>> we are going to go ahead and get started again. chairman nolan has to leave for an engagement. he had to leave for another event, so i am taking over for him. before we start on items 14 and 15, which i believe we will combine, i would like to go ahead and ask ms. morley from the city attorney's office to give us a legal opinion on the idea that we perhaps violated sunshine regulations with our amendment on item 11. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am from the city attorney's office. the amendment to item 11 was proper under the sunshine ordinance.

the item as it was agenda is to reject agend - - as it was agendized would allow drivers to use their own merchants. the board was free to decide that or to decide they were not going to allow it. they were free to allow it but subject to conditions. there was no violation. thank you very much. >> i think we can combine items 14 and 15. -- vice chairperson brinkman: secretary boomer: recommending that the department repeal police" provisions, in designating that staff may

enforce parking laws, deleting a section which makes such designations. it authorizes the mta to subpoena evidence and testimony relevant to enforcement of motor vehicle for hire regulations. it increases penalties for operating a motor vehicle for higher without a permit, remembering various sections for clarity and eliminating outdated provisions of the business tax and regulations code. item 15 amends various sections of division two of the transportation code to add definitions, amend definitions, add requirements for renewal of color scheme permits, and render permits inactive if not completed in 60 days, requiring all gas and gates medallion vehicles change shifts on color scheme property, to authorize the director to impose a

moratorium on the issuance or provide retaliation. it deletes a requirement that taxis taken out of service be returned to service within 30 days or be permanently replaced. it makes unauthorized use of a spur vehicle a separate offense. it requires color schemes to report insurance claims filed to the mta to insure that are not violating laws limiting shift length. it prohibits certain practices in connection with accepting payment by paratransit debit card. it prohibits drivers from tampering with required equipment, requires security cameras manufactured after 2006, up with that data available to the mta and sfpd. it makes changes to procedures for hearings. it clarifies procedures on

citations issued to permit holders. it clarifies procedures for providing public notice. it makes color scheme permit holders responsible for insuring that all gate fees charged are within the cap. those are the two items. vice chairperson brinkman: we have speakers on those items? any comment before public comment? >> i will reiterate that both of these, moving provisions from the police code to the transportation code, and the cleanup items, are the result of many years of experience in working through these codes and identifying problems or loopholes, or other things that have been part of an ongoing process to clean up and stabilize regulation so that

everybody knows exactly what the rule book is. i will remind you that you did approve additional enforcement capability for the taxi services division that will help us in force -- enforce those regulations. director bridges: -- secretary boomer: name[names are called] >> i speak to item 14. on your pbs file material -- on your file material, all these clauses -- if you look at the final whereas clause, it says the proposed ordinance would remove the jurisdiction of the board of appeals from taxi hearings. if this goes forward without that being taken away and severed, the medallion holder

association and other medallion holders that are not in our association will have little choice but to bombard the board of supervisors and implore them to not let our due process rights be taken away by fiat. section 4.106 b of the city charter, established in 1932, provides the city have an appeals board as arbiter when ever permits are granted or revoked. it applies to the department of public works, public health, taxi, and many other entities. for you to be defending your decision to have an ordinance to take away a board of appeals protection, we could have unscrupulous regulators, if we do not now. i have sympathy with the idea

that we do not want people who do not have legitimate cases to get charged for fraud. they should be able to go to superior court and keep their income flowing for five years. that is a separate issue that needs to be addressed separately. i think the board of appeals made a super majority to overturn. i think these will be slam dunk cases for the taxi. this is a separate issue. thank you very much. >> good afternoon again, directors. a lot of stuff in item 15, so excuse me for talking fast. some taxis are operated by companies such as look sir. -- such as luxor.

other cabs are operated directly by the medallion holder. the drivers pay their dates directly to the medallion holder. we asked to make the medallion holder responsible for those particular cabs. they are not going to apply to the transaction. we are a little alarmed with being responsible for that. there is a burdensome requirements. many of the claims have no merits whatsoever. the statistics about claims have little bearing on reality. we already prepare a loss-run statements to the insurer.

be careful about treading on that sensitive area of our business. other sections require us to make weekly and monthly accountings to paratransit regarding certain equipment. these are burdensome and not necessary to the public interest. these are details that are appropriately left for us to negotiate the contract on. we ask that you drop section 1114 a altogether. director bridges: -- vice chairperson brinkman: thank you. >> good afternoon. there is a lot of stuff here. i do not have a lot to do with the permitting. i appreciate the increase in the

level of enforcement. i have seen taxi's offer a white over green crown victoria with the words "bay cab." i do not know how many times i have lost a fair to him pulling up and driving away. it is ridiculous. i was talking to enforcement about that on thursday. the other is the black and gold guy. he is everywhere. i know he has a oodles of money he owes you guys as it is, but he is operating with impunity. you cannot take his wheels. i do not know how else to do that. i am going to air the complaint.

i assume that most drivers are accepting payment. an issue that came up at town hall -- a meeting we had at desoto cab is that a lot of times, wanting to be helpful, you spend a lot of time on the front end and the back end. use secure the passenger in the back. the also have bags and things like that. you cannot initiate the button until you start to go. something we would like to see as a driver is consideration of that through the paratransit program. thank you for your time. >> i have a reservation about items 14 and 15. the board of appeals is an inefficient process right now. the rewriting of the

legislation allows representation by lawyers. what really is happening is the persons who want an inefficient process is bucking these improvements. i strongly recommend you vote in favor of item 14. with regard to item 15, if the director of transportation imposes a moratorium on the color scheme this badge permits that would not be a permanent sort of thing. the moratorium would depend upon circumstances, and so forth. i strongly believe it should be impossible. there are various intuitively

derived calendars by which people could go into business. as i understand, it is a big one. >> two minutes to discuss all this stuff is not enough. please do not eliminate the access to the board of appeals. the director tends to wield power like a scalpel. within the industry and the transportation industry, future directors have wielded power like a bludgeon. excuse me. previous directors. that may be the case with a

future director. the regulations must also protect the persons being prosecuted. the board of appeals is outside the sf mta looper -- loop, unlike the hearing officer. if you eliminate the board of appeals, the mta is judge, jury, executioner, and cash register. the board of appeals is relatively affordable. if you eliminate them, the only thing left is the courts, which are prohibitively expensive to a cab driver. please do not make it so that a person can only get the justice they can afford. failure to appear makes action final and not subject to further judicial review? just for not showing up?

what if you have a vindictive ex-roommate or ex-spouse and do not get the information you have to appear? the year to appear precludes responding from asserting standing for judicial review. do not preclude judicial review just because somebody does not show up. please let it be the same notice as every other item. secretary boomer: [names are called. ] >> i am going to start my comments about process again. put yourself in my shoes. i received all these changes that are going to moment asleep affect the industry this week, and on tuesday, we are voting on it. there are some issues that need

to be vetted. more accountability, higher standards, and being held accountable for services. but when all of this is thrown upon me within the week, and we are voting on tuesday, it is really out of line. i can go into specifics. overall, i support this type of changes. i think if it was affected properly, you would have a better piece of legislation in front of you. you could have had even more tools. i want to give the agency tools to enforce this industry and to make inroads. it is the wild west of there, in my opinion. my business is dependent on high-quality standards for this industry. at the same time, to throw this out in this manner, with less than a week, consolidating two agenda items, speaking two

minutes here and two there, is out of line. i hope you will take more time in the future so we can give much-needed input. given the time, i can already see different recommendations you might think would be appropriate when you put these rules in. i will leave it at that. i support what charles said. i support changes. i think there should be even stronger rules of enforcement. but please put yourself in my shoes. less than a week, all these momentous changes. it is going to affect my 500 plus drivers in my company. you have to make a decision now. >> good afternoon again. i hope by the next time it might

be good evening, but i will say good afternoon. i want to cover a couple of quick things on item 15. subsection four requires only the gas and kate medallions to change shifts on the property. long-term leases can do what they want. yellow cab changes on the property. this is trying to separate us, just like the gas and gates from the affiliates and color schemes. i think it is appropriate if there is a dispute, where some one cannot get satisfaction for the cab company or insurance company. the mta should may be looked into it. but 99% of the claims, people hit the cab or the cab hit somebody, and they are settled.

the other things are the privacy issue, requiring security camera data. i do not think there is an objection to a case by case basis, but this looks like a blanket thing. everything they do in the cab could be viewed by someone other than the police, other than related to a crime. lastly, you keep talking about color scheme. the color scheme permit holder is responsible for the gates being charged. it is appropriate that the color scheme be appropriate for that, not the medallion holder. thank you. secretary boomer: [names are called] >> good afternoon. very toronto -- barry toronto.

giving us two minutes to comment on something as complicated as 15 -- a lot of them makes sense or are important, but they have not been vetted at town meetings. we did not talk about electronic waybills at the town hall meeting. it became more amenable toward the taxi industry. today, there were a lot of concerns. some should be brought before town hall meetings, so they can be vented properly. there were genuine concerns about the wording. we have not seen these changes until the last few days. i cannot even react well to that. regarding 14, they make a lot of housekeeping changes, except for the one about the board of appeals. i have a concern about due

process. all the permits issued by the city go to the board of appeals. if you do this, you have a legal precedent. you may have to say that means other permits should skip the board of appeals. you should have no more board of appeals. this is looked at by the rest of the city government as permits the go to the board of appeals. you will have to change the charter, possibly. the city attorney should look into that. the other part is it is part of our fees that go toward the expenses of the board of appeals. that means you should send refund checks to everybody. a lot of them have paid in advance for the next year and a half, and some of that goes to the board of appeals. so give us our refund check, if you agree with that. you can take that out, but hold

off on 15 until we have had town hall meetings. >> mark greuber, speaking on behalf of united taxicab workers. these items, neither of them is ready for prime time. the other items you had before you at least had a long history of previous discussion. these are new. i saw this late saturday morning, after driving might friday night shift. i get up. i turn on my computer saturday. it is the first time i saw these items. there is devastating stuff. this business with the board of appeals, taking away the right to go to the board of appeals. let us say your card is suspended for two months. it means you will not make any

money for two months. your only alternative will be to hire a lawyer for $5,000 or $10,000 and take them to superior court? ridiculous. some of these other things, there is a repeal in the tax regulations code that governs the amount that can be charged to somebody who renews their card or permanently. that is a very important protection. i do not know if there is anything else in these rules that would replace that. it has been abused in the past. there was a point at which a notice went out with some ridiculous fee for failure to renew, doubling the fee or who knows what. i call the attention of taxi services to this part of the regulations code and they

immediately took back that notice. there is other stuff in here. i have at least a dozen commons i could put in writing. if you are voting today, you are not voting knowledgeably on these items. secretary boomer: [names are called] >> good afternoon. my name is hossein. i am from iran. i worked in the industry over 42 years in this country. i used to work at bettering cab company as a mechanic. i purchased a yellow cab and started driving. one person on site is fired from my job. i am asking you to let our

medallions be transferable. capitalism is work. i paid for my medallion. i am asking you to give me the same right to sell my medallion. that is all i asked. thank you. >> good afternoon. i have been driving for yellow almost for 25 years. i would like to say some day i am going to be able to sell my medallion, to give it to my family the day i pass away. because i have it, big family right now. i am from central america. i have been driving a long time

for yellow cab. but the way we are, almost 90% of people are happy how cabdrivers are handled. >> good evening once again. amendments. you only have 27 amendments to the u.s. constitution, but we have thousands of amendments to taxi rules and regulations. they come nonstop every month, every year. more and more amendments. half the drivers, or two-thirds, have no idea what is going on at any given time, because the have not looked at the last version of the amendments.

i see amendments under 15. i have a medallion. i have owned it for two years. three transmissions later, you are still setting rules on regular taxes reverses a red band medallions and taxes. stop. when is it going to end? no more amendments. the talk of more visual and audio -- drivers put gum over the top of the viewer. they put gum on the microphone to make sure it is not hearing a voice. if you are going to change the rules, going back to 2006, make

sure it is not a taxi company representative selling us that equipment. i do not see that in the new amendment to the amendments. we know who that is. thank you for your time on these issues. secretary boomer: [names are called] >> good afternoon. i would like to give very good credit to the director and his team, and doing very well a job for 2.5 years. we have more than 200 drivers plying their own medallion, running as their own business.