gets charged a fee. people are charging even for cha $5 fare. do you know how time-consuming and what a hassle it is a for the driver? if you were in the business, you would react the same way. please, you are not giving any concessions to cabdrivers. i ask you to pass it on to the passenger. most of them will not complain. thank you. [applause] >> jessie davis. >> good afternoon. in jessie davis, president of creative mobile technologies, one of the providers of the rear seat technology you are debating. by this stage, it started seven years ago in new york when the first technology mandate came to new york. we are different from most companies in this space. and we were built from inside

the industry. all of them have worked with in the cab driving industry. when the program comes together with respect to credit cards, it is a difficult conversation. what is being asked of the technology in these meetings is much more than the transaction. when you call it the security and safety, the integrity of the transaction, the interaction is all part of what the technology provides. when you look at changing the rates, you look at 5%. as a provider of the service, it costs more than the cost of the transaction. the best cards, the best rules, do nothing for the cab industry. what you need of the best drivers. to have the best drivers you need systems in place that are the most sensitive. credit cards are a reality of the world. as of this month, 58% of the dollars spent in new york are on credit cards. boston is up to 54%.

chicago is a few years behind and that 40%. other cities that have required the technology have an rfp out. the direction of the industry across the country is to require credit-card transactions in the car in a way that is safe and secure to the passengers were drivers and passengers can have the best interaction. from our perspective, the driver needs to get his money as quickly as he can. part of the cost incurred in the transaction, that 5% that you were debating, if you went out and opened a merchant account and got merchant rates, you cannot get money funded to use seven days per week. a transaction done on a friday, saturday, or sunday, american express he will munsey until thursday of that week. the equipment says you have to use the transaction. >> thank you, sir. >> jim templeton.

>> good afternoon. my name is nick nicoli. i work for veriphone. i wanted to add my two cents. i think that probably changing the program midstream is not a good idea. there are a bunch of other things that you guys need to think of. to some of these other points, the transactions and installation, how you got the equipment in the car, we have been part of many rfp's and i have not seen one of them change midstream from one percentage to another. another thing, overpayments could have been added to this. but they're not. maybe vetting this, taking a step back would be a good idea. thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please.

>> jim templeton. >> thank you, folks. i started dring a cab in 1973. i have spent 35 years in the industry without dealing with credit cards. i made it as a cabdriver. i do not make any more now. i probably make less now that we take credit cards. here is the reason why. i have got credit cards. the credit-card companies what the merchant to bear the cost of these things. i have got a gold card and an american express card. as far as i am concerned, i should pay the fee. but we have got this thing going on here right now. since the so-called merchant is stuck paying the fee, and the reason this is is because the credit card companies have bought out the u.s. congress because -- you know, if i want

to use my credit card for my convenience, i should pay the fee. and there would be happy to pay. otherwise -- of course, this will never happen because the congress is paid off. some of these other guys that got off track today speaking about the credit card thing, i spent over 30 years as a gates gas cabdriver. during that time the medallion that i'd drive right now belonged to my favorite general manager, marvin grommet. he was a frogman in world war ii and all those years i was a cab driver i felt his retirement in his old age and i was happy to do it. so, old forts like me that got medallions in their 60's, leave us alone, fellas. >> next speaker, please. >> richard weimar. >> good afternoon, richard wiener, for yellow cab.

>> i would ask you to reconsider some or parts of this proposal. number one, cab companies are responsible for making sure the money is delivered in one day, and yet it has to be done to raise certified third party and we cannot control what the third party does and does not do, so it puts us between a rock and a hard place. secondly, allowing drivers to use their own credit card machines causes a problem in the people complain about being overcharged, losing their receipt, other issues. we have no way of tracking that particular transaction if they do not use the in-taxi equipment. i also think that the whole cellphone texting credit cards while you're driving is -- it promotes a dangerous driving situation. if the city provided for 50

places for cabdrivers to pullover to run credit card or check the back seat for lost property, it would be safe here. but we all know that the city is very reluctant to give up the currency for anything, for obvious reasons. >> anyone else? >> that is the last person. >> i would like to hear from one more. the chairman of the taxi advisory committee. mr. smith, could you come forward, please? the advisory committee can weigh in at this point. >> the taxi advisory council has not had the opportunity to review or give an opinion on these items. these are all material changes that are being made. they will have a significant impact on the industry. i think it would behoove you to

consider having the tax opinion on the item. >> i am sorry? >> because these changes on all of these items or single changes and can have a significant impact on the industry, it would be who you to have these streaming on the items before you make your final decision. but i cannot provide facts, but i can provide my opinion. >> well, thank you. members of the board? >> he said that he would be happy to offer it. >> do you want to? >> set the timer. >> this is personal, then? >> this is an objection to what members of the public have brought up. i think that the two biggest challenges i see in this, i

think most processors are looking at a two to five day window. our current provider fulfill bad design with some funds on a regular basis, as well as reducing the fee to 3.5%. if they cannot do that, we have to consider switching out or putting in equipment, a project that could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars if we go down that path. in terms of the cost, 5% is reasonable. most parts of the country would get charged more than that. they would have over 20% from the previous mirror rates. one thing that the current system provides, with

accountability for the drivers certainly helps to provide that. >> thank you. >> members? >> let me return first and ask the question that i suspect my colleague wants to ask, which is to clarify why this did not go before the committee. >> my understanding of the board's creation was to be in place to evaluate the medallion highlight. it is what they had been working on and were charged to do. staff had been working through it with them.

he had worked hard. we had not brought these issues specifically to the technology because they were focused. chris and i are meeting tomorrow to discuss where we go and whether it will be a broad standing committee including all things taxi. i would also be interested in that, but as it was put in place it was to look at medallion sales, which is what they have done. >> the main thing is that would want the peace a context that i left out. if the board had directive -- directed staff for the study to be presented in january, the

recommendations of which were adopted by the board and directed to staff. the first three items represent implementation by and large. staff reports point out the recommendations. i wanted to remind you with a context that this was the direction earlier this year. >> i, for one, feel like it is a good compromise. they have done a good job competitively bringing this together. i think that one of the testimonies on that is that no one likes it very much. people from either side. >> it is unquestionable that

credit cards are good for the industry, good for customer choice and bringing us into the 21st century and that regard. i think that the more cash we get out of the business, the more we increase the safety of our drivers, which is a concern as well. sometimes i am surprised at these meetings. i do not think anyone was planning to see these guys hog for a photograph. they recognized the compromise that the director just mentioned, and i appreciate that. i think that people feel adamantly about this issue, yet they were able to come and put that aside in recognize a compromise. that is appreciated. my main question concerns the use of square and that provision. this might result in now where

or viruses. i think it is possible for -- is it not possible for a virus to get your credit card? >> i could not speak to that. >> in any event, if the driver hops to have a square, on the iphone to use that, folks say they you should download square. a great number of people recognize the benefits. what would be the benefits of having this amended ever so slightly so that the customer to choose whether to use it. >> from my place down here on the totem pole, it would be my preference that it be the

experience that they do not know. that would be assisted a lot in the back of every taxi. ultimately i think that is a policy choice. i defer to the policymakers who have an opinion. our goal was to try to recognize the incredible popularity of the squared device drivers and the growing acceptance of the device but drivers. the fact that it is pci compliant according to my research. aerophone -- veriphone is here. go free to contradict me if i am incorrect.

>> it is a compromise with in the staff, meaning that it must be really good. does someone on the staff want to speak to why the driver would have the right to impose a square, even if the customer wanted to use the on board system? >> the main intent was not to preclude just this one particular technology, but others that may be emerging. in terms of whose choice is, whose technology, the driver verses the customer, it is not something that i think we really discussed. i do not see a big downside in changing that to customer chart -- customer choice. the main policy aim here was to not lock ourselves into one specific technology. when this started i am not sure that they existed. there may be other things that

are different than others. >> i think it was the point about customer anxiety and our efforts to bridge that. i would move to amend this to allow and i would appreciate the comments that it might make sense to simply stick with the on board technology. i realize that this is a compromise and i would not want for it to be too invasive. i would propose amending it frankly, where the customer has a choice where the driver is offering alternative technology, the customer has a choice on which to use. >> aye.

>> the resolution has been amended. >> my next two questions are, i want to clarify -- it has been suggested that the companies will be stuck with the extra 1.5%. there was also a suggestion that a contract could be amended in their ways for the company to address this. is that so? >> back in october of 2010, one of the conditions of the labor -- labor program more than all of the companies included were subject to the jurisdiction of the board of directors. that is what the resolution said. it was very clear from the park -- from the program.

i have certainly not have the opportunity to see the books of these companies. i cannot speak with personal knowledge, but we certainly have no intention of harming the economics of companies. we certainly believe that everyone is entitled to a reasonable return on their investments and we should be partnered with the industry to reduce unnecessary cost regulations. again, i welcome the constructive comments from those who know the facts and figures involved to let us know how we should adjust the policy to make it the best arrangement for those businesses. >> ok. thank you. the next question that i have concerns the comments that were well received. as always, it was good to sort of get that on the ground perspective. one of the things that he went

through was the cab drivers should take credit cards. it is allot art -- in san francisco and you are to take that payment. correct? >> that is true. >> my final question is -- we have heard from a few company representatives concerning the 1 day delivery issue, the one day payment issue. did you care to respond to that? is this something that we think is a provision that they can live up to easily? how would you respond to mr. wiener's comments? >> our intention was to put this responsibility into the hands of professional payment processors. during the pilot program they were able to meet that 24-hour standard.

i cannot speak to their own profitability. the positing the driver funds within a business they might affect those profits. again, for the people who understand those numbers, i would certainly welcome any input to the consequences of these policies. >> i heard that fellow said he were going to impose -- impose a regulation. >> according to my understanding, that is what i understood had been done. >> when i hear coming out of this is that you and your staff, doing what you say, are trying to revisit whether this one day

provision proves to be impossible. >> remember, the overall contest was for the past year or two. they had really made an effort to come back to you over and over again to get the regulations to a place where we could say that that is it, that is the regulations. as of right now, we print out article 11 in the transportation code. we cannot publish a regulation book. we are finally trying to put these things on the table to get them resolved so that those of us were busy with our own enterprises and putting money on the table for their families can go back to their business is knowing what the rules are.

to the point where we can finally close the book on this, so that all of us know what the rules are going to be for the wild. >> thank you, chairman. the questions that he asked are the same ones i have noted as well. my concern is over the contract mentioned by the other vendors. what will happen to those as the results of what we're doing today? the first concern should be passengers. whether we use the credit card or cash. i think that my last concern is

the vetting process. my concern is that all of this has been put out for the last few days, even though we have been talking about it for year. have people have enough time to get it through the passage? i agree with you, that that is not the reason it was set up, but understanding what is going on in this process, taxi owners and others have not vetted this process and we have not had the dialogue, so we understand the dialogue. >> good discussion. >> i agree with the gentleman who said that it should not be anxiety over whether or not they can use a credit card or not. i ask if i could use a credit card in one city and they look at me like i was crazy. i think we need to have that

uniformity. so that customers feel comfortable using a credit card. the tactic can offer the choice -- the taxi can offer the choice. the other thing to remember is that younger generations are driving less and less. taxi drivers in san francisco have a great reputation. we have a really good industry here. kids do not carry money anymore. go out to lunch with younger people in my office, they swipe a credit card for a $5 sandwich. they are not running around with cache anymore. we have to get to the point where they are competitive with the things that are coming out, the things that we do not even know are coming out. we have to make sure that we keep our technology of today to keep our industry up to date. i am in support of this. i do agree that it is good for the customer to have a choice,

whether they prefer to use the in house or square. all taxicabs should be equipped. how many of them have the back seat system? >> not quite half of the fleet. if you would like to address these to a particular manager, i do not know the status in yellow fleet. i do believe that we are close to half the fleet at this time. >> i am willing and ready to support this. >> let me find the right microphone. >> i want to thank the director for his questions. i want to ask christine for some corrections. this is based on what mr. son was dissenting in terms of the waiver that was 3.5%. if you did this package staying,

there were maybe like 12 items? was there a waiver that was signed that we were going to give people? 66 months? >> no, there was no time limit associated with that program. matter-of-fact, it was made expressly subject to the continued regulation of the board, knowing that this would be a sensitive topic. >> thank you very much. i just wanted to get that clarified. let's first of all, i also wanted to second the appreciation to the director. he was recently reappointed, and it is clear why. >> i feel the love. [laughter] >> i feel that was clear. i am surprised he wanted to come back for another four years. so, yes, i feel like this compromise is really just that, a compromise on the part of

every month. by drivers getting a compromise whether they can recognize it or not, going from 5% to 3.5%. it is still a hit, i understand that wholeheartedly, but it looks like we are getting ready to adopt a policy where you can get the square, which has a lower rate, from what i understand, which is another compromise, i think. obviously some of the companies are reluctant to go down to 3.5%, a demonstration of compromise on their part. i was in a taxi a few days ago. actually, it was about few weeks ago. i am sorry. i asked the operator, because i had been hearing -- there was a story in a paper about how a passenger was spit at for wanting to use a credit card. when i asked the driver if he

took a credit card, he said that he preferred cash because they charge 10% fees. i said -- really? i was under the impression it was 5%. i said, how long have you been driving a cab. he said 100 years. i was trying to set up a report by this gentleman. i think that the credit-card transactions are a bit more challenging with a cab driver and passenger, because unlike a store, where you are obligated to be courteous because you want the passenger to come back, you are very unlikely, unless you have a regular relationship, to have the same cabdriver twice. driving that there is clearly a need to resolve this challenge. and i think that staff has done a great job in terms of compromise. i think that we have been i think that we have been talking about this from the day