how they develop their apps. i don't understand the concern. >> they wanted to have a city facility the system, not limited to people who own a smart phone. the information we are providing, one of the third parties who picked this up could use the information to design an application that could be accessed from a laptop or from anything else not limited to smart phones. >> that is correct. >> thank you. there has been discussion about whether we have one app, or an open architecture system. my understanding to make sure we are on the same page is that the idea is by having a petition among the apps eventually one or maybe two mac will emerge as the winner as we have seen in a lot of internet applications.

rather than us picking before hand who should win, it is to have information go out and let the best app or two win, and at that point we will have a relatively uniform or widespread app. he said the thinking behind this with the open architecture? >> we are creating a platform and letting the people whose core competency and profession is to develop apps with whatever features they want, whatever user interface they want. whether or not it would get down to one or two winners is a question. the model is the open 311 platform, like us they are requiring agreements for somebody who wants to create an app employee into it. that are a number of different ways but which people can connect

to 311; a lot of different ways people can access real-time transit data. we want to let the marketplace compete. whether or not we end up with one or two, the thing is that all of them provide exposure to all of the available taxis at once. >> i suppose nothing we are doing here today would preclude us from down the road take it when or if it is more efficient but the idea now is to let the competition figure out the best app. >> that is correct. >> i have two more questions. there has been a lot of questions about why the information that is being mandated to be provided as necessary for a dispatch system. and i guess it may be the best way is to go over this. what information will the color

schemes be required to provide of this repository of information and why is that all of that information necessary? i have heard commissioner mcguire and others say, why do so many my name as opposed my badge number but i gather from the comments there's other pieces of information to which folks are protesting and maybe we should take time to make sure we understand the dispatch needs for that information. >> this goes back to director reiskin's point that the original requirements are part of the electronic data requirements meant to substitute for the paper weigh bills the taxi drivers currently use to fill out while they are driving. those are based on the desire to capture this information that is kept currently in a pre-waybills. those requirements

were developed for this idea of how this electronic access system could be implemented so the data elements that you see in the legislation before you, you see them as amendment because when we originally has this two years ago, they were identified as requirements. it is apparent that the data was generated by an axis service permit holder not a color scheme permit holder, that is why you see these amendments moving them from a permit requirements for the color scheme 28 hermit requirements for it is pets service but those data elements the most part of the same things that we discussed two years ago in order to replace paper recordkeeping. we used the data mostly

for qualifying medallion holders, applicants for medallions rather to establish that they have been driving for four out of the last five years in accordance with a full-time driving requirements. a data element for passenger count was added because we have little information about how many people actually use taxis; that was the issue of regulatory interest as transportation planners to try to find out not just how many trips are being taken but also how many passengers are being transported by this mode of transportation.i think the only new element is the requirement to report in real-time, a feature needed in order to allow the data to coordinate with something that could push it out to app developers. >> so the only new information being required under this

proposal isn't required currently, the number of passengers and trips? >> if you wouldn't mind passing a copy of the legislation, i want to be specific about which element is new. the passenger count was already there; it is problematic because it obviously can't be automatically collected by a meter, that's the one thing that would require some manual entry. the other element that is new, on page 60, starts paragraph number two, integration with electronic taxi access system. this first create the requirement of the dispatch service permit holder implements the system or extend an existing system in order to integrate the electronic trip data and electronic taxi access system that we are trying to develop, and the data elements that are listed

are both made available in real time with a little bit of specifics about where and at what point the data is collected. that has not changed any of the data that was required to be collected under the electronic trip data requirement that have been around for a couple of years now. >> to clarify director hienicke, a through k, on pages 59 and 60, you will find the exact same items being struck from the previous section and page 53. it is exactly the same items that you previously approved that are currently logged to be provided. we are changing the requirement, the provider from the color scheme to the dispatch service. as director -- said,

adding the real-time requirement to make the application work. >> and the real-time requirement, not all of this information is going to have to be entered in real-time by a taxicab driver, the number of passengers, what else is a driver going to have to enter? >> the only thing the driver would enter is a number of passengers, and using the vehicle number. (overlapping speakers) whether a vehicle is available or hired as a status of legal information that would have to be pushed out of the system so the system can know whether to offer that vehicle. >> may be the most important information. okay, i know me to conclude the discussion. i appreciate the answer and i suspect director lee will have

follow-ups. my biggest question, which discloses a position that i have held for over a year now, would this proposal in adopting this now preclude us from doing something we have talked about an hour workshop at numerous meetings? of having a credit card dispatch system whereby people sign up, and they are held on the hook with their credit card account. if they blow off a call, the driver knows they can take this call because it is credit card, essentially using credit cards and preregistration to get the liability for drivers and customers that is the core of the uber model. it's not in here -- we have people talk about it -- my question is, why not put it in here?

and if not which may be a little bit late to do, it is something that we can develop relatively soon? again my personal preference being to have a rather open-ended rule that allows the companies in the app to design this the way they think best, basically allowing credit card registration, pretrip information, and dispatch premiums as well as blown call penalties. >> we would not be precluded from setting up that kind of system. in fact it might be something that would be addressed in terms and conditions with the app providers that use the data, we want you for many of charging, that the meter rates deregulated so that everybody can have equal access to the same transportation so we would want to make sure that remains true while still creating a space for a private app developer

to have some economic returns, otherwise there would be no reason for them to enter this market at all. what you see before you is our first foundation for the system, but we need to go back and examine the fare structure in light of the popular suggestion among drivers the customers be allowed to prepay or pre-offer payment to ensure the taxi driver not matter whether the customer can be found, that the taxi driver is guaranteed some return for making the effort to service that order. >> i am glad that is not precluded. again i would express my strong personal support -- i think some taxicab drivers for that idea -- i will save the pontificating for later. >> thank you for saving the pontificating.

>> it's st. joseph's day. >> in terms of the idea that we are opening this information up for the marketplace to develop an app or a series of apps, and let the best man win so to speak, it is something we are all excited about. what are the next steps available for us to make sure that this information does result in better taxi service for our city? >> next steps, that harkens back to one of my mottos in this job, one foot in front of the other. we have not gotten through most of the contracting process, we have established this regulatory framework; we are very anxious to get this underway in a short period of time and that is reflected in the schedule that we have for the contract. we are of the americas cup coming up, and we certain you would like

to highlight the service in a timely way as and as it possibly can. and as you also heard from many people today business is tough out there. all customer interest aside there is an urgency getting this deployed for the members of the taxi industry who would like to have more access the business opportunities. >> i think in short we expect to be executing a contract as a result of that competitive process with the company to create the virtual hub, with these regulations in place. we would have the means of feeding the data to that hub and from there the process to be as short as 60 days? >> that's the goal. >> and at that point the data would be available for developers; the technology,

already exists. it could be an existing app maker who plugs in and goes from 700 cabs to 1700 cabs; it could be a new player. that part we would not control the timeline but given what we have seen in terms of the demand for this kind of way to access transportation, and we're fairly confident that that would happen fairly quickly. >> mine is quick. director heinicke covered most of the things i want to talk about. thank you for the research; you have made a lot of progress. congratulations to you and your staff. >> thank you. >> i want to go back to mr. -- made the point when he invested a lot of money in apps, i think director reiskin said,

even if they invested in apps, they can be used in open architecture. have you taken into consideration what is out there? >> it is appropriate to allow companies that have a pride in their brand, to develop their own apps; if they want to offer and app with only their taxis, we should allow that exist. we don't want to interfere with that brand. we want people to be able to get taxis a lot easier than they can today. >> nothing precludes luxor or yellow to create their own proprietary app. we can have a larger app

repository, right? >> correct. >> i'm comfortable with the data transferred to the system; sounds like the feedback that ms. mcguire and uber, that responsibility rests with the developers of the app, flywheel or taxi magic; that is feedback that needs to go to the driver when they choose which app when they choos e which app they will work with on there end, that is up to them? >> no. >> in terms of sending a vehicle number or badge? >> the situation which ms. mcguire refer to is a function of the flywheel app,

it identify the driver by name at one point; they have evolved the app; then now to define the driver by a name, at one point it was a nickname. part of the data that comes out of the dispatch system is what driver is behind the wheel, but apart from that there is no driver personal information coming through unless the app provider puts it out there and again that is something we address the terms and conditions. >> is and that the issue? if they are in industry, privacy concerns about some of the information we would put in our terms and conditions of the app provider, you cannot put commissioner maguires name in a way that the customer or police officer would see it. that is something that should be addressed in the contract design stage.

my point would be that since we will be holding that information, and really our only control with what the app designer does is to the terms and conditions is i urge to be sensitive to the issues the drivers are raising and include that in the terms and conditions so that these apps are not free to use however they see fit. >> that would apply to the customer data as well. >> we would control for the design of the portal what information is getting sent out to the app developer; it may be that this a-k data elements, not all of it is necessary for the dispatch service; it won't get to the app developers in the first place depending on how we set it up

so we want to suppress driver names , two different levels. >> this application does not mandate; as we develop the terms and conditioners i ask you to be sensitive and provide information that is truly needed by dispatch or for regulatory purpose. >> thank you. >> first off, i want to thank you for all of the work that you do for the industry. you are doing a great job. don't take my questions wrong. i do support the citywide application. maybe what i'm looking at is something of a simplified version. when you uphold the data, you can have the information here, all the calls that we have in, but you still have to know who is the driver closest to that location so you will still have them on gps or smart phone.

that is my personal hangup. i would making it harder for ourselves? should you be an easier application? when i log on, i am such and such and identify where you are. the reason support this is the fact that when you look at taxi magic and all the applications out there yes we have those but the problem is we still lost market share. how do we regain market share? you fight fire with fire, that is why i support it. >> i want to thank director -- for all your hard work and i agree with what director lee said, we are going to compete with the models out there; we have to be up with the times and technology. i have the taxi magic app, i have used it. when i was waiting for my cab i saw a desoto cab,

i could have abandoned the taxi magic all. the reality is that we have to evolve with technology and with the handset. that being said, i support this and happy to move forward. >> chairman nolan: is there a motion on the amended resolution? >> motion to approve. >> i would be happy to second and throw a few comments. >> will get the pontificating after all. >> could not resist. this is for the members of the public. a lot of what we have heard today isn't about this application; a lot of what we heard about his frustration about uber and other things that are being provided but in a way this application is a response to that.

it is my firm belief that the best way to compete with and neutralize these threats to the cab industry is to build a better app. there are several issues at play; the number of cabs and supply, not before us today; there is reliability and i continue to be a strong proponent for the premium dispatch, preregistration akin to what uber has, so the driver knows there will be someone at the end of the call and vice versa the customer knows they will show up. the third element is enforcement; we heard a lot of calls about enforcement for uber and sidecar. we also heard complaints about taxi zones, hotels owns, illegal town cars. it is in our jurisdiction to enforce. i'm glad to hear there are four more inspectors. (applause) but today, i think the best thing we can do

is let people know that there is a cap system out there that is less expensive than these other situations and we are going to make it more efficient and reliable. i am happy to second it. i will end my pontificating. i will give my congratulations to director reiskin and haiashi to push it through. >> chairman nolan: all those in favor? opposed? >> motion to conduct a close session. >> item 13,

>> chairman nolan: we are back from the closed session. >> it is appropriate to have a motion to disclose or not disclose. >> chairman nolan: all those in favor? opposed? we have a motion not to disclose. thank you very much. >> the garden contains plants referred to by william

shakespeare's plays and poems. located near the academy of sciences, shakespeare's garden was designed in 1928 by the california spring and wild flower association. here is a truly enchanting and tranquil little garden tucked behind the path of a charming rot iron gate with romantic magic. the overarching cherry trees, the gorgeous big walkway and brick wall, the benches, the rustic sun dial. the pack picnic, lovely bench, enjoy the sunshine and soft breeze and let the

. >> golden gate parks largest body of water ska great labor for scrolling and picnicking and both miking which can both be rented at the boat house and the lakewood design for leisure boatings and carriages and a treasure trove passing hunting ton water falls two bridges connect the strawberry island and inclient to the hills the