Taxi TownSF

Taxi Drivers Could Become Extinct One Day, And Replaced By Robot Cars. So Why Bother Buying Medallions Today For $250,000? Tomorrow, They Could Be Worth Nothing. Watch The Videos Below, And You'll See! By John Han.

2012-02-27T21:00:00.099-08:00

Google Car: It Drives Itself - ABC News

Click on video.

(For entertainment purposes only. But read it anyway.)

They're coming! Google's first robotic, self-driving cars have already been, and are being tested on roads right here in San Francisco's Bay Area.

And they're testing successfully, I might add.

I'm labeling this essay uniquely as "for entertainment purposes only" because it's way too early to speculate what self-driving cars could mean in ten or twenty years, or whenever, for San Francisco's taxi industry, and for taxi industries around the world.

But consider what this following video taken from YouTube suggests about the idea of driverless TAXIS and the future... (Read an article about it HERE. Or view the video below.)

Click on video to watch.

Now, one shouldn't necessarily jump to conclusions that human taxi drivers could become completely replaced someday by self-driving taxis, or even go partially extinct anytime soon.

Or shouldn't we?

In a CNET article published in 2010 titled, "Researchers Use I-Pad To Hail Driverless Taxi" by LyaneYvkoff, it says,

"Imagine never arguing about the most efficient route or mentally debating the merits of tipping a driver whose ineptitude at the wheel almost killed you. Made in Germany (MIG) is an autonomous Volkswagen Passat cab you hail using an iPad app, and it eliminates the most unappealing aspect of taxis: the driver."

At the very least, driverless taxis should begin to raise important questions as to how self driving cars could, in time, begin to impact taxi industries around the world. And now is a better time than later to start considering it, I would think.

Especially if you are a San Francisco taxi driver and you want to make the life-long investment of buying a medallion. With driverless taxis possibly looming in the future, would you be making a reliable investment, or would you just be made a fool?

In the video below is a bit more of a comprehensive overview of Google's self driving technology. (It's almost 10 minutes long.)

Click on video to watch.

The above video says Google is a "long way" from bringing its vehicle to the consumer market. That's good for taxi drivers. It means taxi drivers can hang onto their jobs a while longer.

And, Google says its self driving car is not intended to replace human drivers, but rather, to simply improve driving. Good again. It means cab drivers will still need to be kept around to do things like load and unload luggage/cargo, assist seniors and disabled riders, and clean up vomit.

Because if driverless cars really could one day serve to replace human taxi drivers, the future in San Francisco's taxi industry could look something like this...

The City could either continue to privatize to cab companies, or it would itself own self-driving taxis, just like it owns buses, trollies, cable cars, etc., as a public transit means.

These self driving taxis would be equipped with advanced technology that could identify people on the street trying to hail them. And, they would be equipped with a uniform electronic hailing app too, so people could flag them from far away. (Consider that another valid reason to get rid of cab companies, or at least the big cab companies, since the big companies keep resisting the idea of a uniform, across the board electronic hailing app for passenger to benefit from.)

When the passenger gets in, he or she swipes a "smart card" or in San Francisco's case, a Clipper card, and then speaks their destination to the self driving vehicle. The driverless taxi automatically brings them to their destination, and at the end of the ride charges the amount to their card. The money goes directly into the MTA's revenue fund.

No rude driver refusing their credit card, and no reckless maniac! Just a clean, safe, hassle-free ride that can be prepaid with a card swipe.

Of course, science fiction has already envisioned this scenario long ago. Long ago enough, that Arnold Schwarzenegar was still a Hollywood movie star.

Remember the "Johnny Cab" scene from the movie Total Recall?

Click video to watch.

This stuff all seems pretty far out. But it's definitely possible, and even likely perhaps. But if it's for real, it's still a bit of a ways off. And we don't even know if anything will turn out the way it's planned to.

But if driverless taxis make their debut somewhere in the future, when would that be? In ten years? Twenty years? Sooner?

We won't actually know until we actually know.

But if and when it were to happen, could it affect the medallion system we have today, and the longterm value of the medallions?

Because a medallion's value lies mainly in the ability to lease it to non-medallion drivers. And if a driverless taxi industry were to emerge within say, twenty years, more or less, even if a partial driverless industry were to emerge, it may or may not alter the usefulness and value of today's medallion system.

Good thing this thought is just for entertainment purposes. Because if it wasn't, buying a medallion could be a pretty uncertain investment.

ARE YOU ON THE WAITING LIST? WAITING LIST IS GETTING KILLED. YOU CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT: CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT. By Saam Aryan.

2012-02-23T16:40:00.004-08:00

(Note from the blog's administrator - this article has been submitted to Taxi TownSF and has been published in the interest of free speech. The following views are those of its author, and not necessarily the views of the blog's publisher.)

(By Saam Aryan)

Taxi drivers are self-employed independent contractors. They do not have medical, vacation, sick leave, retirement plan, etc. Medallion waiting list was created for those that choose to have a career as taxi drivers. The extra income generated by getting a taxicab medallion would help them to pay their bills at old age; when they are not able to push themselves and work as much. This was the implied contract of the San Francisco Government.

So far, under SFMTA, 184 Taxicab Medallions has been sold with more under way. In Prop K restructuring, SFMTA agreed that for every sold medallions, they would issue one to the top of the Waiting List. If what SFMTA did was not sale than nothing has ever been sold. These medallions did not go to the top of the waiting list. Let us examine the financial impact:

Because senior drivers, now, under SFMTA, are selling their Medallions

(for disability reasons, etc.) the rate of return/year to top of the medallion waiting list is not going to be even 5 Medallion/year. Years ago, under TAXI COMMISSION, the rate could go as high as 10 Medallions/year to top of the Medallion waiting list. Using this older estimate:

184 / 10 = 18.4 years people on the list could move up the list (and not down).

If we say, medallions skipped 50% of those on the waiting list. Then we have:

2,897 people on the waiting list (list as of Sept. 20, 2011). So 2897 / 2 = 1,448.5

Say the difference between having a medallion and not having one is $20,000/year. (Though companies like for a less valuable RAMP Medallion are paying close to $27,000 and smaller companies are paying around $36,000/year).

The financial impact to half of those on the waiting list is:

$20,000 x (1,448.5 = #of people on top half of the list) x (18.4 = years, because around 50% were pushed down) = $533,048,000

This is the low-end estimate. The high-end estimate is:

$36,000 x (1,448.5 = #of people on top half of the list) x (2 = with 5 medallions to top of the list, the list would move twice as slow x18.4 = years, because around 50% were pushed down) = $1,918,972,800

As of February 23, 2012, based on my information, around 210 Medallions were sold. Making the matter worth for those on the Waiting List, SFMTA wants to keep the newly issued medallions and medallions from dead and disabled to themselves for future renting (around $2,500/month). They want to keep around 500 medallions for this purpose. If the list was moving about 5/year, this way it would come to near halt. Again, as I understand it, this is breach of contract by San Francisco Government (which SFMTA represent).

CHC-SF@LIVE.COM CHC FIGHT-CLUB, PO BOX 426742, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94142415-626-TAXI

TAXI INDUSTRY = CAB COMPANIES + DRIVERS (WITH OR WITHOUT MEDALLION).
WHAT HAPPENS IF TWO LEGS OF THE STOOL BECOME WEAK AND WITHOUT CONTROL? I BELIEVE THAT SFMTA IS MAKING DRIVERS (WITH OR WITHOUT MEDALLION) WEAKER. I BELIVE SFMTA LIKES TO HAVE THREE LAYERS:

SFMTA

CAB COMPANIES (WILL BE CONTROLING ALL DRIVERS; WITH OR WITHOUT MEDALLION)

GAS-AND-GATE DRIVERS ONLY (EVEN IF YOU BOUGHT YOUR MEDALLION, YOU HAVE TO GIVE IT TO A

CAB COMPANIE FOR SOME MONTHLY PAYMENT. EVERYBODY WOULD BE PAYING GATE FEE. YOUR

TAKE HOME MONEY COULD SHRINK AS TIME GOES BY.)

1. THIS MEANS YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OPERATE YOUR OWN BUSINESS (BUY YOUR CAR, GET YOUR INSURANCE, GET YOUR DRIVER, PAY FOR A COLOR SCHEME). YOU WOULD HAVE TO GIVE YOUR MEDALLION TO A CAB COMPANY AND YOU BECOME A GAS-AND-GATE DRIVER. YOU WOULD BE GETTING SOME MONTHLY CHECK FROM A CAB COMPANY BUT BECAUSE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THE NEGOTIATION POWER, THEY COULD GIVE YOU SMALLER CHECK IN THE FUTURE AND HAVE A HIGHER GATE FEE.

2. SFMTA WANTS 1/3 OF THE MEDALLIONS TO THEMSELVES (NOT TO THE WAITING LIST). DURING “TAXI COMMISSION”, NEWLY ISSUED MEDALLIONS AND MEDALLIONS FROM DEAD OR DISQUALIFED WOULD GO TO THE TOP OF THE WAITING LIST. SFMTA WANTS THESE MEDALLIONS. MANY WOULD HAVE TO WAIT 500 YEARS TO GET A MEDALLION.

THIS WAS NOT THE CONTRACT (IMPLIED CONTRACT) OF THE GOVERNMENT TO CAB DRIVERS. CAB DRIVERS AVERAGE $35,000/YEAR WITH NO BENEFITS WHILE MUNI AVERAGES $85,000 WITH FILL BENEFITS. MUNI ORGANIZED AND GOT IT WE MUST ORGANIZE TOO. JUST MAKING NOISES AND DEMONSTRATING IS NOT ENOUGH. WE MUST HAVE OUR OWN LAWYER FOR MARCH 6^th MEETING BY SFMTA BECAUSE THEY DO. ON SUNDAY FEBRUARY 26^TH ^,3PM WE NEED THOUSANDS TO MEET AT PIER 48. IF WE DO NOT SPEND SOME MONEY NOW WE COULD END UP LOSING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EVERY YEAR. EVERYONE SHOULD TELL TEN FRIENDS, GET THEIR NAME AND CELL PHONE, AND ASK THEM TO DO THE SAME. HOPE FOR THE BEST BUT BE READY FOR THE WORST.

URGENT

It is widely believed that … was behind the implementation process of “Back-Seat-Terminal,” “GPS based Electronic Waybill” and company based credit/debit card processing. Now, it is believed that he is for ELIMINATION OF AFFILIATES. This means that all medallion holders, which run their own business (buying the cab, doing maintenance, getting drivers, insurance, etc.), must give up their medallions to cab companies, in exchange for say $2,500/month. Because the control would be out of drivers’ hand, in the future, that might become $2,000/month, or even less. They, and all other drivers, would become GAS-AND-GATE drivers ONLY; paying the company’s gate fee.

To cab companies I say, remember that “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.” Thomas Jefferson

Why SFMTA would wants to give you all the medallions and control of all the drivers? Is it possible that, to divide the taxi industry, first SFMTA promises you what you want to hear? If this is the case then, when SFMTA defeated the taxi drivers and medallion holders, you would be in a weaker position to challenge further advances by SFMTA.

We do not have to bring the example of big government and excessive control of ex-Soviet Union, or the Red China. We already know that if those social models were workable, they would not collapse and they would not turn to free enterprise and smaller government control. We can, and should, look at the management model of SFMTA. Is there a need to say that they are sucking our money into their failed system? With more control in the hand of SFMTA, and less control in the hand of cab companies, medallion holders and cab drivers I believe that we would turn into another failed enterprise.

What can we do? On February 26^th,3PM we need thousands to meet at PIER 48. We must have enough money to hire a legal representation for March 6^th meeting by SFMTA. Joining forces is necessary. Sitting on the sideline and letting others to sweat would make us all loose. We cannot succeed with limited participation. Everyone should tell TEN friends, get their name and cell phone, and ask them to do the same. We need thousands because this is a DO OR DIE.

From SFMTA, Soccer Match At AT&T Park.

2012-02-23T10:01:00.000-08:00

When: March 17, 2012

Where: AT&T Park

What: World class soccer doubleheader

1st Match: @ 2pm, San Jose Earthquakes vs.

Houston Dynamo

2nd Match: @ 4:30pm, Mexico vs. Senegal

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

San Francisco Municipal Railway | Department of Parking & Traffic | Division of Taxis & Accessible Services

One S. Van Ness Avenue, Seventh Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 | Tel: 415.701.4400 | Fax: 415.701.5437 | www.sfmta.com

New York May Ditch Taxi TVs Because They're Bothersome, And Replace Them With 'SQUARE', From San Francisco. By John Han,.

2012-02-22T06:03:00.000-08:00

New York Taxi TV Screen

The loud, blaring Taxi TVs in New York may be so annoying to its riders, that the New York Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) is now expected to look at an alternative.

According to a New York Times article this week, the San Francisco card processing service known as “Square”, which has gained favor amongst cab drivers in San Francisco for reasonable processing rates, (and no noise), is expected to formally present its technology to the New York TLC next month.

As a pilot program, Square is proposing to replace fifty of New York's often criticized "Taxi TVs" with “similarly shaped iPads or other tablets” in the rear seats of cabs, and without the noise, according to the New York Times.

Verfione Media and Creative Mobile Technologies (CMT), two companies controlling the Taxi TV market, and who have contracts with major networks like NBC and ABC to target the industry's vast and captive audiences nationwide, have blocked Square at least once before from fraying into the New York territory.

But David Yassky, chairman of the TLC, told the New York Times, "Our job isn't to look out for the welfare of a particular company". In that article, he later added, "My job is to get the best product and technology available to taxis and passengers." The New York Times full story can be read HERE.

If approved, Square could enable passengers to swipe their cards from the back seat at any point in the cab ride, note their location, interact in social networking, and while some people (including this author) could think it a little silly, even play computer games.

But more importantly to cab drivers, Square could challenge the dominant, taxi industry practice of 5% that companies like Verifone, CMT, and others are currently charging taxi drivers all over the country for credit card fees. Square could bring the fees down to 2.75% across the board, a rate generally considered more normal for day to day businesses.

Square card processing on a smart phone

Recently, the New York Post, in an article titled, “All 'hail' the iPad. Back-seat tablets eyed for cab riders," had this to say about Square's services vs. the Taxi TVs,

“The city may ditch the blaring taxi TVs that drive passengers and cabbies nuts and replace them with iPads, officials said yesterday." (February 21, 2012)

The same New York Post story published this about Square's offer to the New York TLC.

"A private company has proposed a pilot program that would remove the current screens — which run a continuous loop of local news segments and commercials from TV stations — and install the tablet computers, city officials told The Post. It would be tried out in 50 cabs.

And in the same article, at least one New York cab driver's opinion on Square is,

“It sounds better than this,” said Orlando Morales, a cabby for two decades, as he pointed to the screen in the back of his yellow taxi.

“It’s all the same garbage over and over. It drives me nuts listening to this s--t all day long.”

Also, in New York's 'Gothamist' article dated February 21, 2012, and titled, “Forget Taxi TVs, Taxi iPads Are (Probably) Coming Soon.”, the author of that article opines,

“...don't be shocked when this program gets a green light on March 1. And don't be upset!

The program would not only mean that cabbies wouldn't have to deal with an endless loop of pithy news bites, it would also mean that passengers would be able to swipe their credit card at any time, get receipts via text or e-mail, play some games even and use a far more familiar interface than the hodgepodge currently available.”

And in a February 2011 survey of 22,000 New York taxi riders, 31.3% (over one-third) said Taxi TVs are the worst part about taking a taxi.

SFMTA Recommendations For Medallion Reform Could Have Serious Impacts. Important Information For The Taxi Industry. By John Han.

2012-02-17T17:21:00.000-08:00

The Taxi Services staff of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) has issued a draft of proposals regarding medallion reform. These drafts were presented for public discussion at town hall meetings held February 14, 2012 at One South Van Ness Ave, Second Floor Atrium.

SFMTA's draft proposals include...

Converting thirty three percent, or one-third, of the taxi fleet into “direct lease permits”. This means that over time, the SFMTA would recover roughly 500 medallions through “death”, “revocation”, and “new issue”, thus acting as the holder to these medallions, eying roughly $12 million in annual revenue, through the direct leasing system to cab companies. This may be regarded as the “corporate medallion”, or perhaps could also be referred to as a “municipal medallion”. These medallions would operate as gates and gas only.
Acknowledging medallions that have already been sold (about 210) shall remain salable. The current fixed rate being $250,000 for purchasing a medallion.
Retaining the core principles of Prop K by continuing to issue non-purchased medallions to the waiting list until the list is exhausted. And then, issue medallions by A-Card seniority.
Clean up the waiting list and cut it off around 1100.
Prohibit Affiliate leases. This means that once the life of an Affiliate lease vehicle has expired, the medallion holder would have to operate the new replacement vehicle through a company's management as a gate and gas taxi. If successful, there would ultimately be no more Affiliate taxicabs.
Not allowing Pre K medallion owners to sell, and not allowing existing corporate medallions to be sold to new buyers either. These medallions would be returned to the City over time, and in turn, issued to the waiting list presumably as non-purchased medallions.
All newly issued medallions would either be leased directly or sold by the SFMTA.

The Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA) Board of Directors is expected to consider these proposals and more, at its March 6^th, 2012 regular meeting at City Hall, Room 400 at 1pm. Public comment will be available. The proposals above are drafts and therefore, it is presumed they are subject to possible changes.

Those who cannot attend but wish to express opinions may email the Board of Directors at, MTABoard@sfmta.com

Below is a text of the draft proposals.

(Draft Staff Medallion Reform Recommendation. Town Hall Meeting, February 14, 2012)

WAITING LIST/PROP K MEDALLIONS

1325

Source: Death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified drivers by waiting list number

Timing: Continuing until waiting list is exhausted

Price: No cost

Once acquired, medallions may any medallion

holder who becomes eligible:

A person at least age 65; or
A person with a disability that prevents their meeting the driving requirement.

After the list is exhausted, reserve 100 medallions for drivers with more than 20 years experience who

will be eligible by A-Card seniority to acquire a medallion without purchase. These would continue

to circulate among this eligible population as they come back through death or revocation.

DIRECT LEASE PERMITS

(Lifetime of Vehicle )

(33% of fleet)

Source: Death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified companies

Timing: As Prop K medallions are returned and new issue

Price: $2,500/month, with $500 reduction for fulfillment of dispatch quotas.

Issues:

• What is a qualifying company?

• What is dispatch quota?

Benefits:

A stable source of revenue as a reward for well-performing companies
More good shifts for drivers (ifthere is a medallion holder they always take the good shifts)
The ability to reduce the fleet size if necessary
Company accountability
Financial incentive for improved dispatch success
SFMTA revenue

TRANSFERABLE MEDALLIONS

210

Source: Individual sellers; SFMTA sales: death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified drivers by seniority

Timing: Continuing as transferable medallions become available

Price: $250,000 +

Allow sellers to sign up on an ongoing basis when they are eligible
Keep rule that if they don't sell within a certain amount of time of offer they are no longer on seller list.
Have an annual sign-up for potential buyers. If they are higher on the list than already signed up buyers they have to wait until the list of already signed up buyers has been exhausted

Additional measures:

Clean up waiting list and cut off around 1100
Prohibit affiliate leases, grandfather existing leases for the life of the vehicle.
Keep existing driving requirement for all ages
No pre-K or corporate medallion sales - all that are returned go back to waiting list.
Interim term: all new issues split between list and leases until maximum lease ratio is reached, then all to list until list is exhausted.
Long term scenario: all newly issued medallions would either be leased directly or sold by SFMTA.

Recommendations For Medallion Reform (Conclusion of the votes). By John Han.

2012-02-16T20:08:00.000-08:00

The following pertains to San Francisco taxi medallion reform, and what kinds of policies the Taxi Advisory Council (TAC) thinks the MTA should adopt going forward with permanent medallion sales.

On February 13^th, 2012, the TAC voted on the items below, which concludes its final recommendations held over two consecutive meetings.

The members present were Ruach Graffis, Dan Hinds, Tara Housman, Richard Hybels, David Khan, Barry Korengold, Timothy Lapp, John Lazar, Tone Lee, John Han, Carl Macmurdo, William Mounsey, Athan Rebelos, and Chris Sweis.

William Minikel was absent as he no longer serves on the council, and his seat remains vacant.

Here are the votes of the council.

Category 3: Financial

1.2 [Financial] No more outright medallions sales by SFMTA

FAILED 7-7

3.2 [Financial] Reduction of SFMTA resale transaction fee to 5%.

PASSED 13-1

6.4 [Financial] Transfer fee distribution should be changed to 10% for MTA and 10% for Driver Fund.

PASSED 8-6

6.5 [Financial] All revenues genterated from the taxicab industry should be reinvested in the taxicab industry.

PASSED 14-0

7.2 [Financial] Driver Fund to be created to help with medallion purchases and subsequent healthcare for drivers. a) $50,000 payment into fund will allow permit holders to auction medallion rather than sell for fixed price.

FAILED 0-14

8.1 [Financial] Medallion prices should remain regulated at 250K with adjustments for inflation.

PASSED 10-4

8.6 [Financial] SFMTA should not have a financial interest in medallions sales.

PASSED 9-5

9.2 Permit holders pay into the driver's fund based on the type of medallion they possess.

FAILED 5-9

Category 4: Retirement

1.3 [Retirement] Reduced driving requirement with contribution to drivers fund for older or disabled permit holders.

These would also be run solely as gas and gate.
A permanent retirement decision can be made of either eliminating the driving requirement or selling the permit anytime after the age of 65.

FAILED 4-10

3.3 [Retirement] Waiver of driving requirement with commitment to sell within fixed time period.

FAILED 5-9

3.4 [Retirement] One month window annually allowing permit holders to commit to selling so heirs could sell if permit holder dies prematurely.

FAILED 6-8

3.5 [Retirement] Allowing a limited number of K permittees to retain their permit without a driving requirement after a commitment to return permit to the city upon death.

FAILED 6-8

4.1 [Retirement] Ability for K and pre K holders to purchase transfer rights by paying transfer fees in advance.

FAILED 4-10

8.4 [Retirement] Medallion holders should be given the choice between selling their permits or relinquishing it for continuing income.

FAILED 4-10

About two weeks earlier, January 30^th, 2012, the TAC voted on eighteen other votes pertaining to the “waiting list” and “operations”. Those votes can be reviewed by CLICKING HERE.

Additionally, the MTA Taxi Services Staff issued its own draft of recommendations for public discussion.

CLICK HERE to view the first page of those drafts.

CLICK HERE to view the draft's second page. (Images are scanned and can be printed for easier viewing.)

The draft recommendations on these two pages indicate whether MTA Taxi Services Staff currently agrees with the TAC's recommendations, disagrees, or considers an item non-applicable for now.

These draft were presented for public discussion at town hall meetings held Tuesday, February 14^th, 2012.

On March 6, 2012, the MTA Board of Directors, at its regular meeting, is expected to consider the proposals for medallion reform.

As of the time of this writing, information is not yet publicly posted on the MTA's website as to whether the Board will be likely to vote on the proposals, or whether it will only discuss the proposals, and then vote on them at a following March 20^th meeting.

Below is the text of a third page issued by MTA Taxi Services Staff titled, "Draft Staff Medallion Reform Recommendation. Town Hall Meeting, February 14, 2012".

It is important to note the implications and potential impacts of these draft recommendations.

WAITING LIST/PROP K MEDALLIONS

1325

Source: Death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified drivers by waiting list number

Timing: Continuing until waiting list is exhausted

Price: No cost

Once acquired, medallions may any medallion

holder who becomes eligible:

A person at least age 65; or
A person with a disability that prevents their meeting the driving requirement.

After the list is exhausted, reserve 100 medallions for drivers with more than 20 years experience who

will be eligible by A-Card seniority to acquire a medallion without purchase. These would continue

to circulate among this eligible population as they come back through death or revocation.

DIRECT LEASE PERMITS

(Lifetime of Vehicle )

(33% of fleet)

Source: Death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified companies

Timing: As Prop K medallions are returned and new issue

Price: $2,500/month, with $500 reduction for fulfillment of dispatch quotas.

Issues:

• What is a qualifying company?

• What is dispatch quota?

Benefits:

A stable source of revenue as a reward for well-performing companies
More good shifts for drivers (ifthere is a medallion holder they always take the good shifts)
The ability to reduce the fleet size if necessary
Company accountability
Financial incentive for improved dispatch success
SFMTA revenue

TRANSFERABLE MEDALLIONS

210

Source: Individual sellers; SFMTA sales: death, revocation, new issue

Eligible: Qualified drivers by seniority

Timing: Continuing as transferable medallions become available

Price: $250,000 +

Allow sellers to sign up on an ongoing basis when they are eligible
Keep rule that if they don't sell within a certain amount of time of offer they are no longer on seller list.
Have an annual sign-up for potential buyers. If they are higher on the list than already signed up buyers they have to wait until the list of already signed up buyers has been exhausted

Additional measures:

Clean up waiting list and cut off around 1100
Prohibit affiliate leases, grandfather existing leases for the life of the vehicle.
Keep existing driving requirement for all ages
No pre-K or corporate medallion sales - all that are returned go back to waiting list.
Interim term: all new issues split between list and leases until maximum lease ratio is reached, then all to list until list is exhausted.
Long term scenario: all newly issued medallions would either be leased directly or sold by SFMTA.

MTA's Plans For Future Improvements To Taxi Service, (Recapping Monday's Supervisors' Committee Meeting.) By John Han.

2012-02-09T12:53:00.000-08:00

File photo by John Han

Last Monday, February 6, 2012, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) reported to the Land Use and Economic Development Committee, its plans to improve taxi services in the City.

It is the first of what is expected to be quarterly reports from the transportations agency regarding taxi service in the City.

Supervisor Scott Wiener, during the meeting, said two things necessary to improve taxi service are increasing the number of available cabs and improving dispatch service.

And while the SFMTA seems to agree on those needs for improvements, it did not ignore the complexities of the taxi industry.

“The taxi industry in San Francisco and anywhere is extremely complex,” said SFMTA Director Ed Reiskin. “There a lot of different viewpoints, often divergent.”

Nonetheless, the SFMTA has a general plan to address both increasing the number of cabs, improving dispatch, and more.

SFMTA's Deputy Director of Taxi Services Christiane Hayashi revealed a somewhat comprehensive outline of what the agency plans for in the near future.

Serious Consideration Of Corporate Medallions:

Christiane stated on behalf of the SFMTA,

“Along the way people have asked us, companies in particular have asked us, to give a number of permits, temporary permits to the companies so that they could operate those vehicles without a medallion holder involved.

And that's something that we're seriously considering.”

Electronic Waybills:

SFMTA is currently drafting legislation to require electronic data collection across the industry.

“We think that will provide a very good beginning for the kind of quantifiable data that everybody needs to see in order to measure whether we're improving or not”, Hayashi stated.

Best Practices Study:

SFMTA has retained Hara Associates, a Canadian consulting firm to advise the SFMTA, and provide analytical data such as passenger surveys, which the agency says is lacking in comprehensive studies.

The Best Practices Study also calls for interviewing industry stakeholders deeply affected by taxi service, such as hotel and restaurant associations, other merchant groups, City supervisors, and the taxi industry itself. And, to establish performance standards not only for the industry, but for the regulators also.

There is to be a comparative study with regards to how other cities approach taxi issues, and a convenience and necessity study to help determine supply and demand, and meter rates.

Peak Time Demands And Single Operator Taxis:

Chris Hayashi stated on behalf of the SFMTA,

“All of the medallions that exist today are required to work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. This doesn't help our peak time service issues, because during the peak times you will never have enough taxis.

But if you over supply in order to address the peak time taxi demand, then you're going to have too many taxi in times when perhaps there's not enough demand. Or at least that's a consideration.

So that's why we're trying this limited program of 50 additional part time permits.”

Wheelchair Passenger Service:

This is the Paratransit debit card system. The SFMTA says the debit cards allow the agency to better monitor Paratransit patterns and the number of wheelchair pickups.

The agency considers the electronic method an improvement over the paper method, citing that the old way encouraged too much fraud.

It says that money saved from not having to investigate as much fraud is being invested back into the Paratransit service as incentives for Ramp Taxi drivers to pick up more wheelchair passengers.

5 Year Capital Plan:

SFMTA has included two projects in its 5 year plan.

Uniform Top Lights: Currently, there is no “off duty” light, or way for drivers to effectively communicate to passengers who are trying to flag them, that they're en route to a phoned-in dispatch service, or are turning in off shift. This is to subsidize new top lights that can signify that a cab is available or unavailable without having to turn off the meter.

Electronic Taxi Hailing: A real time, electronic, GPS based platform allowing passengers to hail cabs directly using a desktop computer, laptop, smart phone, etc.

Christiane Hayashi stated on behalf of the MTA,

“We have no intention of bypassing the existing dispatch services that have already built up their telephone business. We think that this will provide just sort of an overlay that will still allow customers to choose their taxi companies, but would give the customers the ability to find taxis that are actually available by communicating with the drivers on a more one on one basis.”

My comment – This would allow the taxi industry to compete with the growing popularity of Uber, and would allow passengers the convenience they seek through Uber, to be available in more affordable taxi service.

Dispatch Accountability:

This is to measure the success or failure rate of dispatch services as to how promptly, or whether or not, passengers get into cabs they called for, and then reward dispatch services for good performance.

It's also to measure how well dispatch services pick up the phones in the first place. The idea, obviously, is to ensure that passengers who call for cabs actually get them, then get inside of them, and arrive at their destination.

There is only one minor problem with this, and it is minor. But it still may be worth mentioning. And it is that the transportation code doesn't necessarily define dispatch services as accountable to the SFMTA's goal.

Transportation Code Section 1102(i) defines a “Dispatch Service” as...

“(i) "Dispatch Service" shall mean any person, business, firm, partnership, association or corporation that receives communications from the public regarding taxi service for the purpose of forwarding such communications to motor vehicle for hire drivers, and shall include any owner, manager, employee, lessee and any agent of said service. "Dispatch Service" shall not include any service through which the public is able to communicate directly with Drivers, and shall not include any effort on the part of a Driver to market his or her services to the public.”

(SFMTA Transportation Code Division II, Article 1100, Section 1102(i))

The part that may be inconsistent with the SFMTA's goal, is where it defines “Dispatch Service” as entities that,

“ receives communications from the public regarding taxi service for the purpose of forwarding such communications to motor vehicle for hire drivers”.

It seems to define dispatch services as an information referral service only. In other words, dispatch services are only obliged, by definition of the transportation code, to forward the passengers' requests to cab drivers.

So to measure performance based on this standard would only involve measuring how well the dispatch service picks up, or doesn't pick up the phone, and relays information from passengers to drivers.

That obviously is worth measuring.

But dispatch services do not seem obliged by the transportation code to ensure, or instruct the drivers to actually go get the orders, once and if the information has been successfully relayed by the dispatch.

To define dispatch services as accountable to that function could make the dispatch service a “taxi service provider”.

As many know, there are subtle tax reasons why cab companies, and their respective dispatch services do not want to be classified as “taxi service provider”.

They prefer to be defined as “leasing agents”, or, “taxi related services” that market services to taxi drivers, since “taxi service provider” would oblige them to service the public ridership.

If their primary function were defined by the City as being in service to the City's public ridership, that would put them in the same category of business, as the cab drivers that they hire to do the work.

For those who may not know, this could contribute to construal by government agencies at the state level, as cab companies hiring employees to perform the company's taxi services, but deliberately misclassifying them as independent contractors to avoid paying taxes, and other responsibilities.

Other items:

Other plans outlined include -

Improved driver training, including retraining for experienced drivers. The SFMTA says it hopes to implement retraining around June of this year, and would involve sensitivity training for seniors, disabled riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
The SFMTA is drafting legislation to revise its credit card policy, saying it wants to reduce the 5% credit card fee to something more comparable to what other merchants pay. It also mentioned the passage of the Frank/Dodd Act, but did not say whether it, for now, would authorize a minimum on credit card fares.
Improving the 311 system when passengers complain about drivers.

The video archive of the meeting is available at SFGovTv. CLICK HERE to view the video.

San Francisco Boasts The Greenest Taxi Fleet In The United States. By John Han.

2012-02-08T19:08:00.000-08:00

Paul Gillespie of Yellow Cab and former president of the SF Taxi Commission speaks at

a press conference held at Yellow Cab announcing the taxi industry has

met its goal to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the background

from left to right - SF Mayor Ed Lee, Lieutenant Gov. of California and former SF Mayor

Gavin Newsom, and Sal Castaneda, traffic reporter for KTVU News.

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, taxi industry representatives, and environmental departments announced Wednesday that the City's taxi industry has succeeded in its goal to significantly reduce the industry's greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

The “Green Taxi Ordinance”, that went into effect in 2008, requires San Francisco's taxi industry to bring its GHG emissions down by 20 percent of the levels they were at in 1990. And the law requires that the goal be achieved by 2012.

Mayor Ed Lee spoke at the press conference, saying that in 1990, the average taxi-vehicle in San Francisco emitted 59 tons of GHG emissions per year.

Today, the average taxi is estimated to emit about 30 tons per year, since 92 percent of the Cit's fleet is now made up of hybrids or CNGs (Compressed Natural Gas). That's a reduction of 49%, and is said to make San Francisco's taxis the greenest fleet in the country.

“It is equivalent of taking out some 6,890 cars off the highway on an annual basis,” Lee said, adding that cab drivers combined, save an estimated $11 million in fuel costs per year.

Paul Gillespie.

Paul Gillespie of Yellow Cab, and former president of the San Francisco Taxi Commission, pioneered the shift towards alternative fuel vehicles beginning as far back as 1997.

“I think we're about a third of the way there,” said Gillespie. “We've got a first generation of clean taxis. I think there's going to be a next generation of clean taxis. And hopefully, in a very short period of time, we'll have a zero emission taxi.”

San Francisco taxis spewed out about 70,000 tons of GHG emissions in 1990, according to Gillespie. That was with a total 821 taxis operating that year. By 2007, he says GHG emissions rose to an estimated 110,000 tons per year, as the number of taxis increased over time.

However, Gillespie says that since 2008, after the Green Taxi Ordinance went into effect, there has been a drop in GHG pollution. He estimates that today, GHG emissions are at 55,000 tons.

There are currently 1500 taxis in San Francisco, with 87 more expected to be issued this year, including 50 part time "single operator" cabs.

Below are more quotes from the press conference.

Ed Reiskin, Director of San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.

“In order for Transit-First to work in San Francisco we need excellent taxi service. Because as much as we'd like to see you hop on Muni, or hop on your bike, or walk to get where you need to go, sometimes you need a car.

And from a transportation perspective, the most efficient and effective way for us to be able to meet that need, one of them is through taxicabs.”

Gavin Newsom, Lieutenant Governor of California, and former Mayor of San Francisco.

“This is a win-win-win for everybody. The cab drivers themselves are the beneficiaries of lower gas costs, cab companies are the beneficiaries of lower maintenance costs, and the citizens of the City are beneficiaries of dramatic reductions of greenhouse gas emissions and enjoy a much more sustainable environment.”

David Chiu, President of San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

“There are many things that we still need to fix in the taxicab world. And I do hope that it is through a model of ideas from taxicab drivers from the industry working with City officials to make sure that San Francisco, that we are leading the way when it comes to taxis in America... taxis in the United States.”

Melanie Nutter, Director of San Francisco Department of the Environment.

“Our department staff worked with the Taxi Commission and the cab companies to create the Green Taxi Ordinance that you've heard referred to today. This collaboration resulted in a performance standard requiring that taxi companies achieve overall emission reductions each year, without mandating specific car models.

As long as each companies fleet met the required performance standard at an average level of greenhouse gas reductions each year, they could choose the mix of vehicles that best suits them.

Secondarily regarding education, we created the Green Taxi Vehicle Guide, to help all taxi companies throughout the City identify the cars that they could buy that would meet their required fleet averages.

And then finally we also worked using a tool... specifically... incentives. We were able to work with the Air District as well as the County Transportation Authority to secure grants to incentivize the purchase of hybrid vehicles by taxi companies, in order to achieve the level of emission reductions that would meet the overall goal

Jack Broadbent, CEO of Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

“At the Air District we provided a little over $500,000 for being able to purchase some of the taxis here today. And this is, we think, just step one of a long process moving forward and we're real proud of our partnership.”

More photos...

Mayor Ed Lee awarding a taxicab with a congratulations sticker.

President of the Board of Supervisors David Chiu awarding a congratulations sticker
on a Luxor Cab.

Ford Transit Connect CNG taxicab is said to get around 21-24 mpg, and about 200-250

miles per tank.

Photos by John Han.

Recap Of The Taxi Advisory Council Meeting, Monday, January 30, 2012. By John Han.

2012-02-01T14:56:00.000-08:00

File photo by John Han.

The Taxi Advisory Council (TAC) voted last Monday on eighteen general ideas to recommend to the SFMTA Board of Directors, (SF Municipal Transportation Agency), to regulate a new, permanent medallion sales structure for the City's taxi industry future.

The eighteen votes represent just over half of the items on the voting agenda. Fourteen still need to be voted on.

The eighteen already voted on were by a simple show of hands. The items were called one by one, and council members raised hands yielding either an “aye” or “nay” vote for each item.

Thirteen of the fifteen council members were present.

They were – Barry Korengold, John Lazaar, Athan Rebelos, Dan Hinds, Tone Lee, John Han, Ruach Graffis, Richard Hybels, Tara Housman, Chris Sweiss, David Khan, Timothy Lapp, and Carl Macmurdo.

The two council members absent were – Bill Mounsey who represents drivers on the waiting list, and Bill Minikel who represents drivers NOT on the waiting list. Minikel actually, due to moving, no longer serves as a council member and his seat is currently vacant.

TAC chairman Chris Sweiss grouped the items into four main categories totaling thirty-two items.

The four categories are...

Waiting List: Suggestions having to do with distribution of permits to the waiting list or suggestions impacting the waiting list.
Operational: Suggestions having to do with how the industry should operate or specifically how medallions should be distributed.
Financial: Suggestions having to do with the financial aspects of the industry, sometimes more specifically, how the MTA should or should not financially benefit from the industry.
Retirement: Suggestions having to do with possible retirement options for permit holders.

So far, all of the items in the first two categories – “Waiting List” and “Operational” have been voted on, totaling eighteen votes.

Prior to taking the eighteen votes, one more additional vote was taken. And that was simply for whether medallion sales, generally speaking, should go forward at all. The TAC voted in favor of generally going forward with some version of medallion sales. The lone “no” vote was by Ruach Graffis.

It should be noted that all of the votes are to be taken as general ideas as opposed to being taken literally. For example, when the TAC voted in favor of continuing medallion sales, it simply means that some version of selling medallions should go forward. It doesn't necessarily mean that all medallions must become unequivocally transferable, without some able to be given to the waiting list without purchase.

Here are the results of the first eighteen items voted on so far.

Category 1: Waiting List

2.2 [Waiting List] Commit hundreds of medallions to be newly issued to individuals on the waiting list without purchase.

FAILED 4-9

3.1 [Waiting List] Over 2 years issue 100 medallions to the waiting list without purchase and 100 for purchase with graduated discount for the first 100.

FAILED 6-7

5.1 [Waiting List] Allowing medallion buyers to retain their position on the waiting list and sell a purchased medallion once they are eligible for an earned medallion.

FAILED 3-10

5.2 [Waiting List] Pro-rating the medallion purchase price for those on the waiting list based on their time on the waiting list.

Purchase price divided by highest number of years on wait list = discount per year. Each person would have their purchase price discounted by number of years on waiting list times discount per year.
Transfer fees would be pro-rated.

FAILED 0-13

6.1 [Waiting List] Newly issued medallions and revocations should go to drivers on the waiting list without purchase.

FAILED 5-8

7.1 [Waiting List] Issuing temporary sedan medallions to ramp permit holders who have served the disabled community for 7 years and re-issuing ramped medallions to the bottom of the waiting list.

FAILED 1-12

8.3 [Waiting List] A percentage of medallions should remain non-transferable and issued to qualified cab drivers without purchase.

PASSED 7-6

Category 2: Operational

1.1 [Operational] Number of transferable medallions is capped at 1/3 of total number of medallions.

FAILED 2-11

1.4 [Operational] Once the waiting list is exhaused medallions would be distributed according to A-Card seniority.

PASSED 12-1

2.1 [Operational] All permit holders are allowed to sell.

a) Once waiting list is exhausted all drivers with 5 years experience are eligible as buyers.

PASSED 8-5

2.3 [Operational] Lease non-medallion permits to operate to Full-service cab companies on 3 year leases.

PASSED 7-6

6.2 [Operational] Age for selling a medallion should be lowered to 65

PASSED 9-4

6.3 [Operational] All taxicabs should be operated as gas and gates.

PASSED 9-4

6.6 [Operational] Creation of a cab drivers' bill of rights

PASSED 13-0

8.2 [Operational] Medallions should be issued exclusively to qualified cab drivers.

PASSED 11-2

8.5 [Operational] An elected or appointed board of directors comprised of drivers should manage the driver fund.

PASSED 13-0

9.1 [Operational] Only Single Operator Medallions will be newly issued moving forward.

FAILED 2-11

9.3 [Operational] Ramped medallions will be issued directly to companies.

a) Employee drivers will operate ramped medallions.

PASSED 9-4

The remaining fourteen items in the latter two categories are as follows.

Category: Financial

No more outright medallion sales by SFMTA.
Reduction of SFMTA re-sale transaction fee to 5%.
Transfer fee distribution should be changed to 10% for MTA and 10% for Driver Fund
All revenues generated from the taxicab industry should be re-invested in the taxicab industry.
Driver Fund to be created to help with medallion purchases and subsequent healthcare for drivers
a) $50,000 payment into fund will allow permit holders to auction medallion rather than sell for fixed price.
Medallion prices should remain regulated at 250k with adjustments for inflation.
SFMTA should not have a financial interest in medallion sales.
Permit holders pay into the drivers' fund based on the type of medallions they possess.

Category: Retirement

Reduced driving requirement with contribution to drivers' fund for older or disabled permit holders.
a) these would be run solely as gas and gate.
b) A permanent retirement decision can be made of either eliminating the driving requirement or selling the permit anytime after the age of 65.
Waiver of driving requirement with commitment to sell within fixed time period.
One month window annually allowing permit holders to commit to selling so heirs could sell if permit holder dies prematurely.
Allowing a limited number of K permittees to retain their permit without a driving requirement after a commitment to return permit to the city upon death.
Ability for K and Pre K permit holders to purchase transfer rights by paying transfer fees in advance.
Medallion holders should be given the choice between selling their permit or relinquishing it for continuing income.

The remaining fourteen items are scheduled for discussion and vote at the next TAC meeting February 13, 2012, at 1pm in the Second Floor Atrium at One South Van Ness Ave, in San Francisco.

Council Liaison's Report:

During the Council Liaison's Report, Jarvis Murray of Taxi Services staff said that a new, second investigator is expected to be hired, "sometime next week" to enforce against illegal limos and taxis. Currently, the agency employes only one investigator. He said that the two investigators would probably combine a mix of dayshift and nightshift enforcement.

He added that newly proposed changes to the taxi regulations could mean that "wrap" taxi advertisements would no longer be allowed in the City.

Permanent Medallion Sales Program (General Overview). By John Han.

2012-01-27T14:41:00.000-08:00

File photo by John Han.

This article contains some of the main themes raised by proposals for a permanent medallion sales program. Summaries of the proposals are available at the end of this article.

Item 1: DRIVERS AT THE TOP OF THE WAITING LIST

Out of the seven proposals submitted, six of them specifically address the waiting list. The other seventh one, Ruach's proposal, addresses seniority.

While all the proposals regard drivers on the waiting list as a major concern, they offer differing ways to approach it. Continue reading to see what they are.

(Solution) - Scaled Pricing Method:

Carl Macmurdo, president of the Medallion Holders' Association, and long-time taxi driver Richard Moles, both suggest their own versions of a “Scaled Pricing Method”. That means the people at the top of the list would either initially pay no money, or purchase a medallion at a comparatively low, very low cost. The price for purchasing medallions would then increase incrementally, driver by driver, as offers go down the list to drivers.

A “Scaled Pricing Method” would only work with the issuing of new medallions, as no current medallion holder would likely be willing to sell their medallions at a “scaled down” price. To offer a scaled pricing system to the top two hundred or so drivers on the list, two hundred or so new medallions would have to be issued. This raises another point.

One may be inclined to think that the decision to issue new full-time medallions should be determined solely by the public's needs for more available transportation. Thus, thorough research, yet to be conducted, should determine whether more full-time medallions are needed, or only part-time medallions... or both. And if it's both, then what the distribution ratio between the two should be.

But issuing new full time medallions mainly to address concerns over the waiting list, or to appease taxi-leasing firms that covet medallions, means that new issuances are as much of a socio-political issue, or even a labor issue, and not just transportation.

(Also, Richard Moles proposes that drivers who purchase a medallion should be able to remain on the waiting list. After time, when their name reaches the top of the list, they would be allowed to resell their medallion, and receive an “earned” medallion issued to the list.)

(Solution) - Capping The Number Of Transferable Medallions:

The San Francisco Cab Drivers' Association (SFCDA), Mark Gruberg, and Ruach Graffis each suggest capping the number of transferable medallions.

The SFCDA recommends one-third be transferable, leaving two-thirds non-transferable. The SFCDA says, “When new medallions are issued, one third of that number would become transferable. In other words, if 30 medallions are issued, 10 more medallions would become transferable. If 60 new medallions are issued, 20 previously existing medallions would become transferable, etc.”

Ruach's proposal would end all sales of medallions beyond medallions already sold. When Pre K and Prop K medallions are returned, they would be re-issued to drivers qualified by age or by time served in the industry, and/or disability. That would do away with the waiting list.

Mark Gruberg's proposal doesn't get into specifics but says only that a “certain number or percentage” of medallions should be non-transferable.

Other:

Luxor's proposal would allow all medallion holders to sell. And the first offers would be made to the drivers at the top of the list. After that, drivers with at least five years experience could become eligible buyers.

Luxor says, “Protect the interests of drivers on the waiting list by committing to provide a substantial number (hundreds) more medallions to the list over future years.”

Ed Healy's proposal says all drivers on the waiting list should get an earned medallion.

Item 2: “CONFLICT OF INTEREST. MTA's Gain In Revenue From Medallion Sales.

Out of the seven proposals, six of them recommend, in their own different ways, to lower the transfer fees that the City collects from selling medallions, or to stop SFMTA from selling medallions outright.

Despite the differing aspects, the common theme may be that the MTA is taking too much cut from the sales.

Ed Healy recommends that the City only receive 10% of the sale price down from the 15% that it currently gets, while at the same time, increasing the Drivers' Fund share from its current 5% and bring it up to 10%. That way, the City and the Drivers Fund shares would be equal. Ed also recommends that, “all the money the SFMTA takes in should be put back into the cab industry.”

Quotes from the others include...

Mark Gruberg: “The agency's role as a regulator is tainted by its financial interest in medallion sales. I believe money now going to the agency from medallion sales should be redirected to the Driver Fund. If the MTA is unwilling to give up its share of revenues from the private sale of medallions, at least it should relinquish the benefit it gains from direct sales, since that clearly constitutes a conflict of interest in the light of its regulatory functions.”

SFCDA: “The City should sell no more medallions outright, as each one deprives a career working cab driver from obtaining their medallion, which can be compared in other industries, with tenure or a management position after usually at least 20 years on the road.”

Carl Macmurdo: “Noting that resale fee percentages in other jurisdictions are much lower than the 20% currently defined in the Transportation Code, San Francisco should reduce its rate significantly. In New York City, the resale fee is 5% for previously purchased medallions. A similar, relatively low resale fee rate should apply to Prop. A medallions and also to any K and pre-K medallions for which transfer rights are subsequently purchased.”

Richard Moles: “The transfer fee should be reduced depending on how many years the medallion was owned.”

SFCDA, Mark Gruberg, and Ruach Graffis all recommend that the SFMTA should no longer sell medallions outright.

Luxor Cab encourages the MTA to continue receiving its current rate of revenue.

Item 3: REDUCED DRIVING REQUIREMENT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SELLING MEDALLIONS.

SFCDA: “We propose that when a medallion holder reaches the age of 55, the driving requirement could be voluntarily reduced to 600 hours and the holder would contribute $100 a month or $1,200 a year to be split between the SFMTA and the Drivers Fund.

When a medallion holder reaches the age of 60, the driving requirement could voluntarily be reduced to 400 hours and a contribution of $200 a month ($2,400 a year) would be split between the SFMTA and the Drivers Fund.

When a medallion holder reaches 65 or becomes disabled, the driving requirement could voluntarily be eliminated with a $400 monthly contribution ($4,800 a year) to the SFMTA and the Drivers Fund. The medallion holder would still retain the medallion and still be able to drive.

To allow for inflation and market changes, these payments could also be set at a comparable percentage to medallion income instead of a dollar figure.

All reduced or eliminated driving requirement medallions would be run as gate and gas cabs. This would create stability for companies as well as maintain available shifts for drivers.

A medallion holder would have the option to sell when they reach 65. If they chose to hold on to their medallion with a reduced or eliminated driving requirement, they would retain their medallion the rest of their life, but would no longer have the option to sell. When these medallion holders die, their medallions would go back to the list. A medallion holder over 65 who continues driving, could make this decision when they no longer wish to drive.”

SFCDA claims its plan could yield roughly the same City revenues as would transfer fees from selling medallions.

Carl Macmurdo also proposes to allow, “a very limited number of K permittees”, to reduce or eliminate their driving requirement in exchange for ceding their medallions to the City upon death.

Mark Gruberg and Ruach Graffis proposals both include alternatives to selling by having more drivers, or by having all drivers making mandatory contributions to a retirement fund.

Luxor does not offer any alternative to selling.

I cannot pretend to have covered all the relevant issues involved with a permanent medallion sales program. I have tried to highlight what I consider to be the big three issues. But there is so much more.

Below is a copy of the, “Alternate Proposals Summary”, by Chris Sweis, who is chair of the Taxi Advisory Council. As chair, his summary is likely the official summary of the proposals.

But also available on this website is Part 1, and Part 2 of summaries I've written, with links to the full texts of the proposals.

CHRIS SWEIS' SUMMARY:

Alternate Proposals Summary

By: Chris Sweis

Proposal 1 (Continuing Sales)

Number of transferrable medallions is capped at 1/3 of total number of medallions.
No more outright medallion sales by SFMTA.
Reduced driving requirement with contribution to driver’s fund for older or disabled permit holders.
1. These would also be run solely as gas and gate.
2. A permanent retirement decision can be made of either eliminating the driving requirement or selling the permit anytime after the age of 65.
Once the waiting list is exhausted medallions would be distributed according to A-Card seniority.

Proposal 2 (Continuing Sales)

All permit holders are allowed to sell.
1. Once waiting list is exhausted all drivers with 5 years experience are eligible as buyers.
Commit hundreds of medallions to be newly issued to individuals on the waiting list without purchase.
Lease non-medallion permits to operate to Full-service cab companies on 3 year leases.

Proposal 3 (Continuing Sales)

Over 2 years issue 100 medallions to the waiting list without purchase and 100 for purchase with graduated discount for the first 100.
Reduction of SFMTA re-sale transaction fee to 5%.
Waiver of driving requirement with commitment to sell within fixed time period.
One month window annually allowing permit holders to commit to selling so heirs could sell if permit holder dies prematurely.
Allowing a limited number of K permitees to retain their permit without a driving requirement after a commitment to return permit to the city upon death.

Proposal 4 (Continuing Sales)

Ability for k and pre-k permit holders to purchase transfer rights by paying transfer fees in advance.

Proposal 5 (Continuing Sales)

Allowing medallion buyers to retain their position on the waiting list and sell a purchased medallion once they are eligible for an earned medallion.
Pro-rating the medallion purchase price for those on the waiting list based on their time on the waiting list.
1. Purchase price ÷ highest # of years on waitlist = discount per year. Each person would have their purchase price discounted by number of years on waitlist x discount per year.
2. Transfer fees would also be pro-rated.

Proposal 6 (Continuing Sales)

Newly issued medallions and revocations should go to drivers on the waiting list without purchase.
Age for selling a medallion should be lowered to 65.
All taxicabs should be operated as gas and gates.
Transfer fee distribution should be changed to 10% for MTA and 10% for Driver Fund.
All revenues generated from the taxicab industry should be re-invested in the taxicab industry.
Creation of a cab driver’s bill of rights.

Proposal 7 (Continuing and Discontinuing Sales)

Issuing temporary sedan medallions to ramp permit holders who have served the disabled community for 7 years and re-issuing ramped medallions to the bottom of the waiting list.
1. Re-issued ramp medallions will be permanent ramp medallions.
Driver Fund to be created to help with medallion purchases and subsequent healthcare for drivers.
1. $50,000 payment into fund will allow permit holders to auction medallion rather than sell for fixed price.

Proposal 8 (Continuing Sales)

Medallion prices should remain regulated at 250K with adjustments for inflation.
Medallions should be issued exclusively to qualified cab drivers.
A percentage of medallions should remain non-transferrable and issued to qualified cab drivers without purchase.
Medallion holders should be given the choice between selling their permit or relinquishing it for continuing income.
An elected or appointed board of directors comprised of drivers should manage the driver fund.
SFMTA should not have a financial interest in medallion sales.

Proposal 9 (Discontinuing Sales)

Only Single Operator Medallions will be newly issued moving forward.
Permit holders pay into the driver’s fund based on the type of medallion they possess.
Ramped medallions will be issued directly to companies.
1. Employee drivers will operate ramped medallions

From The SMTA. Taxi Advisory Council Agenda For Monday, January 30, 2012.

2012-01-27T11:00:00.000-08:00

(Note that Monday's January 30th TAC meeting will be held on the 8th Floor Room 8244, at One South Van Ness Avenue, not in the 2nd Floor Atrium.)

Jan. 30, 2012, agenda

Notice and Agenda

SAN FRANCISCO
MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
TAXI ADVISORY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF MEETING AND CALENDAR

Monday January 30, 2012
8nd Floor Room 8244
One South Van Ness Avenue

REGULAR MEETING
1:00 P.M.

COUNCIL MEMBERS

Ruach Graffis; John Han; Dan Hinds; Tara Housman; Richard Hybels; David Khan; Barry Korengold; Timothy Lapp; John Lazar; Tone Lee; Carl Macmurdo ;William Minikel; William Mounsey; Athan Rebelos; Chris Sweis

COUNCIL LIAISON
Christiane Hayashi

COUNCIL SECRETARY
Joselyn Caceres

Accessible meeting policy - One South Van Ness Avenue

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Call to Order

2. Roll Call

3. Announcement of prohibition of sound producing devices during the meeting.

4. Approval of Minutes from December 12, 2011 and January 9, 2012 (Discussion and Action)

5. Public Comment:

Members of the public may address the Taxi Advisory Council on matters that are within the Taxi Advisory Council’s jurisdiction and are not on today's calendar.

6. Report of the Council Liaison (Discussion only)

a. Staff Update
b. Regulatory Reform Update
c. Taxi Medallion Sales Pilot Program Update

REGULAR CALENDAR

7. TAC discussion and recommendation for medallion distribution program (Discussion and Action)

8. Council Member requests for information. (Discussion only)

9. Schedule upcoming calendar items. (Discussion and Action)

10. General Discussion regarding Taxi Industry (Discussion only)

ADJOURN

Next regular meeting time/location:

Monday, February 13, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.
2nd Floor Atrium Conference Room
1 South Van Ness Avenue

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decision in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance or to report a violation of the ordinance, contact Frank Darby, Jr. by mail to Administrator, Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco CA 94102-4689; by phone at 415.554.7724; by fax at 415.554.7854; or by email at sotf@sfgov.org.

Copies of the Sunshine Ordinance can be obtained from the Clerk of the Sunshine Task Force, the San Francisco Public Library and on the City’s website at http://www.sfgov.org.

Lobbyist Ordinance

The Ethics Commission of the City and County of San Francisco has asked us to remind individuals and entities that influence or attempt to influence local legislative or administrative action may be required by the San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code, Section 2.100, to register and report lobbying activity. For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, contact the Ethics Commission at 30 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 3900, San Francisco, CA 94102, telephone 415.581.2300, fax 415.581.2317, or visit their Web site at www.sfgov.org/ethics/.

Sound-Producing Devices

The ringing of and use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. Please be advised that the Chairman may order the removal from the meeting room of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices.

Taxicab That Collided With Muni Bus May Be Unlicensed And Illegal. By John Han.

2012-01-26T18:05:00.000-08:00

File photo by John Han.

In case you haven't read about it yet, a taxicab collided with a Muni bus this morning at about 10 am outside of the Hall of Justice. That's according to reporter Dan McManamin of the Bay City News wire.

Accidents happen, but this taxicab may have been ILLEGAL. CLICK HERE to read the story published on SF Appeal. Then be sure to look at the photo in the SF Appeal showing the rear of the taxi. On the rear, it reads, "Taxicab", but doesn't display what city or county it's from.

In San Francisco, we in the taxi industry know that all taxicabs must say, "San Francisco Taxicab". Also, Oakland cabs say "City of Oakland", Marin County cabs and South SF cabs also display their proper cities and counties. This cab does not.

Now, CLICK HERE to see the photo published in SFist. Notice the phone number doesn't have an area code. Could be a bogus phone number?

Is this an illegal cab? I'd like to know.

Message From SFMTA - Town Hall Meetings Schedule - Recommendations For Medallion Reform.

2012-01-20T11:11:00.000-08:00

This is to inform you that there will be a Town Hall Meeting on Tuesday February 14, from 1:30 to 3:30pm, and from 4:30 to 7:30pm on the subject of the SFMTA staff recommendations on medallion reform.

This meeting is scheduled to follow the February 13, 2012 Taxi Advisory Council meeting, by which time we expect that the TAC will have made its recommendation for medallion reform to the Board of Directors.

The TAC will be discussing the subject of medallion reform at its meeting of January 30, 2012, which will be held in in the Second Floor Atrium Conference Room at One South Van Ness beginning at 1:00pm (This should actually say 8th Floor Room 8244. [J. Han]). The subject may also be continued to the following Taxi Advisory Council meeting scheduled for February 13, 2012 at the same time and location.

The purpose of the February 14 Town Hall meeting is for SFMTA staff to present the proposal for medallion reform that the staff will be advancing to the Board of Directors. We expect the Board to consider medallion reform proposals at its meeting of March 6, 2012.

To summarize, the meeting schedule for discussion of medallion reform is as follows:

MEETING DATE/TIME	MEETING TOPIC	MEETING BODY	MEETING LOCATION
January 30, 2012 1:00pm	Medallion Reform-TAC recommendation	Taxi Advisory Council	One South Van Ness, 2^nd Floor Atrium Conference Room
February 13, 2012 1:00pm	Medallion Reform-TAC recommendation (possible)	Taxi Advisory Council	One South Van Ness, 2^nd Floor Atrium Conference Room
February 14, 2012 1:30-3:30pm and 4:30-7:30pm	Medallion Reform-Taxi Services staff recommendation	Town Hall Meeting (public)	One South Van Ness, 8^th Floor, Room 8244
March 6, 2012 1:00pm	Medallion Reform-Board of Directors vote on recommendation	SFMTA Board of Directors	City Hall, Room 400

Here's the agenda for the January 30th, 2012 Taxi Advisory Council meeting.

Notice and Agenda

SAN FRANCISCO

MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

TAXI ADVISORY COUNCIL

NOTICE OF MEETING AND CALENDAR

Monday January 30, 2012

8nd Floor Room 8244

One South Van Ness Avenue

REGULAR MEETING

1:00 P.M.

COUNCIL MEMBERS

COUNCIL LIAISON

Christiane Hayashi

COUNCIL SECRETARY

Joselyn Caceres

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Call to Order

2. Roll Call

3. Announcement of prohibition of sound producing devices during the meeting.

4. Approval of Minutes from December 12, 2011 and January 9, 2012 (Discussion and Action)

5. Public Comment:

Members of the public may address the Taxi Advisory Council on matters that are within the Taxi Advisory Council’s jurisdiction and are not on today's calendar.

6. Report of the Council Liaison (Discussion only)

a. Staff Update

b. Regulatory Reform Update

c. Taxi Medallion Sales Pilot Program Update

REGULAR CALENDAR

7. TAC discussion and recommendation for medallion distribution program (Discussion and Action)

8. Council Member requests for information. (Discussion only)

9. Schedule upcoming calendar items. (Discussion and Action)

10. General Discussion regarding Taxi Industry (Discussion only)

ADJOURN

Next regular meeting time/location:

Monday, February 13, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.

2nd Floor Atrium Conference Room

1 South Van Ness Avenue

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance

Copies of the Sunshine Ordinance can be obtained from the Clerk of the Sunshine Task Force, the San Francisco Public Library and on the City’s website at http://www.sfgov.org.

Lobbyist Ordinance

Sound-Producing Devices

Summary Of Proposals For The Permanent Medallion Sales Program. By John Han.

2012-01-18T18:49:00.000-08:00

File photo by John Han.

(Part 2 of 2)

This is the second half of the Summary Of Proposals For The Permanent Medallion Sales Program.

Like in the first article, the proposals are listed randomly, in no order of preference.

Ed Healy's Proposal:

Ed Healy's proposal contains six key recommendations. Here they are as they're worded in the proposal, with some comments in parentheses and italics.

The waiting list should continue until all the drivers on it have been given their earned medallions. (This is a fine and worthy sentiment, but there is no recommendation in the proposal on how to implement a strategy. For example, how many newly issued medallions would this require? And, what is roughly the time it could take?... 10 years, 30 years? No ballpark estimates.)
The age for selling should be lowered to 65
All taxicabs should be operated on a “gate and gas” basis. (Another worthy sentiment, but again, it needs more meat. For example, what would be the projected cost, even a rough estimate, for the City of San Francisco to shut down all Affiliate and Long Term Lease operations over three year's time?... and how feasible is it? What lawsuits, if any, could incur?)
The SFMTA should only get 10% for medallions instead of 15%. In other words, 10% of medallion sales should to to the MTA and 10% to the Drivers' Fund. (There seems to be some consistency amongst the proposals that the SFMTA is seeking too high a percentage in transfer fees. This is not the only proposal that recommends lowering the SFMTA's transfer rate.)
All the money the SFMTA takes in should be put back into the cab industry. (I support this VERY MUCH. But will the MTA?)
There should be a cab drivers' “Bill of Rights” that should be... (then goes on to say what it should be.)

Healy's proposal is published on his blog, “The Phantom Cab Driver Phites Back”. CLICK HERE to read the full proposal.

The San Francisco Cab Drivers' Association (SFCDA) Proposal:

I have covered what I hope are the main points in the SFCDA proposal.

Cap the number of transferable medallions: The SFCDA recommends restricting sales to one-third. The purpose for this, SFCDA says, is to help, “medallions to continue going to veteran drivers, as has been the respected practice in San Francisco for the last 32 years.” The SFCDA argues that, “career cab drivers deserve a dignified end to their career”, and that after 20 plus years of service, and anticipating earned medallions, not all drivers on the list are prepared to purchase at a cost of $250,000. (Presumably because they're broke.)
The City should eliminate the “SFMTA Direct Sales To Buyers” aspect from permanent medallion sales: In other words, the SFMTA should no longer sell medallions directly to buyers, and then receive the full $250,000 from each medallion. Under a permanent medallion sales program, sales should be restricted to driver to driver sales only, with the City taking just a cut from each sale, but not the full price. The idea is that since in, “SFMTA Direct Sales To Buyer” transfers, the SFMTA gets all $250,000 per medallion (minus 5% to the Drivers' Fund), and that this could lead to a conflict of interests. That's because budget deficit needs could influence the MTA to issue new medallions based on need for revenue instead of transportation. It could also influence the number of medallions that could be newly issued. The idea to eliminate “SFMTA Direct Sales To Buyer” was recommended to the MTA by the Taxi Advisory Council in a motion passed June of 2011.
Allow medallion holders ages 55 and above to buy out of the driving requirement, as an option to selling: This would allow medallion holders who reach the age of 55 to reduce their driving requirement from 800 hours per year to 600. That's providing the holder agrees to pay $100 per month, or $1200 per year, to be split between the SFMTA and the Drivers' Fund. Drivers aged 60 could have their hours reduced to 400 hours per year at a rate of $200 per month, or $2400 per year. And drivers aged 65 or disabled, could have their driving requirements eliminated completely, providing they pay $400 per month, or $4800 per year, to be split between the SFMTA and the Drivers' Fund. The SFCDA adds, “To allow for inflation and market changes, these payments could also be set at a comparable percentage to medallion income instead of dollar figure.” Under this option, drivers would keep their medallions for life. When the medallion holders dies, their medallion would go back to the list as an earned medallion.
A medallion holder would have the option to sell when they reach 65
SFCDA argues its plan would support the “gate and gas” structure, and “provide more available shifts for non-medallion holding drivers.” This is because medallion holders aged 55 or older, who choose the reduced driving requirement option, would have to operate their medallions as gate and gas. This would open up more shifts for non-medallion drivers. Additionally, if the City were to no longer issue, "SFMTA Direct Sales to Buyers" transfers, then new medallions, or revoked medallions, would be issued as earned medallions to the waiting list.

There's more to the SFCDA proposal. It is available online. CLICK HERE to view it in full.

Mark Gruberg's Proposal:

Mark Gruberg's proposal is laid out in a series of questions that stakeholders must consider. He then offers his own responses.

I've listed the questions as they are worded in the proposal, but have summed up his responses to each question, for the most part, to only a sentence or two. Here they are in the order they're presented...

Should medallions continue to be sold under the new system? Gruberg's view -'No'. But the assumption is that they will be part of a permanent medallion structure anyway.
Assuming medallions are to be sold, should the sales price remain fixed, or should they be sold at market value? Gruberg's view - “they should remain fixed”.
Assuming a fixed medallion sales price, what should that price be? Gruberg's view - $250,000 is a fair fixed rate. Prop K medallion holders did not financially invest in their medallion and have already received monthly income for a number of years. Therefore, any amount of money gained through sales is a windfall profit, so medallions should remain affordable for the next buyer in line.
Should medallions be issued exclusively to qualified cab drivers? Gruberg's view – Yes, and it should come with a driving requirement. Medallions should not go to cab companies or other non-driving persons.
Should a certain number or percentage of medallions remain non-transferable and be permanently reserved for issuance to qualified drivers? Gruberg's view – Yes. Not all deserving drivers are in a position to purchase due to lack of finances, age, or both.
If some medallions are to be permanently non-saleable, how can that be accomplished? Gruberg's view - “allow current medallion holders the choice, under conditions to be determined, of either selling their medallions or relinquishing them in exchange for a continuing income. The income would be financed through a fund to which all K-system medallion holders would contribute. Since K medallion holders have no investment in a medallion, requiring this contribution in exchange for the right to sell or retire is reasonable.”
How is the Driver Fund to be implemented? Gruberg's view - “An elected or appointed Board of Directors, composed of drivers should oversee the fund and determine how it is to be used.”
Should the MTA have a financial stake in medallion sales? Gruberg's view - “It should not. The agency's role as a regulator is tainted by its financial interest in medallion sales.”

There's more to Gruberg's proposal. It is online. CLICK HERE to read it in full.

Ruach Graffis' Proposal:

Ruach Graffis' proposal is by far the longest and most complex of the proposals. While Luxor Cab's may try to win favor by its simplicity, Ruach's is complex, appeals to human conscience, and is titled, “Service AND Fairness”. Hers is eleven pages long.

The proposal is unique in that it calls for drastically altering the structure of the taxi industry over time, slowly converting Pre K medallions into single operator medallions, allowing ramp medallions to become corporately owned with employee drivers. And, finally, calls to end the selling of medallions completely.

She articulates the importance that taxis play in major cities everywhere, and therefore stresses the importance that taxi drivers be guaranteed adequate quality of life for the jobs they perform.

Ruach says, “The on time status of BART, MUNI, and CalTrains are reported with the implication that these constitute the range of mass transportation options. But these municipalized modes are not the whole story. The oft forgotten part of the mass transit system is the taxi.”

“To turn a job that is currently low paying, has long grueling hours, and is dangerous, into a desirable professional choice, will take thought and commitment from the controlling municipality.”

Noting San Francisco as a “world class city”, Ruach says, “We deserve a world class taxi system, but to get that, we will have to treat it with the respect it deserves, not as an after thought, or a cash cow for other parts of the system.”

It is hard to make a checklist of all the key issues raised in Ruach's proposal, because there are many. Here are what I feel are the main ones.

San Francisco's taxi industry is often overlooked as an “after thought”, or a “cash cow” that benefits other public transit systems, such as for budget deficits, even though the industry itself is not municipalized. Taxi workers deserve more respect than this from authorities if authorities want “world class” taxi service.
After the industry's switch to “independent contractor status” in the late '70's, Prop K was a worthy and noble attempt to re-balance the industry's power structure between management and workers, after unions had been pushed out. While Prop K may have had notable, benevolent effects, Prop K only empowered a small minority of cab drivers, thus creating a decades long conflict in the industry through a two-tiered system of drivers. Ruach writes, “The two-tiered system for drivers is a source of constant stress in the industry, and any changes that are initiated should address this problem. All drivers, medallion holders or no, should have job security, and retirement security.”
The “cyclical nature” of the taxi industry is “the first of the industry problems”. In other words, it's very busy sometimes (e.g., Friday nights, Bay to Breakers, etc.), and other times it's very slow (e.g., late Tuesday nights in winter, etc.). Allowing illegal taxis is an inadequate approach for solving it. The proposal calls for more driver owned taxi service that could be more responsive to shifting demands.
The meanings and concepts of Pre K, Prop K, and Prop A medallions should be lumped into a new category simply referred to as “Master Medallions”. They would be the bulk of the industry and operate according to the current leasing structure and gate cap. But the proposal calls for the expansion of Single Operator medallions by converting Pre K medallions to Single Operator. In other words, once the Pre K owner dies, the Pre K medallion would be brought back to the City and re-issued as a total of three, separate Single Operator medallions for every one Pre K turned in. But while the Pre K owner is living, the medallion would operate as a Master Medallion.
All taxis drivers would pitch into the Drivers' Fund at various rates depending upon hierarchy, to build healthcare and retirement money. For example, entry level gate and gas drivers could pay $5 per shift, Single Operators $300 per month, Prop K holders $400 per month, and Pre K holders $500 per month. Drivers would become qualified recipients after having fulfilled a designated number of years worth of service to the industry.
There would be no more selling of medallions. Exit strategies would be financed through the Drivers' Fund, theoretically to a broader expanse of drivers. And the Drivers' Fund would be financed by the drivers themselves. (It is not necessarily known if this is financially feasible or if it is unfeasible.)
Ramp taxis would be, “issued to cab companies based on performance. Drivers of ramp taxis will be employees of cab companies.”

There is more to Ruach's proposal. And her proposal is available online. CLICK HERE to read the full text.

This ends the general summary. I hope I did a decent job... a worthy attempt. I apologize in advance to anyone who may feel I overlooked an issue.

Still to come before the January 30^th Taxi Advisory Council meeting, the most difficult but important part - highlighting the obvious similarities and differences.

Thanks for reading thus far.