very complicated to explain. as you know, we have an ongoing program to improve pedestrian access and safety to reevaluate all of the crosswalks. we have an ongoing program to reevaluate all of the crosswalks that we have previously closed. to restore them wherever possible and enhance pedestrian safety as well as access. this is one of the few remaining ones on market street on the north side that if you go on the north sidewalk of a well on market street, it is actually closed. we are recommending that this

crosswalk be reopened. but to do that, it entails a lot of complicated changes that goes along with it. when this gets removed, all three crosswalks will move together like a little scramble system. we will channel this movement so that the right turns will go in here and move the center line over heading eastbound said these turns and these movements don't click each other. what he is asking, why do we prohibit this left turn? part of the other proposal is to put a 20 foot red zone here so that the service can make this turn. there are several items related

to the reopening of the crosswalk. that is just one of the proposals. chairman nolan: very quickly, come forward, please. >> he said the traffic coming westbound on market street and turning right to go westbound on fourteenth street would conflict with people coming east on fourteenth accessing market to turn left or go straight. if it has a green light, wouldn't westbound church and market street, everybody will have a red light and nobody turn right on iran? i don't understand the conflict. >> we have heard the explanation. that will be the end of this conversation.

next item? let's do 12 or 13, whateve rit is. -- whatever it is. >> you do have one member of the public. august 15, 2011, approving the employment agreement. the only speaker is christopher. >> i don't know enough to oppose or approve the gentleman's appointment, but i like to point out that he has a connection with security issues. i would encourage you to go gentle and a continued connections there because we

know the homeland's security in the fbi come looking for cabdrivers, and it has created one of the problems. i don't pretend to represent any of the individual drivers for any of the special matters, but there is a juggling act that if continued, could be a problem. i would look for his connections not to be continued. >> we have already seen and felt the results generated by those individuals designated and placed in positions directing and overseeing certain departments and positions without any prior experience.

while someone from within the already has a prior experiences and his early in the louvre -- in the loop like ms. johnson not placed in a position that they are prepared to pay upwards of $300,000 a year for probably the most important and integral position? chairman nolan: thank you. is there a second? are you speaking on this one? go ahead. >> i have spoken in front of this commission in the past. i think the new director comes a very good credentials based on the past director. i think the salary is a little out of line. if you look at the break out across the board, the biggest

problem with the city is the salary and pensions. the previous director came from atlanta and was paid $180,000 a year. it is probably in line with most directors across the united states except washington, d.c. and new york city. even though we are now paying the assistant summer around those numbers, is proudly more in line with the city and county can handle in a budget. they will assume directorship and how it is part of the -- directorship is part of the mta. i don't know why gavin newsom picked him several years ago. in view of the liabilities that will come along with this man,

it is off the charts. $300,000 a year, you're selling medallions to benefit your bottom line. it will pay for part of his pension and other pensions and liabilities. i feel is totally out of line and should be looked at in scrutinized more specifically. i thank you for your time on this matter. chairman nolan: all in favor? so ordered, it's unanimous. >> back to public comment. the opportunity for public comment, members are welcome to address the board on matters within the jurisdiction of the board of directors, but not on

dave's calendar. robert, the bill, and christopher will be first. >> good afternoon, directors. it is very interesting that you seem to skirt some of the issues that have such an enormous impact both on buses and on taxis. you spend so much money on priority claims and you don't police them. we have this curious situation around union square. you have got, i don't know what you call at. the academy thus, the tourist bus, the open air bus. they are all using your lanes.

and this means slower service for buses. i watched a study that showed, if you could increase the speed of your buses by 50%, partly by eliminating bus skills, you would transform the entire service. but what you don't seem to realize, these same things affect taxicabs. every year we get this whole thing of lamenting, i can't get a taxi. but the simple example i would give you is, a few years ago, in the morning, a taxicab could readily which the four commuters.

what i mean by that is four different commuters in the peak time hours in one hour. the cut at pacific heights and taken to the financial district. [chime] now they can pick up three. this is because you don't have priority lanes. chairman nolan: thank you. >> i would like to comment on limousines and the city. nobody is doing anything about it. they've eliminated the out of town taxis, the other day i picked up someone, and a flag to me to take the lady.

they didn't give the out of town taxi a ticket and told him to go on his way. it has to be dealt with. nobody has ever dealt with in the limousine problem, and i don't know why. it has got to be taken care of. every city in america, new york city has a shortage of taxis at rush hour. it never works when you have a peak time taxis. it is always the wrong idea. that is all i have to say, thank you. >> the afternoon, directors. these comments are not a reversal of items 11 and 12. i want to register a complaint

with you, in frustration with the way things are transpiring. we were afraid of this happening when you took over. your over estimating your rifle power. some of us have seen the machine and know when you don't have the right. you have been conducting an educational campaign to correct the minds of the public in order to make them continued to believe that more cabs means better service. the coordinating council has been used as a forum to push the idea of 500 more calves. the sun shine violation that i've brought was approved by the task force, proving that they don't follow agenda items. it was violated when he told us that better service means more calves. the cab companies are speaking

out of both sides of their mouth to you. on one hand, someone says they have no objection to part time permits. the piecemeal treatment of the problem is obviously legal speak for that we plan to throw more cabs you. more cabs are unreasonable under any circumstances, and they are not the answer. chairman nolan: next speaker. >> he will be followed by mark and charles.

the i represent both services, the advisory committee, and the mayor of's disability consultant. i am here to address concern about traveling on speed level -- the street level. that it can be pretty dangerous because vehicles really don't pay attention to warn them to yield to the passengers. we have a person who is legally blind that almost got hit while trying to board. the other meeting i attended, they made a pretty good suggestion that maybe they can

investigate, to use flashers. like school buses. whenever they have the flesh as -- flashers on, they're required to stop. maybe sfmta can look into that to the improve the safety of passengers getting on and off the train. i don't know how many accidents or anything have occurred, but it is a big concern for people that are blind and have no sense of trying to figure out how to board it. maybe if you look into the -- i

think it would help. >> [reading names] >> i want to address the question of tax credit card fees. as you are aware, cab companies have been given permission to pass these on their drivers. and one of the conditions is that there be a back seat terminal in the cabin.

-- in the cab. i want to read you something, we obtained this through a public records request. it says, as we have discussed previously, there may be a place for bringing taxi advertising directly to the sfmta. it will have to be a cooperative situation where we agreed to bear the administrative burden to increase their revenues in exchange for a share. this is not an attack on the deputy director. i support her. it is a commentary on a way of thinking. they can benefit monetarily if there are back seat terminals in

taxicabs, and they can benefit through a deal with cab companies, but can only do so if they pass on those fees to the drivers. they're not going to give up any advertising revenues. there was an enormous incentive here for the decision that was made to pass on these costs to drivers and put the back seat terminals in the cabs because the mta stands to benefit financially from it. >> good afternoon, and directors. i have a happy news, a very upbeat story for a change. one of the cab drivers recently stopped to assist a crime victim and help the police find

the criminal. in recognition of the driver's actions, the police department will present him with an award tomorrow. the driver's good work was supported by the taxi security camera. those cameras face forward and backward. before facing cameras captured the crime in progress and hope to get convictions. look for extensive coverage today, we're very proud of our co-worker and we are pleased and happy that the security camera was unable to help protect public safety. >> i saw that on tv, it is very impressive work.

>> he was trying to escape on muni. chairman nolan: it involves us all. >> [reading names] >> at this time, i am rising to speak to an item that is not on the agenda that may solve a lot of problems. and that is the idea of a centralized taxi dispatching service in addition to what ever other dispatch service they have in their cabin. i am not just talking about open taxi access, and if i am, i want to put some flesh on the skeleton. i feel i have the right to do this because i asked for and got

them meeting with mayor brown and got the former commissioner with me. mayer brown said it was a no- brainer. nobody in the city has carried forward. revenues and endorsed the idea in tuesday of the city addresses. the idiot is to use high-tech dispatch the that a passenger can get the nearest available cab regardless of company. with the director were here, he would know that under the law, taxicabs and their owners are public utilities. i think we need to revisit centralized taxi dispatch in addition to whatever dispatched there is in any of the other

companies. a they there would be more reliable service across the board for passengers taken as a whole and it would be a win-win for the drivers as well. the meeting i had with willie brown was 14 years ago. and nothing has been done since then. it is just business as usual. it is your business to see where you can do to help the public get better dispatch. >> [reading names] ." i'm from aerocab company. it is important to point out that it virtually is negated by the memorandum in october of

2010. this requires cabdrivers to pay mandatory credit card fees. they barely make enough money to support themselves. the owners are zero former cabdrivers and they look out for the interest of cabdrivers. in order for us to survive in this industry, we must take decisive action regarding the unfair treatment. let me give you a quick example. oh russian-speaking citizens, they call a public meeting to transfer them die in this out in record time. something they have never done for any other cab company. we're grateful for breaking the pattern of non responsiveness. we hope that this board will

follow her example and respond before they complete their review of our complaint. i would like to start with him. i want to hear the opinion regarding the causes of action and evidence in our complaint. i will call his office tomorrow morning to schedule an appointment at his convenience and the hope he can make time for us. >> i would like to address the structure of the newly formed a taxi advisory council. as you know, it was formed to evaluate the medallion pilot program.

i attended the last meeting at it seems to be composed of the majority of members that seem intent on undermining the sales program. the only do i find this confusing, the lenders are starting to be affected as well. what if they stop lending? hard-working career drivers, some of them have invested their life savings. i have a friend that invested $175,000 of money he saved during his entire working career. if this program fails and they stop lending, what are you going to do? are you going to reimburse these people? there have been 120 transfers. i really find it curious that the director has created a scenario that could potentially

sabotages program. i wonder if she is thinking with a clear head here. particularly with an item 12. you are giving them no exit strategy. it puts the public in danger and imposes a potential liability on the city. thank you. >> thank you so much, good afternoon. i like to address how to items, what about the mason street. we have to use that area, we have to make a left turn. it makes delay for the public

for the hotel and sites. please take away this time limit. we are making it very safe to make a left turn. another item is about the bicycle lanes. your bicycle lane is only for young people 20-40 years old. all the family and kids can i use the bicycle lane because it is not safe. you have to create a lane for the public. it is a big project. for the families like your kids and your grandchildren. e is for education. you cna make -- can make money

and teach children. and entertaining. you could have ice-cream service, so this should and bring the family out. they cannot do it on market street. [chime] >> [reading names] >> commissioners, once again, thank you for letting me address you. i like to bring the two topics today and to spend a minute on each. there are many cab companies out there that operate with funds

from taxi drivers. and when the taxi drivers leave the firm, they don't get their money back. the number is probably in the thousands. you place a deposit of $500 for whatever claims they are. they can decide not to pay you and take them to small claims court. i think they should start addressing issues related to the taxi drivers. they don't have to go to court nonstop. the you will know what cab companies are violating these laws because a security deposit is a security deposit. i would like to also bring a of if you look at an increase on the meter, without