sentences that acknowledge that it has created job opportunities, enabled city residents to utilize a greater supply than provided by the taxi industry alone and easier entry into jobs for the taxicab industry, more flexibility and better pay. better pay, more flexibility, easier entry jobs, and more supply. so did you analyze the specifics of any of those? like, how many more jobs, how much more flexible, what the pay differential is or what the differential for experience for past for riders is ? was that analyzed at all? >> we did not look into that? >> why not? >> we were asked to provide a profile of the regulation of both industries and identify potential risks and/or costs to the city. >> did supervisor mar ask you to look at the benefits of tncs beyond two sentences? >> yeah. we were asked to, you know, look broadly at the benefits and the costs. >> okay. because i see -- i'm not trying to be critical. i have great respect for your office, but there's a lot of pages and pages that seem to be, you know -- one could read as critical of the tnc industry or pointing out aspects that maybe need some work, which we all agree. we all agree the insurance needs work, other aspects need work, but it would seem that there are benefits as well, and that that would probably deserve some analysis. a lot of people have jobs now. i mean, i know people in my district who are, you know, having trouble making their rent and they drive for one of these companies and they're able to make rent because of that. i know people who have given up their cars because of this so they no longer need a parking space because for the first time they're actually able to rely and before they didn't think they could get a cab, but now they can get something where there's a cab or tnc. i think in looking at this issue, i think it's important to look at both sides, the challenges and the improvements they need to make, and the benefits to the community and workers as well. >> just on that question, there are more than two sentences about the benefits so we do have details in the tables about the lower costs for drivers to get a job compared to getting a job with the taxi industry and there is information about the number of jobs because we know there's 10,000 vehicles and the number of jobs is commensurate with that. so there is some information in there about the benefits and we've made the statement several times that providing more transportation services than were available before. >> okay. >> also on the wear and tear we made the statement that the tnc vehicles are well -- could well be replacing purchases that individuals may have made of cars so we're not assuming there's a detrimental effect because of these vehicles being on the street and that is in the report. >> and all vehicles pay gas tax and the like? thank you very much, i appreciate it. >> thank you -- >> supervisor mar. >> yeah, thank you. i just wanted to say thank you for a couple of the recommendations wales. as well. i wanted to ask you about an assumption from emails i've been receiving about having stronger driving vehicle training, consumer protection, protections built in whether it's state law or what we do locally, that that would lead to a decrease in service. i'm wondering, do you think additional safety regulations and some state and local regulations would lead to decreased service? >> i guess it'd probably depend on the level of, you know, what specifically is being put in the proposal, but right now it seems like the incentives are -- from the drivers are pretty heavily in favor of working for the transportation network companies. i -- in preparing this report, i saw a lot of information that showed that -- or indicated that taxi company -- a lot of taxi drivers are shifting over to drive for tncs. obviously they're always -- the tncs are getting a lot of new drivers that are driving for the first time, but there is also, i think, evidence of a shift over from the taxi industry to the tnc industry. >> and then just really briefly, you've looked at other jurisdictions in the report, in particular seattle, but also a number of other jurisdictions. and could you just talk a little bit about the state of california's regulatory power versus what we can do locally and maybe some ideas that have come from other local jurisdictions? >> sure, so in seattle, now, the situation in many of these jurisdictions is in flux. one of those is seattle, which i think has put forward one of the more stringent sets of regulations and one thing that makes -- that is unique about seattle's proposal is that it enables their city administrator to place a cap on the number of tnc licenses or moratorium on new tnc licenses. in most of these jurisdictions they're putting forward regulations that touch upon many areas of the cpuc. it's touching upon insurance requirements, training, criminal background checks, vehicle inspections. so what we're seeing is a lot of consistency in those areas, and then i think seattle kind of sticks outs as one that took it a step further. i should say that the ordinance did pass in seattle, but there's a question as to whether it's going to be rescinded now by the city council or by the voters up there. >> and then i had another question about your estimation of 5,000 to 10,000 drivers from the five tnc companies in the city. why is it we can't come up with a more accurate estimate of how many are on the street or how many available in peak times or in general times? >> so the tncs are not required at least currently to report the number of drivers that are working for their respective companies to the cpuc and the mta has no census or -- currently they're not claiming jurisdiction so the mta is not actually regulating in any respect the tncs. >> i really appreciate the thoroughness of the report and how quickly you got it completed as well, so thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i just had a quick question. you may not know the answer to this and i'll ask sfm ta if you don't. on the first graph you had put on the extent of required background checks, it says that sfmta looks at the entire adult criminal history. >> correct. >> do you know how they do that? >> yes. so as a government agency the mta is permitted to do fingerprint based criminal backgrounds checks and it goes through, like, a national department of justice database. and tncs as private entities do not have access to that system so they can run checks on social security numbers, which provides seven years of history, but not the entire whole criminal history. >> and do you know if sfmta has changed their policy since the enactment of the fair chance ordinance? >> my understanding is their current policy is still checking the entire adult criminal background. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> okay. >> mr. chairman, i was just going to thank everyone. i have an appointment that i have to be at and i cannot stay, but i appreciated my colleagues' amendments to the resolution and i would strongly urge, as you consider the last -- i think there's a couple of resolves that are before you to consider -- and i think it's been handed out. it's a two sided sheet that has in red some compromised language from what supervisor wiener has proposed and my proposal is to include, i think, supervisor wiener's additional resolution, but to replace the last resolved with the following language, resolve that the san francisco board of supervisors urges the sfmta to develop a plan [inaudible] including the protection of accessible services and enforcement of enhanced safety regulations in cooperation with the california public utilities commission within six months of the passage of this resolution and striking the original language that was proposed. that is my proposed compromise from what supervisor wiener has proposed, but also allowing his resolve to be added in as well. i'm sorry that i cannot stay to kind of hear the discussion of this, but i think for the the whereas recommendations, i would say including supervisor wiener's, but not striking the language that is factual that references the budget and legislative analyst's report, for example, and not striking the factual language on tncs and people with disabilities and accessibility, that would be my recommendation. but i'm sorry that i cannot stay for the dialogue from the public or from the body. >> thank you supervisor mar. colleagues, i also, if i may, i did see supervisor kim's minor amendment about the fair chance, which i'm fully supportive of so i've incorporated a version of that. this would be on page 4, line 10 of my red lined version, wra it says including but not limited to one stringent safety regulation. and then i've added in, stringent safety regulations, including criminal background checks, [inaudible] >> thank you for doing that, chair wiener and thank you to supervisors kim and cohen for making that recommendation as well. >> thank you. supervisor kim. >> thank you. i actually have a [inaudible] 15 minutes ago so i'm not going to be able to stay the entire hearing, but i want to clarify, supervisor mar, you want to keep >> page 2, line 19 -- and i'm drawing from -- i believe it's supervisor wiener's version, so page 2, line 19, keep the mention of the budget and legislative analyst's report. it's drawing directly from the report. . and from line 19 through page 3, line 15, so my suggestion is keeping in all that language and not striking it. >> that's, "driver's and"? >> yes. >> you just want line 15? >> no, page 2, line 19; all the way through page 3, line 15. so keeping all those factual and information into the resolution, but allowing supervisor wiener's additional language to be included. >> okay. >> thank you for clarifying. >> i know that we had, from the mta, kate torn, who's here and been the recently appointed interim taxi and accessible services s director and i wanted to thank her as well. >> thank you. goods afternoon chair wiener and committee members cohen and kim and supervisor mar. excited to be here. i've been on the job a week so hit the ground running, or tried to. and i have prepared some comments today and if i go on too long i guess you'll just give me the signal. >> yeah, if you could be extremely brief that will help. >> i've been the para transit manager at the sfmta for 15 years and was recentsly appointed accessibility side of the house and if any questions come up related to that please let me know. i really wanted to position the sfmta's values related to a regulated taxi industry and that there's a public good to having a regulated taxi industry and that we have an interest in maintaining a strong and healthy taxi industry. and we champion that through these values of public safety, good customer service, accessibility and sustainability. and we've heard a lot of comments are the ble report so i won't go into the details about public safety, but we know include insurance and vehicle inspections and clearly marked vehicles, drivers training, background checks, et c. we have noticed through our enforcement team that there has been an up tick in violations associated with street hails of non tnc vehicles and non taxi vehicles so this is something we're concerned about. general public drivers picking up street hails. last week in the last few weeks there was a registered sex offender actually found to be trying to pick up a street hail so this is a real concern to us when private vehicles that are not clearly marked are providing services so we know the values of good customer service and non discrimination. all customers are required to be served in the taxi industry, all neighborhoods are required to be served. . we can do better on that. all cabs are required to accept credit cards and debit cards and then there's the clear and fair structure. accessibility -- taxis have been part of our para transit program since 1981 so we have a long history in working with them and we've had wheelchair accessible taxis since is the 1994. if there were no para transit service we estimate it would cost the city approximately $6 million more in those para transit trips to be provided on vans. we talked ability the clean area requirements and the fact that many 7% them are low [inaudible] program. also, there's an economic development interest here. taxis provide a sustainable career. we need more drivers, we're looking for more drivers. i think this is what's happening now that the -- i'm understanding tncs are recruiting drivers with taxis as well and we feel like it's a good career path for our taxi drivers because after driving for a certain am of time and getting on the and there's pride of ownership in that medallion so we have a strong interest in maintaining that career path. also drivers have workers comp insurance, there's a due process, if there's a complaint against a driver or customer that there's a due process so these are values we finds to be very important for us. sfmta's provided a lot of support to the taxi industry given the economic situation that we've providing incentives for our ramp taxi program to value this important service and there have been a series of fee reductions for the industry at this time. initial initiatives include developing a market and driver recruitment plan so i'll put the call out today we are interested this drivers. we are offering free training for the driver at this point and free ramp taxi training and so we're going to really be putting an effort up in that way, increased enforcement and a focus on creating more taxi stands. that's it in a nutshell >> thank you for jumping into the position so quickly and hitting the ground running as well. >> how about better service? >> that's -- and i say that because -- and i'm looking forward to working with you. i think that i heard a lot about implicitly what's good about cabs and bad about tncs, but not the acknowledgment that the cab system in the city was failing and i'll be honest, the agency and -- your predecessor in this role, there was some real challenges in terms of working with the tncs because there was a hostility and i'm hoping that will change. i don't think that the mta should be hostile to tncs. i think the mta should be looking for ways to work together so i want to put that out there because the mta had had a lot of years and was given enormous power by the voters to make improvements to the cab system back in 2007 and years went by and there were finally some small changes, but not anything near the dramatic improvements that people on the street want. and so i hope that the, you know, mta will focus on making those improvements and not just in terms of the negativety in terms of tncs. you talk about things in terms of customer complaints, those happen against cabs too. they're good cab drivers, bad cab drivers, there are good tnc drivers, and bad ones. >> absolutely. as i was waiting during the recess and just briefly talking to some of the drivers here, it to me looks like the same group of drivers that may be driving for tncs may be driving for taxis, but they're people looking for work, jobs, to have a career, and i don't think there's a huge divide in terms of who's providing the service and we certainly don't want to create a hostile environment so we're about making connections and trying to finds common goals. again, i was trying to position the taxi industry with the values we're championing and that we have regulatory authority to implement, but i -- your point well taken about customer service. >> yeah. i just want to make sure. all your values you stated are good ones. i just want to make sure one of those values is also providing reliable service so people can get a cab when they want to get one because that has not emanated from the agency very much. >> absolutely. and we'll have to, as an industry, have to provide that service in order to provide. >> thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> i didn't realize you were in the audience, otherwise i would have asked the question of you. but san francisco had recently passed the fair chance ordinance, but i hope you will reconsider and actually fall in line with how we do criminal conviction backgrounds checks, in terms of seven years, not just the entire adult life. that was one quick comment. i have to say, and, you know, i don't have a really nuanced understanding of our taxi industry, but we are losing not just clients and riders, we losing drivers. and i think sfmta is going to have to have a real deep look at our system that we have a real high cost of entry to becoming a taxi driver and that's a system that's not going to work anymore given the existence of tnc companies. whether we agree with this or not, it is in existence today and probably will be for quite some time. i just -- i feel for the drivers and i know that they are -- they've lost a ton of business. when i talk to taxicab drivers they feel like they've lost up to 50% of their revenue and they can't stay. and we may lose all of our drivers soon and i just -- i think we have to rethink this model at this point and i just hope at some point we have that conversation instead of saying this is the good system and that's the bad system and we're going to keep fighting for the good system, even though the drivers and riders are leaving it. we can think we have the better and safer system, and i agree with that, but in terms of the market and the way it's going right now, we may not have drivers or riders so a good look at that system would be important. i don't have any solutions or advice for that, but i think it's important to face that perspective at a certain point and really address it. . it's certainly a critical time in the taxi industry and the industry as a whole. i wanted to comment, my kol like and i were looking at the transportation coat vis-a-vis the fair chance ordinance, and there is staff discretion. so we have that in the code already, but we can also review the fair chance ordinance and see where we need to align. >> and we're happy to meet with you about it offline. >> yeah. absolutely. >> thank you very much . >> thank you. okay. at this point we will open this item up for public comment and i want to profusely thank the members of the public who have sat through our very long land use hearing today. so thank you for your patience and so we'll now do public comment and i have several cards. i apologize in advance if i mispronounce your names. [inaudible] and shawn taylor, bill [inaudible], beth hailey. go ahead. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is [inaudible] and i've been a lift driver since april of 2013. to date i've given over 6,000 rides and never refused a passenger. i've done this while consistently maintaining a 4.9 out of 5 star rating. this [inaudible] as my passengers repeatedly confirmed they had a safe and friendly driver [inaudible] rigorous screening and background checks that were required for me to start driving for lift. i can attest that ride share policeman forms have dramatically increased transportation options for residents throughout the area. ride sharing drivers regularly give their neighbors a ride providing organic platform for [inaudible] san francisco and are too support innovative transportation options ratser than overburden them with excessive regulations. [inaudible] for san francisco. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> thank you for your time today. my name is john taylor and i've lived on 11th and ir ving and sun set for the last [inaudible]. i drive from 7:00 to 11:00 in the morning monday through friday. i start my day from home by helping a student from sun set or richmond get to san francisco state or city college or i help someone in my neighborhood get to downtown. over the months i've become friends with a number of repeat passengers. they asked about my riding and i ask about their classes or careers. after my downtown drop off and head back to my neighbors. thanks to lift mid after my morning ride i have time to go home and work on either my writing or attempt to get my short stories published. thanks to lift i can pursue my dreams of becoming a fiction writer and not fear losing my home because i did not choose the 9:00 to 5:00 route. i'd like to let you know they have added so many layers to the people of the city. they are so kinds and caring and 3d and human and live and they have made me a better person. i wake up everyday to hang out with them and i am endlessly fortunate to call that my job. before lift i worked as a bartender and it was impossible to get a cab to take me back to the sun set. it is because i know this personally how difficult it can be to get a ride to this neighborhood, that i hang out in it. and it is because i get where they are going. i have never denied a ride. thank you for your time. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> supervisors thank you for having me. i don't have a card filled out but hopefully that's okay. sally from uber technologies. we're proud to be a part of san francisco, having been founded and grown here, head kwartdered with hundreds of ploy years just down the street here. r believes that ride sharing is just one part of transportation solution in san francisco and should be seen as one of the options for residents. uber is a technology company that seamlessly connects riders and drivers with our app. one of the ways our app is [inaudible] peer-to-peer. this resolution calls upon the san francisco mta to establish additional local regulations that are unnecessary and due mriktive. [inaudible] operates under a transportation company [inaudible] on april 7, 2014. tncs are regulated by the state just like tpc and there's no meter rational for additional regulation. the tnc permit from the puc requires many of the things talked about today -- driving roshd checks, $1 million commercial insurance, and planned surrounding providing accessibility for wheelchairs. uber and myself have met with sfmta to ask how we can [inaudible] accessible vehicles. as written in this resolution does not accurately take into account the ways in which puckuc currently regulates tncs. san francisco transit first policy [inaudible] the primary objet

Related Keywords

California , United States , San Francisco , John Taylor , Beth Hailey , Shawn Taylor ,