Open Letter to Mark Gruberg, Dave Schneider and All The People at Green Cab

Hi Mark, Dave (photo) and the rest of you guys,

I just heard the news that you are probably going out of business and I wanted to express my sympathy along with my gratitude for having spent two years working for a company that was an actual co-op, a place where both professionalism and fair treatment of drivers was of paramount importance.

I'm a story teller and I think a few little tales will explain the difference between the attitude at Green and the way drivers are treated at many other companies.

Shorty before I went to Green, I had my medallion at Luxor Cab. I came to work one day only to find 30 drivers lined up at the cashier's window tying to pick up their cabs. There was no movement for a few minutes so I walked up to the window to find out what was going on. The female cashier, who was supposed to be putting out the taxis, was running numbers on an adding machine.

I watched her for a few minutes then got her attention. She gave me a big smile, apologized for keeping me waiting, stamped my waybill, gave me the medallion and went back to her adding machine.

I called her over and asked what she was doing. She said that she had to add up credit card totals. I told her that she should do it later because the drivers were losing money while they were waiting.

"Don't worry," she said with a suck-ass smile, "just come to the front of the line and I'll put you out."

It was a major reason I left Luxor. I didn't like being forced to act like an asshole just because I held a medallion.

After my first shift at Green, my night driver left me a long letter pointing out that: I had not washed the cab when I turned it in, that I had not vacuumed the inside and that I'd left pistachio shells all over the floor. He ended his note by saying, "We don't act this way at Green."

My first thought was, "Hey – I'm an owner!" My second thought was, "Hypocrite!"

Of course he was right. I should've cleaned he taxi and he should have the right to call me on it if I didn't go my job. A driver's a driver whether he or she owns a medallion or not. Green is one of the few companies where this principle was a daily truth instead of empty verbiage.

Perhaps, the thing I liked best about Green was the fairness with which everyone was treated. As result you had the most professional drivers in the fleet. If I'm not mistaken Green had the highest percentage of radio players and Flywheel users. I also have little doubt that Green set the industry standard for fewest complaints. If Green had any drivers who turned down credit cards or refused to take people to the Sunset they sure didn't talk about it.

Mark – Green set the standard for everyone else to follow. If all the drivers in San Francisco acted like you guys did at Green, the taxi industry would be in much better shape than it is now.

Here's a shot from your 2010 Christmas party. I never stopped enjoying my time there.

Good luck! I hope the rumors of your demise turn out to be false.

Living the Farce 1

There is good news. The SFMTA Board changed the percentage for a transfer of a medallion (they are no longer to be sold) from 30% to 20% of $300,000 and raised the cut for a "surrender" of a medallion by both Pre-K and Post-K holders to $200,000 instead of $150,000.

Director Malcolm Heinicke came up to me before the meeting, told me that he read my blog and said that he had no hard feeling over what I'd written about him. We shook hands like pals in a debating society. He added that he did pay attention to my ideas.

I imagine that this was his way of telling me that my writing had influenced the changes that he'd made in the above figures. Flattering - but I doubt that I really had much to do with it.

I think it was more like the old scare-the-be-Jesus-out-of-them-and-they'll-be-happy-with-what-we-give-them gambit. There are a few reasons for my thoughts:

1. Contrary to Heinicke, the financiers clearly did not "bless" the 30% loan. Rebecca Lytle of the San Francisco Federal Credit Union, who loves her work and has enthusiastically answered every question I've asked her in the past, politely declined to comment on the 30% figure; and her boss Stephen Ho spoke with relief about the drop to 20%.
2. Nobody else on the SFMTA Board discussed, debated or questioned the amendments that Heinicke introduced, giving the impression that the subject had been vetted and agreed upon behind closed doors.
3. Driver Tariq Mehmood claimed during public comment that he knew about the changes the Saturday before the meeting.
4. If true, this would be a clear violation of the Sunshine Ordinance. But, the existence of a rule has rarely stopped people in power from abusing it.
5. In any case, it shows that something other than the force of my prose motivated the amendments.

There was another theory going down on "The Street." Depending upon who you talked to, either John Lazar of Luxor and Jim Gillespie of Yellow or Lazar, Gillespie, Chris Sweis of Royal and Dan Hinds of National had either threatened to sue the MTA or had worked out a back door deal with them.

I asked Jim Gillespie about the rumors. He told me that he was "a Christian" and "wouldn't lie" to me. He assured me that no such events had taken place.

Gillespie reminds me of Ronald Reagan. He has the same ability to believe everything he says while he's saying it. I always believe him when I'm listening to him. Later in the meeting, Gillespie told God and the MTA Board that there was no enforced tipping at Yellow Cab. I'll leave it to the drivers at Jim's company to judge the relationship between his religious beliefs and his conception of truth.

But, do the amendments make the Heinicke plan a good deal?

My mother might have said that the changes were better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. $50,000 is $50,000 and 10% is 10%.

But, Heinicke is once again being misleading when he says that his amendments are "in line" with the Pilot Plan:

1. In the Pilot Plan - there were no separate categories of medallions. Whether Pre-K, Post-K or re-sold, they all gave the same 15% to the MTA and 5% to the Drivers Fund.
2. Under the Pilot Plan - any increase would apply to all medallions being sold. Therefore, capping the profit at $200,000 for a "surrender" has nothing to do with the plan that was worked out with the consensus of most people in the industry in 2010. If the price went up to $300,000 under the Pilot Plan, the medallion holder would get $240,000; at $400,00 the holder would get $320,000.
3. This makes the cut to the MTA either 33% or 50% for a transfer. The national average is 5%.
4. Under the Pilot Plan - an increase in sale price was to be based the Consumer Price Index (CPI), not Director Heinicke's thoughts.
5. The CPI that I just ran calculates that $250,000 in 2010 is worth $262,666.47 today.
6. As driver Tariq Mehmood and others pointed out at the board meeting, the combination of a slack tourist season and run-a-muck competition from illegal taxis and limos has greatly reduced the money coming into the taxi industry. 
7. This challenges the very idea of raising the price of the medallions.

In addition, "surrendering" the medallions instead of selling them would also apparently take the 5% away from the Driver's Fund.

There is neither a policy reason for the increase in the sale price nor for the creation of "surrendered" medallions except to give the SFMTA more money from the labor of the drivers who have worked to earn it. The MTA would gain $18 million over time from the Driver's Fund and $72 million from $300,000 sales.

Is it worthwhile to get a medallion "transferred" to you for $300,000 with 20% to the MTA?

Depends.

The $250,000 figure was chosen because it was doable without too much pressure on the new medallion holder. The down payment on $300,000 would be $10,000 more or $60,000 and payments would increase about $400 per month. Balance that against making an additional $40,000.

More important might be the difference between a "sale" and a "transfer." The 300 or so drivers who bought medallions under the Pilot Plan actually own or owned them. In a transfer, the city owns the medallions as an "asset." And, as we've repeatedly been told, the city can do anything it wants with one of its assets ... for the public good as is, of course, understood.

Another way to put the question might be to ask, "Would you buy a used car from Director Heinicke?"

More tomorrow.

Tariq: Or, "It's True If I Say It's True."

There were 170 hours of Town Hall Meetings leading up to the creation of the Pilot Plan in April 2009.


Tariq Mehmood showed up at around the 160th hour, after the plan was more or less in place. Claiming that 90% of the drivers were behind him, Mehmood declared that the taxis should all be sold at auctions. 


This was similar to they way he behaved at the airport meetings in December 2010 where the record shows that he said,


"Each driver of the taxis industry knows me personally... 6,000 drivers are known to me but they cut me out.  I had to push myself into it.  As regard to the people, the 6,000 drivers, 18,000 family members has come to you to beg you."  

Tariq rarely mentions the merits of an idea. In fact, he appears to be incapable of arguing rationally. Instead, he takes a position then claims that he has 90% of the drivers or 6,000 or 18,000 people behind him. He once told me that my thoughts didn't matter because I only spoke for myself.

Mostly what he did in 2010 at SFO and at the 2009 Town Hall meetings was try to take over and gum up the works.

Selling medallions at auctions was a position that had already been discussed and dismissed before Tariq showed up at the Town Hall meetings because it would penalize both drivers on the waiting list and those with A-card seniority. 

He gave two memorable speeches at the Town Halls.

In the first, he said that he was fighting, not for himself, but for other drivers. He, Tariq Mehmood, didn't even want to be a medallion owner and had never put his name on the list.

In the second, he took credit for the medallion sales pilot program and praised Deputy Director Christiane Hayashi for her role in helping negotiating it.

At the last Town Hall meeting, Hayashi informed us that she had closed the Waiting List in order to preserve A-Card seniority for the purpose of future medallion distribution, which is a key element of the Pilot Program.

Mahmood started screaming at her that she shouldn't have closed the list without warning him. He hasn't stopped shouting at her since.

He was not arguing that she shouldn't have closed the list at all, mind you, only that she shouldn't have closed it before Tariq Mehmood - the man who'd claimed a week ealier that he didn't want to own a medallion - had had a chance to put his own name on that list so he could buy a medallion.

Flexible Reality.

The "truth" for Mehmood appears to be whatever he says it is at any particular moment. 


This truth was borne home to me at the August 8, 2011 TAC meeting that resulted in recommendations to curb illegal brokering that were passed by the Council by a vote of 14 to 1.  


Contrary to everyone else who spoke at the meeting, Tariq declared that brokering was a minor problem and shouldn't even be discussed.


My inside sources tell me that the practice includes from 200 to 500 cabs and involves millions of dollars a year.


Why would Tariq Mehmood, who lives in the milieu where the brokering takes place, deny that it exists?


A Man Who Lives to Hate.

"Tariq reminds me of the character in (James) Joyce who lives just to hate," a driver who'd known Mehmood for years told me.


The quote seems apt.


Hayashi isn't the first person that Tariq has trashed. Instead of arguing a position, he makes personal attacks on anybody who disagrees with him. At various times, this has included Mark Gruberg, Brad Newsham, Christopher Fulkerson, members of the Airport Commission, Sonali Bose and Tone Lee.


Mehmood and his disciples have sent dozens of attack e-mails my way. The one below is my favorite. It was supposed to have been sent by one of his goons but he can't hide his unique style from me.


"Bullshit and lies. That's what you are doing. Are you defending your girlfriend. Wait till she get fired. The die is casted. Murai did not defend her. I found Tariq the most powerful and great leader this industry has ever seen."


Mehmood, of course, has made a special project out of hating Deputy Director Hayashi and has spent over a year and a half going around trying to get her fired. At this point he probably can't even stop. He's boasted so often that he'd be able to get rid of her that he'd lose face with his followers if he failed to do so.


The 2011 Town Hall Meetings.


His animosity reached its height during the these meetings when he showed up at every one of the three two-a-day sessions to harass and verbally attack Deputy Director Hayashi for long periods of time.


The Town Hall meetings are intended to be democratic with people being able to speak without time limits as long as they are reasonable and stay on the subject.


Tariq Mehmood, who has accused other people of being communists, actually borrowed an old trick that communists used to take over unions in the 1930's. He undermined the democratic process by bringing an entourage of 6 to 12 people with him for every meeting. Thus, he had a built in majority for almost every vote and, even when he didn't, he claimed he did. In one case, he went out into the atrium next door with 9 of his disciples and returned to claim that all 7,000 drivers were behind him. 

Mehmood rarely stayed on point, constantly interrupted other drivers, monopolized the floor, repeated himself ad nauseam, and, incredibly, complained that he was not being given a fair chance to speak. His preposterous behavior would have been entertaining if he wasn't so vicious.


When he sat down, one of his disciples would usually take over to either express the same viewpoints or harass the Deputy Director. His acolytes repeatedly told Hayashi that if she did what Tariq wanted they would make her popular and successful among all the people of San Francisco, but, if she went against the great Mehmood's wishes, she would suffer the consequences of his wrath. 


Hayashi responded saying, "it's not my job to be popular."


In the end, the only thing that drivers not in Tariq's entourage agreed with Mehmood on was that they didn't like back-seat terminals. His insistence that the meter should be increased 40% was thought ridiculous and most drivers liked Hayashi's compromise plan on electronic waybills that would allow the MTA to gather statistical information without taking individual driver information.


Medallion Financial Of New York

Mehmood has repeatedly attacked Hayashi for conspiring with Hansu Kim of Desoto cab and Rebecca Lytle of the San Francisco Federal Credit Union (SFFCU), to cheat San Francisco cab drivers by keeping a loan company "so big it's on the Stock Market" out of The City. These  verbal assaults included a 40 minute diatribe carefully transcribed by Julie Rosenberg (photo) of the MTA during the Town Hall meetings.


Talk about Doublethink! 


Setting up driver loans though SFFCU is actually one of Hayashi's finer accomplishments and the terms the drivers are getting are far better than many people expected when the Pilot Plan was drawn up. 


Tariq's "Evidence" for a Conspiracy.


Hansu Kim introduced Christiane Hayashi to Rebecca Lytle.


That's it, folks! That's the alleged evidence. That's all there is. Nada mas.


In short, Mehmood's accusations are pure slander.


Some Facts.


A taxi cab medallion hadn't been sold in San Francisco for over 30 years when the Pilot Plan was put together and many people, including Mark Gruberg of the UTW, thought that nobody would loan money to a cab driver.


Deputy Director Hayashi had trouble finding anyone willing to risk money on such a loan. At one point, she invited more than 35 banks and credit unions to a meeting to discuss medallion loans and only four loan officers showed up. Three of them left before Hayashi's presentation was over and the other guy never came back. 


Even the San Francisco Federal Credit Union originally declined to participate because this was an untested loan program.


San Francisco Federal and Montauk Credit Unions.


Some time after the above meeting, Hayashi was contacted by the Montauk Credit Union of New York (which has a lot of experience making loans to cab drivers) to get the ball rolling. Then,  Rebecca Lytle became Vice President of Lending at the SF Federal Credit union and became interested in the Pilot Program. Lytle worked with the Montauk Credit Union and convinced her superiors at her  uredit union to rethink their opposition to medallion loans.


The result is the Pilot Plan Sales Program that is tailored to San Francisco's unique situation.


Two things that both Hayashi and the drivers who helped draft the Pilot Plan insisted on were: (1) there be no prepayment or other hidden fees and (2) that the loan payments be no larger than the monthly amount that a taxi company pays a "gates & gas" medallion holder. 


Both of these conditions have been met by Montauk and SFFCU. The program has been going on for a little over a year and about 150 cab drivers have received loans. So far, no cab driver has been turned down for a loan nor has anyone defaulted on a loan. In fact, no driver has even missed a payment.


Ms. Lytle says, 


"We’ve moved our rates down twice now because of movement downward in the interest rate markets and because we’ve gained a little more knowledge about the borrowers ..." 


For a look at the San Francisco Federal Credit Union's current rates click here.


So, are San Francisco's taxi drivers being cheated by Christiane, Rebecca and Hansu?


What Rates?

A good way to answer that question might be to compare SFFCU's rates with the rates of Tariq Mehmood's favorite loan company.


The problem is that - unlike SFFCU or Bank of America or Chase or Wells Fargo or any other bank or credit union that I checked -  Medallion Financial does not publish its loan rates.


Why? It's one those questions that would seem to answer itself. If their rates were lower than the competition they'd certainly want you to know about it, wouldn't they?


And, they also hit their taxi customers with prepayment penalties. This means that, if drivers tries to pay off their loans early, Medallion Financial charges them penalties equaling three months of payments for every prepayment. Grotesque but apparently true. There are stories of cab drivers who've paid on their loans for years only to discover that they owed Medallion Financial more money than they had borrowed in the first place.


And, Tariq Mehmood has accused Deputy Director Christiane Hayashi of not letting this company do business in San Francisco. Can you imagine that?


But, like so much that Mehmood says, it's simply not true. 


The Deputy Director will allow any loan company that meets her criteria to do business here. Medallion Financial did inquire about making taxi medallion loans locally and Hayashi sent them her guidelines (i.e. No prepayment penalties or other hidden fees, payments be no larger than the monthly amount that a taxi company pays a "gates & gas" medallion holder.) 


Medallion Financial never got back to her.


So Why Does Tariq Mehmood Keep Trying to Bring Medallion Financial into San Francisco?


Is that another question that answers itself?


A driver who had aligned herself with Mehmood during the first few summer protests changed her mind after watching Tariq spend 3 or 4 hours a night at the airport trying to sell drivers on Medallion Financial. 

"He'd tell them not to worry about the prepayment penalties because nobody paid off their loans early," she said. 

Tariq Mehmood, the self-proclaimed "powerful and great leader of the taxicab drivers," has repeatedly declared that he has no connection with Medallion Financial of New York.

LIMITED DRIVING REQUIREMENT - A Proposal by the SFCDA

The Taxi Advisory Council is still collecting data and reviewing some effects of the Pilot Program so far.   Because of delays in the implementation of the program and the many issues presented to the council, we have not yet discussed long term medallion reform.  I feel much further thought and discussion is necessary before making a final recommendation to the SFMTA  Board.

There are many who would like to see all medallions eventually transferable.  I would like to point out that if all medallions become transferable, there will no longer be the advantage of jumping the line by purchasing.  Everyone will have to wait again, only now when their name comes up, they'll have to split their medallion income with the bank.  This will exclude many older veteran drivers from owning a medallion.  We therefore feel a significant cap on the number of transferable medallions is essential.

Barry Korengold
President, SFCDA
Vice Chair, Taxi Advisory Council

Medallion Reform Proposal by the San Francisco Cab Drivers Association

We believe that as in most occupations, career cab drivers deserve a dignified end to their career. This plan will benefit a broad spectrum of interests. It will benefit the city by putting money into the SFMTA, it will benefit all cab drivers by contributing money to the driver's fund, maintaining gas and gate shifts, as well as continuing San Francisco’s long honored system of earning a medallion through time spent on the road, rather than by having to go hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt. This plan will keep medallions going to veteran drivers at the top of the list and allows for elder and disabled medallion holders to reduce or eliminate their driving requirement or to sell their medallion. It benefits the public by maintaining quality, career cabdrivers in the industry.

We feel that although purchasing a medallion might be a good choice for some younger drivers early in their careers, many other drivers have already invested 20 years or more of their lives servicing the public for low pay, long hours, with no benefits, doing one of the most dangerous jobs in the country. Therefore, there needs to be a way for drivers who have made a career of driving a cab to be able to obtain a medallion.

In order for medallions to continue going to veteran drivers, as has been the respected practice in San Francisco for the last 32 years, there needs to be a cap on the number of transferable medallions. We suggest a third. Because of the slow movement of the list, we feel two thirds of the medallions should continue to go to the top of the list without purchase. When new medallions are issued, one third of that number would become transferable. In other words, if 30 medallions are issued, 10 more medallions could become transferable.

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.

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 a 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 lives, 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 their decision at the time they wish to stop driving.

Since there would be a cap on transferable medallions, eventually there could be a waiting list to sell. A qualified medallion holder waiting to sell would not have to pay to eliminate their driving requirement until able to so, at which time they would make their decision.

We’d like to make this comparison of revenue from the current transfer fee of $50,000 per medallion to the revenue from this Limited Driving Requirement plan. With the amount of debt undertaken when buying a medallion, the purchaser will likely hold onto their new medallion for more than 10 years, probably closer to 20 or 30 years. After 10 years of participation in our recommended program, a 75 year old driver will have contributed $48,000 to the SFMTA and the Drivers Fund. If the same driver took advantage of the plan starting at the age of 55 he will have paid in $66,000, and still be contributing to the fund and the SFMTA.

We feel this plan is healthier for the industry overall. It will allow senior and disabled medallion holders to stop driving and allows older career drivers to still obtain a medallion. This will also help color schemes maintain gas and gate medallions, and provide more available shifts for non-medallion holding drivers.

Cab Company Scams 2: Subleasing

Unless you're directly involved in a shady activity, you aren't likely to know much about it. I mean, the people running scams usually don't put up websites or hold conventions. Nonetheless, knowledge of illegal brokering and illegal subleasing in San Francisco is so widespread that I've been given names and details about these activities by people who aren't even directly involved with the taxi business.

Subleasing is a name that covers a lot of sins. One variation concerns Long Term Leases (LTL).

The way a LTL is supposed to work is that a driver leases a medallion and hires 2 or 3 other drivers to work the shifts that he or she doesn't work. She keeps what she makes himself plus the "gates" the other drivers pay her - which should not be more than an average of $104 per shift but, according to inside sources, are often far in excess of that legal limit.

Sometimes, however, the medallion holder "subleases" the medallion to a "broker" who hires the drivers and often takes huge deposits and charges higher than legal gates.

• Sometimes the medallion holder doesn't want the trouble of running a small business and only works his or her shifts and lets the broker do the hiring and handle the money for the other shifts. 
• Sometimes the medallion holders turns the entire operation over to the broker.
• Sometimes the LDL driver subleases the cab himself and charges exorbitant gates.

Some Post-K medallion holders either don't want to or can't work and sell the use of the medallion to a broker. This, in fact, is probably how the illicit practice started. It might even have had the semi-benign motivation of helping infirm drivers keep an income stream.

Prior to the "Pilot Plan," Post-K medallion holders could not sell their medallions and were required to work 800 hours per year. Many of them couldn't work as they grew older and let cab companies create phony waybills and fill the medallion holder's shifts with non-medallion drivers - not incidentally allowing the companies to make more money off the additional gates and tips that these drivers paid.

However, this practice has evolved into something far larger. Many medallion holders, who can but don't want to work, turn the medallions over to illegal brokers who buy the cars, create the fake waybills, do the hiring, and, last but not least, collect the gates.

Using brokers benefits taxi companies because it removes them from the illegal activites. The brokers or medallion holders often copy the waybills of legitimate drivers and put the medallion holders names on the documents.

But, I've also been told of cases where the managers of certain cab companies sublease medallions themselves without the medallion holder's knowledge. The medallion holders in question work their shifts but the drivers of the other shits pay illegally high gates to the managers.

Obviously, this system wouldn't work if non-medallion drivers were only paying legal gates. The brokers need to pay off the cab companies or the medallion holders and make a profit for themselves. In order to do this, they have to charge way over the legal gate cap.

In addition, there are some taxi companies that are simply over-charging their drivers to go to work. We're in a recession and they are many desperate people willing to work for very little.

My sources tell me that illegal gates prices are going from $140 to $160 to as high as $170 per shift. There are at least a couple of hundred medallions and several hundred shifts involved. This, in effect, is a multimillion dollar pyramid scheme with all the money being extracted from low-income drivers at the bottom - who are doing all the work.

The Phantom Answers Anyonymous

Lately I've been besieged with comments from a character hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. Sometimes he gives a name like "Dave" or "Anonymous #1" but more often he refuses to give a name claiming that he's afraid of retaliation from the companies or the Taxi Division.

As an ex-non-medallion holder who openly tried to form a driver's union and openly criticized policies of the companies I worked for, I can't say that I admire his courage. However, I believe that the main reason he is being anonymous is that he's one person pretending to be several and thus bogusly claiming to represent "how members of the Taxi community really feel."

He's hostile to the Pilot Plan and keeps looking for weak points to attack. If you respond to one of his jabs, he comes back and attacks from a different angle. Some of his rhetorical assaults are beyond ridiculous. For instance, he claims that if people who buy medallions are forced to follow a driving requirement, they would lose their medallion if they had to go away for five years to take care of a sick relative.

What can I say? ... Anybody who left any business for five years would probably lose it. At least a medallion owner would be able to sell the medallion and would be a lot better off than a driver who would lose his or her place on the waiting list.

Having answered that pseudo-question, I'm sure I'll have to field another equally ridiculous one in response. It's like dealing with an eight-year old who knows he's smarter than you are. However, I do think that he has some legit questions or concerns that I'll try to address:

• Buyers of medallions will be able sell them right away: They will not have to wait until they are 70.
• Director Chris Hayashi is not sitting on medallions. Since she's taken over she's put them out at a rate consistent with the years in the past as you can see from this chart.

YEAR # of Medallions Awarded

2000 85

2001 83

2002 26

2003 53

2004 28

2005 18
2006 52
2007 56
2008 106
2009 55
2010 9

• In the year since the SFMTA took over, the Taxi Division has put out 37 medallions. They will be putting out 5 more on April 20th.
• 2000, 2001 and 2008 were all years where new taxi medallions were issued. If you remove these from the equation, the average number of medallions issued per year is 41.

It is true that the Taxi division has a backlog of about 25 medallions but Hayashi says that this is only because she has been unable to hire enough staff to investigate and issue the medallions to new owners.

Anonymous is certain that the real, the true reason is that the SFMTA wants to hold onto the medallions until the Pilot Program is over, when the nefarious Hayashi intends to sell the medallions instead of giving them out to drivers on the list.

There are a few things to say about this:

• On April 16, 2010, SFMTA will be interviewing people for the investigator positions that Director Hayahsi needs.
• The medallions being held now are being given out on a basis of one medallion to drivers on the list for every medallion sold by the MTA. That is to say that she can't sell the medallions if she doesn't also give them out.
• Therefore it doesn't make any sense for her to hoard them.
  

Anonymous has also criticized the Fixed Price sales plan as leading to a possible bankruptcy tsunami like what happened when the old Yellow went down the tubes in the mid 70's.

When the final financing plan is my hands (hopefully in the next few days) I'll go into more detail, but the above scenario is very, very unlikely to happen for the following reasons.

• Old Yellow owned most of the medallions in the city. It's hard to see how 300 or so individual medallion holders could conceivably all go bankrupt at the same time.
• The failure rate of loans to cab drivers in New York City is 1/2 of 1% (0.5%) and New York sells their taxis at much higher prices than they will sell for here.
• Although I don't have the final figures, I've been assured that the loan payments the medallion holders will have to make will be about the same as the amount these medallion holders will be paid for leasing out their medallions when they aren't working them.
• Thus the medallions will pay for themselves. If anything, I would expect the failure rate on these loans to be even less that it is in New York.

For now, I guess that is it.

I've enjoyed the comments that I've had on this blog but I really don't want to continue to deal with the silly little games that this character has been playing. I would appreciate it, if in the future, people who want to post here would identify themselves in a consistent manner. Not that you have to use your real name (I'm not using mine on this blog) just that you do use a name and use the same one every time.

Thanks in advance.

A Micro History of S.F. Taxicabs with Definitions

In order to understand the issues involving the Mayor and San Francisco cab drivers, a few definitions and a little background are necessary. For starters, it's impossible to understand anything unless you know what a medallion is.

• Medallion = a license to own and operate a taxicab. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that all U.S. cities have some form of medallion system. In all cities, except San Francisco (once again, correct me if you can) these medallions are for sale, usually at auctions. In New York City they cost upwards of $500,000. They are currently not for sale in San Francisco because of:
• Proposition K = which was passed by San Francisco voters in 1978 and gave the city a unique system. The medallions are not for individual sale but are owned by the city and the rights to use them are sold to working drivers for a fee. There is a limit of one medallion holder (often called an owner) per taxi. He or she can use the medallion as long as he or she follows certain rules. When the holder retires or dies, the medallion reverts to the city and the rights to use it is sold to the the first driver on a waiting list. Over the years, the rules covering the holding of medallion have evolved. Currently: 

1. It takes an average of fifteens years to get to the top of The List.
   
2. A driver has to have worked a minimum of 800 hours per year for five of the last six years to qualify for a medallion.
3. Medallion holders have to work a minimum of 800 hours per year to keep their medallions.
4. If the holders cannot work because of disability or illness, the medallions are be taken away and given back to the city.
5. The San Francisco Medallion Holders Association has filed a lawsuit against the above rule on the basis that it violates the American Disabilities Act. A verdict is pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
6. Proposition K could not be changed except by San Francisco voters. Numerous attempts to eliminate Prop K were all overwhelmingly voted down. 
7. Then along came:

• Proposition A = which was passed by the voters in 2007 as a way to raise money for the reform of the Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA). The money was primarily to be used for the repair, rebuilding and improvement of the bus and rail system. The measure contained a one sentence rider that put taxicabs under the control of the MTA. The Mayor took this to mean that the voters had overturned Prop K.

Definitions 

• Independent Contractor = those who have signed an independent contract with companies rather than work for a salary. All the cab drivers in San Francisco are Independent Contractors. It is an accurate description of the condition of Medallion Holders. For ordinary drivers, however, the contract is pure fiction. About the only thing they are really independent of is the protection of most labor laws. Thanks to a Supreme Court reject named Robert Bork, independent contractors can't legally form a union.
• The List = the waiting list that cab drivers sign up for the right to own a medallion. The medallions are awarded on a first come first serve basis.
• Medallion Holders = guys who have bought the right to own and operate taxicabs. Often incorrectly called "owners."
• Medallion Holders Association (MHA) = what it sounds like. An organization devoted to the interests of the medallion holders.
• Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTA, SFMTA) = The agency that controls San Francisco's buses, light rail, taxis and other vehicular sevices.
• Transferability = The right to transfer or sell a cab medallion to someone else.
• United Taxicab Workers (UTW) = what is sounds like. An organization devoted to the interests of non-owner cab drivers. It's an association, not a union.