it might be and out of town taxi. if someone cannot get business in oakland, tç they are picking up a few extra affairs. they could be an authorized limousine chartered by the state public utilities commission but çis acting illegally by picking up shares of the street. limousines are required by law to be prearranged, reserved rides. the third and most dangerous kind of illegal vehicle is where someone just goes out and gets a lincoln town car and a suit and just drives around the bars at night picking people up. >> in otherç words, they are masquerading as a permitted vehicle and that is able to ferry passengers for pay but they have not obtained the necessary approvals to do just that. >>ç that is correct.

>> what kind of statistics are there that have been captured of this problem? >> it is anecdotal. as soon as the sfmta took over the taxi industry, it was obvious this was the biggest concern the industry had. this represents, for the taxi industry, people competing for scarce resources out there. spçtaxi drivers are not highly d individuals. in order to make their work profitable, it would be important to reduce the number of illegal vehicles operating. and to the public, itç is critically important because of the personal safety issue. i feel very concerned that there are a lot of people out there getting into vehicles and the driver has not been screened by any regulatory agency, the vehicle has not been inspected, and you do not know if there is any liability insurance if

injured. >> in an urban areaç like ours, certainly in the high tourist areas, this would seem to be more of a reality in different pockets. but i would also think that this is true for the airport. airport. >> absolutely. i do not think anyone can deplane in san francisco without being approached by an illegal limousine operator. >> supervisor campos? >> just a couple questions. with respect to theç changes involving the illegal vehicles, trying to provide service by taxis, whatç is the correct la? -- current law? what is the need for the

amendment? >> part of it is transferring misdemeanors over into the transportation code. you will see another cleanup ordinance coming before you in the future to move up the articleç 16 motor vehicle for higher out of the police code and into the transportation code. with respect to new crimes that are created, these are specifically to address that contact that occurs inç the industry. operating a color scheme or dispatch service without a permit should be just as illegal as operating a vehicle without a permit. we do have the legal brokers that operate as if they were a licensed company. we also want to make sure that if we have a crime in place, allowing someone to drive a taxi who is not aç taxi driver. there is currently no criminal penalty for that. hotel doorman are also a rampant problem in the industry with respect to illegal competition. any taxi driver can tell you,

for $8 at any hotel you can get a referral to the airport. that is frustrating and demoralizing for the taxi driver who is trying to play by the rules. there is no current caught -- crime in place that is affected. is it that, extortion, bribery? those are pretty big words for $20 transactions. what we want isç a targeted, specialized misdemeanor that will address this specific conduct that we can use as an effective enforcement mechanism to prosecute these individuals and businesses. also, there isç a crime of overcharging drivers. drivers are the ones that provide this service on the ground. they are often subject to a lot of overcharges by various contacts along the way in their

work day. so we intend toç regulate the charges that can be charged to drivers. we want to make sure if those regulations are broken, it is more than a slap on the wrist. we believe this will haveç a gd deterrent effect. there is also one more crime in here that is already an administrative violation but is not a serious enough penalty. that is to sell a driver a shift, or a good car. if you give me $500, i will let you work on a saturday night. we want to make sure there is a strong deterrent enforcement mechanism. >> could you talk about the enforcement of these new changes, how they would look? you were a doormanç who did soe of these81zzñ things, how does t look? is it realistic where you are actually going to prosecute someone or penalize someone for

doing that? >> it would require an undercover work and surveillance. we intend to work with the police on that. we feel one or two prosecutions might have a good deterrent effect on the rest of the industry. >> makes sense. çis there any effort to educate folks about the changes? >> we did bring this through the taxi advisory council and the mta board of directors. çgenerally speaking, we have a communicative relationship with the taxi industry. a few of them are here to speak about it. >> i think it makes sense to do that, but it also makes sense for us to disseminate the information about what the new rules are, city-wide, so that the people that could be impacted -- doormen, for example -- that there are severe

penalties that would be in place. >> we have frequent contact with çthe hotel council, so we have pretty good communication channels, and we can certainly utilize that channel to get the information out. >> i do not have a problem around the changes of these vehicles. the question was more with the first piece of the changes that had to do with the actual twoin owing of unauthorized vehicles, allowing staff to do that. çcan you talk about what that looks like, who would have that authority? i would like to know what kind of training is provided to these employees, how many employees are we talking about? if you could say a little bit about that. >> we are kind of new in the

industry, i have been building my staff. we created a civil service class. çwe have a civil service class of taxi investigators. they will be doing administrative enforcement. we are working with the division now inç preparation for this program to develop field protocols and procedures that these individuals would be trained with. currently, i only have three inv. i hope to have a team of seven. their work also involve office work and field work, including such things as going to baseball games and helping with the taxi stand, callingç on enforcement efforts to be visible to the illegal operators so that they know there is someone out there watching? . >> maybe i am misreading the çamendment, extending the authority around parking

regulations, which now allows any police officer, parking control officer to issue citations. now you are adding to that category other sf employees authorized to enforceç parking lot. >> an example could be a team of tax investigators who went out to a hotel. they might stick their head in a window to make sure a vehicle is clean, make sureç that the tirs are not bald. there could be a limousine parked at the stand. they could then write a parking citation to the limousine for being a limousine in a taxi stand, as opposed to calling for a pco. if the limousine is unattended 1 that vehicle, instead of calling

a police officer, they can call the compound right then and there. >> who are those individuals? >>ç currently, we have a team f three, i hope to hire as many as seven. we hope to hire high language skills, community outreach skills, and we will be trading on the motor vehicle for higher industry to make sure that they are knowledgeable within the area in which they're working. >> what kindç of training do ty get now? >> currently, we have not deployed to the field. we are trying to build this program. we are also building feel protocols in conjunctionç with sfmta enforcement. when we have those protocols, we would be happy to share them with the board those individuals will be trained on those field

protocols. >> i think it is great to do that. as a general rule, i would like to see the protocol sooner rather than later. if this authority is going to be provided,ç it would be good to know. i understand what you are doing. it makes sense. thank you. >> i am curious to know where in the city these inr c1 will be located. >> they have desks with the rest of the sfmta. other than that, their efficiency relies on the element of surprise. they will be where they are needed, they will be visible to illegal operators so we can discourage that trade. >> you have seven now and you want to ramp upç to 11? >> we have three now and we hope to get seven so that we can have teams of two in the field periodically. >> what are the proposed ships

for the teams? >> we have toç work on that as well. we need to apply some sort of flex time principle. if someone is working and enforcement shift on friday night, we do not need to see the next morning, perhaps. >> their ships are going to coincide outside of a regular 9:00 to 5:00 -- the clubs close at 2:00. you may have said this butç how do you plan to catch these taxi imposters? when you catch them, what do you do? >> it is almost impossible not to find one if you go out on a friday night. çwe need to be present. it is like swatting flies. you need to make sure that people know there is movement in this place and you have to go somewhere else. did i answer your question? >> how do you plan to catch them? >> sometimes, enforcement may

involve issuing them away -- çshooing them away, for exampl, some legitimate that drivers can pick up customers. going after any moving violations. they could be dealing with rather dangerous individuals, so we have to make sure they go out in pairs and we develop protocols for ways to approach a limousine or illegal operated to issue a citation without getting run over. z with commissioner campos. i have a hard time envisioning your enforcement of this policy. çit seems so obscure and so big -- i do not even know if seven

people could tackle this issue. >> we may not be detected in citing every illegal vehicle operator, but it will be important for the illegal operators to know that when they come, there is enforcement and there are consequences in the form of $5,000 penalties, getting your vehicle towed. currently, enforcementç involvs a police officer riding a citation for less than $200 and not telling the vehicle. that is just the cost of doing business. >> is there some sort of policy that will incentivize other taxi driversç who are legally operating their car to turn in a fellow driver if their operation is not legal? >> we do not need to do that. they are begging us to take this enforcement action. i considered asking them to send us photographs but i do not want our taxi drivers to take

photographs while they are driving. we are looking for every way that we can become effective. that has to do wiéh!fine amounts, field presence, being able to tow, and it has to do with being visible. >> are their current programsç that you are modeling this after? >> there are other jurisdictions were taxi regulators apply administrative enforcement. police resources are scarce. the problems are huge. los angeles, for example, has moved to an administrative enforcement mechanism to deal with the legal vehicles because it is more efficient for staff time. another thing is you control of the citation. right now, he would go off to the court of justice. we have no knowledge or input as to how the judges actually treat

that citation. if it is it an administrative citation, it wouldç be treated like a parking ticket and it would be sfmta officers who would be fielding those citations. >> so you will be cracking down on gypsy cabs, these forms of transportation that are not necessarily authorized. where i am concerned is, a large part ofç the reason why these wrote taxi services pop up is because they serve and underserved population. in the southeast part of the city, where i live, near candlestick park,ç oftentimes, even i have a problem getting a taxi. i have to spend several minutes, waiting for a cab.

further south, they do not even come that way. i am in a pinch try to reconcile this. çthese gypsy cabs arrive becaue services do not exist. so what are you doing, your fellowç cabbies, how can we mae this work? >> in addition to our enforcement initiatives, we are trying to deal with customer service issues. it is difficult to get a taxi in san francisco at certain times of day and in certain geographical locations. i want to say first of all, we are working on that issue. i do not know to what extent it would be inappropriate to go through all of the different ideas we are havingç to pursuen

the future. one thing is we are going out to bid for a public convenience and necessity study that will measure the need of the supply and demand of the taxi industry. if we are able$ these illegal vehicles, the city would be in a position to issue more taxi medallions, put more vehicles on the street. if we do that, more tax to drivers will have better working conditions. service response should be better. now that we have the tax medallions sales pilot program, those sales could represent substantial revenue to the city. right now, they are being sold for a quarter million dollars a piece. if we issued fourç new taxi medallions, that is potentially about a million dollars worth of revenue. so it is in our financial interest to clean up the service that is being served by the illegal vehicles and replace it

with legal vehicles. the otherç issue, besides serve -- because i agree with you. we need to address the service issue. but there is a critical public safety issue here. ii have this vision of a couple of inebriated youths climbing into the back of a car, getting into the back of an unlicensed vehicle. that is a public safety issue. we need to address that, in addition to the service problems. >> thank you. this hasç been a fascinating conversation. >> thank you. one question. the first citation is valued at $2,500? >> yes, the police department, if this ordinance isç passed, e fine would be $2,500 as authorized and the public utilities code. if administrative staff issues a

citation, the county is $5,000 as authorized by the government code. it was my intention to make the police department fine equal to the ministry of fine, but the city attorney's office opinion was that because of reauthorization of the public still is code was limited to 2500 on the criminal statutes, the pleas to permit could only issu, a$1 fine. -- police department could only issueç a $2,500 fine. >> is a strange inconsistency for it not to be levied in the same way. criminal choice, you would hope that they get hitjonú by the puc version rather than the sfmta version. >> either way, thm qenalty would be substantially higher, they are getting today. >> i get that, but the question of resources and staff applied to this endeavor. you say you have three investigators now. those examples, if this law is

implemented, examples will be made and radiate around. getting hit with a $5,000 on patient --ç citation, i wonder the need for you moving up to seven investigators. i asked earlier if there was staff and you said only anecdotally. i want to understand better what the universe of trouble is that we are dealing with. >> çit is a universe that is difficult to eliminate, that we can only minimize, i think. it is a very attractive thing, especially in these times, for someone to get an illegal vehicle and come to san francisco and take the chance of getting caught. it has been a serious problem for decades. it is a problem in every major

municipality that has a taxi regulators. ] citation that has been issued by the police department. i can tell you in 2010, i believe the police department issued -- i think it was 125 illegal vehicle citationsç, about 300 citations to legal vehicles that were acting outside of their charter. so that is about 400 citations issued by the police department during one calendar year. but that does not account the degree of the problem. that is simply what the police department has been able to apply. >> the revenue generated from the citations, does it then return to the mta? >> the $2,500 fine would goç to the criminal court, just as any

other misdemeanor case. the $5,000 fine by state law is required to be reapplied to illegal vehicle investigation and enforcement. >> whaf is your standard for determining increase in staff? you said three investigated by moving up to seven. right now, it is quite restrictive in how we are bringing in new staff in city government. i would like to hear how that determination is to be made. >> the number that i have set upon is based on trying to schedule it in a way that they are not in the field at theç te -- all the time, that they have a combination of being in the field and at the desk. the financing of those positions, first of all, comes from a reduction in the police department work order for the

first two new hires. the police deáartment used to provide the taxi detail for this kind of enforcement. now that enforcement model has changed. some of the work order money is coming back to our agency. with that money, i will be hiring two more investigators. and if the investigators pay for themselves, two more. >> so the savings on the work order that would be returned to the police department is what? >> i believe $375,000 coming back to the sfmta from the police department work order. ç>> does this mean the police will continue or discontinue to also assist in trying to curtail an arrest this problem? >> we continue to assist the their enforcement and assistance is also required as well for any

criminal enforcement. that is their jurisdiction entirely. but they still have, i think, a quarter of a million dollars in their work order to fund that activity. it is just that the work order money used to fund salaries at the police department for the taxi detail is move over to the agency so that the same work could be performed by our civilian administrative staff. >> supervisor campos. >>ç just a couple of follow-up questions. the $2,500 citation would be new sfmta employees authorized to enforce parking lots, including issues of citations. would they be able to issue a $2,500 citation? ç>> no, that is the criminal citation issued by the police department. >> supervisor cohen raised an

important issue, something that we deal with on a regular basis. i actually just had to refer a resident of the alameda housing development to the mta commission because they are not able to get a taxi to come to their housing. do you have peoplö investigating -- if a resident of such a development had a complaint, is there someone that looks at that issue? >> definitely. we have staff that follows up on the 311 complaints. that is the most effective way of complaining because we have a track >> how many staff to you have looking at those issues? >> we have three people dedicatedr.3 >> the reason i raise this issue

is, one question i have four other members of this committee, is whether we should hold off on moving this forward until we actually hear some concrete steps that are being taken on the other front, the issue of what is happening with our residents. iç think something needs to be done about this, but why should we wait until you give us something that actually addresses this other issue that goes in tandem with what we're talking about here? >> that is a reasonable request. >> that is something i would ask my colleaguesç to consider. if this is an important issue, which it is, i have to say, the level of responsiveness on the concerns of some of my constituents who cannot get a taxi service has not been at the level i think it should be. it may be something to consider, holding off on this until we get

something concrete on the other front. >> thank you. to that point,ç supervisor cohn and i were discussing this. if there was something that was not adversely affecting the timing of this to get more information, on how there might be a remedy2or more attention brought on to these points, perhaps we can continue this to the next public safety meeting. i know supervisor chu is here. i do not know if you want to speak to this. certainly, that gives us two weeks opportunity to get further along so that the unintended consequences of some of this -- that would be helpful, too. >>ç judson chu.

it has been an interesting discussion around this legislation that has come to us through the mta, a taxi division. çsupervisor mirkarimi is committed to issues around taxis, particularly as they respond to taxis, responsiveness to people. taxis are in the interval part of the system and city first policy. we believe the mta has made important progress on the taxi front in recent years, especially related to reforms in the industry, but we have a long way to go to make sure the industry isç providing san francisco residents and visitors with a taxi service that they deserve. particularly, some of the other areas that are not as frequented by tourists, including some of supervisor cohen'sç