and meetings. mr. schweitzer has done a great job as the elected share of the t a c. -- chair of the tac. the makeup of how it has been set up is wonderful. however, there are some concerns. first, it is important to include public comment from independent members of the industry. however, the feedback has come before we actually know what will be decided. they make a motion and then vote without feedback. some of the time the motion has had very little to do with what is on the agenda. i am concerned about that. there was an issue that was brought up regarding applying a key personnel inception the people who are applicants rather

than actual holders of medallions. we did not get a chance to make our say. i have discussed this with the chair and i think that he understood, but i am concerned going forward about the love left for feedback on what we will decide on. there are other issues that have been discussed that have nothing to do with the actual goal of this particular body. i will address some of that during my public comment. i am concerned about the fact that this industry is being used more as a cash cow and how we can improve services to the passenger. one concern in closing that i have stressed, you have got to look at the impact on the passenger and driver when you evaluate the program. it is not being done very well. >> anyone else on this subject?

before we leave it, jogged my memory. it would be interesting to hear how the project worked at the park last month. do we want to do that again in the future? >> with member consent. i will put together a memo. all indications are that it went successfully. >> moving on to public comment, an opportunity for the public to address issues not on today's calendar. mr. chairman, you have several members that mr. address. starting with bobhol planthold. >> i come back to again make the same complaint that i have said to you folks several times and have communicated to management.

i have made it or early in person and have seen your legal counsel taking notes. nothing has happened on this. an injury hazard issue. i am against seeing buses that have full chords across the front side seats. by have reported this numerous times. people standing up to leaned backwards to pull the cord. that is an injury hazard for those people i am legally protected class as up front. i reported it to the person newly hired the day after he came on as your director safety of training. i have said it to you. nothing happens. these buses go out without being inspected. it is a simple visual inspection. it is a simple task. i have seen jury rig chords

strung together. it is not rocket science. it does not require a major purchase of material. it is a hazard for people that are holder of will and fragile. it could cost you lots of money. i keep saying it in public because i want people who are injured to know that you have not done your job in case they ever sued the city. >> next speaker. >> charles rathpone. >> we would like to applaud the agency for creating a temporary cap stand at third and king street. over the years we have had and his complaints from cabdrivers about how difficult it is to service the area of maryland the ballpark.

from our point of view it is welcome to tell drivers that there is an alternative to simply avoiding the area. we encourage you to make that stand permanent. either in the same location or a nearby location of that makes more sense. the other thing that i wanted to talk about briefly, a bit of concern about the taxi service having to cancel classes for new drivers. we completely understand the problem of the shortage of staff. right now we have a full house of drivers. there is no immediate crisis. but it can change quickly. there is no way for people to come into the pipeline. we are nervous and hope the situation can be corrected. thanks very much. >> very toronto.

-- barely e. -- barry pronto. >> i hope that the new director will open their eyes to the issue of the mta dealing with taxicabs, a semi-independent industry. i think that the city would like -- would like to act like we are employees. if you want to educate yourself, please avail yourself of asking questions. do not forget to ask lots of questions. the next issue, you have a proposition on the balkans today. i do not want to try to take sides, but i do have a small story. but took the no. 9 bus a couple of months ago.

it was a dramatic experience because of how the bus driver treated people. they can act like police, but i am concerned about drivers not helping to make sure that passengers pay their fair share, like i do. that is my concern with that issue. cabstands, it is important to make that third and king. i was on the committee with jerry robbins. it should be made permanent. because it works. in closing i am consistently did not have representation last of -- concerned that we did not have representation less time

regarding traffic and parking issues. they are not going to the meeting because they're dealing with police matters out there rather than administrative stuff. i am concerned. >> mark berger is the last person crew has turned in a speaker card. >> thank you. you may have made note of this in the paper that millions of dollars are being funneled from the federal government through the mtc for the electric taxi project that i alluded to in the last meeting. this is a project but forward by private companies. it seems to bypass and sidestep

the regulatory process where we have had very little input and we are now talking about what could be 50, 75 cabs in san francisco under a completely unproven program with many questions that i cannot get into but i will just mention one that comes to mind. the person involved clean-air programs and the department of the environment, who probably had a heavy hand in this whole thing, is now working for the private company that is promoting the steel. so, you know, i think that there are questions here to be answered. the other thing that i wanted to allude to in the time that remains is that the credit card processing rules that have now been established are highly unfavorable.

the processing fees under the rules, they are the ones that have the merchant accounts. yet the advertising revenue does not go to them. apparently 90% of it goes to cab companies that are not paying a penny for the equipment because the costs are going out of those revenues. 10% goes into a driver fund. but this raises questions. >> consent calendars? >> you have a member of the public that wishes to have item 11.4 severed. another board member wants an item removed. >> 11.4? >> 11.123.

>> motion to approve? >> second. >> those in favor of thema >> -- in favor? >> aye. >> opposing restrictions for certain street segments and fixing the penalties for violation of restrictions and making technical corrections and clarifications. >> good afternoon. having been a journalist in my career, i'd look for the stories behind certain issues. this item should handing a separate line item on the agenda. this issue has created a lot of news in the past. this has not really made the news and on a slow news day this

would be in the news. this is a big deal. my main question is to get clarification as to whether or not there are taxi issues involved in this. some of the larger vehicles to take people. but the agenda item is not clear in the riding. it would be great to get a clarification as to how the taxi is impacted by this. there is also the fact that we do not know what the changes mean and what is a commercial passenger vehicle. it is not said in the agenda item itself. some of the material in the staff report explains that, but this is another important issue. the side issue of the company buses that have gone on certain streets, the fact that this legislation has been tweaked and cannot because of increasing

company vehicles the take their commuting employees to and from the workplaces, particularly on the peninsula and the south bay, it would be great to get some background and clarification for the public. suddenly something happens and of later we wonder -- what happened? why did they do this? or it is great that they did this. it is important that we know that this occurred. thank you. >> i will call on the director to explain with further clarification on what this resolution is attempting to do. >> mr. chair, good afternoon. we consider this item to be an administrative matter. when it was passed in 2007, the board of supervisors, working with us and the city attorney

is, we advise the division's one and two of the transportation code. they used to be a part of a police code. basically what it does is it delineates certain streets that were identified throughout the area from the neighborhoods that there was a preponderant of vehicles that are frequenting -- frequenting those streets. this entire section was intended to be dropped from the transportation code. and then moved over entirely to division 2 of the transportation code. for some reason there was a clerical error were the item was dropped. now we are just bringing it back to move the entire section from the police code into division two. but there are no new streets added or removed from the group.

these have a minimum threshold of nine or more passengers. we would not expect a taxicab in general. further discussion? >> aye. >> moving on to the regular agenda. item number 12, discussion of the first quarter financial report. >> mr. chairman, members of the board, i would ask terry williams to present that item to you.

>> good afternoon, ms. williams. members of the board, lamus terry williams. i am here to present to you today the status of the financial status for the first quarter of fiscal year 2011. format that you will see today is different from what you have seen in the past. we will be looking at quarter

projections. the first quarter is usually the most difficult quarter to present. is transitional. representing the closing of the old fiscal year and the beginning of the new year. this is the first quarter for 2011, which is no exception. the first chart that i am presenting to you represents of revenue status for the agency. the first column is the final approved a budget that includes all of the technical adjustments. the second is the approved budget amount for the first quarter of 2011, july through the end of september. the third column is the actual revenue collected during the quarter. the fourth is the project -- projected revenue comparison compared to the first budget. the last column represents variance between the first quarter actual revenue

collection and first quarter approved budget. during the first quarter, transit fares are coming in better than anticipated by $5.7 million. operating grants are just a little under budget. parking and traffic elections are trailing behind by 7.5 million. the most significant decline of the revenue that we have right now. remaining revenue categories are slightly below the quarterly budget targets. combined variants for the category shows a decline for the first quarter. this chart is going to depict the explanations for any variants greater than 500,000.

the three major increases in the collections pertaining to the $5.7 million surplus pertain to lifeline passes, cash fairs, and special events. parking and traffic revenues decrease as i mentioned earlier. about 7.5 million. mostly due to a decline in parking related citation issuances. there are several variables that have contributed to this decline. capital projects, such as the st. francis circle that include parking control officers for controls to ensure pageants rather than citations, special events that also use parking control officers for traffic control, such as sunday streets in the series playoffs in the world series. it impacts the second quarter as

well. increase bridge tolls and a fair assessment for carpoolers have affected the number of bridge crossings. furlough days, in accordance with the bargaining agreement has affected the citation issues as coverage is not a one-to-one match because of attrition and the sunset of the employee wellness plan at the end of june. moving to the expenditure side of the agency, column headings are the same as those described for revenue. the first quarter actual results represent those expenditures posted on the books as being paid to the system. salary and benefit makes up more than 60% of budget expenditures by $3.6 million.

contract and with other services are spending at a rate that is under-funded. material and supplies spending at a rate under the budget by $11.3 million. ridden buildings are just under $500. insurance payments under a budget by $8.8 million, work orders are under budget by $15.1 million. the first quarter of fiscal year 11 is $48.1 million under budget. you can look at that for now as it is the last time you will see it through here. bringing us back down to reality on the explanation of the charts. for a salary benefits for the first quarter, they do not reflect the following.

approximately $800,000 for those expenditures that are charged through operations that are due to expire in france. not reflecting for the first quarter expenditures for the st. francis' first quarter project originally charged as the costs have not been charged to the capital grant for $3.7 million. contracts and other services do not reflect the services rendered completed through the payment process. material and supplies do not reflect purchases made through the payment process. also, a $1 million credit to reflect the grants for the parts suppliers for vehicle rehabilitation. equipment and maintenance do not regret the purchases made but not completed through the payment process and assurances do not reflect judgment claims

of about $8 million not completed to the payment process. most of them attributable to the san francisco general hospital. work orders, as a result of the controllers audit, april of 2010, we were in negotiations with city and county agencies to document the services provided and what would be supporting documents. on the agenda for today we have a calendar item for the completed memoranda of understanding. payments to other agencies have occurred during this quarter for work orders until that approval is in place. now that i have explained these variances to you, i would like you to look at the next page. since we now know that actual

expenditures under the current fiscal quarter is not a true representation of the current status, expenditures on the first quarter if they were incorporated, it is a very different picture. in contrast to what we saw earlier. total variance would be adjusted as the expenditure is $2.8 million. in comparison to the large surface that we saw before. with this in mind, we can see where we are, financially, and the agency presents the final slide of the representation. quarterly results for the agency in the first quarter is $5.8 million in deficits. but must emphasize that this only represents 2% of the agency's total budget.

we are already taking measures to improve the citation process , transit services is working on a plan of action and once it is finalized, mr. haley will be able to comment on the course of action. in addition, the team and staff are looking for ways to curtail expenditures and equipment. we will continue to monitor over time with new safety initiatives in place and are hoping to see fewer claims in the future. this concludes my presentation. i will be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> one area that would be helpful for the board to understand is a detail of the technical adjustments made to the budget between when the board adopted a between april of 2010 and now. hard to tell where we are at without knowing the details of

those technical adjustments. >> we did present that to you on july 13. but would be happy to include that so that [unintelligible] >> you are saying there have been no adjustments since july 13? >> correct. >> i will go back and take a look at it. i noticed that there were no adjustments made for work orders. we have $15.1 million in work orders that arguably will discuss during later agenda items. >> we are hoping that with an approved a memorandum of understanding and everything going accordingly, if everything is documented the way that it is now, we would be paying through the other agencies.

that is the reason for the lack of variants in the line item. it would be the approved amount between both agencies. we never had a memorandum of understanding for both agencies in the staff. >> i know that. i guess my bottom line concern is that we are upside-down now with arguably the work orders not factoring in to that number. do you take that out with a full year of expenses? we are upside-down $24 million. it is a concern and until we get more information and will be difficult to deal with. >> any other questions? >> that is a good " -- a good point. >> it is a sobering picture of where we are. >> i know that we have been out of the office and with budget

continuity for the people examining, it is important. we appreciate the work that you have done. one question around parking and traffic citation decreases, was that because of a decrease in parking control officers, or are they becoming more careful demand law abiding? >> we do think that there are people who are complying so that they do not pay the higher fees, which makes an impact as well. there are problems with control officers at this point in time that mr. haley is trying to address. like i said, every time that we have a special event, it is time taken away from the issue of citation. >> it was fairly labor

intensive with parking control officers that were dealing with that issue. you can see it we are both operators as well as other supervisors who will be reimbursed through the capital part of the budget. but we lost the actual physical pcl for that time frame that was being redeployed for some other special events that came along during the timeframe. we also have the challenge of peace co + that may have takenpco's p -- co [s -- pco's that may have taken the relegation that gave furloughs for reducing overall salaries. in line with