requirement, this is a minimum. and you can drive for nine months two days a week and still fulfill this requirement. i believe that mr. omar has an occupation besides driving a taxi cab but he is aware that he is short and he has been aware that he was short. people know who he is. we did not dispute this. this is not mean that you are out driving. the primary issue here is whether he fulfilled a full-time

driving requirement. he did not. we cannot get out a permit for people who do not. with that being said, nothing against mr. omar, but we don't believe that he fulfilled a the permit requirements. >> i have a question about the types -- i am assuming that you are the person to ask. when people are up for a permit, and medallion, are you seeing people having difficulty meeting the driving requirement. obviously, once they come to us -- >> that is the primary issue. >> what is the percentage of

people who get on this list and cannot meet the requirements? >> i would say 1/3, 50%. we will send out 20 of the letters that only 10 will qualify. a lot of it is a function of that has been a long time. sometimes we stop driving and i am close to the top. they come back to the company and, i did not drive that much but i will start driving right now. that is what we see, people have been waiting and then they realize that they're close but they are light in the first few years and they are heavy in the last few years. we want to take this seriously. many did not take this requirement until they realize that they have to do this to get

a permit. >> can you talk about the gps. >> there's nothing about using gps. it is true that many of the cars are beginning to get more of the gps data in fault. i have seen people who have it on their smart phones. we have the requirement that you need to know your way around the city. >> is this a specific address, a landmark? >> this is not a specific address but a landmark.

we will ask you about the bigger hotels, that kind of thing. we want them to know the basics on how to get around. we want them to serve every part of the community. >> could you speak to the notion that one does not need to pass the test, just take the test. >> been there would be no point of the minister in the test. the section says that you must take this as required as part of

your medallion application. >> any comment on that there's no consistency in your review process. >> i am unaware that anyone who has been granted a medallion for three years. i don't know situation that has occurred like that. and that has not happened. >> this has been with the mta for about a year. >> for about a year and a half. i believe this was in march of 2009.

>> thank you. >> one of the questions asked is what st. the entrance to city hall was on. two of the answers were polled and the growth. mr. omar. both of them because this was at the corner. in actuality, this is -- the test itself at the wrong answer. the best example of the questions they asked with respect to finding locations in the city. with respect to throwing away

the bills, this happened years ago and not necessarily in the past two or three years. i believe that there was a rule that was instituted about keeping the bills for a certain amount of time and the possible 20052006 and to go back and look. with respect to how many people are denied their permits, let me just say that i have been representing this for five years. i've gotten calls from people who are being denied permits. it seems that once the mta to go for, they became overly strict and their application of the rules. the way you can look at a bill and whether or not this is accurate. this might be one of the

problems, in the past, it was granted for three years and a little bit of the fourth year and all of a sudden it is not. in closing, we believed that the application and the decision to deny this is contrary to the lock and to the evidence and we request that the application be granted where the decision be overturned or alternatively, it gives omar a fair shot at taking the test again and submitting the bills from 2009 until the present. if you have any other questions, i would be happy to answer them. >> are there any questions?

commissioners, the matter is submitted. it is hard when you hear testimony that he is a good driver and he has worked so many years. it is hard because i don't see that he needs the driving requirements and i'm not sure what we can do about that. >> i am in agreement with that statement. this is not that difficult to achieve.

this would be only three out of the past five years. they have discounted the way bills and the airport trips, and still leaves a number of years short and by not a very difficult threshold.

if there is no further comment, i will make a motion. i will move that we reject the appeal and uphold the department. >> thank you. >> this is to uphold the nile on the basis listed. on that motion -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >>

the denial is upheld. thank you. >> we can move on to our last case, item number seven. i think the parties for this case for staying so late through the other items. -- i thank the parties. >> calling item 7, appeal number 10-102, dijeau poage construction appealing the revocation of a street space permit. >> typically we would hear from the department first. ago >> good evening -- >> good evening, commissioners.

had this berman been administrative error or an oversight, we would not have revoked the permit. the brief by the appellate party is factually correct, however there are certain difficulties a present. we informed them that they can only have a four-month extension. i provided them with a piece of paper and wrote in pencil, unfortunately, saying that they were allowed a four-month

renewal. at some point, the applicant came to my staff and provided a handwritten note. my staff as i waited this and noted that there could be some discrepancies and they contacted the home office and talked to one of my permit staff. per discussion, they were authorized a four-month permit.

this is not answer the question that was posed that how what an individual was given this, it would somehow change from how it would change possession. based upon this information, some have a document and we have to revoke the permit based on what appears to be fraud. had this to build a building permit or a planning document, someone would make the change.

deep building believes that we acted appropriately -- the building department believes we acted appropriately. but appears that someone had manipulated information. >> it is that your handwriting? >> that is my handwriting except for number 5. >> what are the word spread of four of the line at the bottom. >> that lists 30 linear feet. >> i just want to make sure. >> when you put to that, you had written it the number four. there was no extension at 38 linear feet. >> that is correct. >> when this was presented to the staff, the four had been changed to 5. >> that is correct. >> on principle, you took the

action of revoking. >> it was not so much principle but it was it was a case where i would not have it at that point. someone change that piece of paper. >> when you were first presented with a question of the extension,, it was asked if you for five months. >> ok.

>> i would like to reiterate what was stated in the letter on october 18th. to comply with the rules and regulations, i went down to the offices at 1660 mission and subsequently went to 875 stevenson. this process is not new to me. i have been in -- i have been doing this for quite some time. previously during might to your employment with the local real- estate company. no fraudulent affirmation was submitted by me or anyone else.

there is an obvious discrepancy. there was never any disagreement or opposition to the amount of time granted to us for the renewal. i followed all the rules and protocols as laid out. on september 5th, i received the notice and i was shocked and confused why they had submitted a letter and the fraudulent information had been submitted. on the advice, they said it would be a good idea to try to resolve the issue outside of the

board of appeals. i went down and visited him at his office. i did this so i could put the issue to rest. this is why i am bringing it now to you. i just asked about the evidence that i submitted. each year we start 10-15 new projects where similar permits are pulled and they have never been accused of such allegations and the board will recognize our

credibility and we can move on and continue the remaining 12 states that we have on the existing permit. in addition, i am not looking for any extension or monetary reimbursement. in the duration that this whole appeals process happened, the permit was renewed on september 3rd which is a friday. on the following monday, we received a letter from mr. fung's office saying that the permit was revoked at which point we removed all of our employees from the property because we did not want to incur a fine. for about 15 days, i made an attempt to reach out and resolve the issue and before that 15 days, from the fifth until

september 24th when we received another notice from the board of appeals offices, we did not have our signs up so we lost 15 more working days with our guys using that space. there was time off and there was money lost. we're not looking for another extension of six months and we hope that in our future projects, this is not prejudiced against the other. >> were you the persian that -- were you the person that person and delivered the paper? >> i went down there on friday

morning and i originally went to the building department and they told me that i had to go to the office. they notified that he would give me authorization and one of his staff gave me to post it note. as i was leaving, i said, are you going to let them know that i am coming. the gentlemen who gave me the note said yes. he said i will call over right now. he said, bring this with you. i said, okay. i walked over there and we issued the permit and i showed them all of the documentation i was given. they said that it says five months and they told me for months over the phone. this is what ever they granted us.

i went to the process and a photocopied everything and i kept all of the originals. we received the notice on the following monday. >> did you ask the question why you only got four months? >> i literally grab the note and i had been waiting there since about 8:30 or 9 so i got the note and i said will you let them know that i'm coming to the offices. as i was walking out, he was on the phone and we granted them the amount of time and she is on her way over. >> when you took it over and showed five months, and you paid and received a permit for four

months, did you question the permit? >> no, they give it to me and i did not even look at it. initially i had verbally requested five months and i asked if there is any reason and they said that -- and we don't allow longer than that. >> they told that they don't allow five months. >> yes, they told me that. >> is there any public comment? >> this is a situation where you want to deal with these issues, however, staff was able to identify the documents and the note did say five months.

i know for a fact that i did that change the notation and it was in pencil. this is a very sensitive area. what we're trying to do is to balance this. that is why we reduced this for months. as i stated in this case, the applicant did go to the park and did ask for the five months. this is only because the staff was contacted and some verification was made before the permit was issued. had no verification been made, this would have been done based upon the note. this was a discrepancy and somehow the note changed.

we do know that this was in the applicant's possession the entire time. >> yes. it is unusual to have a post it? >> yes, that was my mistake because it was a very busy day. there was a discussion. i voted on a piece of paper and i handed it to them. >> is there a middle ground.

>> we don't want to set a precedent. a public works permit, the public works permit. >> understood. -- the public works permit. >> how much time is left on a permit that would be a former permit? >> this would be a four month permit.

>> this ends on december 3rd. we were originally issued on december 3rd and then we removed the permit on the shift and did not put them back up. the 24th when we received a notice from your office stating that the revocation was suspended. according to what was issued, this is only good until december 3rd. this is 19 days. >> you are using this as the you have a permit. >>