Us today. This resolution reflects the t. A. s concerns that up zoning will negatively impact transit by exacerbating existing crowding, increasing wear and tear on existing highcapacity transit lines, and subject transit operators to unforeseen costs. Up zoning directly tied to Transportation Services could have a Chilling Effect on transportation enhancements in places where people do not want to development. This could decrease public demand to upgrade Transit Services to avoid s. P. 50 up zoning. True transitoriented development should account for impacts on transit. It should expand transit and not reduce it and it should improve transit service, not potentially make it worse. Transportation authorities should be concerned and take action on Development Bills that impact and are directly tied to our work. As a body, we need to stand firm on opposing a bill that undermines our Community Transportation plan unless and until our concerns are addressed with amendments and or companion legislation. This resolution calls for a new funding for communitybased planning to evaluate Transportation Needs resulting from will 50. New funding for local jurisdictions to deliver additional transportation infrastructure needed to support the Housing Development enabled under bill 50. And limited ceqa exemptions for Public Transportation projects so that bill 50 landuse impacts are not considered significant for these projects, mitigating the additional time and cost for these projects as a result. The t. A. Staff, including director chang and Public Policy managers analysed model transportation incentive programs that could be expanded or created to provide adequate resources for Public Transit improvements alongside Housing Development. They are available for questions about these potential opportunities. Fellow commissioners, i believe this resolution affirms our shared commitment to good planning and better transportation and i urge you to support it today. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions or comments from commissioners . Seeing none, there are a number of individuals who like to testify on this. I have some speaker cards. We will open it up to Public Comment. [calling names] first speaker, please. Good morning, my name is jeffrey. I am a resident in the outer sunset. I am supportive of the board of supervisors vision for bill 50 and the amendment for all the reasons that are good reasons. I know that in researching this and attending town Hall Meetings with scott weiner, i know he has an attitude of we dont need to worry about transit, transit doesnt have to be imperfect perfect to increase housing, is one of the many things we dont like about bill 50. It is kind of the cart before the horse approach and as such, i fully support this similar resolution adopting and opposing this on will 50 for these reasons. Thank you. Can i have the overhead, please . My name is jury with the San Francisco landuse coalition. I support the proposed resolution to oppose bill 50 unless there is an amendment to include transportation mitigation provisions. San francisco has 865,000 People Living in 47 square miles or 18,440 people per square mile. We have the second highest number of residents per square mile in the United States. San francisco has twice the population density of los angeles and three times the density of san jose. It is much more difficult and costly to build and maintain infrastructure in a very dense city. Bill 50 needs to be modified to address the existing disparity in population density between San Francisco, san jose, and los angeles, and allow for transportation mitigation. San franciscos current Public Transit infrastructure is unable to support the Current Population density, let alone the proposed higher densification. Sfmta has the second oldest and the highest mileage Public Transit fleet in the United States. This is a bay area problem. Oakland and fremont are also on the worst city list. The m. T. A. Has a serious staffing problem. As was mentioned, not enough drivers and not enough skilled workers to maintain aging equipment. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please and if we can return the overhead. Thank you. Good morning, transit authority, i am a tenant in district eight. I am a munimobile writer. I take the jay line, the 49, every line. I have been in this city almost 50 years so ive familiar with the transit, which is in a sorry state. The proposed state senate bill 50, the more homes act, links housing density and the proximity to transit. The bill 50 would enable developers to build higher and more dems housing along transit corridors with the highest percentage of the units being market rate housing. It makes perfect sense there be a provision for transportation infrastructure to support the growth policies for transit rich areas because we need to have plans for complete communities. And therefore, i support the resolution to oppose the bill 50 unless it is amended unless there is companion legislation that specifically would provide sufficient new funding for Community Planning to ensure local jurisdictions can evaluate Transportation Service and infrastructure needs resulting from s. P. From bill 50 provide sufficient funding to the local jurisdictions to deliver the additional transportation infrastructure and services to support the Housing Development enabled under bill 50, which could include supporting existing and new grants programs. And provide unlimited exemption from ceqa analysis for Public Transportation projects such that the changes inland use regulations resulting from the project arent considered significant. Please support this bill. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning, commissioners. First of all, i want to welcome our new supervisor, supervisor preston. We are just elated to have you here. And thank you to commissioner marr for introducing this resolution that is very much shedding the light on the sham that bill 50 is. Commissioners, how could we possibly increase population . Lets not talk about density, just population. When the entire Transit System in the city of San Francisco is broken . Chair peskin, you brought up the pin issue. That is an absolute embarrassment. We are bringing in a new fleet of cars, nobody has even quality assured them, and almost a year into this, we realize these are grave, serious problems. So are we transit rich . I daresay not. Here is the report that came out from our late mayor that commissioned this and it came out in 2018. This is not too long ago. According to the report, overhead, police. The city of San Francisco is 22 billion, that is not an m. , it is be, billion dollars in their red. By 2045, because of the deficiencies, the deficit in the funding that we have for transit this is a report out that was commissioned by the city. This is not a made up report by, the public or god forbid, the nimbys or that faction. We are not doing anything about it. There is no source, a Single Source identified to close this gap in 25 years. Secondly, this whole thing about transit rich, here is how transit rich, district four is. Fifty minutes from there to their. That is how transit rich we are. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning. Thank you for listening to all of this information. I support supervisor mores resolution to bill 50 because it was well thought out and includes funding. That is the most important part. Lets make our city better than it is now. Thank you. Thank you. I am with van ness neighbours i actually had the interesting experience the other day. I went, for the first time to the bart station in oakland. For the first time, i saw an area that seems like it was ripe for Affordable Housing. It was covered and surrounded by hundreds and hundreds of acres of deteriorated and closed factories. It would probably be possible to put maybe 10,000 units of new housing there and has a major bart station and major bus station. Lets be positive this works. What would it take . It would take increased funding for bart, increased funding for a. C. Transit, increased funding for s. F. Munimobile because you have to connect the workers to get to the station, to get into the city and get to work, i think the most i think Affordable Housing is actually more possible than transit. I think the transit has to come first to be able to get people to work, which is the and into school and it is one of the most important things we have to do. We cant just plunk down any kind of housing without connections. We know that another important thing is we must have a new tunnel. We are maxed out with everything to do with bart. Put transit first and do support these amendments. Thank you. Thank you. Edward mason. The m. T. A. And the sfcta should participate with the Planning Department to acquire Development Funds. Growth must fund growth and not rely on state funding. The nexus study for development and transportation study resulted in this transit sustainability fee being reduced by 75 . In essence, growth was not funding growth and there should be more reliance on the developers paying the fee. This is an article for the Valley Transportation Authority in santa clara county. On the 208th of december, they will restructure their transit lines. Bottom line is, they will escape probably most of the requirements of bill 50 by having Service Upgraded to 15 minutes from 30 minutes and a lot of lines are going to go that way. However, you the transit stations, they will have anywhere from 30 to 238 buses in our. Indirectly, senate bill 50 has rezoned that area around those centres. This is in direct. My concern is growth must fund growth and dont go to the state piggy bank for funding because the state piggy bank has been funded with our tax dollars that go in there. The developers should be responsible for any type of Development Funds that are required on that. And also, keep in mind what happens when transportation is driving the planning results as it winds its way through senate bill 50. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. Im with the San Francisco transit riders. I am here to support supervisor marks resolution. It is not to like there are a ton of m. T. C. His on munimobile buses and trains waiting to whisk everybody along. Through the mayor do the work on the mayors task force, we have gotten clear on how far behind munimobile is on staffing and maintenance and how much how far it has to go to catch up to current demand, nevermind the mode shift we need to achieve and nevermind future populations if we really prioritize transit to serve new development, then we would have had the 16th street project, the new fair landing and the t6 before the chase center opened and not after. And makes sense for us to tie the streamlining of approvals and funding for transit to increase development and increase housing. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning, commissioners. Welcome to supervisor preston. Looking forward to working with all of you. Im the council of Community Housing organization we were not aware this is coming. This is very smart to support the resolution before you. I know this is coupled with the resolution the full board of supervisors will be considering with a different frame. This makes Public Policy transitoriented development together. We really do that and so you are doing the right things. You are youre talking about pieces of the puzzle. This is not to say i think it is important for everyone listening. Do not up zone, do not plan, do not grow, do not develop. All these things need to happen, but you need to think about them carefully. We need to think about them carefully and do it right. Theres nothing wrong with saying when used to be done right to grow and plan and develop. I also suggest we stepped back from the details of this resolution and consider that we are in a historic time. This is absolutely a transformative change after decades and decades in the region, in california and nationally of suburban sprawl. That is how we accommodate population growth as a nation and as a region. We are reversing that. What that does is it presents massive challenges to tackle. It is not something for simple, a wand waving solutions. That will not fix it. I really believe that San Francisco is built as a place to figure out how to do it and do it right. All of you as electeds are doing excellent jobs as leaders. We have the democracy to do it in this jurisdiction. We have the advocacy committee, folks who are experts in this field and we have dedicated activists on the ground. Lets figure out how to do this right. Thank you for sending the message about how to get it right and grow right. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of this public of the public for item number 11 . We will close Public Comment. Would we liked to make a motion to adopt the resolution . Yes. Moved by commissioner mar is there a second . Come seconded by commissioner preston. Is there any discussion . Seeing none, same house, same call, the matter is finally approved. Please call item 12 through 14 together. Item from the Personnel Committee. Item 12 is recommend adoption of a real Program Manager job classification and revised organization chart. Item 13 is evaluation of Public Employee performance and recommend approval of performance objectives for 2020. I do 14, recommended option of the revised Salary Structure amendment of the existing employment agreement and setting annual compensation for the director for 2020. They are all action items. Thank you, colleagues. The Personnel Committee consisting of myself, the vice chair and Personnel Committee member commissioner ronen met earlier today. We have recommendations for you, but if any member of the body would like to meet in closed session, we can do so. If not, if there is no motion to meet in closed session, the item has been called. I would be happy to share with you what the Personnel Committee recommends to this body. Seeing no motion to meet in closed session, the Personnel Committee met to discuss the performance evaluation and recommend approval of our executive director for the performance objectives for the coming year and found her work during the 2019 year to be exceptionally good. We took action in closed session , which i reported out to recommend a revised Salary Structure range, which is a 15 increase in the range, but not in salary to a new range between 217 dollars is a minimum to 304,000 as a maximum. We also recommend to you the amendment of the Employment Contract for an additional three years so this would be the third threeyear contract which would commence on the last day of this month and last until 2022, and finally, the Personnel Committee recommends an annual compensation for the 2020 year with a 5 increase, which is in line with data that the committee reviewed for other similar positions for a total salary of 267,417, and we recommended that the unspent 15,000 for Employee Development , which missed chang did not spend in 2019 because she has been incredibly busy and working her behind off, they spent in 20204 things that will help enhance her Job Performance missed chang, we are delighted to have you. We hold you in the highest of esteem. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments . Are there any members of the public would like to comment on items 12 or 14 in so far as we are not reading in closed session . Public comment is closed. Is there a motion to move the Personnel Committees recommendations . Made by commissioner mar and seconded by commissioner yee. We have the same house, same call. Those items are adopted. Is there any general Public Comment . Thank you, supervisors. I would like to talk about the five m. Building. The reason i am addressing you is that i have contacted multiple people throughout these five years. I want to ensure that there are no encroachments for the width of the street, which is the width of 30 feet. The reason im requesting this, i know some of you have been briefed. There is another alignment with the lying, it is on the alignment it has been on the table for eight years and as we discussed during the first Personnel Committee, the same individual that was responsible what happened and by the way, the procurement as the caltrain railcar. If they are also responsible for ignoring that alignment. I want to give you some updates on this. I have worked walked this alignment with engineers who have done something similar the last few years. And they basically agreed that it