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 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

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. 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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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. 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.

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

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

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?

>> thank you for the work you put in on this. >> did not think me. there are hundreds of hours in the afternoon. thank you for the appreciation. i would like to give the secretary a copy i do not think that has been presented. it would be beneficial for you to read it.

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 a smaller revenue

stream from this program and any revenues that were taken out to have some amount reinvested in the industry for the betterment of the industry. there are issues the industry faces. today, i do not believe any funds have been reinvested in the industry to help it out with its needs. other than that, the change of the surrender fee and the post- transfer fee back to 20%, we're in line with what we have recommended. their numbers that entice folks to sell their medallions and allowed drivers to get to a hundred thousand dollars purchase price, that is a lot of conducive -- incentive. we will leave this of you guys -- up to you guys to make the changes.

and the next recommendation is to lower the age. the second recommendation which we took subsequent to the first is to open a sales to anyone and everyone who wanted to sell. this is different from the other proposal were folks above the age of 60 would be allowed to sell. i think the director's recommendations are in line. the biggest departure year from the director's recommendations is there should be some medallions i go to the driver's on the waiting list. it is what holds back the industry from moving to a -- a new medallion transfer and program.

we do not believe that the people should be put aside or forced to purchase. the city committed to giving the medallions when they first entered into this agreement and they should be given the opportunity to be considered for for medallions. we were going to continue with allowing medallion distribution. the recommendations adopted or are around an amount of core percentage of medallions to remain on transferable to be given to the remaining people on the waiting list. i would say that was the biggest difference there with regard to the waiting list. the continuation of distribution according to seniority.

as well as keeping the medallions distributed to qualified cabdrivers. living in to industry operation, we have -- this was us examining how having sales or transfers really affected the quality of the service provided to the public. there a few recommendations here they can go over the week ended up adopting. the biggest theme is having more involvement of lead per diem for it -- full-service cab companies to ensure the medallions are operated and run in a proper fashion that would benefit the members and people of san francisco. there are cab companies to have reinvested in their operations

who are doing their best to -- to abide by operations and corporate. the drivers fund is a subject that was not addressed to much in the proposal. this remains the same between what we decided and what the director has put forward. the biggest highlight here is that fund be allowed to which i believe it is in an investment account and allowed to grow. a group of people here and, that is appointed to manage that fund severally. we have a couple of recommendations that will pass. these their suggestions that -- they are hot topics we have

discussed but they did not get through grade we thought you should be aware. that is the highlight of our report. any questions? chairman nolan: thank you. let me ask you about what you said about the waiting list. would you recommend, is it a certain number to be allowed to continue as they are? >> yes. chairman nolan: did you talk about any number of that? >> the discussions were -- there is a lot of contention and opinions. getting down to specific numbers and figures is something we had best left up to staff but the general policy we wanted to get across to you guys. chairman nolan: as i recall,

that had not been actively utilized in any way. >> it has been growing. we're past couple million. there is a lot of discussion on how that can be used. >>fá it is a positive suggestiod and can be beneficial. director heinicke: i have heard most if not all of that beofore. one comment was the overall sense of the body -- to make sure medallions are ending up in the fl