could not purchase a medallion. i wish i would have been able to. i would have had the best cars, the best shift, but the city would not make that available to me. i decided to stay in the industry only because i knew that after a certain amount of time, about 13 years in my case, i was going to receive a medallion, for being a grizzled driver, basically. now they're trying to do the classic take from peter to pay paul, by excluding all of us who did play by the rules that the city established, from going to the airport. that is going to be the value of all the k medallions to basically nothing. because nobody is going to want to drive any of those cabs. it's going to have additional adverse impacts. the city is not going to be served. because if all the people, the shrinking pool of drivers is going work with the prop a medallions so they can go to the airport, you're not going to have the residents of san francisco being served. so this could have such a terrible impact on the -- [bell ringing] -- prop k medallion owners and most especially on the elderly population of the city which is still reliant upon taxi cabs. the mta does not have the best track record when it comes to proposals and i feel terrible for these people who purchased the medallions, but i should not, and my drivers should not be the ones to pay for it. it should be the city. thank you. [bell ringing] [applause] >> good afternoon. my name is kenny. i'm a medallion holder and everybody knows that it's so bad, that i drive the whole day, bring home 50 bucks. i have to raise three kids. we need lots of hope from you guys. having the city buy back the medallion. so we can get more help to go to the -- and we actually need the city to actually try some way to enforce or to limit the über, lyft, so we can survive. thank you. [applause] good afternoon. i've been a taxi driver for the last 30 years. and i'm on the board of taxi union. i think all the problem we have is über and lyft. if you limit them, or at least limit them from sf where they can't pick up, only drop off, that will help. and also by banning k medallions, it's totally unfair, because k people have been working for the last 30 years, a long time you know. and we've been following all the laws, all the rules. so it's not fair to steal from us and give it to the purchased medallions. i really am very sympathetic with them that they got this bad deal, but it's all mta's fault. they sold medallions, made millions of dollars and i think they should buy all the meions back and -- medallions back and picking them up at the airport, it's like you had a heart attack and they put a little band-aid on you. it's very bad, a cheap approach and it's dividing all the cab drivers. and everybody is feeling bad. the business, there is no way you can make a living now anymore. thank you. [applause] >> hi, number one, mta is the one who messed up everything. i drive cab 29 years. i have k medallion. i have no benefits. and they tried to stop us from the airport. where i go? 29 years i work in the city, start in the morning, 2:30. work, pick up all the drunk people. i did the 15 years of that. now i'm 56 years old. where should i go? tell me where i should go if you stop me from going to the airport? they purchase the medallion, they offered them a medallion because they jump the line. they are the one who jumped the line. they make their own decisions. they're the ones who pay under the table to get the medallion. if you don't believe me, take a test. thank you. >> hi, i'm liz bradley. 21 years in the industry. i've had a lot of bad jobs in my life, but i still love my job. i love my job. i may be the only person on the planet that would say this, because it's a hard job. it looks easy and it's fun sometimes, but you know, people complain about nothing all the time. bottom line, i put my name on a list, paid my $300, where is my $300 for my name on the list when they declined to give me my medallion. that's against the law. that's breaking rules and laws left and right. i want my $300 back if you're not going to give me my medallion. you want to sell it to me when you know i make $30,000 a year. what kind of joke is that? a bad one. did you know that 50% of all über drivers are felons? they can get out of prison in the morning, rent an über with their grandmother's car and pick up your daughter and son-in-law at the airport and the airport says we're so safe. where is it? i'm sorry, ain't buying it. the other thing, every time i turn around you guys are threatening us. we can't work more than ten hours, but you want us to pay $250,000 for a medallion when we have four pickups a day at the airport. [bell ringing]. you get four rides out of the airport, you make 100 bucks. you call that a good job? thank you. >> want to look at it before i start? ok. this is -- sfmta is doing what it does best, it is dividing this industry. it's really good at this. it's been doing it for the better part of 40 years. they get us cutting each other's throats. that's what they do best. this is the lawsuit filed by the federal credit union against the city. i'm going to go through it really fast. let's go to page 2. it says here the credit union says these are a lot of allegations would not decrease the medallion purchase price below $250,000 -- >> if you could pause the time. we didn't -- i don't think we got the right copy of this. we don't have page 2. >> no, no, you're not going to see many pages. this suit has maybe 80 pages. i just extracted certain -- >> i see. i see. >> i'm on page 2. >> page 4? >> well, look, don't look at the bottom here. just -- this is the cover. these pages come through -- it's about a 60-page document. it's a lawsuit. >> could i just ask you then to refer to the bullet point or something, because we can't follow it. >> what if i just say -- ok, well -- >> i can't follow along. without a page number. >> let's start at the top, no bullet point -- >> let's start his time again. >> ok. the credit union made a deal where no permits could be sold below -- did you want to ask me a question? >> you didn't start the time. sorry, ok. >> bullet point 11, takes a perfect security interest in transferrable medallions in the event of defaults. this is what sfmta promises. the program collapsed or failed because sfmta ceased transferring medallions and intended parties to -- this was meant to be an exit mechanism. next page, bullet point 22. they allege sfmta has not issued or sold medallions since 2016. bullet 23, the credit union has not been able to transfer any medallions. bullet 24, they have promised the credit union they would take steps to invigorate the industry. next page, bullet point -- at the top -- instead the sfmta let the business collapse. bullet point 26. even though it terminated the program, sfmta has failed to transfer or repurchase the credit union's foreclosed medallions. next page. bullet point 184. it wasn't until after november 2016, at a meeting, that sfmta repeatedly broke promises -- the credit union began to suspect that the program was in collapse. bullet point 185. it became clear to the credit union would not admit its revenue generating scheme had failed. next page, bullet point 93. $64 million was loaned. or i'm sorry, $64 million is alleged in the transfer program and bullet point 93 details all of the monies that were loaned in the various types. [bell ringing] [inaudible] bullet point 167. on november 3, 2016, all these people mentioned -- to have a meeting. it was at that meeting that the credit union realized that sfmta was not going honor its applications and their only recourse was to sue. this suit is why we're here. not because of the -- report, it's because of this suit. because the city -- [inaudible] -- is so extensive, it's trying to look for ways to mitigate what it's going to have to pay. this is the part. -- this is a farce. [applause] thank you. >> thank you very much. [inaudible] >> there is only one aspect of this program that is ok that is [inaudible] -- somewhere between that market price and what the city has paid is what the city should make up to those buyers. >> thank you. before the next speaker, i'd like to call peter miller and terry chan, you may line up as well. >> good afternoon. my name is amen. please i am a medallion holder for quarter of a million dollars and drove taxi for 30 years. i heard that they are crying here. i don't want to go against them, but über and lyft came only recently. those guys have pre-k medallion, and after, they only make so much money and now they're crying wolf here. as if they are the real victim. they are not. so what i'm trying to say here, you failed -- you mentioned something important -- you said all the passengers that come to sfo and all of a sudden, you want to reduce the taxi cabs to only 560, how can they handle that? their answer to the question is, we were waiting two and a half hours at the airport to get one passenger. if that proposal goes through, instead of two and a half hours, you just wait one hour and i'm sure there is no fix that by now, the only victim in this whole situation are people who purchased the medallion. we're the ones who are the victim. if you can help us a little bit to be the only one to pick up at the airport, that would be fair, that would be the most reasonable thing to do. [bell ringing] and i hope that goes through and we'll only wait one hour and we'll take care of all the passengers that need to be picked up at the airport. >> hi, good afternoon. my name is ca hall. i purchased medallion for $250,000, i cannot make my payment. number one, buy back medallion from us. number two, if sfmta don't buy back medallion, make a reasonable price. for example, 125. number 3, buy back medallion from us and give us medallion so drivers drive five days a week. if someone does not drive or work, his medallion -- if they don't drive five days a week. if they're driving, like the gentleman sitting here, they continue driving, i know them last 20 years, let them work. if someone -- came back with a yellow cab and got the 1500, $1200 check and go back, that -- all the medallions. please, please, help us. we're dying now. thank you very much. >> hi, i'm peter miller. second generation san francisco taxi driver. i'm opposed to these measures. i think it's divide and conquer. i think the taxi industry needs to stick together to the pre-k medallion holders. who my mother was one of. these are people who did not get a medallion for free. these are people, who through years, decades of blood and sweat equity, serving the citizens of san francisco, earned a medallion and were promised this was going to actually do something for their livelihood. and when you look at federal labor statistics, it shows one of the most dangerous jobs in the country is being a taxi driver. so even earning a medallion does not adequately compensate a taxi driver for what they put into it. the greatest loss is not to the drivers in this room, but the taxpayers. if you look at the value of the medallions, a new york medallion on the open market sells for a million dollars. i think a san francisco medallion is worth just as much. that puts the value of the medallion in san francisco at $2 million. this is money for 32 years under prop k, these were not bought and sold, they were reinvested into the city. this is the value to the taxpayers, good jobs, pensions and having control over our public transportation system. we need to look at how we can save this. i'm happy that you as an independent commission are looking into this. the mayor's office, the mta, the airport commission could be doing things or could have done things not to let this get to where it has. and we need to look at this and do something to move this in a better direction than it's go. thank you. please stand by. >> brought in as public employees. the taxi system needs to be a public service. needs to be a public utility just like the bus system and then the drivers need to be given full pay benefits and union protection, you name it, especially union protection to grab the mta by the short hairs and make them do the right thing and i'm including the drivers in the medallion system and the ones that want to retire but if you don't do the second step it won't work. there's all kinds of things you can do with regulations and fees you can put so many fees and so many regulations on the bad behavior of the ubers and lyfts that it would be uneconomical for them to under cut the drivers and they'd have to line up and become taxi drivers in the public municipal system. those are the solutions. we need to cut through to do that. thanks. >> supervisor: thank you very much. do we have any other public speakers. >> clerk: that was the last public speaker. >> supervisor: if you have any other comments please line up or we'll close public comment. >> thank you, supervisor fewer. on occasion i've done policy work for the cab companies so i want to make that full closure. as a number former commissioner on the transportation commissioner one of the most appalling bankrupt studies i've seen it says to the san francisco community we'll divide and conquer and people came to raise their families in the cab industry pitted against the newer immigrant. it's appalling what the sfmta is trying to do because they basically made a mistake in 2009 and decided they wouldn't put out more medallions so we can at least address the problems of supply and demand that allowed the development of lyft and uber. secondly, they came up with a more regulatory approach which produced over 500 to 700 pages of regulations that every single one of the medallion holders have to adhere to while their counterparts face no regulations. third of all, they decide to put a $375 million price tag on the price of medallions as the city ownership but they weren't going pay for that. what they were going do is make the people try to find a way to earn a living pay for that. and they caught themselves in a mistake. they went to the credit union and said, you -- we will guarantee this and sell them out the city placed essentially a liability for over evaluation of the system and put it on the backs of these hard-working men and women. [bell ringing] >> supervisor: thank you very much. i'm sorry, if you have given public comment on the issue you're not allowed to give public comment again. if you have not spoken before this body, please come forward but if you've already spoke enyou will not be permitted to speak again. speaker, please. you have two minutes. >> i've jerry chan and have been driving since 1974 and i think i have a solution to solve all this. you can buy back the medallion from the city but it would take me 45 minutes to an hour to finish my solution. i willing to talk to either one of you individual whatever time you have and every time i bring this up these people want to kill me, okay. all the cab driver want to kill me every time i bring it up and i need more time. if i can schedule a time with you, either one individually or all together i would solve the problem. uber, lyft, buy back, everything. >> mr. goebel would you mind taking the gentleman's information? next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is roberto martinez. i bought a medallion for $250,000. i work more than 12 hours a day. i start at 8:00. sometimes i get home after 11:00. i don't see my family because i have to make they'll payments. i pay more than $3,000 to the company and now we have' check and i have one to 15 to make the payments. i'm behind because no customers. the problem is all the solutions is not -- we have a lot of competition. too many. even sometimes i cannot go through. the busiest day for us at the wharf they come plenty, friday, saturday sometimes go home very upset because we don't make money. too many of them. you should do something to reduce them and believe me, we have a pretty bad situation. i hope you can help us with something. thank you so much. have a great day. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is mohammad tirti and i'm driving one of the three med medallions and it's not a free medallion. it's my life's work. i paid 15 years call it $250,000 the first 14 years. i paid. it was not for sale. so please don't separate us from each other and believe the job done properly. it's very difficult these days for everybody who buy it and get it free. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm the last one i'll make it fast. i'm ebron and i bought it for $250,000 and i don't want to take your time to hear the same story but always my kids they ask me, if something happens to them what happens to the $250,000 do we have to pay them. can you ask the sfmta, if i have a stroke today what happens to the medallion. what will happen to my family and kids? it's a shame when you sit and talk about the income in the city for $50,000, $60,000 a year. do you know how much they pay in rent with two kids. i have an a daughter 19, she will study medical can you tell me how i can support her and a son 18? sfmta, when people go rob a bank they think the way out not in. can you tell sfmta do they have a plan b? after this year they come ask the driver what we can do? we wait 17 years. i wait 17 years and i wait to 50. sfmta what will happen to me if something happens to me? the bank will take the medallion and i have all [indiscernible]. i bet a million dollars you're not because they cannot support you. i live in fairfield. it takes me two hours to come here. it takes me another two and a half hours to commute. another $1500 a month. mr. lazar, knows when he sold his business there is no business. sfmta have a lot of things they can do. [bell ringing] >> supervisor: thank you very much. commissioner pollock, we've called all the cards. thank you very much. public comment is now closed. any questions, comments? >> i have a couple additional questions for ms. trin. can you explain the payments that the medallion holders make to the cab companies. i don't understand that. >> there are a couple different ways to run a medallion and one is called gas and gauge and that is you are the medallion holder and you hand over your medallion to the company to run and they run it for you. that's one way and the second way is where you are an affiliate. you run the medallion as a small business owner. you affiliate -- you're required to affiliate with a color scheme and pay for dispatch service for the colors and run thur medallion under that color scheme. it depends on the package you get. sometimes it's the vehicle insurance, the dispatch, the colors, there's a package the medallion holder will buy from the color scheme and dispatch service. >> so the holders of the $125,000 or $250,000 medallion, the post-k is that what you call them? >> that's a different group. it's super complicated and fraught. >> >> supervisor: they have to pay for whatever they have their payment on the lone -- loan and in addition pay the color scheme and whatever's left over is their wage? >> correct. and the purchase medallion holders typically run as affiliates and have all the costs you just mentioned. >> so that's -- and you've taken all that into account when you've estimate the $38,000 a year annual earning? >> correct. and the full details are in the report. i'm happy to send it over, the pfp report and did a full analysis and were on site and talked to the various stakeholder groups and accounted for the cost of the medallion, yes. >> we will be continuing to look into this. i will just say that first -- i don't have any more questions, thank you and thanks for being the messenger today but to the workers i will just say thank you so much for coming out and sharing all this information and the stories. it's outrageous. i know many of you have come to the board of supervisors meetings and waited a long time to get our attention on these issues. i do believe the entire way in which the sfmta has handled taxi drivers is outrageous. there's been so many mistakes along the way. it's hard to even begin to talk about. there's a lot of information to take in and understand how this works. in general, i am not -- i understand where the two groups are coming from and the fact that are being pitted against each other, especially by this propos proposal from the sfmta around the airport. i will be looking into whether our not our powers to regulate t.n.c.s are greater in the than the rest of san francisco and the board of supervisors is limited and this is a huge call out to our state delegation and assembly member wang and chu, you have to give us that power. not only have we done wrong as a city by the taxi industry and the many workers that are suffering so tremendously in this industry and this is personal for me. my dad was a taxi driver before i was born actually and then he drove a super shuttle for a while so it's in my blood the taxi driver ethos and i know how dangerous and difficult this job is and what a service it provides to the city but we need to the power to regulate t.n.c.s and if there's a possibility over time to buyback the medallions, i don't know yet. we have more research and a deeper delve into the situation to understand that. i also know that what would not only solve this situation with the value of the medallions and many other issues in our city, safety, congestion, a number of things as if the board of supervisors had the power to regulate the t.n.c.s. so this say call-out to our -- is a call-out to our state regulation, if you don't want to regulate them yourself, let us do it and we'd be happy to do so. in the meantime, i'm hoping we might have additional strategies we can employ at the airports to make sure that taxi drivers of all medallion types get some leg up to be able to give those rides at the airport which i know is such -- really the only part left of the industry that's at all profitable. i'll just end by saying before passing it over to my colleague that i really appreciate mr. brooks' comments about the taxi system being a public agency and drivers being public workers. i went to spain over the legislative break and i arrived at the end of a multi-day taxi strike where the entire country's taxi drivers struck for days. not a single one of them worked. shut down that public transportation -- well, it is a public transportation system. they are employees of the cities. what struck me was the solidarity of the workers to one another. we got into really long conversations with all of our taxi drivers while we were there about the fight they have against the t.n.c.s in spain and it was so different because there was so much solidarity among all the taxi drivers whereas i see you being split apart. i would really encourage to you stick together in this fight because you've got such a monster to fight on the outside, these large corporations dumping money into politicians' campaigns to get them on their side. you have to stick together. don't let them separate you in this struggle. [off mic] >> supervisor: i know but i'm telling you already have a big uphill battle as it is and when you go against each other it makes it harder so that's a call out i have to you. i know supervisor fewer and i spoke about this and it's not something we'll turn a blind eye to but continue to work on this to get justice for you all. i just wanted to -- i learned so much today. i appreciate your time. and the education you've given me and we're going to continue to work on this issue so thank you so much. >> just to echo commissioner roanen's comments, a huge thanks to workers who came out today to give us an education and thank you for your presentation and the education on different types of medallions. i mentioned on the outset of public comment that i am a customer of taxi drivers and primarily use taxis and the bus for transportation and so it was a realization that even being a customer doesn't protect drivers. there are so many more layers purchasing the medallion and their monthly payment, payments to color schemes. these are things i didn't understand in the landscape of what it means to be a driver in the city and so that's been an education for me and just sort of knowing the ways that i knew to support fell short. i thank you for that. i am interested in speaking with mr. goebel and having you talk to us about what the jurisdictional boundaries are on how lasco could begin to address this situation. we understand that not only do the board of supervisors have no jurisdiction in areas that sfmta does, that this body of lafco would merely only be to influence. something that could come before the board of supervisors and also to be a sounding board but i think if lafco were a sounding board for the taxi drivers, you would feel failed in that sense because we don't have the power to make a change at sfmta. so it's not fair to say we can help in the ways that i think need to happen but what we can do is take the schaller report and other items and begin to look at ways in which lafco could further study the issue. i really struggle with how we could. i struggle with our budget, which is severely constricted and with staff time and so i just want to invite mr. goebel to advise us and perhaps today is not the day, but if you have a sense of what lafco could do. >> commissioner, thank you. yes, i've been talking about potentially doing a survey of the purchase medallion holders to get more data on them and understand the demographics but i think you're correct in that we are limited in our authority, however, you can direct me to conduct the study on any aspect of the sfmta's directions to go to the board of supervisors if you so choose. >> would that require you to submit a supplemental budget request? >> i think i would need to identify funding for it, but if you so desire we could hire a consultant and i could work with agencies to identify funding but i personally in my role with clean power s.f. and emerging mobility services i would not have the capacity to take on a big load. >> commissioner: thank you. >> commissioner: so in close ig want to thank everyone for coming out today. i know you took out a day from driving to come out a couple hours. i think we all learned a lot. thank you ms. turin for educating us and i still don't feel like i understand it fully. i just want to say the san francisco board of supervisors has very little power over the sfmta. we can vote to budget up or down. that's all we can do. i, myself, have gone before the sfmta commission which is unusual. usually supervisors do not go before the sfmta commission but i did in this budget cycle ask them to do something to address the issue for taxi drivers and when the vote to approve the budget of m.t.a. came forward i voted no on their budget because of this very reason. i think clearly this is separ e separating you as taxi drier -- drivers are suffering and some are suffering more, those that bought their medallions for $250,000 or $150,000 are suffering but the whole industry is suffering as a whole. there is a culprit and we can point fingers to city but it's t.n.c.s also and i echo what supervisor ronen said is i know it's hard but i hope you will stay united because i think working class folks need to stay united in san francisco. i said we don't have much jurisdiction over this. i think we can have further conversation. i feel like this has opened up a whole bunch of questions. like, i am wondering who are the people -- i mean, we have heard that the medallion holders and taxi drivers are financially challenged. are the taxi companies financially challenged, i'm wondering, are they still make profit? so all these questions come into play. so i want to thank my colleagues for having this brought forward also to hear this and i think that we will have to continue this conversation but i just want to thank everyone for coming out today and some of the stories i think my colleagues will agree with me are somewhat heartbreaking and it is very frustrating, quite frankly, that our hands are tied on what we can do. thank you so much today for coming out and sharing your stories and we don't have an action item on this but i think we will continue this for further discussion. so madame clerk, i would like to make a motion to continue item number 4 on the agenda until the next meeting. >> clerk: we still need to take public comment though. >> commissioner: i'm sorry. >> clerk: i'll call the item first. you're on item six. would you like me to call item four. >> commissioner: yes. >> clerk: an update and presentation on emerging services emergency labor draft scope. >> commissioner: is there public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. i make a motion to continue this item until the next meeting. >> clerk: and we need a second. >> commissioner: without objection. please call item number five. >> clerk: item five is authorization for the executive officer to issue a rerequest for proposals for and not to speed $5,000 to support a contract for labor service of emerging emergency services contract workers. >> commissioner: please, quietly if you're having a conversation please leave the room. we're conducting a meeting here. thank you. >> commissioner: i believe mr. global has a 30-second explanation. >> this would authorize know issue an r.f.f. on a survey on emergi emerging mobility services and this would authorize the funds for that. >> commissioner: thank you very much. is there any comment from our s? -- our colleagues? commissioner pollock. >> mr. goebel, to begin the work -- i know we're continuing item number four. could we still approve the issue or authorize you to issue the r.p.f. and we can have an update with item four and update on the r.f.p. on the next meeting? >> that would be fine. and this will take up the bulk of the funds of about $62,000 and leave us with a balance of $7,000. i do anticipate it's possible the cost for this survey will rise but i can't really say until we receive some proposals in and i'll have a better idea then but this authorization today will get us rolling. >> commissioner: thank you very much. >> commissioner: i have one more question have you considered an r.f.q. instead of r.f.p. to cut down on responses? >> what i was planning on doing with your approval is doing an informal process so that i solicit three or more bids on this. that will be a little quicker than the formal process. >> great, thank you. >> any other comments? this opens public comment? any public comment on item number five? >> thank you, mark brugberg again. i was looking at the materials here and i noticed there was a potential survey instrument which i take to be a draft but i had a couple of comments on that because there seems to be a concern for the workers who work for these companies. a little ironic i think given the fact of what we have in san francisco which is a living wage and minimum wage and prevailing wage and for cab drivers we have a starvation wage. then there seems to be a lot of concern about the working conditions of t.n.c. drivers but there is an exploitation going on there i do believe. i wanted to make a couple suggestions. some of these questions, how many hours do you work a week? well, i think you might want to know how many hours some of these people work a day. what are the housing arrangements and how many are sleeping in parking lots? these are safety issues. how much are they earning at this job and if they're working for multiple companies, you want to know that. there's a whole bunch of questions i think are not on the list that need to be asked so thank you for that. >> commissioner: thank you very much. again, this is item number five. please come forward. >> sorry, i was confused because i thought we were talking about the working conditions and what you can do about t.n.c.s and everything. is that not so? >> commissioner: i'm sorry we're on the authorization for the executive author to request a proposal to fund and support a contract for a labor survey studying the emerging mobility services contract workers. >> okay. i noticed a peculiar thing about what happens to t.n.c. workers. if you go to 24-hour fitness which i do quite frequently, they're full at so many times of the day and half the night of people who come for a shower and a shave and then go back to sleep in their cars. now, this is completely and utterly illegal and it's not a question of the war of us against them or anything else. this is a problem because according to the county transportation board there are approximately 45,000 t.n.c.s at one time or another work in the city. the vast majority of these people are commuting long distances to come into the city. they do not live in the city because they can't afford to live in the city and park their vehicles and they go into the parking lot of 24-hour fitness or whatever. >> commissioner: thank you very much. >> and they're sleeping in their cars and they need to wash. they need to shave, they need to do all those things. and nobody is taking any account of their hours. i'm a regular person who speaks at the c.p.u.c. and i was, in fact, a party member and resigned from that because it's futile. if you haven't got a bag full of money, you won't do anything with a p.u.c. but the p.u.c. have never increased their enforcement personnel from 35 people for the entire state. yet, there are 150,000 t.n.c.s approximately but they don't even keep count [bell ringing] . >> commissioner: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> i want to take a note of the potential survey questions you offered. >> i hadn't planned to speak on this but i sent a copy of the two of you and the five-minute video the nbc affiliate in sacramento did and maybe you can look at and that it's for everyone else's education that certain people who are criminals have advertised in chat rooms and websites you can rent out their lyft and uber account which is entirely illegal. so what the story showed was that these people who rented it and don't have the money to go straight to their bank account and substituted pictures of their own cars and photographer so someone comes out of a bar for example, in eastbound -- in eastbou under the influence and the person hasn't not only been fingerprint order a background check at all. when they looked into it it was a guy who was totally innocent and his identity had been stolen and this seems to be common and seems the dmv seems to be playing jurisdictional dodgeball. if you're going to do a study, it seems like the people driving in the system aren't in the system or registered so i don't know how you will get statistics when you don't know who the people are driving the cars. >> commissioner: thank you very much. public comment is now closed. would someone like to make a motion to authorize our executive officer? >> a motion to authorize our executive officer to issue an r.p.f. not to exceed $65,000 for this contract on emerging mobility service contract workers. >> commissioner: thank you very much. we can take that without objection. thank you very much. please read item number seven. >> clerk: item seven is authorization to expend $145,000 in funds for the executive officer to attend the 2018 conference. >> commissioner: i think it's explanatory. any public comments? public comment is closed and i make the motion to pass to attend the conference. >> i need a second. >> commissioner: thank you very much. could you please read item eight. >> cler >> clerk: item eight is orders to not to exceed the amount of $5,000 for -- >> commissioner: i think this is mainly for our possible interns and supplies? >> exactly, madame chair. currently they don't have authority to sign purchase orders without approval from the commission. this would grant me some spending authority so i don't have to come back to the commission with every request and not to exceed $5,000 subject to available funds and approval by the chair. there's a resolution attached to this which i have which say final line the executive officer will exercise the authority with approval from the chair and be it further resolved the executive order shall provide an annual report outlining the contract and purchase orders. >> commissioner: thank you very much. colleagues, any comments or questions? >> i have a quick question. it's not to exceed the amount of $5,000 for each purchase order so we're not capping you at $5,000 for the year. >> that's correct. >> commissioner: i make a motion to authorize the executive officer to approve contract and purchase orders for professional services and equipment and supplies not to squeeze t -- exceed the amount of $5,000. >> seconded. >> commissioner: i think we can take that without objection. thank you very much. we are going to lose quorum very quickly so mr. goebel would you mind if we did a two-minute item number 10? great. >> clerk: it's executive officer's report introduction of interns mark bautista and leah tru and a meeting scheduled for 2019. >> thank you. mark had to leave because he had to go to class. mark bautista is our new intern and senior at s.f. state studying mechanical engineering with a minor in electrical engineering and has done course work and i'm impressed with his enthusiasm and i'm already learning a lot from him and will help us plan what the next steps will be on clean pour -- power

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Spain , San Francisco , California , Peter Miller , Jerry Chan , Roberto Martinez , Liz Bradley ,