requirements that they imposed but there are training requirements and driver requirements such as there were some, and there was some specificity that could not appear like age and that sort of thing. >> through the chair, you mentioned san francisco tiny 49 square mile geography and the limited number or the amount of space and so how many cabs are in existence and how many are on the street at any time and then also, what are your best estimates of the uber type of tncs like the number on the streets at any time and the number of vehicles that may be licensed to be tnc, type of vehicles >> this may be, and puts and, that is the crux of one of my issues with this whole situation is that we have no way of knowing that, there is no mechanism by which we will

be entitled to find out how many drivers or vehicles are on the street at any particular time from the tnc fleet. >> so for cabs, i know that you can definitely know this and how can you protect the public safety when you don't know how many of these private vehicles are going to be used for new year's eve or for a key time? how can we protect the public safety if we don't know those numbers. if i asked the state government for one thing to control these vehicles, it would be control

over the numbers. some are saying that the taxi drivers are losing about 15 dollars per shift or even more as the number of these private personal vehicles are increasing on the street, but do you know the impact on the taxi industry right now from the huge rise in these type of private vehicles on the streets? >> i can tell you that companies are starting to hand back the medallions because they cannot afford the shifts or maintain the vehicles, 25 percent of the wheelchair accessible fleet is no longer in operation because the companies kanlt afford because they have migrated over to the tmc, and we have adopted a number of incentives to try to get the cab drivers back into a ramp accessible vehicles, but that is at a public cost, that is public money that is going

to insensitivize that, because, we have got to get the drivers back from the tncs. and then i know from your previous to get it accessible to the people as well and that seems like another piece of the puzzle as well. >> and we have begun the initiatives to part to market to the public to remind the people that they can hail the taxis by the smart phones and flywheel is the one that has the most taxis. on the system, these are two

ads that i found in craig's list just one day and they are popping up all over the place where you can lease a tnc vehicle, and here is one, where the vehicle owner offers to loan it out to other people, so that this creates the risk of the situation, and where you have a tnc vehicle, but you don't know who is driving it. >> wheelchair vehicles are extremely expensive and they are mechanically vulnerable because they are after market modification to add a ramp to an existing van.

whether they will require a wheelchair accessible vehicle or those with disabilities and by september 19th, 2015, actually, that is the error, that is 2014, and the one year before the initial decision, they must report how many customers requested the wheelchair service and how often that was provided and that should be an interesting report because, to date, if there is one that is all there is, if you are somebody who has a personal vehicle who is wheelchair accessible, then you need that and it is not going to put it into service so that it will make down and be more expensive. >> do the puc regulations in any way, provide any protection to anyone who needs the

wheelchair accessibility? >> well it is by protection, you mean universal, accessibility? no. if they don't want to take a dog they don't have to take a service animal. and so that is one of the reasons why it is so important to protect the taxi industry, as a form of transportation that needs to be available to people, universally in san francisco. >> the other interesting thing is that it was probably an oversight is that the decision says that the tnc vehicles may not be significantly modified from factory specifications which i believe was intended to

avoid the use of stretch limo or vehicles but also has the effect of prohibiting the use of after market mode identified wheelchair accessible vans. >> sorry a technical difficulty. >> and so i think that you have copies of the slides so i am just going to speak from my copy so that we don't lose the thread here. so, in san francisco, in 2013, the wheelchair service that was provided by taxis declined by more than half and it started at 1400 trips a month and went down to fewer than 600 trips per month and we really consider that a crisis of wheelchair transportation

service and in order to maintain that we ponied up a public subsidy for the drivers who pick up the wheelchair customers that has a value of $20 per trip. >> supervisor yee do you have a question? >> just a quick clarification, the number of rides provided for wheelchair accessibility, decreased by i am just wondering whether, the calls or the demands for maintaining the same, or... >> well, is there a correspondence with the calls coming in. >> i don't know that i have the data to measure that. but i think there is some folks here that in wheelchairs that who may want to speak to that, but to some extent i think that someone in a wheelchair probably decides to make other kinds of arrangements when they find that one type of service has just become so unreliable

and you just stay home or find a friend or make other plans. >> so as i mentioned earlier as well, 25 percent of our 100 wheelchair taxis are not in service today because the companies cannot atowered to operate them unless the drivers appear, and there used to be a surplus of drivers and now, every company is complaining that they don't have enough drivers to fill their shifts not only with the wheelchair accessible vehicles but the other vehicles as well. and another issue that has been raised about the cpuc's decision is that it allows removable trade dress, when that i cans it possible to remove the adisha of being a tnc and this could be done in the event of a collision if you are trying to convince your personal insurance carrier that you are not acting for hire at the time and, it could also be an advantage at the airport where you are not allowed to

pick up, but you could take your trade dress off and pick up any way, if there is no, semipermanent like a bumper sticker or a window decal skaition that it is a tnc vehicle we don't know that it is the same vehicle that was inspected according to the cpuc's rules that is part of the problem. and the vehicle inspections were required, there is a 19 point vehicle inspection that is required to be conducted but the cpc's decision does not specify by whom it must be conducted either by the tnc or by a licensed facility. and but if the tnc decides to do it in house, then there is really no control over who within the tnc is conducting that inspection. and the cpuc's decision does require that the inspection records be maintained in the event that the cpuc conducts post audits of compliance with

that particular requirement. and discrimination was another big subject during the cpuc's hearings because the tnc drivers are freely allowed to pick up who they want. and the drivers can rate the passengers but the pcup says that they are not allowed to discriminate either to deny service or base it on origin of religion, sex, or sexual orientation and age and, identity. i think that is a noble sentiment, but i don't know how that is going to be enforced it is a very subjective thing and so, that is a difficult point, i think. and the tncs are required to report this in september again i think this is 2014, how many

rides were requested and how many rides were not accepted by the zip codes and so that will be the performance measure at the end of the year to see how many rides were requested by zip code and in that zip code, how many of those rides were not actually provided? so, there is a number of reports that are due to the cpuc. and the difficulty from my perspective about this reporting requirement is that it really amounts to self-regulation because if i just asked the taxi industry to send me a report, when they violate something, then, i don't think that i would be very effective. but, the reports that are required, are the number of drivers down to the committed violations or who have been suspended and the zero tolerance and the out comes of

investigation, and each accident or other incident which is not defined and that involves the tnc driver and was reported to the tnc and the cause and the amount paid to any party in each incident and the date and time and the amount paid by the driver's insurance and the tnc's insurance and any other source. the average and mean number of hours, driven by each tnc driver, so i guess, at the end of the year, we will start to see some actual documentation or at least self-reported documentation, and how many drivers and vehicles we have. >> is there any regulation on how many drivers can work for, you know? can they work for, you know a very extended period of time? according to the cpc decision, no regulation of hours driven and i believe that it will come under the state law, and they are prohibited from driving more than ten hours at a time

more than a certain period of rest. there is nothing that says more than 60 hours each. >> and could you take a break in there. >> under the state law? >> under the existing. >> not only, nothing that addresses the driving hours in the cpc decision and also there is absolutely no way to monitor that. >> okay. >> thank you >> can you tell us how they are regulated verses how the taxi drivers are regulated. >> before you become a taxi driver you have to get a criminal background check, which as i mentioned covers your entire adult life and as well as a ten year, dmv history and the tnc, driver will be screened for 7 years, based on

social security number and background check and whereas your ting engineer print and i believe that it is a three year, dnb history and there is a training requirement, but, the tncs are only required to report what training that they are given. or giving. and there is not any specific requirements, we have designed very specific requirements for our taxi schools and what vehicle code sections they need to cover and how much time they need to spend on traffic safety and how many time they need to spend on geography and those do not apply to the tncs. >> the taxis have a camera in them and that is designed to protect the driver against crime. and so that i think is an important difference in safety and it protects the passenger

as well. and so, if, it helps to document things so that we can know what happened and take appropriate disciplinary action, for example. >> and we also have a disciplinary structure and the taxi industry, and so that if the driver, and they do violate the regulation and we have progressive discipline and the driver has due process and eventually, we have systems in place, to take the driver out of service under certain circumstances and of course

>> can you tell me about the fees that are required for the taxi drivers verses the tnc and are there, besides the fees, are there taxes that are paid, can you talk a little bit about that? >> well, taxi drivers all pay business tax to the city, and tnc drivers who are doing exactly the same activity, >> in addition, new drivers pay an application fee or they pay for the criminal background check and they pay renewal fees

and the people who operate, the taxi medallions have paid a quarter of a million and this fiscal year alone that is 30 million of the new revenue, to the sfmta and the holders pay a stiff fee that i believe is about 1500 dollars a year. >> and i would have to say that the largest burden to the taxi industry, is the cost of insurance. and we require, that all taxi drivers be covered by the worker's compensation insurance and that is incredibly expensive but everybody has it in place, and the lack of level

playing field between the tncs and the taxi industry. >> if we are talking about that, we will talk about the tens of million of dollars, from the taxi industry to the city, how does that compare to what the tnc pays the city or the state?

they are authorized for the proof of arrangement to ask to see the phone that was booked for the trip and if there is a lot of white space on that page that is because that is the only thing that the local, authorities are allowed to do, under the cpuc's decision. >> i have been part of a monthly phone call with my colleagues and counter parts all over the country and even over the world, to talk about what is developing in different cities, and the cities that have more experience with it, are often contacted by cities where these services are new. and so, we have been talking a lot about, you know, what the issues are and how we should respond, and so, i know that tncs are actually prohibited in new york city, and austin, and new orleans and portland and miami and detroit and philadelphia.

and the other jurisdictions where they have appear are scratching their heads and trying to figure out where and how to regulate the service and particularly to insurance and that is happening in boston, chicago, and washington, d.c., and georgia, denver, and dallas and houston and pittsburgh and happening all over the country and i am hopeful that there will be coordination among the state and local governments, on this issue. and so that we don't end up with a huge patch work of different regulations and every single town and city. seattle was among the first to act, and just within the last couple of weeks, adopted regulations that limit each tnc company to a fleet of 150 vehicles, it requires primary commercial insurance, and it requires permanent trade dress and it requires a $50,000 permit application fee and so that has been hopeful i think, to a lot of other cities to

start to see, an example of regulatory options. >> and that concludes my slide presentation. >> i think that supervisor yee had a question? >> yes, this last part of the presentation is helpful and because that is to the last was going to say what can we do? and i am just wondering, in regards to what, these, different jurisdictions have done and are there challenges to what they have done. >> there is an interesting collection of legal challenges among the most interesting is that in the city of chicago, that a group of taxi drivers, sued the city government for failing, to regulate, tncs. and i know that others here have read that decision and i have not had an opportunity yet, and then, the other lawsuits for unfair competition, again, by industry representatives, and there have

been some liability lawsuits, against tnc companies which have been reported in the press, those are the extent of the litigation that i am aware of. >> okay. >> so because, actually i was interested in seattle, because it is so new, we don't know whether anybody is going to challenge this or not. >> i am certain that the tncs are doing everything that they can in seattle to change that result, and because it is essentially ends their business model which is to operate without the cost of regulation. and so, i would guess that there is a lot of lobbying happening in seattle right now and i don't know that there will be a lawsuit. and there might be. >> okay. >> and the other question that i would have is because you are so, tied into these issues at every level it seems like. what do you think the chances of california's puc to take

maybe a stronger stance in the regulatory piece of this? so that we don't have to go after these local type of regulation? s >> we did reserve the jurisdiction to reopen the hearings a year after the decision so that we could see, you know, what actually happens on the ground, and so there will be an opportunity to address the cpuc again, to ask them to revisit some of these issues. but that is the other reason why i am happy that the board is holding this hearing, because i think that we should have this discussion locally, and then, raise it to the state about what we want to see, come out of this process. >> yeah, i think that was my last sort of question, what can we do, locally to influence the state? >> well, it occurs to me that if the board were to pass a resolution, urging the state to take certain measures, that would probably be very helpful at least it would be a clear communication, from, you know,

unified jurisdiction that we have local preferences about how all of this comes out. >> supervisor mar? >> yeah, i just wanted to ask if you could briefly summarize the seattle pilot that was just passed i believe on february 27th by their city council so it looks like there is a pilot program. and there are caps of the vehicles from the company on the street at any one time, could you just summarize what the city council in seattle passed? that is the best that i can do is the things that were the most compelling to me was the cap on the number of vehicles, the permanent visible and disha on a vehicle. and primary commercial insurance and if that is all that we achieved, this will actually, this could be a way that everybody can live together in the same sand box, in fact, if the tncs can

survive under that kind of a business model it actually could be a helpful kind of pique time transportation service but right now it is completely unmanaged as far as the level of supply and demand. >> thank you so much >> thank you. >> i appreciate it. >> the next speaker is marsha from the public utility commission and i would say that we did invite uber and lift and other tmcs to come today, and i would like to ask if any of those reps are here and i would invite them up after miss safar as well. >> and good morning, and my name is marzia, and i am director of policy and planning division, for the california public utilities commission. and i think that miss hayashi touched on a lot of the rules and regulations so i will quickly give you an overview and take your q,&a. the california public utility

commissions began to review in december 26012, however these companies were already in operation before our review began but i am not sure about all of them but i think that lift and uber were definitely in place before december, 2012. and the commission's goal in stepping in was not to pick winners or losers or protect a form of business and rather our goal was to establish the consumer protection rules and promote safety of consumers and i think that local government as well as the legislature could have easily stepped in ahead of us as well and the spot that we were excited to step in and see, we will take and we will take over this. >> and in as an indication of that, when we finalize our decision, in september, 2013 ten months later in the decision on page 2, the commission said that while the commission adopts these rules and regulations, and it will

also look for further guidance from the state legislature, should it decide that there is a need for legislation to provide guidance. and in all of you took like i said, ten months and it was a public process and we had a two-day workshop, and i think about 20 different parties participated in our proceedings. and at the end, we adopted 20 different rules and regulations for this industry and divided by between safety requirements and regulatory requirements, and among those, are briefly just mentioned a few of them. we require the criminal background check and sense we also regulate the limo industry. we require the 199 point car

inspection and we do not require the same of the limo and zero tolerance on drugs and alcohol and we have, well, we are requiring the tmc companies, on a quarterly basis, to pull or to do the dmv pronotice program to insure that the drivers do not have more than 3 points on the driving record, and since this is such a new industry, and we don't have any sort of data, to make you know, decisions based on verifiable data, we have asked tnc to report to us on a number of areas, and i think, that, miss hayashi mentions all of them, and the two main ones that we are really looking to see is that we want to see if

the dtnc don't leave behind the disabled community and that they don't only going to the rich areas of city and these reports will be due to us on september, 2014, and once we see the data, and once we have verifiable information and then i think that the commission will open phase two and begin to modify what is necessary. and we win convene that one year after the issuance of the decision and like i said by then we will have the verifiable data and i think that we felt. and as we issued the draft decision, and we opened it up for anyone who wanted to file the comments with us, and i believe that both the mayor of san francisco, and the mayor