SFMTA Board Meeting on Tuesday August 21, 2012

 Come One! Come all! See the SFMTA Plan to sell us out!

The drivers on the Waiting List should go because the SFMTA intends to stop giving you medallions worth $30,000 a year in revenue or $250,000 in a sale and take the profits for themselves.

The 300 Pre-K's and 900 Post-K's should go because the SFMTA plans to take $50,000 away from the sale of your medallions to give themselves a nifty $60,000,000.

But, wait! The SFMTA has something for everybody!

To read more click "Read more" below.

A Reward for Playing by the Rules?

Brian Rosen is fifty-two and has followed all the rules. He's done everything that he was supposed to do to "earn" a taxi medallion.

Rosen's been driving cab five shifts a week (2,000 to 2,500 hours a year) for almost twenty years. He takes a lot of dispatched calls, knows the city, rides for orders in the neighborhoods, has a good driving record, accepts credit cards and treats his customers well.

He's also one of the few cab drivers who has health insurance. He pays $854 per month for a policy with a $2,950 deductible.

 Brian put his name on the Waiting List in 1993 and he's currently number 38.

If the SFMTA Board had not replaced K with the Pilot Plan two years ago, he would almost certainly hold a medallion by now.

If the rules of the Pilot Plan had stayed in effect, he would almost certainly be a medallion holder soon. The Plan called for one newly issued or re-issued medallion to be given to the List for every medallion put up for sale. Whenever the city put more cabs on the street, he would have received a medallion.

If the Taxi Services Staff Recommendations worked out by Director Christiane Hayashi in May 2012 (calling for one medallion issued to the List for every permit issued or medallion sold by the MTA) were to take effect, he would certainly get a medallion soon.

But, if the SFMTA's current proposal (based on a plan of MTA Board Director Malcom Heinicke that was rejected by a Charter Amendment reform group in 2007) is passed by the MTA Board, there is no mention of the commitment previously made by the city under every other plan to reward drivers like Brian for playing by the rules.

"I'm very concerned," Mr. Rosen told me stoically. "The anxiety I feel is very frustrating."

SFMTA Plan Creates Lack of Quorum at TAC

Photo shows (from left to right) Taxi Advisory Councilor Dan Hinds, Taxi Services Investigator Mike Harris, Executive Secretary Mau Anu Flieder, TAC Chair Chris Sweis, Councilor John Lazar and Councilor Tim Lapp waiting to see if enough councilors would show up for a quorum. Only Councilor Carl Macmurdo made it before Sweis ended the meeting at 1:15 PM. Councilors Tone Lee and Athan Rebelos came as we were leaving. Eight Councilors are needed for a quorum.

Councilors Ruach Graffis, John Han, Tara Housman, Richard Hybels, David Khan, Barry Korengold and William Mounsey (half of the TAC's 14 members) have resigned or are resigning over the SFMTA's new Medallion Deform Plan.


The Taxi Advisory Council  supposedly had been founded as a way for all sides of the taxi industry to come together and make recommendations to the MTA Board about how to replace the Pilot Plan for medallion reform with a permanent plan. The councilors have met every two weeks for two years and have made a couple of dozen proposals to improve various aspects of the business.  The Council also created and wrote the Taxi Advisory Council Report that has been ready to read since May.

The SFMTA Board has not so much as looked at any recommendation or proposal that the TAC has made. But, after much ear pulling by Sweis and others, the Board finally agreed to hear the TAC Report on August 21, 2012.

Then, on August 3, 2012, the SFMTA released its own vision for Medallion Reform that will also be vetted and possibly voted on August 21, 2012. Meaning that the TAC report will be heard and most probably ignored before the MTA Board tries to cram its agenda down our throats.

Councilors are angry and insulted at having wasted their time and money for two years only to be stonewalled and ignored. Even the ones who showed up at TAC last Monday disliked the MTA plan. Athan Rebelos may have summed in up for them when he wrote me,

"I want to continue to represent DeSoto Cab and to bring progressive ideas to this industry. If the TAC can be a vehicle for that then I will not resign."

"I the TAC can ..."   If the MTA dumps its Plan? Or not? (A career in politics beckons, Athan.)

Councilors Richard Hybels, Barry Korengold and Tar Houseman were more direct.

Richard wrote me:

"This was written in haste and not as good as the 2 others I saw but if you want to print it OK. I wish I'd praised staff among other things." 

Mr. Tom Nolan

SFMTA Board of Directors Chairman

1 South Van Ness, Floor 7

San Francisco, CA 94103

Dear Mr. Nolan

I have served on the Taxi Advisory Council for about 18 months. I own and operate Metro Cab by myself with one helper and I am very busy.

If you are not aware, the Pilot Program was created because no one in CCSF wanted to rip medallions out of the hands of the sick and elderly, which was actually mandated by Prop K.  The Program has worked rather well and put twenty million dollars into MTA coffers. Almost none of this money will be used for anything Taxi related.  Even the work to carry out The Program was paid for by Taxi fees while enforcement of rules against hundreds of illegal transportation providers goes begging. 

It has become rather painfully obvious that the TAC is nothing more than window dressing and I am no longer willing to waste precious time attending.

Everyone I know is completely and utterly opposed to the scheme being proposed for your next meeting.   

"Justice isn't about some abstract legal theory or a footnote in a casebook. It's about how our laws affect the daily lives and daily realities of people: their ability to make a living, care for their families, achieve their goals."

President Obama

Sincerely

Richard Hybels

Proprietor

Barry Wrote:

Ed Reiskin

Director of Transportation, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency

1 South Van Ness Ave, 7^th Floor

San Francisco, CA  94103

Cc: SFMTA Board of Directors, Taxi Services

Dear Mr. Reiskin,

It is with deep regret that I have decided to resign from the Taxi Advisory Council.  After reviewing the medallion reform proposal that will go before the SFMTA Board August 21, I realized more than ever before, that all of our efforts at analyzing, monitoring and discussing of the Pilot Program over the past 2 years, have been a great waste of our time and for some of us more than others, money.  All of our concerns have been ignored, if even heard.

I for one have attended nearly all of the Taxi Advisory Council meetings, as well as the Town Hall Meetings over the past 3 plus years.  Whoever came up with this proposal either has not attended any of these meetings, or is simply disregarding any of our discussions or analysis we’ve done. 

This proposal makes clear that the primary concern of the MTA is to extract as much money from the taxi industry as it can get away with.  There is no regard for drivers who have invested their lives driving a cab in San Francisco, safely transporting the public and making tourists feel welcome.  These drivers also put up with many emotional stresses and dangers, such as being spit on, assaulted, robbed, having to clean up others vomit and being broadsided by drunk drivers.

For the 32 years prior to the SFMTA taking over the taxi industry in San Francisco, longer than most drivers have driven a cab, medallions have been “earned” by waiting one’s turn in line, and driving the required hours or shifts per year.  Getting one’s medallion can be compared to attaining tenure, or a management position in other careers.  Since “Daly/Ma” went into effect in 2005, the qualifying driving requirement has gotten significantly tougher, making it difficult or impossible for a driver to work fulltime elsewhere and pursue another career while remaining eligible.

As a medallion holder, I believe we need a dignified “exit strategy”, but I also believe drivers who have been following the rules set out by the city years ago, and have structured their lives accordingly, should not be left out to dry.

This plan includes NO medallions going to those who’ve waited years and altered their lives believing they’d eventually “get their medallion”, or gain tenure.  Instead, the author of this plan seeks to take that raise and promotion these drivers have worked towards, and give it to the MTA, or sell it to them for $300,000!  Keep in mind that most of these drivers at the top of “the list” are getting up there in years and don’t have the time or energy left to pay off this kind of debt or to find a new career.

Is the primary purpose of having the MTA regulate taxis to provide better service to the public and to have better quality cabdrivers, or is it to extract as much money as possible from them?  Why isn’t this money used to quell the tsunami of illegal taxis, limos and towncars that are invading the city?  How can the MTA even consider selling more medallions before addressing this issue?  What will they be worth in a couple years if this isn’t stopped?

Those of us who’ve worked in the industry for years know that when drivers are earning a decent living and have a future to look forward to, they drive better, are calmer, friendlier, and tend to be of a higher quality.  This may not be obvious to someone who has merely served on the Taxi Commission for a year or two.

I think a Taxi Advisory Council is a good idea if it reasonably represents the different sides of the industry and its suggestions are considered and taken seriously.  However, after reading this proposal, and of its presentation the same day that our recommendations are finally to be considered by the Board, it has become clear to me that the TAC is being used to help the MTA appear as though there’s a legitimate process, when in reality, our concerns are ignored.

I have decided to make better use of my Monday afternoons and the considerable money I spend on parking.  I do not wish to continue being part of this facade.

Sincerely,

Barry Korengold

Vice Chair, SFMTA Taxi Advisory Council

President, San Francisco Cab Drivers Association

Tara Wrote:

August 13, 2012

Mr. Tom Nolan

SFMTA Board of Directors Chairman

1 South Van Ness, Floor 7

San Francisco, CA 94103

Dear Mr. Nolan,

It is with great regret and heavy heart that I feel compelled to resign from SFMTA’s Taxi Advisory Council, effective immediately.

My fellow Council members and I have worked hard on the task assigned to us two years ago. We have not only offered many constructive ideas but we have also made tremendous progress in bringing about industry consensus, all geared toward smoothing the implementation of the Taxi Medallion Sales Pilot Program.

We were pushed to finish our report to you many months ago, yet it has languished somewhere in the SFMTA hierarchy since then. We were finally told two months ago that we may present our report at the August 21^st Board meeting.

Now it seems that, at that same meeting, you will be asked to pass a cunning, cutthroat, and cold-hearted piece of legislation which totally circumvents not only the efforts we have put forth, but which has, so far, never even been mentioned at a Taxi Advisory Council meeting, much less vetted.

Such an action, with such coldly strategic timing, shows utter contempt for the hard work of the Taxi Advisory Council, and for our industry as a whole.

I, along with the other TAC members, have shouldered the expenses ($20 parking per meeting, for starters), and given our precious time, to help craft a workable medallion system to serve the people of San Francisco. In return, we have been disgracefully and disrespectfully treated.

I have nothing but the utmost respect for Taxi Services. Director Hayashi, Jarvis Murray, Michael Harris, and the staff have been a hard-working breath of fresh air in San Francisco’s taxi regulatory realm. In addition, my previous contacts with Muni, during my eight years on the Paratransit Coordinating Council Executive Board, were very rewarding.

I look forward to working with SFMTA again in the future, in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

 Tara Housman

The Arithmetic of Greed 2: Killing the Future

Perhaps the thing that riles me the most about the SFMTA's new Medallion Deform Plan is their cowardly and dishonest refusal to admit that they intend to KILL the WAITING LIST. 

I mean, as if these guys would shakedown everyone else in the business and let drivers earn medallions without paying for them.  As if the the MTA would reward cab drivers merely for the decades of service that they've given the public. As if the MTA would keep the City's commitment to these drivers. As if the MTA would consider fairness and compassion more import than a quick buck.

Actually, the MTA would make money even if they did give the medallions away for "free." It would just take a little time - but not too much. Most of the people on the top of the list are in their 60's or 70's. Their medallions would probably be turned around and transferred fairly quickly.

Let's do the Math (click "Read more" below):

The MTA's Plan to Rip Off Cab Drivers: The Arithmetic of Greed 1.

The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Director of Transportation Ed Reiskin - photo) has a new plan that is designed to transfer over $200,000,000 from taxi drivers to the MTA. Going from fairly innocuous to callous they want to:

1. Transfer (the MTA no longer uses the word "sell") medallions at a price of $300,000 with the MTA getting 30% instead 15% of the $250,000 under the current Pilot Plan.

2. Charge both Pre-k and Post-k medallion holders (who earned instead of bought their medallions) 50% to transfer their medallions for $300,000.

You heard that right. 50% - Five Zero - FIFTY PERCENT.

Did I say greed? The industry average for the sale of a taxi medallion (in New York, Boston, Chicago et al) is 5%.

While the MTA would take $150,000 from a $300,000 medallion, in Boston they would get $15,000 from the same medallion.

Conversely, a Boston medallion holder would keep $285,000 from the transfer or $135,000 more than a San Francisco driver.

Even the famous $1,000,000 medallion sale in New York only brought that city $50,000 leaving $950,000 for the medallion buyer and his or her banker.

The MTA justifies itself by claiming that San Francisco needs money. All the rest of these towns don't?

Greed, in context, seems an inadequate word. How about avarice, cupidity, rapacity, craving, lusting or money-grubbing?

Tomorrow: The Arithmetic of Greed 2 or Killing the Future.

The City vs the Cab Drivers: Now!

How rapidly the past becomes the future. Yesterday morning I wrote a post about a bleak moment in our recent past and today I find that it could become tomorrow's reality. The SFMTA has a new proposal.

It appears that Director Malcom Heinicke has convinced his colleagues that he is an expert on the taxicab business and they have taken in his gab hook, line and sinker.

Certainly, I doubt that anyone else on the MTA Board is cold enough to come up with a scheme like this.

Philosophically, the plan holds that public needs are more important those of any individual - especially if said individual drives a taxi. ("The city needs money, driver, and we volunteer YOU to foot the bill.") If enacted, the proposed legislation (on rough calculation) would result in the transfer of $100 million to $200 million from taxicab drivers to the SFMTA over a period of time - maybe more ... probably more.

I haven't gone through the specifics yet but in general the Medallion Reform Proposal would:

• Increase the transfer fee to the MTA from the sale of a taxi from 15% to 30% while increasing the price to $300,000.
• Allow Pre-K medallion holders to sell ... er ... I guess the world is "surrender" (as if the drivers had stolen the medallions when, of course, it's the MTA that wants something for nothing). Anyway, the "holders" can "surrender" their medallions to the MTA for $150,000 as opposed to selling them for $200,000 as they could have under the Pilot Plan.
• Force Post-K medallion holders to "surrender" their medallions to MTA for $150,000 instead of selling them for $200,000 as they could have under the Pilot Plan.
• Allow the MTA to turn around and sell the same medallions for which they had just paid $150,000 - for $300,000.
• Leave the drivers on the Waiting List who have worked the job hard and served the public well for fifteen or twenty years, who have followed all the rules and were promised a medallion if they did so, who have chosen to drive cabs instead of doing other jobs or following other careers,  hundreds of whom are over sixty waiting for - NOTHING.

Maybe this should be re-named Medallion Deform.

There will be two Town Hall Meeting to discuss the particulars of this moral and political abortion on: 

Tuesday, August 7 at #1 South Van Ness, 2nd floor Atrium from 1:30pm - 4:30pm  & 5 pm - 8pm.

The following items will be on the agenda for the August 21, 2012 SFMTA Board Meeting, meaning that nothing we say at the Town Hall meeting is expected to have any effect. Talk about transparency, huh!

MedallionReformCalendarItemfor08212012_000(1).pdf 24K   View   Download

MedallionReformLegislationfor08212012.pdf 72K   View   Download  To Brad Newsham, Sorry, Brad, if I said anything unkind.

The City vs the Cab Drivers 4: Heinicke's Schemes

Over the years Director Malcolm Heinick has presented us with a few variations on a major theme. The basic plot has always been to take money away from the cab drivers who do the work and give it to the City. This is usually to be accomplished by taking individually held medallions and turning them into special medallions or permits that are to be leased to drivers or companies by the city.

But, since the specifics change, I thought that it might be interesting to see the reception that these designs have been given by the people in the taxicab industry (the experts in the business) before looking at a version of the plan itself.

There was a Charter Amendment group studying taxis in 2007. I didn't attend but everyone I've talked to about it tells the same story.

Numerous industry people (drivers, medallion holders, managers) gave their ideas about how the taxi business should be reformed. Heinicke was then either assigned the task of writing up their ideas into a report or took it upon himself to do so. His report, however, included no thoughts or plans of anyone else - only his own. The other members of the group all repudiated the report.

It should be pointed out that in 2007 the economy was booming and San Francisco was flush. The city didn't need the money that Heinicke proposed to take away from the cab industry. Thus, for Heinicke, politics appears to precede economics. The principle of separating cab drivers from their coin - of turning the industry into an "income stream" for the SFMTA - appears primary for the Director even if there is no pressing reason for it.

Director Heinicke's ploy popped up again in 2009.

After Christiane Hayashi was demoted to Deputy Director, she was instructed to present this plan to the drivers by the MTA Board. We were told that we could "tweak" or "make "improvements" to the gambit but it was to be the future of the cab industry.

The new Deputy Director then proceeded to present Heinicke's stratagem at a couple of Town Hall meetings. She asked drivers, medallion holders, company owners and managers what they thought of the plan. Then she copied down the comments and brought them back to the Board to read.

The people at the Town Hall meetings universally expressed loathing for Heinicke's disregard of people working in the taxi industry.. Jane Bolig, who then was president of the board at Desoto Cab, quipped that, if the plan was implemented, the taxi industry would "look like Berlin after Wold War II."

Medallion holder Mike Spain thought that the plan looked like it was "drawn up by a grad student." Those were two of the nicer comments. 

The MTA Board finally "got it" and set up a new series of Town Hall meetings that culminated in the Pilot Plan - still the fairest and best conception of how to improve both the taxi business and taxi service that anyone has come up with - probably because people from all aspects of the cab industy helped create it.

I hate to have to spell out the moral of this story but some taxi people tend to be a tad slow on the uptake.

In 2009, it took all the people in the taxi industry acting together to stop Heinicke's nefarious ruse to turn the cab business into a feeder stream for the SFMTA.