survey in there. if you give us the go ahead today, we can start the process. they can start getting their surveys done from the residential standpoint. it will be a little the unique. -- bit unique. it might take a month or two to get the paperwork process up and running. i am putting out an nine-month pilot period. we bring it back to you in the next board meeting, age as well as penalty recommendations. >> for people that might not be completely familiar, the position is a process that is

generated by the neighbors. they actually start the process and gather the signatures. i am sensitive to the amount of work that we have created around this. i just wanted to clarify. i can support that. director nolan: i'm not sure we have 3 or 4 people in support of anything else. >> i would like to make a recommendation for the amendment. >> there is a motion to amend the resolution to require a nine-month pilot program, understanding that before the pilot project moves into place

there would be further discussion at the board with regard to the age limit and the penalty. >> i will second that. >> for clarity in drafting this amendment, i am not certain i understand what the scope of the survey would be. is the intent to survey the entire permit area? "said block by block, but we do not really mean that, do we? >> and the way we do it now is if you are on the 200 block and do not have a residential permit -- it is just the residence. >> i thought you were talking about the whole district. >> it is not the whole district. but you have to be attached to a

residential parking zone. if you are one block off, you would be part of that zone. that is how it works to add rpp to a block. i think you are proposing would have to get approval within that rpp to get a nanny permit on your block. >> i think a understand to be -- i think i understand that to be a single-block survey, as opposed to a survey during the creation of a permit. >> i would procedurally -- you know where i stand. i think we should approve the thing. but i understand i do not have the votes. i would suggest that mr. ford

has well summarized the gist of this board's direction. rather than voting on an amendment on the fly, you know where we are coming from. if this is going to happen, it will have to happen with this sort of modification. i am sorry to say i think the best thing to do is to let staff work that out so we all know exactly what we are voting on rather than speculating about it. >> i agree with that. >> i think there would be two votes. >> thank you. chairperson nolan: to my mind, the family thing does trump. >> ban yi would like to address you on this. >> the legislation before you for consideration is a policy saying that households

requesting the child care provider is eligible for the permit, including setting up the requirements for the block as well as the approved -- the affidavit, and also the issue once -- issuance of the permit to be displayed -- those are administrative procedures we are recommending to make it work. we can come back, if you approve this legislation. we can come back before we actually launch the pilot with a list of all the administrative processes that need to be in place for you to approve before we actually launch the pilot, including the age threshold, the actual permit itself, the affidavit they need to sign, and the requirement that the requesting party submit a petition of 51% of the block.

>> you will come back with all of that. is that right? >> i think what ban is saying -- they could bring it all back, is that right? mr. yi is suggesting we go forward. >> we will bring back those modifications well before any implementation. then staff can go ahead and start putting administrative pieces together and fold in the comments and recommendations the board wishes. that will give you an opportunity to modify those. >> yes. chairperson nolan: in that case, we go back to the original motion.

do we need that in language? is that clear enough? >> is a motion on the floor that i believe was seconded. if the vice chairman agrees to withdraw his amendment, you can go back to the main motion. chairperson nolan: will you withdraw that? vice chairperson lee: i will withdraw it. chairperson nolan: do we have a motion on that? do we have a second? i will second that. any further discussion? how about roll-call? director beach: no. director brinkman: no. director heinicke: aye. director bridges: ye. director oka: no. vice chairperson lee: aye. chairperson nolan: aye.

>> it is approved. chairperson nolan: i think we need a break. we will have a 10 minute break. chairperson nolan: we are back in session now with item 12. >> members of the public, please find a seat. item 12, adopting amendments to

transportation code, a division to, to define and gas and gates operation of a taxi, to require medallion purchasers to make a down payment of less than 20% of the purchase price to operate as a gas and dates until the sellers downpayments subsidy is paid in full, to amend hearing procedures, and rabbis equipment standings, require electronic waybills, change the reporting deadline, and amend eligibility requirements. that is the calendar item. staff has asked that the resolution be amended with regard to the eligibility requirements to become a taxi driver. their request is to leave the minimum age requirement as is,

so you can obtain a driver's permit at 21, rather than changing it to 24. chairperson nolan: we can certainly hear the report and from the public. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me see if i can make it a little muddier. [laughter] chairperson nolan: i appreciate that. >> first of all, i think the part of the -- the part of the thing that i would like to amend concerns the way bills and that kind of thing. i talked to several cabdrivers, as well as small companies.

they tell me that there may be some privacy issues, or that kind of thing. so i would like -- i am working on some language that might take care of all those concerns. i would like to eliminate that portion -- illuminate that portion. the whole credit card thing. chairperson nolan: we do not have any motions on the floor yet, but there are three things that are possible to change in terms of the overall recommendation. >> as far as the stock proposal goes, it is what we have come up-the changing of the age requirement. -- we havee, cminus the -- we

have, minus the changing of the age requirement. chairperson nolan: why don't we hear the speakers. >> starting with [unintelligible] chris fulkerson, [unintelligible] charles rathbone. >> first of all, and want to complain in the strongest possible terms about the sheer number of items. this is a good example of what i was talking about earlier. there is too much to say. these items merit closer discussion than the two minutes or so you can give. i understand that director hiashi need to get things done, but the same complaint.

i want to make sure it is understood that i believe it is extremely evil to make people pay a quarter of a million dollars for low-income jobs. that said, the dates and gas requirement -- gate and gas requirement makes sense. you are participating in banking when you make a requirement like that. there is something else going on at the end of the duration that is not being discussed. that is that these bankers are offering balloon payment loans. you can find a home for $0.25 million. such a loan is illegal. bankers are finding a new market, namely us. that are coming down with a seeming agreement that simply should not be allowed. they are saying couping words. you can just refinements, and so

forth. the requirement of that is improper. i think that march 31 is too soon for a recommendation on the part of the taxi advisory council. the chairman has said he does not plan to make a recommendation of a report if you come across the requirement that he make a recommendation, there may be a problem. i think that for more meetings is not enough -- four more meetings is not enough. >> richard, followed by charles rathbone. >> i am richard highbolt. i am in my 23rd year of owning and operating taxes. focusing on one aspect of the vehicle standards rule, you can understand that a 2008 taxicab

with 300 dozen miles on it is probably not as good as a 2005 taxicab with 60,000 miles on it. you will be in favor of these regulations. that is what we are faced in. i have already had to throw away cars that were better than some i am allowed to keep, simply because of the year there were manufactured. i do not know how that makes any sense to anyone. with respect to the 21-year-old thing, it is no skin off my nose, but i do not think many insurance companies are going to cover them, and probably nobody will hire them unless they are the child of somebody who owns a cab company. thank you. >> charles rathbone, followed by song aryon. >> looks or cab company -- luxor cab company made numerous suggestions and pleased to see

some are included in the final version. we would have liked to see some additional changes, especially regarding weekly reporting requirements. that said, these regulations have been under discussion for months. we are ready to move on. we urge you to adopt the agenda for you. thank you. >> sam marian, followed by barry toronto. >> the delay was a first -- a one time event and should not minimize the value. what i am talking about -- you can access all the information by one or two keystrokes. but there is a flop if you want

to use the gps, for example. if somebody forgets to turn off the meter, the drop off point could be a few miles down the hill. many times, we get papers from the police department or customers that they need some information. if we write it down on our way bill, we can fish the memory for that incident. but if it is done through the gps, we have nothing to go by. an electronic waybill using our waybill as a foundation for a database is good. using the gps has so many flaws that i could talk for hours about.

>> barry toronto followed by talik mahmoud. >> good afternoon, chairman nolan. i am really concerned about process. there is a lot here. you do not have to tell me. have all of you read all the pages of the changes today? if you have not, this is a concern, because then you are voting on something you do not know about. we need to go to every page. i have not been able to go to every page. that would be an insensitive way of going through this, by approving something you do not know personally about. on that note, there are concerns. some of the issues need to be passed today, because they are our safety and they are procedural and they ought to be done. there are others that require at least proper book vacation. we know about the tax schemes,

but that is for the pilot program. it is not for dealing with pages of changes that couldpeople's id other issues. those issues have not been dealt with enough. have a couple more town hall meetings so you make sure, when you get the note is about all the discussions of the traffic and parking changes -- it's as public hearing held out when? have you shown actual dates, showing you heard enough public comment to this? a lot of people were unhappy with certain issues. some of them are no-brainers, as we said before. some of them should be dealt with in the to but more. what about the fiscal impact to us, non-employees of this

agency. we do not work for you. you regulate us, but you do not pay our salaries. you do not pay our health benefits. >> i am a driver. about the electronic waybills, do all of you put out your contract in one disk and let us have a record of what contacts he made with your clients, what money you collected? we do not. do we ask the millions in this country how much money they make? we do not. they have their own system. 90% of them steal the money every day. millions of them do not report

their information correctly. 90%, no. and electronic waybill means everything on one disk. how many things can go wrong? one day, it can go way wrong. one day it can go wrong. that this -- you are slaughtering the industry, the drivers future. an electronically bill is no good for the drivers. -- an electronic waybill is no good for the drivers. you do not pay them a health care or pensions. you do not give them anything. it is brought to you by lobbyists and cap companies who brought you through a certain way. they are going to benefit out of it. the way bill costs $300 a month.

we are starting from $70 a shift. that is already $107. we have added up in the last 10 years, tens of hundreds of millions of dollars to their pocket. everything can be handled. no electronic waybills, please. >> my name is tong lee. i am a taxicab driver. drivers buying medallions are so happy. a lot of drivers regret they did not sign up to buy. all of the drivers are going to be guilty. a lot of drivers drive more than

the hours you regulated. also, we are very scared and afraid of this electronic waybill to affect our job flexibility, and also a lot of things. i would install a wire to your bank account and install a gps in your car. we would track all of your activities. i think all of the government's cars should be installed with gps and track the activity they make. a lot of government officers use their high-priced car and gasoline to go to their own personal parties. we use our own gasoline. what about wikileaks? how much damage did that make for america. all this information is good and

bad also. could end up with our own weapon because some enemy knows our defense system and should sit at our own hands. that is so scary about electronics so far. a lot of things are good. an electronic waybill -- we are not ready. i asked a lot of drivers. thank you so much. >> i am not sure what you decided. you decided to talk about electronic waybills? generally speaking, that was the

intent. ok. basically, this thing has been discussed and discussed, a lot of these details in here. i think it is time to actually do something. the change about this from 21 is pretty silly. nobody would insure a driver for 21. otherwise, i think this is about time to go forward. thank you. >> jim gillespie. >> commission director, i am the general manager at yellow cab. my comments are going to parallel the issues that are on there.

with newer cars and hybrid cars, there is a lot of demand being put on the industry that costs a lot of money. the companies, the medallion holders, continued for the last two decades. the staff of the texas division -- their salaries are funded by medallion renewal fees. burkhart dispatch renewal fees. the reason i bring this up is we now have the sale of medallions that is raising up several million dollars going to the mta. my understanding is that 20% of it is going into the texas division. it seems to be some percentage that should be designated to that. our fees have basically tripled

in the last few years. our renewal fees are up to $1,200 because we are the only funding source for the texas division staff -- for the taxi division staff. you're passing things that could be good for the industry. it does create a financial burden on us. we appreciate these several million dollars coming to the agency. some percentage of it could be directed to taxes, to relief of the fees we are paying. i would take it away and bring it back to what it used to be. thank you. >> good afternoon. i have been asked to speak on behalf of arrow cab company.

let me address the electronic waybills implementation. we are not against that. however, it is a significant change, a paradigm change in the way of reporting on waybills, both in proceeding and purpose. therefore, we think it is going to take some significant amount of time to adapt and understand how it works and how it is going to not work, possibly. we are asking for a significant window of time for implementation, sort of a beta test for some of the equipment before we are formally required to have it. for instance, pushing it to september before it is actually required. there may be legal implications. a lot of the electronic waybill information should be solely for the purpose of the taxi

director, and not for the company. if there is some way to fire wall that provided for that reason, i wanted to go to the gas and gates issue for seller'' down payment. i think it should be a set amount of time rather than and tell payment in full is made, because i forget what the reason was. it seems to me it was to serve also the purpose of addressing losses to the company caused by the sale and transfer of medallions to long-term leases and affiliate's status. and affiliate's status. this preserves -- and i out of