Natoli for waiting so patiently for us to hear your nomination. Were going to conduct the hearing from ms. Natoli, if there are any questions, and then ms. Lai, and questions, and each Public Commenter will have two minutes to speak on either or both no, maam niece. We would love to hear your reason for serving in this capacity and experience, etc. Whatever you would like to share with us. Thank you. Really appreciate the opportunity today and appreciate the consideration and i know its been a while and appreciate all the hard work you are doing. I come to the advocacy for safe streets and that is how i got into this as a volunteer and organizer for infrastructure and better improvements to keep san franciscans safe and i served on the Bicycle Coalition and was an elected member there. Unfortunately as we see 30 people were hit and killed each year on the streets and over 500 are seriously injured and we all want that number to go to zero, though, so that is far too many. I have been hit three times in the last five years on the streets. I have been fortunate to get up and walk away and not everyone is. This drives me to do the safe streets advocacy and i have been fortunate to serve as the mayoral area since 2018 and definitely gotten to learn more about the innering workings of a lot of what is going on in the city with general Obligation Bonds and Committee Work and served on other boards such as the sf lgbt experience with oversight, governance and phi fiduciary responsibilities. I have a lot of experience doing compliance work through the day job. But as i stated, i really come as someone who is an advocate who is Community Based and Community Engagement and i want to bring that same spirit and energy into serving in this. I am fully aware this is obviously not an easy time to join anything like this. This is the unprecedented moment with equitable and the significant Budget Constraints and will require more creativity than it ever has to figure out how to support sfmta and support san franciscans in that regard. And to bring to san franciscans and not seeing that quickly enough. And to figure out how to make it work. The advocacy is a complement in this moment. And eager to bike and walk with safety and dignity and do Cost Effective treatments to make that easier. Doesnt cost much to do a slow street or emergency transit lanes or emergency bike lanes. Huge impacts on how to get people around. That is what inspires me every day. I know i come to this and come to it not necessarily knowing every corner of what sfmta does but with the humility to know that and eager to dive into it and learn more about it. With the initial appointment with the mayor. With that, i will keep the remarks short and keep that up. Thank you very much. Colleagues, do you have any question . I do, chair ronen, thanks. First of all, thank you so much for your many years of activism and leadership with the bike o coalition and safe streets as a leader in the city and thanks for stepping up to serve an incredible role on the sfmta board. I had some questions more as a fellow resident and is great to bring perspective as a west side resident to the m. T. A. Board and just wanted to get your thoughts on how to particularly improve Transit Service on the west side which has been underserved compared to the east side of the city. And this is a high priority for me and working on the district formability study right now with the c. T. A. And sfmta and stake holders. And the important work of sfmta. Of course. So i think one of the things that will help improve transportation on the west side is we need to prioritize some of the Capital Improvement projects that have been maybe backlogged and hear a lot about van ness, geery is taking longer and there are other things that are also sitting in there and prioritization and from the m and the n. And things that have been in the q. And we havent necessarily adequately moved up. And the end serves a lot of people and to focus on that area from 138 and serving a lot of san franciscans daily to get from the beach to downtown. And we are doing something that will help with more of the cars join us line and will help essential subway and with the backlogs and to help improve on the west side. Those are areas that we need to continue to make sure are priorities and seems like things are closer and to speak up for residents and in the west side neighbor and five to 38 improvements and are getting delivers in a timely fashion for them. I want to be an advocate for those and make sure that we are not forgetting that because it is easy to be like that doesnt cost that much, doesnt feel like as much of a priority now. And that doesnt work for someone who is a daily rider on one of those lines. Doesnt deserve the same dignity as everyone else. I dont have any other questions and thank you, jane. Do you have any questions . Thank you, chair ronen. And thank you for being here and so great and i cant remember how many months ago it was, but i really enyou and ied the conversation we had around so many issues and i think i have two questions that i didnt get to really cover when you and i met previously. One was partly cloudy and wondering how the city can work to guide muny with a lot of tension between the board of supervisors and sfmta and Mayors Office around budgeting and how you think that we can help to guide and Work Together to deal with the recession harming the Transportation System and what are your thoughts around that . And the activity and related to the pandemic and we still want to have a Transportation System thats deeply impacted and clear stable source of funding and a big part of the conversation around things like ferries and provide that and some of them have been in the back burner and we havent necessarily done anything with them and Vehicle Licensing fees and then senator mark leno worked to provide an opportunity for and never ended up using. At the time it was estimated to raise 73 million i think in the last number i saw. I dont know what that would be today because i dont think its been studied again. I think there are opportunities like that that exist to provide more Stable Funding and we can run muni and lets dedicate and find other sources that arent barriers because this obviously isnt the time for them. Hopefully Going Forward with dedicated streams of funding so we dont have to consider that and have a stable system and paying for itself and with the Long Range Planning and opportunities to look at. And retail and muny can be a partner in the recovery and obviously i dont think rents are where were going to see an improvement right now because we want to be mindful of the tenants that are there. We want to help support them and this is a tough time for them. But in terms of the longer range of support so we are not trying to balance the budget on the backs of the riders and instead making sure that its funded and to come together and find a solution on. And what i have heard and we want stable muny funded and to support riders and we just need to get together and figure out the shared solutions. And i think that we have a lot of people here. Awe i respect your advocacy and capacity and the coalition and support that 100 and i think one death on the street is one too many when it comes to pedestrian cyclists and motorists and whatever and we all know the tension that sometimes happens when changes are being made. And also what that can mean for Community Feedback and therefore judgment on that feedback and a lot of times is misplaced judgment, i think, in terms of people just wanting safe streets but not really understanding exactly how to see that solution. Although the solution is likely a very good one. And i am just wondering how you think that given the diverse ideas around safety with Traffic Safety and everything we encounter and with the city and county of San Francisco and trying to make the streets safer. And how do you see incorporating all the voices on that and i want to make sure that i know that sometimes theres a tendency to misplace peoples fears around safety and traffic and change. And like i said, i supported 100 and know in the community sometimes its difficult to make the changes happen. And with shared solutions and shared values. We have a lot in common in terms of that. So as you are going to be in this role, i definitely support you in this role, how do you see getting around a lot of that tension that i know you have written about and tension that has to be managed and had to be overcome . Of course. That is perfectly reasonable. And is especially when you get online and is easy to forget we are people with a shared love of community and maybe different experiences with how to get around it. And one of the things that i think about a lot and professionally and personally is how to say yes instead of saying no. Changing that frame a little bit to say, all right, lets say we want to put in a light share station. We want to do a summer and need some amount of them here. And what works for everyone. Not just were going to put it here and when you come in and say put it here and take on a couple of Parking Spaces and a large contingency of people who say i wasnt hurt and didnt know anything about this. They have tried to make efforts to see Community Engagement exists in form and where the improvements are going. We have unlimited street space and can only use so much with it. And we need to engage each other to learn and what are the optimal location in the neighborhood. And i know my neighborhood well and i know other neighborhoods and it would be haughty to think i know every neighborhood in the city and in richmond. And so really engaging folks to find out and with what were going to do there. Another aspect and we have too much and limited street space. And trying to do anything with it. And we want to make sure that people can get around a variety of ways. Take a bus and can jump on the bike and walk and drive. Whatever is the chosen way and should be able to each way should be able to get someplace safely and feel like a complete trip to them. And shouldnt be challenging and not that large for that. And its not an optimal treatment and when it comes to where we think about bike lanes and a lot of feedback and what works. And really getting in there to figure out what makes sense for the people who are using this street every day. And the solution to drive less and make it and not antagonistic to drive less and to shift that mindset and hear the concerns and the concern and with what we are going to do. This is the idea that we want. How can we do this in a way that works for as many people as we can and also occasionally being realistic and something we are talking about and there is a lot of parking. Not necessarily a bike route where you exactly want it. And tradeoffs that exist everywhere and when you Start Talking to people and get together with them. And break that down more than when we retreat into the corners and dont think about the holistic needs. Thank you, jane. I just am in strong support of the nomination. I think our strong addition to the board and look forward to working with you and maintain this open line of communication and thank you for the advocacy. And thank you for the answers. And going about making decisions about which lines to cut or restore . I was digging into the ridership numbers and trying to thinking about that. We do have to keep that lens in mind and serve a lot more people. And not bringing lines back and be mind to feel the impacts and might not carry a lot of people. But they serve hillside residents. They have no other connection to it. We have ruled out some programs and with a line cut that dont have as high ridership, but the people who need them need them. There isnt an easy solution. Data needs to be informed by a lot of things besides just like the pure ridership. It is easier for me when they cut back lines here and deliver up the five. And to walk up to the 38. For someone with mobility issues, that is not a realistic as a choice. And i get why we have cut the low ridership lines and listen to people and the feedback about who is truly using them and are hugely important and without that connection and figure out other ways of serving people that are going to meet their needs and figure out how to get the service pack. I dont think just looking at pure ridership will solve all of it. And so its a tough position and generally speaking and i like the plans they came up with it. And they tried their hardest to assess where the tradeoffs were. And in general i support what sfmta is going with so far. We need to keep the same open mind throughout this and be receptive to what we are hearing from people and adapt that. And what we have done with the programs and will help me be more successful with it. And bring the lines back and that is a tougher reality to accommodate. Thank you. I appreciate that. And what engagement have you had with tw2250a . I have not had any notable engagement with them. And i am aware and am aware of them and trying to reach out to talk to somebody and havent had the opportunity to sit down with anybody, but in the previous advocacy i have never engaged with them. Are you aware of the most pressing concerns and how to address them . An at this time, no. That is part of why i have been trying to have a conversation with it. And with the Labor Relations side, that is not a side i am knowledgeable on in terms of where i am coming from. Okay. And you havent read any of their advocacy in the press or the m. T. C. And the articles in the newspaper what about the drivers are facing . I mean, i have read some of that, but i dont feel like im as fully informed on that as i would like to be and something that i have been working on. And i know that some of what other Driver Safety is a big concern and we recently so that and i dont want to get too far ahead of myself on that. And what about are you up to date with the current plight of taxing medallion owners and do you have any ideas about how to address that situation . I am up to date on that. I have been reading up on that and i have been at several Board Meetings where the issues have come up. I think its a really, really tough situation and we clearly need more regulations, and dont have the tools to do that since a lot of that is delivered at the state level. And undercuts the ability for the tax drivers. And i feel like that is something to keep advocating at the state level and more ability to have more control to level the Playing Field for them. And they dont have that and cant compete in that environment and sign up for t. N. C. And take really minimal course and not worry about delivering the Single Service and are integral for disabled people in the services. And to me, thats something that we need to advocate for more ability to do more oversight so that we can support our taxi drivers. And kind of connected to that, do you see any roles for t. N. C. S within San Franciscos Transportation System . I think t. N. C. S can have a role and were beginning not beginning, and many people have seen this for a long time, and the data is beginning to show they are not necessarily environmentally sound and dead heading and causing more congestion on the streets. And i dont think they are there to serve the equity of all san franciscans and serve the convenience of those who can afford take them. So if theyre willing to meet those sorts of goals that we want from our Transportation System, then i think they can have a role. If theyre not, then i think that thats why we really need to i am excited to see that we have done a little work with prop b last year to try and tackle them a little bit more. And i dont think that and no work to do and the t. N. C. S and playing by the same rules as so many of the other people providing Mobility Options for people in the options in San Francisco. And i certainly understand people have gravitated to them in many ways. I think we need to look at the real harms with the perceived convenience and said if they are willing to meet there and do that, they can play a role. If theyre not, then its less clear they have a longterm future as a real transportation option for san franciscans. Appreciate that. What actions f any, should m. T. A. Take regards to people who dont pay the fares . I am i dont think that that should be our highest priority. I definitely understand that when were in a fair enforcement system that essentially its just checking for that enforcement and there needs to be an element of that. I have concerns and how to deploy that and frequently radiating from them and near m. T. A. Headquarters. And a lot more fair inspector rs and ride five. And which lines are we doing it on . And who are we getting . I get that we need that as a tool when were having and the Fare Enforcement policy that relies on that to some degree. I dont love the impacts of when i am a rider around who gets pulled off. That people are changing and with the level of clines. I want to look at how we are doing that not just in certain parts of the city and the entire city. And they discussed this as a recent Board Meeting and director tumlin gave good comments on that with why they need some element of that. And if not, it is not my preferred thing. I dont necessarily see it as the most equitable tool. To continue to impoverish and make sure we do it as fairly as possible. That part of how the current fare system works. Okay. I just have a couple more questions as the supervisor of district nine representing the Mission District, i face this question quite a bit myself. I am wondering how you would respond. Which communities o