that i dont know. One of the reasons because we do have requirements around all those other things as well. Its not to say that its inconsistent but we have a lot of different priorities. If i may, i would add two things. One, part of the r. F. P. Is premise on the part of the sfmt will continue to own the underline parcels, if and when a development is actually approved and so there are going to be many future points at which whether its through the Lease Agreement or the entitlement through which all of these workforce provisions will be cot a fied and the r. F. P. Does include, because of the ownership of the city, they include a very holistic set of workforce and Employment Requirements including, local hire, a mandatory requirement goal, not just a goal, first source hiring and others. Thank you, yes. Thank you. Sorry to put you on the spot and have to serve the role of someone else and all that but, you did it ably and i appreciate that. It gets to the larger point of this. This is just the issuance of an r. F. P. Were not making a decision here as to what is going to be built and how its built specifically. Were starting the process for something that clearly has a lot of merit for a lot of policy needs. So with that and subject to director kristen and ill move the item for this . Ill second it. And to go back to the gentleman who has a Retail Establishment and do we have a consideration for someone who is already operated a shop within one of our sites, perhaps give special consideration Going Forward . I have the privilege of speaking with the gentleman earlier today who had expressed that concern and we will work with Economic Workforce Development and work with a selected developer to try and accommodate those interest as best as possible. Excellent. Thank you. I have a motion and a second. All in favor. Aye. Any opposed. Hearing none . 10. 9 is approved. Moving on, item 11, presentation and discuss regarding the Transportation Task force 2045 recommendations. Thank you. Im sorry. Its ok. Ive been under the understanding that the presentation was going to be pre loaded. Can we go out of order so i can get the presentation up . Yes. Can we go to item 12 if mr. Thornily is happy to come out of order . Ok. Lets see, who gets your presentation up first. [laughter] so well go to item 12 then. Presentation discussion regarding management and vehicular habitation. This is item 12. Good afternoon members of the public presence and viewing through s. F. Gov tv. Im andy thornily im senior. In this beautiful, wealthy, intelligent city, every night perhaps 7500 folks are out on the streets. We know, we have a fair estimate from the bienial point in time from presence on the street, about 1200 people are living in cars or vans on the streets of San Francisco. The demographics are various. Their individuals, there are families, there are elderly folks. And not only is there hardship of being vehicularly housed, but citations and towing can just make it worse, and can only one lose her home to towing, but often, possessions are lost. Everything can be lost in a stroke. The issue is complex and multidimensional, to be sure. This agency asks us to address punt amount tally different questions about who we are as a city. We must address these questions if we are to become our vision of a truly great city. This city has charges regulating the curb, so i want to make it obvious. This is a transportation agency. The city charges the mta with regulations limiting parking, stopping, etcetera. This is our charge. Its not something we do as a hobby. We are responsible for managing the curb in a safe, equitiable and efficient manner. Lots and lots and lots of things pressing on the curb. Transitways, parkways, daylighting, and that is challenging enough. If all we were doing is refere refereeing the curb for parking and other uses, but some of what is parked are vehicles, and some of those vehicles have folks living in them. The Public Works Department has some enforcement responsibilities, the police department, of course, is an essential partner on this business of regulating use of the curb, but it really is up to the sf municipal transportation agency. Want to acknowledge that while i assert the prime task of this agency is to manage transportation and streets, we obviously are not apart from the rest of the city. You have heard folks make that comment, in fact that last consent item was this city recognizing and having an opportunity to be a participant in addressing the housing crisis. Personally, im thrilled. We will lose a garage, perhaps, but well gain Affordable Housing and also, depending on how that turns out, a hotel to help serve a very important aspect of the local industry. So this is a very complicated thing that the mta has struggled with, not just bridging the responsibilities of the transportation and streets management with housing and habitation, but finding cooperative harmonious arrangement with other agencies so that we can focus on transportation. Vehicles used as housing present a significant policy challenge to the sfmta. Again, directors who have been here with me for the past several years know this, directors who have joined us more recently havent had all of those conversations, but we have struggled with this for a while. First, ill start by reminding everybody that under police code since 197 1, its against the l 1971, its against the law to live in a vehicle. The enforcement of that law has been challenging for the police practically, and also i think as a compassion issue, so it may be illegal, but thats not enforced as strictly as it could for various reasons. Inhabited oversize vehicles present social and safety problems. Youll here, im sure from members of the public about not only the issue of blights, having r. V. s parked along a certain street, but it becomes a refuge for mischief, to put things lightly, we hear about drugs being bought and sold, prostitution, fighting dogs, all sorts of trouble. We hear about the disposal of waste in ways that are not only unpleasant but unsan unsanitar. Your staff, frankly are sitymid to address this challenge. We are, im pleased to say, beginning to have what i hope are productive conversations with the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing towards having that relationship with an agency thats not just a transportation agency. And were starting to see the potential for some mechanisms, and well touch on that a little bit later in the presentation, and i think i have a colleague from the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing to speak to that and answer some questions about it. Just to touch very briefly on what is living in vehicles on the street . Well, we dont know for sure. The point in time survey, the bienial survey i dont want to say its superficial, but its only one night. But there are folks living in vehicles who have been living in vehicles for years whos effectively residentially vehicularly housed. We have somebody whos in a camper coming from sacramento and on his way to los angeles. Weve got tourists and visitors. Im down in the marina, and i will often see families with rented r. V. s from indiana living in vehicles. A airbnb lists r. V. s as rooms you can stay in in San Francisco. Im not just saying it to be silly. I had an email before i came here to talk with you from a gentleman who was living in an r. V. Attending school here. Hes come to San Francisco. He cant afford or he finds it untenable to rent space, and so as a student, hes living in an r. V. Thats one of the many flavors of things. We also are hearing more about folks coming in from other counties driving for uber and lyft who are spending the weekend sleeping in their cars in on the grounds beach. Again, quite different from someone living in a camper for months or years on end. Theres also something i want to overlap between over side vehicles as a hazard and n nuisance and People Living in them. Weve developed tools and responses that weve brought forward. In 2012 we working with the right sides came up with a new kind of infraction. Dimensionally based, 27 feet long, 7 feet tall, where you cant park over night. That wasnt meant to target homeless folks. It was also meant to target landscape boats, fishing boats, lots of different large vehicles that were parked where they shouldnt be, and we need as an agency to address that. There are many bits of curb where we do not want to have a large vehicle parked for site line blocking reasons or other safety and health issues. Getting into a little bit more of the history and context, this is a photo that was sent to us by a constituent in the portal district. This is university street just a couple of months ago, and its interesting and illustrative for a few reasons. You do see a line of r. V. s. You see that if youre a neighbor in this neighborhood, youd be concerned or worse about that. Youd also see that theres a small s. U. V. With a boat and a trailer parked there. Im suspecting that thats a neighbor whos storing a large vehicle on the street. This is one of the challenges that we also have as an agency. If we try to regulate large vehicles parked on the street, neighbors are large vehicles will protest. But just to touch on a little bit more of what we have try today do before i get into the specific regulations tried to do before i get into the specific regulations. We have in talking with other cities and advocates, coalitions for homelessness in particular, to explore other mechanisms. There is the concept of the Safe Parking Program. Again members of this board have heard this and talked about this. Ive first got wind of this from the coalition of homelessness who pointed us to the balanceard neighborhood of seattle, where private parking facilities, churches and other ballard neighborhood of seattle, where private parking facilities, churches and other walmart, for instance, make those available for overnight refuge for folks living in vehicles. Those parking lots have social services attached to them, and that idea of a Safe Parking Program has been recommended to us over the years . We have talked to other agencies about is a way that perhaps San Francisco could experiment with that. Its apparent to your staff that the mta could not operate. No other agency is running a Safe Parking Program, but we are standby to be partners on that and well talk a little bit about that further down the road. Again, theres some regulatory precedent on that. Against, since 1971, the city code has made it illegal to inhabit a vehicle. The 72hour rule which is basically the abandoned vehicle mitigation rule, that you may not park a vehicle for longer than 72 hours, neighbors sometimes ask us why cant the mta move these vehicles along just for the 72hour rule, if somethings parked there for three days . Well talk a little bit more about that in a moment. I just started to tell you, ill tell you more now, that in 2012, we did codify the board of supervisors codified an over night vehicle parking restriction, where posted a large vehicle cant be parked between midnight and 6 00 a. M. Weve brought you proposals for that over the years, but youve become understandably reluctant to approve those, and we have stopped bringing you more of those to use that oversize vehicle regulation. I have, myself, hoped that we might as a city, talk again about a blanket citywide prohibition on oversize vehicles parked over night. The board of supes proposed that in 2004 but did not adopt that. I think because some neighbors who have their own large vehicles minded. We might come back to that as a city. And of course, there are a lot of other rules that cause vehicles of any size to be moved, whether its time limits, resident permit time limits, parking meters, tow away zones. There are all sorts of things apart from that oversize vehicle regulation. So there are fines and fees that are associated. I mentioned that when a vehicle is cited and towed. I want to emphasize, youll hear from members of the public, couldnt mta provide relief from someone who was cited, their vehicle was parked too many times and towed. At your january 16 meeting, you remember, you acted to reform the unpaid citation Community Service and payment plan. Its now a little bit cheaper to get into that plan if you have a lack log of citations. Weve also implemented fee reductions for firsttime tows and even deeper reductions for low income folks, so we are as an agency making reforms to make it less of a burdensome if youve been towed, but there are still some gaps. I think youll hear from members of the public looking for more relief on these fees and fines for towing. An impounded vehicle often contains personal property, and the inability to pay delinquent fees and fines of towing, even with these fee relief reforms, frequently mean the loss of the vehicle and everything it contained. All right. I havent been asked, you may have heard, why isnt the 72hour rule enough to move large vehicles or any vehicle along . Its a basic time limit that no vehicle can be parked for longer than three days, but it was really intended to address abandoned vehicles. Its quite effective at that. When a vehicle is strollen aol abandoned, no one is coming to get it. It was never meant to be a hard rule for threehour limit or threeday limit, rather; and in fact our parking control officers are reluctant to enforce is too strictly because sometimes they find themselves in a spite match between neighbors. My neighbor goes off to chicago for a week. Another neighbor says that car hasnt moved. Thats not what the 72hour rule was meant to address. And on that notion, it has built into it an exception. Other conventional time limits, resident permit time limits, three hour time limits, whatever, you have to move the car at least a block or a tenth of a mile. The 72hour requirement does not have that intent to shift, so if youre sitting there three days, you roll a foot forward and the clock is reset. So to be clear, to the board and the public watching, the 72hour rule is not a way to enforce longterm parking by large vehicles or small vehicles. That oversize vehicle restriction which is transportation code 7254 has been posted in about 47 miles of San Francisco block faces. This map is pretty hard to read here, but in your packet, youve got a cleaner copy. Thats about 25 miles of the 900 miles of San Francisco streets where weve posted this oversize vehicle restriction. This board does not approve further use of this oversize vehicle restriction since october 2016. You may recall rebrougwe broug three sides of the safeway parking lot. Blanket, no stopping, no standing, many other ways that were coming at this. We have a business park, apparel city, its called. Not quite bayview, just in off of bayshore drive, and we worked for quite a long time to come up with some sort of parking regulations that would move along vehicles parking on those streets, and still leave space for the businesses and their customers to move on. We still havent been able to address this program, but were looking at it with actuals that offer some resistance to the community. Again, that oversize vehicle restriction, just to say to you that the beginning of this chart is july 2015. You see that after we had signed a few locations, we had quite a bit of citation writing. That falls off pretty quickly. Once that oversize vehicle restricted is posted, pretty much it does the job. It moves those vehicles out of there. The problem is where does it go, and who is in those vehicles . We cant say for sure, and we certainly can say were not compassionately engaging those people that were displacing. Again, some unintended consequences. That is quite effective at moving vehicles along, but it displaces people instead of resolving them, and of course the folks living in them are displaced. We have, several times, ever since bringing you the proposal to use that oversize vehicle restriction, been working with the coalition on homelessness fitfully, distractedly, i confess. We have not been sitting with other people as closely as we might. Weve got other projects were working on. Weve gotten to know dph and the Homeless Outreach team as well. Very close. I know lots of police officers. Weve approached the interfaith council, whether they might help us get a safe parking lot going. Weve worked with every member of the board of supervisors to get their interest in addressing this. Now we have the department of homelessness and the support of housing, thank haerch, and we are beginning to have conversations that i hope will become productive in finding some relief. I believe randy casada from the department of homelessness and housing relief can answer some questions on what were doing with them. Finally, to recap that conversation with dhsh has resulted in a working group being convened. Weve had a series of conversations towards developing some sort of relief mechanism for folks living in folks, bringing them not to services but helping move them out to more appropriate housing. We really as a city need to find a way to help people get into conventional healthy housing, and so were looking at ways that not only could we grant an exception for relief for someone living in a vehicle, connect them to services, connect them to housing, get them out of the vehicle, get them off the street. And in the meantime, this agency cant stop regulating the curb. You will hear from members of the public who are very frustrated that we are not addressing their problems, and i do not have a proposal for you today. I am, rather, here to update you on where the conversation stands, and as you hear from members of the public and get some questions, left to get a bit of direction from the board on how we might proceed in executing on our mission to regulate the curb while we show some due empathy and compassion. And i will just end on that point because as i say, there are folks from the public who want to speak to you. Thank you very much. Good presentation, and a very difficult topic for us all. Directors, i think i would like to go to the public to hear Public Comment first, but i know we have two representative aides from the board of supervisors. We id like to ask them to come up first. Clarifying jurisdiction. I heard a social Services Agency presentation. Are we taking on that role as well or are we just delineating time to parking . I think mr. Thornily, would you like to answer that question please . I think what i heard you say in your presentation is that we are not taking on the role of a social Services Agency, and we deal strictly with managing the curb space. Thats right, chair brinkman. But he also said hotels and other housing. Is that something you want to take on . No. Pardon me for any confusion. Im asserting, and i think with confidence, and i hope mr. Reiskin will clarify or confirm, this agency is not a social service agency. We are not a housing agency, we are not in the business of setting and following habitation policy. Okay. I misinterpreted it brink br. K chairman brinkman thank you, thank you director torres. I think miss torres and is it mr. Persky. Im a legislative aide to supervisor fewer, who represents district one on the board of supervisors. So first, we do just want to thank you for taking up this issue which does go beyond the scope of parking and traffic in the city. As a district that represents much of Golden Gate Park and open park space, we have heard many concerns from neighbors that these impacts to vehicles cause a lot of issues to the surrounding community, but at the same time, we realize that the issue here is ultimately a symptom that comes from growing wealth divide and to make ends meet, lower income communities have to resort to these r. V. s and living out of these cars, and enforcement of these matters does cause a lot of impacts to these communities. So while we are very appreciative that mta has been working closely with the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing, and all the other obligations mr. Thornily mentioned, we do look forward to working with them to identify sites in the county to find places where these vehicles can park with minimal impacts to surrounding residential areas, and we hope that this can be a citywide plan that we can all work towards. So we appreciate your consideration. Thank you very much, mr. Perce persky. As you know, supervisor tang and myself have been involved in the issue of vehicular population for many years. As andy showed in those photos, there would be a wall of vehicles which led to a lot of other issues illegal dumping, animalhuman waste problems, sometimes noise late a night and generally a lack of parking and also visiblity for pedestrians which is a big concern for us . We also know there are many people in the vehicles who keep to themselves and present absolutely no issue to their communities . Unfortunately, many [ inaudible ] of course, there are many challenges with where they moved and what services they had. Over the course of the last few years we have put in a very few requests around playgrounds and parks, we only put in the requests when it is a persistent problem such as light or public safety, not just in large Parking Spaces that happen to be scattered throughout the neighborhood, which is where a lot of oversize vehicles are currently parking. We want to mank the mta for working with different agencies to create anecwitnessable solutions for people who find themselves in the situation, and we dont want 2 ow away fees or fines to be the impediment to allowing people to get out of homelessness. Brimpg brink well set the time limit at two minutes. Theres a count down clock on the podium. When you get to 30 seconds remaining, youll hear a light tone. When you get to the end of your time, you will hear a louder tone, at which time, i will politely but firmly instruct you to stop your remarks. My name is cameron crockett. Im the chair for the marina association. I came to the sfmta back in december over our residents who expressed serious concerns over the safety issues from people camping out in their trucks, vans and r. V. s. First want to say thank you. Youve been very responsive. Connected me with andy. Weve had several great meetings, includiand ive also analyzed a study from long beach city. This problem is forced to get larger not smaller. However i fully believe sfmta has the power to help curb this program if the right policies and services are aligned. My recommendation would be to explore a solution similar to l. A. s program, which is banning campers and r. V. s within the city unless a special day use permit is purchased to special enforcement to people sleeping in vehicles, and then three is starting the safe transition park area where people can park their r. V. s cars and vans without fear of being towed. The safe transition park concept is not new, however for it to be implemented effectively, i believe sfs Homeless Department will need to find the right location and focus on redoubling their efforts to help people find a purpose. [ inaudible ] thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Sylvia shaman. Hi. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak today. My name is celia shuman, and i was invited to come here and share a little bit of our history with oversize vehicles and parking issues. So this is 2002. This shows you, this is not a new issue. 2002, 2001. So up until 2016, our area had zero curb enforcement, so anybody could park anything. R. V. s were part of the problem, but thank to andy and sfmta we now have four hour time limits there which have helped us a lot. This is a more recent photo right before i had our time limits. I apologize for the black and white here, but again, very similar to other photos youve seen. And things had improved significantly with that curb enforcement. However, within the last couple months we are now seeing r. V. s returning to areas where there is four hours curbs and actually meters and they are there for seven to ten days, so the problem that were having is an enforcement question, who do we call . Department of parking and traffic says its a police issue, and they say its a 31 is are a is 311 issue, so who do we call . Additionally, were having a problem with nonmotorized vehicles parking in those space does. This is kind of a wooden structure thats parked in front of a parking meter there. Oh, sorry. So this, i understand, there is no jurisdiction for, so this this is another challenge that we need to address. Thank you. Chairman brinkman thank you. Next speaker, please. April prozer, followed by evan prozer, and then melody. I have a picture, too. I just put it on the thing . Chairman brinkman itll come up. There you go. I just want to i guess youd call it a reality check. This is a department of public works worker with a sledgehammer about to demolish a persons home. It had he had made a little stairway and a little desk in there, and he had all his tools hanging neatly on the wall. And he took a video. That is off the video, and he was very nice. You know, he never complained, you know . He just was watching them as they with the hot team and the police watching. This is the reality of whats happening. You know, i appreciate everyone saying that these people are vulnerable. They are, and until something is figured out to do besides just saying well, we dont know where theyre going, maybe we should put some kind of a mo moratorium on kicking them out and destroying their homes because they are vulnerable and theyre citizens of San Francisco. Thank you, miss prozer. Next speaker, please. Evan prozer. Today, folks, thank you for hearing us. Im aprils husband. Together we pastor the Homeless Church here fore the last 24 hours. For seven years, we lived on the streets ourselves in a school bus to get a sense of whats going on. We love the people very much and know whats going on. I want to add to that picture that she just that story. The police were there while this was going on, and they allowed the owner of the of the constructed home to film that far for the first part of the sledgehammer, and then they told after it had been torn down as a way of more traffic. They stopped him from filming when, being unable to to destroy the vehicle with a sledgehammer or by backing a flatbed truck into it, they took a a whats the right word . I lost it now. They took a backhoe and bashed it to the ground. Dear people, dear people, are you aware of the suffering of the Homeless People in our city . Do you have any idea what its like . Im just emphasizing im emphasizing the empathy and compassion that youre so aware of, im just emphasizing. These when you crush a persons home and hes standing right there, unable to film it, youre crushing him either further in his personality. Homeless people are crushed people. Thank you. Chairman brinkman thank you, mr. Prozer. Next speaker, please. Melody. Followed by sam christiansen. Chairman brinkman melody in . Is there a melody here . Im sorry, melody. We have to keep everybody from two minutes. Please go ahead, and im sure that you can do you want to wait and let somebody else speak first . Okay. Well call a few more speakers and then you can cull up. Mark, sam. Yes, im mark christiansen, speaking as an individual. Sfmta needs to take a lead role in a firm yet compassionate approach to vehicle overnight habitation on the streets of San Francisco. Currently, r. V. s park on the streets taking up valuable Parking Spaces for neighborhood residents and persons dispose trash and many other items on the sidewalks of surrounding vehicles. This is a health and safety issue. It must be addressed. I suggest locating perhaps up to three or four large public sites, each not in close proximity to a residential property, block or so away at least, that could support r. V. And vehicle lots and perhaps charge a very nominal fee for maintenance to sustain these special lots. All requirements could be worked on for the benefit of all parties, but i think thats a safe and compassionate wray way to deal with it, and i think there are sites in San Francisco that could deal with this. Probably take 12 three or four sites that could probably hows up house up to 1200, so thats my suggestion. Thank you. Chairman brinkman thank you, mr. Christiansen. Next speaker. Sam lu. Hi. Im sam lu, and i work at the coalition for homelessness, and we get calls every day from people who are homelessness, and theyre really in a state of distress because their car has been taken away. Melody wanted me to read some of her statement. There are approximately five to seven Navigation Centers with a capacity of 75 to 120 people each. Currently, the turnaround is 30 to 60 day stay. Its become nothing more than a revolving door. At most it can get approximately 500 of the 7500 Homeless People off the street for a very short time, and i think it just speaks to why were taking away peoples cars when we have such a burden on the homeless system as it is. Its also difficult to get your car back with all of your possessions in it. I was here with mr. Hernandez whos in the audience today, until 11 30 friday to get his car back because of the impounding tow fees. If you dont pay it that day or in a couple of days, the fee is so much that youll never get your car back. So i see a lot of different pla flaws especially for people who are living in their cars, and i ask you to put a moratorium on the tow fees or at least the impound fees for people who are living in their cars. Theres also an issue with a need to get an i. D. To get your possessions back. A lot of people get their things stolen, they cant get an i. D. , and also tow for low income fee, you need some sort of documentation. But if youre someone whos undocumented or if youre a working poor person and just are on any of those programs, you cant access that reduction, so im open to any questions if you have any. Thank you so much. Chairman brinkman thank you. Next speaker. Gonzalo hernandez followed by michael ignant. Hello. My name is gonzalo hernandez, and im homeless. When i want to say several help some people to this situation, right . I was i left my car and then they towed my car, right . I was desperate, right, because thats my house, right . Try to get back get my home back, right, and i couldnt do it because when i went to talk with one woman that was supposed to pay, and the next day, it was more, so too difficult, right . I was i was what im a drug addict, but i have five months im not using drugs right now, so and i was desperate, right, because i cant get my home back. S