tv [untitled] August 22, 2012 10:00am-10:30am PDT
10:00 am
away. thank you. ñi>> our last two speakers. >> this afternoon, commissioners. you have a nest egg, a golden goose. you got $20 million from the taxi industry. it cannot even run the buses. you understand, i am not talking about what you do to the drivers, what you do to anything. but your massing -- you are messing up the bus lanes. taxis tecolote to get from a to be so it costs more money and there are not enough drivers -- taxis. it cannot enforce the white
10:01 am
zones. so the taxis and everybody else double park or triple parks in the whole of the downtown so you have gridlock. why? it is not about money because you could find these people. you could tell the hotels i am sorry, this is not a parking zone. the white zone is for dropping off and picking up. but you cannot do it. you do not care. you're still getting money from us. we do not understand, you're not sending attorneys up to sacramento are talking to other cities on ways to defeat these electronic new methods. you do not understand. when there are no taxis to pick up levees are taken to the hospital or anythingr%ñ else, me you will start crying. >> thank you, next speaker.
10:02 am
>> i am president of the sf taxi drivers' association. i am former vice president of the taxi advisory council. after going to town hall meetings and missing work and discussing medallions and how the new plan would possibly affect drivers and the jillian holders and then all the sudden before our report and recommendations are sent to the board, you guys come up with is already written out ready to be voted on plan that has nothing to do with what we have talked about were considered things we talked about. it does regards drivers to put their lives into the industry,
10:03 am
who have adjusted their lives because they're on the medallion waiting list and they expect to get a medallion up till two years ago. they have been waiting up to 19 years waiting to get their medallion. maybe they have given up other careers like i did to get my medallion. medallion holders who want to get out of the industry now, they're offered less money and the mta wants to sell the permits for twice as much. i just think that this whole thing has been a facade and you need to listen to some of these concerns and not just look at medallions of the taxi industry as a revenue source for the mta. it is not serving the public. cabdrivers are not making a decent living if they feel they have no future, there will be less safe drivers. it is a public safety issue.
10:04 am
if nothing else. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. in 2008 and 2009, my income dropped roughly 50%. there was a recession nationwide. i and 10 and 11 we picked up something and we were ok. 2012, this year there are no tourists. no europeans in america, no europeans in san francisco. go and look at the taxi stand. they are jammed packed with cabs. over the city taxis are looking for any customers for $5. and you're looking at 300,000, $500,000. i'm not talking about that item.
10:05 am
what are you looking? hoover cap is cutting as. business is not there. and your looking to put the hands in my pocket and take every penny from my pocket. you have to look for the ways to give kendry more business. not the way is to cut my income. you're looking at -- 35 cabs at the start of this year. we're planning 50 calves and 85 more. 200 added three years ago. now you're looking at 200 more coming by september 4. where are you doing with us? can you read, can you understand? go look at the website and see how the economy is doing. things are bad. terribly bad for the taxi drivers. are you working only for the
10:06 am
many union? not for other taxi drivers? they're not human because they're immigrants? there from other countries? that is what you're looking at, the taxi drivers? ÷hpthank you. >> the last peter -- speaker. >> i am a driver at national veterans' camp. i am disappointed in a lot of what i've seen coming down the pike here from the commission. we're at a critical juncture in the taxi industry. we have a fleet of pirate taxis with electronic taxi healing technology on smart phones. in the pirate taxis, charging double and triple the rates of authorized taxis in at the commission rather than
10:07 am
mandating and coming up with regulations for legitimate taxis to have electronic taxi hailing uniformly applied, instead come up with a way to make money from sales of medallions and to limit the amount of money occur in medallion holder can make from the sale of their medallion. it is asinine. i think it is very clear that the commission is out of touch with what is going on at the taxi advisory council and what is going on in the industry at large. we have got a lot of people here in the room, maybe 100 and we have thousands of disenfranchised taxing workers out there. the textile workers, myself included, many of us have seen the light and there is this thing called a charter amendment. it is a proposition that will do away with the mta and there are
10:08 am
thousands on the street 24 hours a day and once we start collecting signatures, you might want to think of this as your constituency also. thank you. >> the last person who has turned in the speaker card. mr. chairman, -- president nolan: i note for members, a member of the sfgtv family passed away. she did a great deal of work and will be missed. i ask we adjourn in her memory and send a letter to her husband and her son. thank you. >> with respect to the
10:09 am
director's report item, the presentation by sfbc has been continued. that would be item 11. but we find that one. i'd love and amending the transportation code division -- amending the transportation code division to a long-term medallion transfer policy. >> thank you. i have a brief presentation i will walk through. just to provide context on how we got here and the process that you heard quite a bit about. there is a lot of passion in the voices your hearing coming to the mike and i appreciate that what we are contemplating here is very meaningful and it will have real impact of people. i want to recognize and knowledge that.
10:10 am
what we're proposing today as part of a larger scheme of reform, some of which came forward on june 4. i was intending to bring the reform proposal. i felt it was not ready. what we have drafted -- while more comprehensive, it was too complex and there were too many unanswered questions. it does fit into an overall package of things we're doing to improve taxi service. to speak what is on the table today the proposal before you is my proposal. it has everything else that comes to youxd which is incumbet upon me in a position, it comes with my signature and reflects
10:11 am
my best thinking on what ever the item is including this one. itk.'es not necessarily reflect ideas of the director or staff. it is informed by discussions by recommendation i get from the taxi director and her staff. it is informed by conversations i have had with members of the board, with members of the board of supervisors, members of the public, and members of a lot of different facets of the taxi industry. drivers, medallion holders, companies. people involved with finance. it does not mean that i take everything i hear and put it down on paper and handed to you. i did not see that as my job. my job is taking what the taxi staff provides and taking all the input and putting it
10:12 am
together in what i think is the best package this is my proposal. it is not a staff proposal. it is nothing driven by anyone sitting out here or anyone else out there. it is my proposal. i want to make clear to the public this is not what the board has decided. it is merely what i have proposed and their decision will be informed by what is proposed and whenever they hear in public comment, there has been a lot of comment provided in writing by e-mail. we sent out this draft to encourage this comment.
10:13 am
i had also discussed with the chair the board can hear directly from the tac. i am aware of the resignations and the impetus behind them. rather than being able to come to establish to have established a quorum at the last meeting to consider the proposal and come with recommendations including things you like for dinallo like about these -- this proposal, that opportunity, at least on this last proposal, it was not there. it was not there to rubber-stamp the proposal made by staff. it is to analyze and make recommendations. there was a lost opportunity there.
10:14 am
to the extent that there is anything that is good in this proposal, a credit all the different folks across the spectrum i have talked to. to the extent that there is anything that folkestone obligor feel good but i take responsibility for those. i think in presenting this to the board i do it in a spirit i believe they're open to feedback including some of what we heard and have seen in advance of this meeting to make it fair and workable and that is the spirit in which this was developed. i will walk through the couple slides to take what is a complex issue and try to lay it out. that would be open to any clarifying questions or comments and i would like to yield to the chair for his response before
10:15 am
public comment. if we could go to the brief slide presentation. somebody made reference and appropriately so in public comment to what is the overall plan and the board did adopt a strategic plan for the agency this past january when into effect this june and we're building now action steps to achieve the objectives under each goal of the strategic plan. the transit first goal that is within our strategic plan is one that i think absolutely requires good taxi service in the city in order to make transit for sterility. if we want people to not have to rely on their own private automobiles to get around, there will be times when transit or bicycling or walking or car sharing are not the right avenue for them and taxi service will
10:16 am
need to play an important role and we need to improve taxi service to make transit first work. so people can get by in san francisco largely without their own vehicles, should they desire to. taxi service is essential to the transit first policy. there are more things, i made reference to this that we're doing from a regulatory perspective. we have been bringing the number of things to the board. we're trying to set strong standards for those in the taxi industry and enforce those that are operating outside of those standards. i agree that we're at an important time. we have these external forces that are threatening the viability of the taxi industry which makes all the more urgent anything we can do to improve
10:17 am
taxixd service but also that wen force against illegal cabs or anybody who is not play by the rules. it did give your ascent for increased enforcement over what was in the original proposed budget for taxi services and we have been meetingñi with police department, the d.a.'s office, cpc -- cpuc. we have our best practices study under way. everyone is looking forward to that along the lines of improving service. the public voices often not included in these discussions about the taxi industry. obviously an important voice and there is medallion reform which is in part what we are comfortable -- contemplating
10:18 am
today. just the basic, to put it in simple terms. a medallion is a permit to these permits are held by individuals with the small exception of some older permits. and generally these permits since 1978 have been non- transferable. there is a little over 1500 medallions currently in use at their managed either by the medallion holder through an affiliate lease or their accompanying a method on behalf of the holder. the pilot that folks have been referring to was established by
10:19 am
this board in 2010 and allowed to transfer of medallions again. fees medallions were non- transferable. under this pilot in allowed transfer by certain holders to transfer their medallions in exchange for a fee. apportions windt -- portion wena portion went to a drivers' fund. the financial organizations have been able to finance medallions and the purserpose was designedo
10:20 am
study the effect of transfer. we [unintelligible] better six years or older or that have prop k. that would be opening up relinquishment to all the xdholders 60 or older. to use the waiting list as the recipient pool. all those folks who have been waiting for a medallion, there would have a first right of refusal for any medallions that or relinquished in this matter. -- in this manner. we would maintain the driving or carmen -- requirement to ensure that we have driving medallion holders which many people in the industry feel is important for
10:21 am
the strength and stability of the industry. when there is financing involved, the financing requires that it be a guest and gates model. to try to make sure we do not have illegal brokers or intermediaries between us and the medallion holder. but i have proposed in this proposal is providing $150,000 in exchange for a ruling which medallion and establishing a transfer amount that would be indexed with inflation going forward. the first transfer previously acquired under the pilot program would have the same share of proceeds going to mta and the travers fund. for other transfers, it would
10:22 am
go up from 20% to a total of 30%. 25 to the mta, 5 to the driver fund. i do believe as somebody said in public comment that these medallions are public assets and the value of them really belongs to the people of san francisco for the benefit of the entire transportation system. there is a balance those trying to strike here in making sure that enough was being invested in the taxi industry to ensure that driving a taxi in san francisco would be able to attract people to entertain people in and is clearly from some of the public comment, there is a question on whether those right balance has been struck but that was the intent. i feel like it is appropriate that the value of the medallions are used to strengthen the entire transportation system but it
10:23 am
cannot be at the expense of four to the detriment of the taxi industry. we need a strong taxi industry as part of our transit transportation system. my idea here is this would create a path toward getting medallions to the waiting list by increasing transferability. and provides a way out for people who no longer want to be in the industry and realizes that value for the whole presentation system including the taxi industry. i think i will stop there and i would like to ask the chair to come up. >> that afternoon.
10:24 am
i would like to propose an amendment. the wonder iffá there would be beneficial for him to hear them so he can comment. i think so. i do not want to have you in a situation where you have spoken and you did not know what was coming in the form of my imminent. >> this will not take very long. i hope. thank you for that walk through and my comments to you for coming in to speed so quickly on what i can attest to. also the openness you have shown to the industry in your meetings is in my experience unprecedented from a director and so i appreciate that.
10:25 am
the amendments i would like to propose to the director posey thoughtful proposal, i would like to bring the economics of this in line with the pilot program which wd approve an economic model. and when we need to be mindful for -- mindful of. amending the provisions related to the amount of money going to existing medallion holders who turn in their medallions. this would not affect people down the road who will sell medallions or people who have already bought medallions. this is this transition where people would turn in medallions. there is no obligation for them to do so. the proposal has it with them getting $150,000 and the mta getting $150,000. i propose we amend it to the medallion holder getting two- thirds of the sale price subject
10:26 am
to a cap of $200,000. we know that the $200,000 figure has proven a valuable incentive for people to do this under the pilot program and brings the number in line with the pilot program. if we do that with the cap it will stay. the remainder of the money would go to the mta as previously proposed. >> let's get a second on that one. is there a second? >> i will second. >> the second proposal is a similar thing bringing us in line with the pilot project. that is the back end transfer fee. this is when someone sells it. separate from the initial
10:27 am
transition. this is one the medallion is being sold down the line. your proposal has a 30% chance for a fee which was blessed by the finance years and it was something that would work financially. i wonder if the goal here is to expedite the sales, complete this transition process. we might want to heed both the programs' previous mark which was tied%. i suggest we take down the back end transfer fee when someone sells one of these purchase medallions from 30% to 20%. >> there is a second. will go back and vote on the amendments and then the full thing. is that right?
10:28 am
10:29 am
what we have done beyond that is we have broken up our recommendations into a few categories. the first one is over here. the categories are financial -- over a medallion purchased. and then the drivers fund. on the financial section, this pertains to the dollars and sense of the program. not too far off from what the director -- the amendments that were just proposed. way -- the biggest, the theme of this section really was that the mta have
107 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on