service improvement. we had one very far along in the pipeline. even if we were to vote on it today, it would not be implemented until we consider the flag drop and other issues because of weights and measures. with that, i would make a motion to continue this to either of our june meetings and no later.

there are no members of the public on this body. no matter how we constitute anybody that oversees this, it's impossible to represent everybody in the industry, it's not going to happen. it's not something that i like but i do think that we need to be responsive to the taxi riding public. and as all of you know, i do not just ride special taxis, i

ride the regular taxis too on almost a daily basis. that's why i say to you that taxi drivers want proof that we care about them. one of the ways we do that is to put immediate money in their pockets. how do we do that? we to that by raising the meter. but i also believe that we can cannot do the meter increase without consulting the cab companies who also at the same time i believe need a gate increase also. i know that's a -- that's unpopular for many drivers who think that they're being overly charged by the companies anyway

but i believe if we don't do both things together, then the public has a right to be disgruntled and i for one do not want to hear complaints twice on the same couple of issues. i'd just like to take care of it all in one package. so i think about having this done within the next two meetings in june is an excellent one. i don't think we can wait much longer than that. so, you know, all of you, i know all of you have my phone number. continue to use it, please. i welcome your input. whether you yell at me or not, that's my job, ok. just be civil about it.

>> thank you, director bridges. >> i think i need a point of clarity to make sure i understand clearly, if, first of all, i support the increase but i'd like to know for sure, all the proposals before us for the increase and implementation, if we do this, it could not be done all at one time in the system or it would, i guess, cost additional money to do it incrementally. is that true? >> i think that was a question related to the meters and the annual, i guess, calibration that we would want to do anything related to the meters all at one time. if we do it in separate steps that would create additional cost, registration costs.

>> so in moving it, doing it all at once, voting on it two meetings from now, one meeting from now, would not make a difference. >> not as it relates to implementation. whatever point you make that decision, whether it's the fee increase now or the meter increase now and some subsequent time you did the drop, we would not have staff recommend to start any action until we get all that resolved in one shot. >> and in terms of having everything from staff by our next meeting, is it fair to say we will have everything we need to make a decision on everything in the next two meetings? >> in terms of the peak time medallions, it's my understanding we could have a recommendation to this board by the end of june. second meeting in june. so that's that item.

we can also at the same time come back with a recommendation as it relates to the meter increase which you have before you, i believe we also -- >> the full package. >> full package, flag drop too. >> i want to make sure when we say full package, because i heard a discussion about gates. >> if we could take it item by item and let me know, let the board know, what we will have by that meeting. >> i'm walking down that. we can have a proposal on peak time medallions, we can bring back the meter increase and that is mileage as well as wait time and then we can also bring you pack a proposal as it relates to a flag drop. so we can have all of that by the second meeting in june. >> personally to me, that's fine. i don't need to wait for the gate increase, that's a different issue that needs to be vetted, i wouldn't want to hold this up for that.

i mean i realize the director may feel differently or feel differently about timing but for me if we get those three things an clarity about how the credit cards are going to work vis-a-vis the customer, there's a whole mess of issue it is deal with as to whether 5% is the right fee and who bears it in the industry but if those four things came forward in june, i'd be satisfied and prepared to vote for the fare increase then. >> we can do that. >> given that, and given the fact we have all the information and we can support the industry, because i fully support the fare increase, i think it's long overdue, it is a long time to wait based on the cost of living increase and san francisco is an expensive city to live in, i would want everyone to be able to live in the city and live comfortably, so if we have all that information, we can vote for the meter increase, the flag drop, everything, then i would support moving it and being

prepared to vote to support everything on that day. >> director brigman? >> i'll second the motion to continue item 11. >> i fully support an increase for the drivers, you know, this last-minute notice of, talk about a flag drop, that's really kind of -- that really threw everything off kilter now. my concern is, i know there's a real immediate out there for the drivers. i know there are things that logistically have to get done. so i guess the question i pose is, if you look at just the portion that we want to pass, you know, can we show our commitment by passing that now and having that done with? >> i think that was from a staff perspective, that's what we were proposing today to recommend the meter increase, recognizing the fact that we have to come back with the flag

drop, we had to come back with the peak time medallion program, but as a show of good will and support for the industry and drivers, recognizing that the gentleman from weights and measures, the meter increase would not occur prior to you taking action on these other items. from a logistical standpoint. >> i think we need to show support to the industry at this point. what i would ask is for that vote that we pass it, we have a a way to work out the logistics, at least the industry knows and got the message that we are concerned and we hear their message and we do understand the need out there. so i would like to make a recommendation to move with the item. >> mr. chairman, you actually have a motion and second on the floor that would be proper to deal with that motion first. >> so your first motion?

>> it's director heineman, continue item 11 to the second meeting in june with the understanding that staff will bring back four items with regard to -- >> peak time medallions, flag drop, the current meter increase as well as -- what was the fourth? clarification an we handled waybills. >> i hear everything you're saying, vice chairman lee, and i, you know, the industry knows how i feel. they know i'm going to favor the meter increase. i think it's appropriate procedurally to do this all at once for the very reasons you stated at the outset of the discussion. >> so the motion is to continue item 11 to the second meeting in june, ke the june 21 meeting, to consider peak time medallions, flag drop increase, the meter increase and mileage for wait times and credit card

charges. is that -- >> yes. so it's a motion to postpone. >> yes. >> and for the last time. >> is there a second? >> do you want a roll call vote? director bridges. >> aye. >> brinkman. brinkman aye. director lee, no. director oka. no. oka opposed. the item fails adoption. any motion of the m.t.a. board of directors requires four to pass. >> i want to propose a motion to approve the increases as

stated. >> i'll second. >> so, mr. chairman -- >> are the city attorneys comfortable? of course she is. >> mr. chairman, just for clarification, on motion to approve the meter rate for wait time and mileage. >> yes. >> can i make a proposed amendment to this that we just clarify that if we adopt this right now, it will not be implemented for the reasons we talked about until we've finished this entire package of materials? >> yes. >> on motion to approve the meter rate for wait time and mileage with the understanding that there will be no implementation until the additional package is brought to you on june 21? >> yes.

>> i'm sorry, we need a second for that one? >> yes. >> i'll second that. >> there's a motion on that, and a second. roll call rote? >> yes. >> director bridges. >> this is on the amendment? >> on the motion to -- >> with the amendment. >> it was a friendly amendment. so it was accepted. so this is on the motion to approve the meter rate for wait time and mileage which is not to be implemented until the additional package is brought to the full board on june 21. director bridges. briges, aye. brinkman, aye. director heinicke, aye. director oka. aye. director lee. aye. the motion is unanimous. >> we're going to call for a break, 10 minutes.