City and County of San Francisco Taxi Commission

Public Convenience & Necessity Report February 13, 2007

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ......................................................................................4 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................. 7 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................ 9 Dispatch Survey............................................................................................ 9 Flag Down Survey....................................................................................... 13 Observation of Hotel Taxi Stands ................................................................. 15 Survey of SFO Airport Taxi Staging Lots........................................................ 15 FINDINGS .................................................................................................. 15 Dispatch Survey.......................................................................................... 15 Flag Down Survey....................................................................................... 24 Observation of Hotel Taxi Stands ................................................................. 26 Taxi Availability at SFO Airport Taxi Staging Lots .......................................... 29 The Taxi Industry in San Francisco: Two Snapshots…………………………….30 Factors Affecting Demand for Taxis ............................................................. 31 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 32 Appendix A: List of Hotels Observed............................................................. Exhibit 1: Excerpt from Controller’s Budget Status Six Month Report (FY 06/07) Exhibit 2: 2006 San Francisco Citywide Hotel Occupancy Rate Exhibit 3: 2006 Total Deplanements at SFO TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1. Locations of Dispatch Calls by District.............................................. 12 Figure 2. No Shows by Time of Day…… ....................................................... 19 Figure 3. No Shows By Day of Week............................................................... 20 Figure 4. Arrivals by District.............................................................................. 21 Figure 5. Average Wait Time for Flag Down Attempts and Wait Times by Time of Day and Day of Week ...................................................................................... 22 Figure 6. Average Wait Time in Minutes to Flag a Taxi………......................... 25 Figure 7. Average Wait Time for Flag Down Attempts by Location…….. ........ 26 Figure 8. Longest Wait Time at Hotels Experiencing Wait Time………………..27 Figure 9. Taxi Activity at Hotel Stands – Longest Wait Time…………………...28 Figure 10. Average Wait Time to Obtain a Fare at SFO................................... 30 Figure 11. Friday Snapshot…………………………………………………………31 Figure 12. Tuesday Snapshot………………………………………………………31 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1. Response Times by District (For Which Taxis Actually Arrived)……….. 9 Table 2. Calls by District………………………………………………………… ....... 810 Table 3. Calls by Dispatch Company…………………………………………… ..... 11 Table 4. Calls by Time of Day…………………………………………………. ........ 11 Table 5. Location of Flag Down Attempts by Time of Day and Day of Week…….14 Table 6. Arrivals and No Shows by Dispatch Requests by Company…. ................ 17 Table 7. Response Times by Dispatch Company For Cabs Which Actually Arrived…18 Table 8. Response Times by District…………………………………………………….. 18 Table 9. No Show Rates by District…………………………………………………….......20

3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Report prepared by: Jordanna Thigpen Data Collection at airport staging lots: Joe Martin, SFO Landside Operations Surveyors: Heidi Machen

Jordanna Thigpen Vicky Siu Steve LaPlante Special thanks to: Drivers who responded to the survey

The Controller’s Office, CCSF Rigor Jaochico, Administrative Services, CCSF

Fall Line Analytics PKF Consulting San Francisco Convention & Visitor’s Bureau

Alana Dunnigan Maggie Ziemianek

And a very special thanks to all members of the public who submitted comments regarding taxi service in San Francisco.

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The San Francisco Taxi Commission was created through San Francisco Proposition D in 1998 and is responsible for regulating the taxi industry and setting policy to ensure proper customer service for visitors to and residents of San Francisco. The Commission is also responsible for releasing a sufficient number of taxi medallions to assure adequate taxicab service throughout the City and County of San Francisco. Currently, there are 1,381 medallions issued in San Francisco. Each year, the Taxi Commission conducts a Public Convenience & Necessity Hearing to determine the adequacy of the total amount of medallions. Municipal Police Code (MPC) § 1079(c). This year, the Commission elected to conduct research for this nearing in-house, rather than contracting out to a third party. Performing the survey in-house has provided very useful information since Taxi Commission staff brings additional industry knowledge, enabling them to provide more careful reports. The research for the hearing provides a snapshot of availability of taxi service in San Francisco. Response time standards for telephone prearrangement of taxi service are set forth in the current edition of the Taxicab/Ramped Taxi Rules and Regulations, Section 2. Specifically, Response Time Goals are as follows:

• 70% of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 10 minutes of the service call • 80% of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 15 minutes of the service call • 99% of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 30 minutes of the service call

Data for the study was collected from November 2006 through January 2007. The study measured taxi availability for each of four means of obtaining taxi service: dispatch requests (telephone prearrangement), including a sub sample of requests for ramp taxi service (special vehicles with a lift for the disabled community), flag downs, hotel taxi stands, and airport staging lots. The methods employed in the study were based on recommendations for measuring taxi availability made by consultant Bruce Schaller in a 2003 report to the Taxicab Commission. Methods were also modified based on comments from the general public regarding last year’s report by Q2 Research. For example, dispatch testers called a dispatch company back after 15 minutes, rather than just marking a no-show for a cab that did not show up within 30 minutes. Additionally, dispatch testers recorded the total time for a cab to arrive, if it did in fact arrive – up to 77 minutes in one case. Methodology A total of 569 dispatch calls were made for the dispatch survey. The sample of locations was distributed across the 11 Supervisorial districts of the city. Rather than weighting the results, the surveyors actually made more calls during the peak times and days, and called the largest companies disproportionately more than the others. Luxor and Yellow were each called during every shift, since they comprise 50% of the available fleet. DeSoto and National were also called more than other companies. For the flag down survey, surveyors went to specific locations and counted the number of taxis with and without passengers, including Fisherman's Wharf, North Beach, the Financial District/Embarcadero, Union Street, the Marina, the Geary Corridor, South of

5

Market to SBC Park, and the Mission. The attempts were made throughout the week and various times of day, and the results were not weighted. Surveyors did not actually attempt to “flag down” a taxi due to safety concerns and inclement weather, but did observe actual patrons during this period as an indication of time spent flagging down. To determine availability at hotel taxi stands, a total of 30 one-hour observations at 26 hotels was conducted, all in District 3 and District 6. Observations took place throughout the week from 5 PM to 12 AM. SFO Landside Operations conducted a survey of airport staging lots during the study period, recording the number of staged taxis and exits at each hour from 7am to midnight. Key Findings Dispatch Survey

• Overall, 50.25% of dispatch attempts (including those for which no cab is available or no dispatcher is reached) will result in a cab arriving. Last year’s report had an average 49% arrival rate so this is a bare improvement.

• 49.75% of all taxis dispatched are no-shows. Last year’s report showed a 35%

no-show rate.

• The average time between when the taxi is dispatched and when it arrives is 16 minutes and 20 seconds from the time contact is initiated, and 14 minutes and 45 seconds from the time of booking. Last year’s report demonstrated a 9:23 average arrival time, so this is a significant increase in average arrival time.

• 56.25% of ramp taxi requests result in a refusal to provide service.

• No-shows were highest from 6-10 PM at 65.29%, No-shows were also highest on

Friday and Saturday evenings, and in Districts 4, 7, and 10. An average of 66.14% of no-shows resulted from the dispatch service refusing to provide a cab at all. No-shows would have been much higher, had surveyors not called companies back after 15 minutes to remind them of the service request.

• Districts 7 and 8 had the highest no-show rates respectively at 64.86% and

63.89%. • Response times were slowest in Districts 4, 7 and 11.

• Surveyors spent an average of 2 minutes and 58 seconds on hold, but on

Fridays, that time jumped to 4 minutes and 39 seconds.

• Regents and Union Cab both shared the slowest response time by company from time of booking at 21 minutes and 30 seconds each. American and National had the fastest response times at 10 minutes and 12 minutes and eight seconds respectively. However, both American and National had high rates of no-shows.

6

• Union Cab had the highest rate of no-shows at 95.65%. Luxor had the highest rate of arrivals at 81.82%.

Flag Down Survey

• The average time for a successful flag down, citywide, was 7 minutes, 49 seconds.

• Average wait times were longest on Fridays and Saturdays, up to 60 minutes in some locations, with the shortest wait times on Monday and Tuesday evenings, although times varied widely by location.

• Most cabs are driving around with their top lights on, even with passengers inside, a violation of Rule 5.C.10.b. The drivers are not properly utilizing the top light as they do in other jurisdictions, making the public very angry. During the flag down, it was impossible to tell from a distance or on rainy nights if a cab had a passenger in it due to misuse of the light. Additionally, we observed many people cursing the cabs when the lights were misused.

• Reiterating this concern, there are several public comments which demand compliance with the top light rule.

• It is easier for a member of the public to go to a hotel stand to obtain a taxi, than to flag one down. Naturally, this is only feasible if there are hotel stands nearby.

Observations at Hotel Stands

• The longest wait time observed at a hotel time was 25 minutes. The average longest wait time was 3 minutes and 34 seconds.

• An average of six parties per hour approached a hotel stand for a cab. An average of 2 taxis waited per hour with no passengers.

• Of parties who had to wait for a taxi, the average wait time was 1 minute, 30 seconds.

• Customers are more likely to find a cab waiting at their hotel on a Monday or Thursday than on a Friday or Saturday. This also belies the popular rumor that on Fridays and Saturdays, “the cabs are all downtown,” ie, at the hotel stands.

Survey at SFO Taxi Staging Lots

• The average number of cabs staged per hour was 170, and the average number of exits per hour was 178, suggesting an average wait of 60 minutes.

• Waiting times for taxis in the staging lots ranged from a high of 1 hour and 33 minutes late on a weeknight to a low of zero minutes at various time periods. This wait time is for taxi drivers and not for members of the public.

• Only one member of the public commented that taxi service was inadequate at the airport on holidays.

Conclusions Dispatch service does not meet the response time goals set forth in the Rules and Regulations, and frustrates the general public (see attached public comment). A significant percent of calls are either unanswered, result in a no-show, or result in a refusal to send cab service to a specified location (49.75%). No-show rates are highest

7

on Friday and Saturday evenings and for ramp requests. The no-show rate has improved slightly over last year’s results, but last year’s surveyors did not call back after 15 minutes to “remind” the dispatch – a fact which significantly affects the rate of no shows vs. arrivals. Additionally, surveyors waited longer than 30 minutes for cabs to show up, while last year’s survey marked cabs as no-shows after 30 minutes regardless of whether or not they finally showed up. Availability for flag down service is adequate in certain areas of the city, and is notably more effective than telephone prearrangement or hotel stand service on Friday and Saturday evenings. This is most effective if an individual is attempting to obtain a taxi in District 3 or the northern portion of District 6, and is not possible for the rest of the City. Availability at SFO is higher than in 2005, although the number of enplaned passengers has declined since 2000 and BART has extended service to SFO since that time. A popular rumor is that cabs are waiting at the airport when they should be in the City, however, the waiting time figures belie that and show that cabs are scarce at the airport on Friday and Saturday nights. Availability at hotel stands is sufficient although particular hotels continue to experience problems through no fault of their own. Surveyors also noticed illegal limousine traffic at several hotels. Various indicators suggest that the demand for taxis in San Francisco is higher than it was in 2000, while the number of medallions issued remains at 1,381. Recent data from the Controller’s Office suggest that hotel, payroll, and sales tax revenues are expected to be $12 million higher than in 2005, which indicates increased revenue from visitors. Altogether, availability and demand indicators suggest that the ramp taxi program is not meeting expectations, and there are not enough cabs during peak time hours for any area of the city.

The availability of cabs really makes a difference for people who are deciding whether or not to buy a car. – Ajay K. Taxis play an important role in the safety of women and girls by providing safe rides home, keeping pedestrians safe, and being the eyes and ears on our streets at all hours. – Amy Moy, Associate Vice President, Public Affairs, Planned Parenthood Golden Gate

BACKGROUND The San Francisco Taxicab Commission was created through San Francisco Proposition D in 1998. The Commission is responsible for releasing a sufficient number of permits (medallions) to assure adequate taxicab service throughout the City and County of San Francisco. Currently, there are 1,381 medallions issued in San Francisco There are 1,306 regular permits and 75 ramped taxicab permits (i.e. wheelchair accessible). This number has been the same since 2000. Field surveys are the primary means by which taxi availability is determined. The

8

Taxi Commission conducted surveys in 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2005. Last year’s report, prepared by Q2 Research Group, did not recommend the addition of any medallions, and the Commission adopted the recommendation. This year, the Commission conducted the survey in-house using existing staff, and the report was also prepared in-house. The study measured taxi availability for each of four means of obtaining taxi service:

1. Dispatch requests (telephone prearrangement), including a sub sample of requests for ramp taxi service

2. Flag downs, 3. Hotel taxi stands, and 4. Airport staging lots.

The methods employed in the study were based on recommendations for measuring taxi availability made by consultant Bruce Schaller in a 2003 report to the Taxicab Commission. According to Schaller, the primary question answered by availability studies is, “Are passengers adequately served?” To answer this question, he stated that the availability surveys should provide the following:

1. A complete picture of availability taking into account telephone prearrangement, taxi and airport stands and flag downs

2. An accurate measurement of availability for each means of obtaining cab 3. Service standards for assessing whether a given level of availability is

satisfactory (i.e., how long a wait time should be considered acceptable?) Schaller’s 2003 report included a methodological design for a telephone prearrangement (dispatch) survey, as well as recommendations for conducting a flag down survey and surveying hotel stands and airport staging lots. His recommendations are the basis of the four components of this study, and are discussed in the following Methodology section of this report. Standards for response time for telephone prearrangement were established by the Commission and are set forth in Section 2 of the Taxicab/Ramped Taxi Rules and Regulations. The Commission’s response time goals are as follows: 1) 70 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 10 minutes of the service call; 2) 80 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 15 minutes of the service call; and 3) 99 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 30 minutes of the service call.

9

Table 1. Response Times by District (For Taxis Which Actually Arrived) District Within 10 Min. Within 15 Min. Within 30 Min. 1 41.86% 72.00% 90.69% 2 60.00% 88.00% 88% 3 70.00% 87.88% 100% 4 27.77% 44.44% 88.88% 5 78.57% 77.77% 93.75% 6 66.66% 77.77% 100% 7 18.51% 40.74% 96.43% 8 58.82% 82.35% 100% 9 32.35% 52.94% 100% 10 47.22% 83.33% 94.44% 11 24.24% 69.70% 96.66% Average 47.82% 70.63% 95.35% In addition, all cab companies operating ramped taxis must provide an average response time of 20 minutes. This report describes the methodology and results of the four availability surveys and offers interpretation of their significance for the Commission’s determination as to whether more regular and/or more ramp medallions should be added.

[There are] too few cabs at rush hour, as that is when they switch shifts – the equivalent of a restaurant having the fewest number of staff on at the peak dining hour. – Ken Z.

METHODOLOGY Dispatch Survey Schaller’s key recommendations for the dispatch survey design included: 1. Measuring availability using a sample size determined by the actual volume of

dispatch requests by time of day and day of week, over sampling on Friday and Saturday evenings;

2. Using equal sample sizes for each of 9 geographic regions recommended by the Commission; and

3. Weighting the results to correct for geographic and time period over sampling. In his report, Schaller determined sampling weights by reviewing the May 2003 dispatch data from the 2 highest volume cab companies. He looked at the volume of dispatch requests made during the following time periods: Sunday through Thursday from 6am to 6pm and 6pm to midnight; Friday through Saturday during the same time periods; and Friday and Saturday from midnight to 2am. In addition, he looked at the volume of calls

10

made from each of the 9 geographic regions and calculated a poststratification weight to correct for disproportionate sampling from low-volume regions. The actual weights used for the data were derived from Schaller’s weights and adjusted for the sample sizes obtained. Schaller’s methods were altered for this survey based on feedback from last year’s report. Specifically, surveyors called dispatch companies back after 15 minutes if a cab did not show up. They also waited beyond the 30-minute no-show mark and waited for the cab to come. All 11 Supervisorial districts were chosen, rather than 9 “regions” used before, in order to give a complete picture to the Board of Supervisors. Surveyors called the largest companies more than the smaller companies, and called certain districts more than others in response to comments from the general public that taxi service is “impossible” in their districts. Table 2. Calls by District. District Total Calls % of Total Calls 1 60 10.54% 2 36 6.32% 3 36 6.32% 4 55 9.66% 5 39 6.85% 6 47 8.26% 7 74 13.00% 8 36 6.32% 9 63 11.07% 10 71 12.48% 11 52 9.13% Surveyors called the largest companies more than the smaller companies, to more accurately reflect the volume of calls to these companies and to reflect the size of their fleet.

11

Table 3. Calls by Dispatch Company

Finally, surveyors made a larger percentage of calls at peak times and hours, when patrons were more likely to call for a cab. Table 4. Calls by Time of Day Shifts Number of Calls Total Calls % of Total Calls 6 to 10 am 56 569 9.84% 10-2 pm 119 569 20.91% 2 pm-6 pm 129 569 22.67% 6 pm-10 pm 121 569 21.26% 10 pm-12 am 72 569 12.65% 12 am-2 am 72 569 12.65% The dispatch survey was conducted between November 2006 and January 2006. Dates were especially chosen not to coincide with street closures, conventions, or holidays. Selection of Locations Selection of sample locations for the dispatch survey was conducted by examination of maps and data on the volume of requests within regions in the Schaller report, with an eye towards mixing residential and commercial locations. For example, Friday night requests included both a Noe Valley restaurant and a Sunset residential area for the peak time of 6-10 PM, and both residential and commercial requests in Districts 7 and 9 for later in the evening. Between 6-9 locations were selected for each district, and requests were spread out among the district.

Name Number Total Calls Size of Fleet

American 614-2000 40 21Arrow 648-3181 37 69Citywide 920-0700 44 133B&W Checker 285-3800 44 157DeSoto 970-1300 55 109Luxor Cab 282-4141 77 184National 648-4444 68 118Regents 487-1004 41 39Union Cab 285-1901 46 21Town 401-8900 43 58Yellow Cab 333-3333 74 475

12

Figure 1. Locations of Dispatch Calls by District

Data Collection Procedures One location was surveyed for each shift. Surveyors used a schedule of dispatch numbers which were especially selected for that particular shift. Surveyors used a different alias (name and voice, where appropriate) at each location and used a different cell phone for each shift. During evening shifts, surveyors worked in pairs and took turns calling dispatchers. Data points recorded included:

1. Taxi company, 2. Time of first dialed attempts and any subsequent attempts; 3. Time taxi was dispatched (as time call to dispatcher was terminated),

13

4. No taxi available/no answer from dispatch, 5. Time of arrival, 6. Taxi (medallion) number and 7. any notes regarding the experience.

At each location, interviewers waited for taxis until the final taxi was dispatched. When a taxi arrived, the surveyor met the driver, explained that s/he was collecting data for a survey for the San Francisco Taxi Commission, and offered the driver $5 in compensation. The drivers provided receipts for the compensation. It should be noted that many drivers expressed frustration with both the survey and the amount of compensation. Ramp Taxi Requests Ramp requests were scheduled as the first call on the list for each location, to allow for extra time for arrivals. Flag Down Survey A total of 48 locations were selected for the flag down survey. Locations were distributed throughout Districts 1, 2, 3, and 6. Flag downs were attempted only from 4 PM to 7 PM Monday-Thursday and 4 PM-12 AM on Friday and Saturday, due to budgetary and staff constraints. Selection of Locations The sample locations for the flag down survey were selected recommendations made in the Schaller report. Locations were selected to ensure distribution throughout areas with heavy foot traffic. General areas included Fisherman's Wharf, North Beach, the Financial District/Embarcadero, Union Street, the Marina, the Geary Corridor, South of Market to SBC Park, the Mission, and the Richmond District. Taxi stands at hotels were also included in the sample. Data Collection Procedures Here, surveyors counted the number of taxis with and without passengers at particular locations. While not a completely accurate picture of flag down service, since some taxis drove by without picking up passengers, this method provides a good picture of the availability of taxis for passengers at particular locations. Additionally, surveyors made all efforts to monitor actual members of the general public who were attempting to flag down taxis.

14

Table 5. Location of Flag Down Attempts by Time of Day and Day of Week Time (PM)

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

4-5 California & Locust

Haight & Stanyan

Chestnut & Fillmore

Polk & Turk Valencia & 16th St.

Stockton & Vallejo

4-5 Van Ness & McAllister

California & Grant

Columbus & Union

Geary & Masonic

Sutter & Montgomery

Market & 5th Stockton & Post

5-6 Clement & 9th

Haight & Ashbury

Union & Fillmore Polk & California

Mission & 20th St. Mason & Green

5-6 Van Ness & Pine

California & Montgomery

Broadway & Grant

Geary & 23rd Ave

CA & Montgomery

Market & 9th Powell & O’Farrell

6-7 Van Ness & Sutter & Montgomery

Fisherman’s Wharf: Beach & Hyde

Geary & 34th Ave

California & Grant

Market & Van Ness

Grant & Geary

7-8 SOMA: Howard & 4th

Embarcadero: Ferry Building

7-8 North Beach: Columbus & Union

Union Square: Stockton & Post

8-10 Broadway & Grant

Powell & O’Farrell

8-10 Folsom & 4th Battery & Embarcadero

10-12 Fisherman’s Wharf: Beach & Hyde

Grant & Geary

10-12 11th & Folsom N. Pt & Embarcadero

It should be noted that last year, surveyors were instructed to only consider cabs with their lights on as vacant, and not to attempt to flag down cabs without their top lights on. The general public has complained that taxis are not obeying the light-on rule. Thus, this year surveyors counted all taxis. Surveyors also noted that a majority of the time, taxis stopped for passengers when the light was not on. This is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Getting a taxi in the Tenderloin [is unacceptable] if you are not in front of a bar. Cabs need to stop in the non-bar areas where residents who at times choose to use a cab are living. – Diego S. …Someone needs to teach all the cab drivers the ‘light on-available, light off-occupied’ rule that every cab driver in every other city seems to understand!!!! – Anonymous

15

Observation of Hotel Taxi Stands Availability at hotels was measured via observations of 26 designated hotel taxi stands (listed in Appendix A). Hotels were observed in November 2006 and December 2006. Surveyors recorded the following information at each hotel:

1. Hotel name and location, 2. Time of observation, 3. Number of parties waiting for taxis, 4. Number of taxis waiting for passengers, and 5. the longest wait time

Survey of SFO Airport Taxi Staging Lots SFO Landside Operations conducted an hourly survey of airport staging lots during a two week study period, beginning at 7am and ending at midnight each day. The following points of data were collected each hour:

1. The number of taxis waiting in each staging lot (both domestic and international terminals)

2. The number of cabs exiting (checkouts) each terminal. FINDINGS

I find most cab drivers to be professional, courteous, and friendly. – Diana G. The best aspects of the SF taxicab industry are probably great drivers. I have never, ever had any problem and they are almost always friendly, good drivers, and helpful with bags, answering questions etc…The taxi industry has definitely enhanced my business as a salesperson… – Carrie D. [C]leanliness is a serious issue. Many of the taxicabs I have used are not clean. On the last two years I had frequent trips to the hospital for treatments and already being ill had to enter an unclean taxicab with an objectionable odor, soiled and strewn with papers [which] was very unpleasant. – Stephen L. Most taxi drivers are friendly and helpful, and they seem to know their way around the city (this is not true of all taxi drivers in all American cities.) – Lana N.

Dispatch Survey Overall, the experience with dispatchers was pleasant. On occasion, dispatchers were rude or surly.

16

One of the biggest problems was noted with Union Cab. Union Cab’s extremely high no-show rate was due primarily to a dispatcher who could not speak English. This dispatcher repeated “yeah” when told the address, or else he said “all cab finished now,” even in the morning or afternoon. On one occasion he continuously repeated “no come back” until the surveyor hung up. He was also unable to correctly repeat phone numbers and addresses when they were provided. This language barrier was a major problem in attempting to obtain taxi service from Union Cab. Problems were experienced with Luxor Cab Company. Luxor’s high arrival rate may in part be explained by the fact that surveyors usually had to call back after 15 minutes. Yellow Cab also had a poor dispatch system, particularly on weekends. Surveyors either waited on hold for several minutes, or were not able to connect at all. On Friday and Saturday nights Yellow was recorded as a no-show because surveyors heard the message “this caller is not receiving calls at this time,” waited on hold in excess of ten minutes, or were simply unable to connect at all. Drivers were generally happy to hear about the survey, and in 99% of cases, were happy to receive a $5 bill (“the easiest $5 I ever made!” said one happy driver.) However there were three separate incidents of varying magnitude involving drivers who were unhappy about the survey. Some drivers complained that the $5 was not enough in compensation for their time. Of note is a special program that Luxor Cab developed in partnership with Starbucks Coffee during the 12/4-12/10 survey week. Starbucks actually paid for a specified number of fares in a specified number of Luxor taxis during the first part of a weekday, as a holiday promotion, and also provided these lucky fares with a $5 Starbucks card. The survey results indicate that 50.75% of attempts to obtain taxi service through telephone dispatch actually result in a cab being dispatched; in 69.23% of no-show cases, the caller will not be able to connect with the dispatch company (because of no answer or a busy signal) or will be told that no cab is available. In 30.77% of calls designated as no-shows, the cab will not arrive at all, despite multiple attempts to contact the dispatch company. Each result is equally frustrating for the customer.

…I have learned to allow 45 minutes to an hour of leeway on Saturday evenings. On some occasions (Saturday evenings) a second call to the dispatcher is necessary. - Patricia M. [W]aiting time has increased to ½-I hour. We can’t rely on the prompt service and often can’t make it to doctor’s appointments on time. - Menorah Park Tenants Assn.

17

Table 6. Arrivals and No-Shows of Dispatch Requests by Company Name Number Total

Calls Total Arrived

% Arrival No Show

No Cab

Total % No Show

American 614-2000 40 9 22.50% 2 29 31 77.50% Arrow 648-3181 37 21 56.76% 9 7 16 43.24% Citywide 920-0700 44 31 70.45% 7 6 13 29.55% B&W Checker 285-3800 44 21 47.73% 10 13 23 52.27% DeSoto 970-1300 55 39 70.91% 3 13 16 29.09% Luxor Cab 282-4141 77 63 81.82% 5 9 14 18.18% National 648-4444 68 41 60.29% 8 19 27 39.71% Regents 487-1004 41 7 17.07% 6 28 34 82.93% Union Cab 285-1901 46 2 4.35% 8 36 44 95.65% Town 401-8900 43 20 46.51% 11 12 23 53.49% Yellow Cab 333-3333 74 55 74.32% 11 8 19 25.68% In this table, ”no show” means that a cab was actually booked and did not show up. “No cab” means that the surveyor could not connect with the dispatch service, or that the dispatcher refused to provide service. Response Times For the dispatch requests in which a cab arrives, the average time from the beginning of a call attempt to the time a cab arrives is 16 minutes and 19 seconds. The average time between when the cab is dispatched and when it arrives is 14 minutes and 46 seconds, and an average of 2 minutes and 57 seconds in time on hold. These numbers do not meet current standards and are unacceptable.

18

Table 7. Response Times by Dispatch Company For Cabs Which Actually Arrived Name Number Total

Calls Total Arrived

Shortest Response Time

Longest Response Time

Longest Response within 30 minutes

Average Response Time (Min.)

American 614-2000

40 9 4 18 18 10.875

Arrow 648-3181

37 21 3 19 19 11.526

Citywide 920-0700

44 31 2 42 26 14.63

B&W Checker

285-3800

44 21 3 46 26 15.68

DeSoto 970-1300

55 39 2 51 30 16.25

Luxor Cab 282-4141

77 63 1 55 30 16.33

National 648-4444

68 41 4 77 24 15.81

Regents 487-1004

41 7 5 30 30 14.71

Union Cab 285-1901

46 2 25 41 25 33

Town 401-8900

43 20 43 1 26 15.1

Yellow Cab 333-3333

74 55 1 43 30 15.75

As described in the executive summary, the Commission’s response time goals are as follows: 1) 70 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 10 minutes of the service call; 2) 80 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 15 minutes of the service call; and 3) 99 percent of the time, taxicabs will arrive within 30 minutes of the service call. Table 8. Response Times by District District Within 10 Min. Within 15 Min. Within 30 Min. 1 41.86% 72.00% 90.69% 2 60.00% 88.00% 88% 3 70.00% 87.88% 100% 4 27.77% 44.44% 88.88% 5 78.57% 77.77% 93.75% 6 66.66% 77.77% 100% 7 18.51% 40.74% 96.43% 8 58.82% 82.35% 100% 9 32.35% 52.94% 100% 10 47.22% 83.33% 94.44% 11 24.24% 69.70% 96.66% Average 47.82% 70.63% 95.35% Meets Goals? NO NO YES

19

Not surprisingly, the results show that it is significantly less effective to obtain cab service via telephone prearrangement on Fridays and Saturdays, particularly during the evening from 6pm to midnight. Figure 2. No Shows by Time of Day

% No Show by Time of Day

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

6-10 am 10-2 pm 2 pm-6 pm 6 pm-10 pm 10 pm-12 am 12 am- 2 am

Figure 2 shows that attempts to obtain taxi service via telephone dispatch are most successful from 10 am-2 pm, and on Mondays. The fewest no-shows (18.29%) occur during this time period, as well as the lowest rate of no-shows on Mondays at 30.55%. The second most successful time period is Tuesday (35.21%) from 6 to 10 AM (33.93%.) This may be due in part a common scenario witnessed by surveyors: a cab arrives at a specified location in response to a dispatch call, but members of the public would jump into the cab before the surveyor had a chance to approach. On only one occasion – a Royal Taxi on Union St. at 11:30 am on Monday, November 28, 2006 – did the driver ask the passengers to get out of the car so he could pick up the caller.1

Well, last night, I called Yellow from home for a ride for myself to somewhere I was going. When they had not appeared in 20 mins, (my son snickering in the background) I called and was told they were ‘a minute or two away.’ Ten more mins want by, nothing. I called again. The dispatcher to whom I complained that Yellow used to be very reliable and I was told the cab was a minute away and was not very upset, said now the drivers can ‘accept’ a call to a home but if they see a ‘better’ pickup on the way, they have the option of not going to get the home pickup… - Cathy H.

1 The surveyor immediately ran up to assure the driver it was okay to take them.

20

Figure 3. No Shows by Day of Week

As the above figure demonstrates, on Friday and Saturday the rate of no-shows increases significantly, and the cabs that do arrive have longer arrival times. While the highest no-show rate occurs on Fridays (67.27%) and Saturdays (55.45%) as a whole, it is notable that only 5% of dispatch calls on Fridays and Saturday evenings from 6 to 10 PM actually resulted in a cab arriving. Taxi Response to Dispatch Requests by Geographic Area The Districts which experienced the worst service included Districts 4, 7, 8, 10, and 11. This was due primarily to geography, but other factors also played a role. Table 9. No Show Rates by District District Total

Calls Total Arrived

Average Response Time

No Show No Cab % No Show - Total

% No Show Including if Cabs Arriving over 30 min are not included

1 60 36 15.15 4 20 40.00% 45.00%2 36 28 12.35 4 4 22.22% 27.78%3 36 33 8.75 1 2 8.33% 8.33%4 55 25 19.82 6 24 54.55% 65.45%5 39 26 10.82 5 8 33.33% 38.46%6 47 35 12.4 4 8 25.33% 27.66%7 74 26 18.46 11 37 64.86% 68.92%8 36 13 10.58 8 15 63.89% 63.89%9 63 32 12.71 17 14 49.21% 49.21%

10 71 28 11.65 14 29 60.56% 61.97%11 52 27 16.14 7 18 48.08% 53.85%

% No Show by Day of Week

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%

M T W R F S U

Series1

21

As the results demonstrate, District 7 has both the highest rate of no-shows, and the highest average response time. District 8 also has a surprising amount of no-shows, although the average response time is lower due to the location relatively near downtown. District 4 also has a high no-show rate and a high average response time. Many drivers who arrived in Districts 4, 7, and 10 expressed frustration with these areas of the City, stating that people call multiple companies for taxis, and take the first one that comes without canceling the others. Thus, they are reluctant to drive out to these areas because there is usually no fare waiting. Additionally, drivers expressed reluctance to pick up passengers in the Bayview and even Vistacion Valley, expressing concerns for their safety and reciting tales of robberies and other problems. Several Daly City cabs were observed in Vistacion Valley during the survey time, although they were also observed in Fisherman’s Wharf. Members of the general public often noticed the survey in process at various locations and offered their own comments on taxi service. These comments were generally negative; most people reiterated that they could not obtain taxi service on weekends, during rush hour, and in their neighborhoods. Some individuals became irate when recounting missed events, wasted tickets, and the stress of having an “unreliable transportation system.”

…[S]ome business travelers have deemed our property as not being convenient to the locations they need to go. They have decided to stay downtown due to location, as they could not rely on a taxicab service to get them to their appointments on time. - Patrick Jackson, Hotel Manager, Argonaut Hotel I live in India Basin…I had a party last month on a Saturday night and some of my guests needed to take a cab. I think they called Yellow Cab around 1:30 am. It was a total nightmare! They did not get picked up until 3:30 am. My guests were irate and said this would never happen in other parts of SF. – Tori F. I am a manager of a Safeway store and I call cabs for my customers on a regular basis. More often than not, we have to call two or three times before a cab shows up. Apparently many drivers do not like coming to grocery stores because they feel that the money is not worth the hassle of having to load and unload groceries. – Bill K. I live in the Richmond District…during peak times, it is nearly impossible to even get service and wait times are always at least 45 mins (again, assuming they show up at all.) – Walter A. I am a black male professional and I know that getting a taxi in San Francisco is one of the worst experiences that I have ever been through. – Hiram H. Many illegal cabs have popped up [west of Twin Peaks] due to high demand the lack of service. – James K.

22

Figure 4. Arrivals by District

23

Figure 5. No-Shows by District

24

Ramp Taxi Response Times Requests for ramp vehicles ending in a dispatch are more likely to result in a refusal of service than regular requests. Out of 16 calls, surveyors received a total of eight refusals and dispatch companies did not offer to call another dispatch company for service – despite being required to do so by Taxicab/Ramped Taxi Rule 9.A.4.b.. 50% of ramp taxis which did arrive met the response time goals in Taxicab/Ramped Taxi Rule 9.A.4.a.. Company Result Arrival Time American No call Arrow Refusal Citywide 1 Arrival 14:00 B&W Checker Refusal DeSoto Refusal Luxor Cab 3 Arrivals 54:00, 6:00, 35:00 National Refusal Regents No call Union Cab 3 Refusals Town Refusal Yellow Cab 3 Arrivals, 1 No Show 13:00, 20:00, 36:00 Flag Down Survey The average time between cabs without passengers, citywide, is 7 minutes and 49 seconds. The flag down component was conducted over the course of several evenings in December 2006. Two of the nights involved inclement weather, which may have contributed to the relatively high average. However, it also gives an accurate snapshot of the San Francisco flag down situation, since we do experience rain on a fairly regular basis. The flag down was conducted from 4-7 PM only Monday-Thursday, and from 4 to 12 AM on Friday and Saturday. The highest numbers of cabs were noticed in the Financial District and North Beach during weekdays, while the lowest were noticed in the Inner Richmond, Clement Street, and the Upper Haight during weekdays.

When I am in the downtown corridor, I have found that I can simply go to the corner and usually find one, certainly within 10 minutes…I think the service level is excellent. – Cal B. I spoke to a cab driver the other night and he does not even respond to phone orders because there is enough sidewalk traffic these days. This is also evidenced by noticing several taxis circling the block in the Marina any given weekend, but on the same night I can’t get a taxi to respond to a call South or Market. I have to make my customers walk two blocks to the Hyatt where there always cabs waiting for the easy toll. – Mick S.

25

Figure 6. Average Wait Time in Minutes To Flag a Taxi

The flag down results suggest that customers can expect to wait an average nearly ten minutes to locate a taxi, and will be frustrated by multiple attempts to hail a taxi which has lights on, but is in fact filled with passengers. Outlying areas away from downtown experience severe difficulty obtaining cabs at all or up to an hour wait.

26

Figure 7. Average Wait Time for Flag Down Attempts by Location

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Califor

nia St. &

Locus

t St.

Union S

t. & C

olumbu

s St.

Polk S

t. & P

ost S

t.

O'Farre

ll St. &

Powell

St.

Haight

St. & Ash

bury

St.

Union S

t. & Fi

llmore

St.

Califor

nia St. &

Mon

tgomery

St.

Califor

nia St. &

15th Ave

.

Beach

St. &

Hyd

e St.

Geary

St. & 34

th Ave

Haight

St. & Fillm

ore St.

Beach

St. &

Hyd

e St.

O'Farre

ll St. &

Cyri

l Mag

nin Plac

e

Folsom

St. &

4th S

t.

Folsom

St. &

11th St.

Broadw

ay St. &

Gran

t St.

North P

oint &

Emba

rcade

ro

Tim

e in

Min

utes

The “top light on rule” (Taxicab/Ramped Taxi Rule 5.C.10.b.) was a major source of frustration. At night, in the rain, and from a distance, customers had no way of knowing whether or not a cab was actually available. Currently, the top light on rule applies to color schemes only in the context of an equipment requirement, yet color schemes have no control of the top light once the cab leaves the lot. It is recommended that the Commission amend the Rules and Regulations to make this rule apply to drivers, and enable enforcement personnel to issue administrative citations for violations of this rule. Observation of Hotel Taxi Stands Of all observations made at hotel stands, the average wait time was three minutes and 35 seconds. It should be noted that the week before hotel observation was begun, the Westin St. Francis reported severe problems with obtaining taxi service on a busy Saturday night. Taxi Commission staff monitored this hotel and surrounding hotels in the Union Square area during the life of the survey to ensure proper taxi service, and a blast fax was sent out to all taxi companies indicating that a problem existed. Thereafter, Taxi Commission staff noticed a sufficient amount of taxis at that particular hotel. Many hotels had no wait time whatsoever in the time that observations occurred. Others, such as the Hyatt on Stockton Street near Union Square, experienced up to a 25-minute

27

wait on a Friday evening. Other hotels experiencing difficulties included the Westin St. Francis, the Sir Francis Drake, and the Crown Plaza on Sutter Street. Hotels experiencing sufficient taxi service included Fisherman’s Wharf locations, the Four Seasons on Market Street, and the Hilton O’Farrell. However, the bellmen tell a very different story, as described below. It should be noted that during observation of the Hilton O’Farrell, dozens of taxis without passengers were observed driving by on O’Farrell. The figure below does not include hotels for which a zero wait time was observed. Figure 8. Longest Wait Time at Hotels Experiencing Wait Time

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Hotel T

riton

Clift H

otel

St. Reg

is

Marriot

t Fish

erman

's Wha

rf

Fairm

ont/M

ason

& CA

Mark H

opkin

s

Stanfor

d

Ritz C

arlton

Stanfor

d Cou

rt

Marriot

t

Presco

tt Hote

l

Hotel P

alomar

Argent

Grand H

yatt

Sir Fran

cis D

rake

Westin

St. Fran

cis

Holida

y Inn

(Van

Nes

s)

Crown P

laza

Hyatt E

mbarca

dero

Hilton O

'Farre

ll

Longest Wait Time in Minutes

Many illegal limousines were noticed at the hotels during observations. Because existing personnel lacks the ability to administer administrative citations or arrest the drivers for violations, no enforcement could be performed. On one occasion, a black limousine without plates pulled up ahead of the taxis at the Hyatt at Stockton and several passengers climbed in with the express authorization of the bellmen.

The one thing I have watched of late is a little disturbing. It seems the major hotels are using their own cars for airport runs instead of using the cabs. I believe this is not allowed…It just doesn’t seem fair to the men and women struggling to make a living driving a cab. - Christina H.

28

Availability at Hotel Stands by Time of Day and Day of Week The map below demonstrates that the longest wait times recorded are in the Union Square area. These wait times were all recorded in the evening and they demonstrate a service problem in Union Square. The report of the Westin St. Francis of up to one-hour wait times, as well as field conversations with bellmen at each hotel, support this assertion. Figure 9. Taxi Activity at Hotel Stands – Longest Wait Time

In cases when one or more taxis or parties were waiting at a hotel stand, the average number of parties usually exceeded the average number of taxis. Of parties who had to wait for a taxi, the average longest wait time was 5 minutes and 12 seconds. Average wait times varied widely by time of day and day of week, and that variability may be partly a function of small sample size. The longest wait times were observed on Friday and Saturday evening. A survey was also distributed to the bellmen at various hotels (see attached). Most bellmen reported serious problems with taxi service, with an average wait of 5-10 minutes for passengers. The most commonly cited complaints were fights among drivers about line order and problems with service in the rain and during conventions. Many bellmen reported that drivers are refusing fares unless the passengers want to go

29

to the airport. Bellmen at the Four Seasons and the St. Regis said they often have fares wanting to go to Oakland, but cannot obtain a taxi at their hotels. Nearly all bellmen reported big problems with service on Fridays and Saturdays and from 4-8 PM.

[Cab drivers] will not wait for a fare unless we tell them it is an airport….[they] complain constantly/try to avoid any fare except airports. They argue about line order and are using the hotel restroom often when a guest needs a cab. – Anonymous, W Hotel Business as usual for a Friday, 4 cabs dropped from airport and refused to pick up so they could return to the airport. – Anonymous, Renaissance Parc 55 Drivers can be rude and drive recklessly. Guests arrive stressed out and concerned for their safety. – Anonymous, Mark Hopkins

Availability at SFO Airport Taxi Staging Lots Day and Day of Week Taxi Availability at SFO Airport Taxi Staging Lots In 2005, the average number of cabs staged was 170, up from 107 in the airport survey conducted in 2000. The average number of exits per hour was 178, down from 216 in 2000, suggesting a longer average wait of 57 minutes compared to 30 minutes in 2000. Last year’s figures were 160 cabs staged and 198 exits per hour, with an average wait time of 49 minutes, so this demonstrates that more drivers are attempting to service the airport. Using a moving average of the number of cabs waiting in a given hour divided by the number of cabs exiting in that hour and the hour immediately following, we can approximate the time that taxis waited in the staging lots before being dispatched to terminals to pick up fares.

30

Figure 10. Average Wait Time to Obtain a Fare at SFO

7:00:0

0 AM

8:00:0

0 AM

9:00:0

0 AM

10:00

:00 AM

11:00

:00 AM

12:00

:00 PM

1:00:0

0 PM

2:00:0

0 PM

3:00:0

0 PM

4:00:0

0 PM

5:00:0

0 PM

6:00:0

0 PM

7:00:0

0 PM

8:00:0

0 PM

9:00:0

0 PM

10:00

:00 PM

11:00

:00 PM

12:00

:00 AM Su

n Mon Tu

es Wed Th

urs Fr

i Sat

0

0.5

1

1.5

Average Wait (hr)

Time

Day

Taxi Lot Wait by Time and Day

SunMonTuesWedThursFriSat

It should be noted that only one member of the public complained about availability at SFO, and that comment pertained to availability on Thanksgiving and Christmas. Figure 10 demonstrates that availability is sufficient. The Taxi Industry in San Francisco: Two Snapshots The following graphs demonstrate typical Tuesdays and Fridays in San Francisco. These graphs were created by overlaying the average dispatch wait, the average flag down wait, and the amount of cab staged at the airport. The intention behind this was to dispel the popular rumors that cabs are “hanging out” at the airport waiting for choice fares.

31

Figure 11. Friday Snapshot

Friday Snapshot

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

6 am-10 am 10 am-2 pm 2 pm-6 pm 6 pm-10 pm 10 pm-12 am 12 am-2 am

Timeframe

Min

utes

Wai

t Ti

me

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Air

port

Cab

s

Average Dispatch Wait

Average Flag Wait

Average # Airport Cabs

Figure 12. Tuesday Snapshot

Tuesday Snapshot

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

6 am-10 am 10 am-2 pm 2 pm-6 pm 6 pm-10 pm 10 pm-12 am 12 am-2 am

Timeframe

Min

utes

Wai

t Ti

me

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Air

port

Cab

s

Average Dispatch Wait

Average Flag Wait

Average # Airport Cabs

These graphs demonstrate the reality that as dispatch wait times increase, flag time decreases. There does not appear to be a correlation between the number of cabs waiting at the airport and a high flag or dispatch wait time. Factors Affecting Demand for Taxis To augment the results of the availability surveys, it is helpful to examine trends in tourism and business activity in San Francisco that may affect demand for taxi service. In the mid-FY 06-07 report (“Controller’s Report”), the San Francisco Controller’s Office reported that the city is projected to take in an additional $12m from payroll, hotel, and sales tax revenue (Exhibit 1). Last year’s report by ICF Consulting, made in conjunction

32

with the city’s Economic Strategy Plan, reported that the City’s population has declined since 2000. Thus, it seems the increase in revenue can be attributed to visitors. The attached graph (Exhibit 2), from the San Francisco Convention & Visitor’s Bureau, shows that the average hotel occupancy rate has increased as of November 2006 by nearly ten percent since 2002, to a calendar year 2006 average figure of 77.7%. The Controller’s Report estimates that for FY 06-07, we will be at 76.8% occupancy (Ex.1) Deplanements at SFO The attached graph (Exhibit 3) from the San Francisco Convention & Visitor’s Bureau demonstrates that total deplanements at SFO have been increasing since a low in 2003. The December figures are not yet prepared, however, so it’s not clear what the 2006 results will be. Assuming December 2006 deplanements are the same as December 2005 deplanements, we will exceed the 2005 figures. The Year 2000: An Appropriate Benchmark? The theory is that more medallions should not be added unless there is adequate demand to support them. Medallions were last added in 2000, so the basis for comparison that has been suggested is the year 2000. However, our economy was at an all-time and artificially inflated high in 2000 due to dot-com activity in the region. While it is necessary to have some basis for comparison, a case can be made that the year 2000 is not the appropriate year. While hotel occupancy waned from 2001-2002 in the wake of the dot-com implosion, there were still many individuals residing in the Bay Area who had moved in from 1999-2000, but had not yet moved to other communities in an attempt to locate technology work. RECOMMENDATIONS The comments from the general public suggest that there is a lack of availability. Many members of the public expressed anger at the state of the taxi industry. Dispatch, wait and hold times, and perceived inability to timely flag a cab were the most commonly cited sources of frustration. The data supports these assertions. There is a significant and unacceptable percentage of no-shows (49.45%) in response to dispatch requests, particularly on Friday and Saturday evenings and for paratransit requests. Additionally, the industry is not meeting any of the response time goals outlined in the Rules and Regulations and in the case of the first response time, falls nearly 30% short of meeting the goal. One of the most shocking statistics is a 5% arrival rate for Friday evenings. Availability for flag down service is sufficient as long as a customer is in District 3 or the northern portion of District 6. Otherwise, a customer can expect long wait times, up to an hour in the case of waiting at 11th and Folsom. As was the case last year, availability of taxis for flag down is at its peak on Friday and Saturday nights, at the same time that dispatch and hotel stand availability are low.

33

Availability at hotel stands is adequate during the weekdays but declines on the weekend. Availability in Union Square is problematic on weekends and causes problems for the hotel industry and their guests who bring revenue to the City. Q2 Research reported last year that “although there are numerous reports of limousines and other unlicensed vehicles picking up fares, vehicles without medallions were observed in only 2 of 300 of this study’s flag down attempts (less than 1 percent).” This year, staff noticed at least eight (8) instances of rogue taxis and illegal limousine pickups and was solicited on two occasions. Recommendation 1: The Commission should require all new medallions to be CNG/Hybrid only, and should issue 50 new CNG/Hybrid medallions at this time. The reality and the impact of climate change on our world cannot be underestimated. For years, San Francisco has been at the forefront of the sustainability movement and continues to make strides towards solving our collective global crisis. Recently Mayor Newsom mandated that the taxi fleet be 100% green by 2011. Issuing new medallions as CNG/hybrid would ensure compliance with that mandate. A parallel component is to require conversion of existing medallions to CNG/hybrid in phases, although that is beyond the scope of this report. The private sector is already on board with making the transportation sector cleaner and greener – a new private company, Planet Tran, is opening in San Francisco with hybrid limousine service. The San Francisco taxi industry can make history to become the first green taxi fleet in the country. There are many creative components that can be part of these new CNG/Hybrid medallions. For example, a new wrap taxi program could begin with reduced fees for local green businesses. Recommendation 2: The Commission should add 50 new ramp taxi medallions to ensure prompt and efficient service for members of the disabled community. Due to the small sample, the difference in the no-show rate and availability for ramp requests compared to regular requests was not statistically significant. However, the large percentage of no-show rates does suggest there is a crisis with ramp taxi service in the City. Members of the disabled community and businesses and nonprofits which serve them did not have anything positive to say about the paratransit program. Many disabled individuals do not have the luxury of walking to a hotel stand or down the hill to a commercial corridor to obtain a taxi after they’ve waited 45 minutes at their house for it to arrive. Staff recommends adding 50 new ramp medallions.

34

Recommendation 3: The Commission should proceed with caution when considering the addition of peak time medallions. In order to enforce this species of medallion, it would be necessary to paint the taxis a distinctive color and to develop an enforcement and administration scheme before issuing the medallions.

Peak Time Medallions: One idea that has been proposed is the issuance of peak time medallions. These medallions would enable drivers to use their vehicles only from Thursday to Sunday. This would ameliorate the severe shortages of taxis when demand is at its greatest. Perhaps the Taxi Commission could also determine that these vehicles could be used during other days of the week when large conventions or events occur in the city or in other emergencies or times of need. The best aspect of peak time medallions is that they would not adversely impact existing drivers who are attempting to make a living on the slower days. Some of the problems with peak time medallions include inability to enforce the peak time rule, and a disincentive for color schemes to maintain the vehicles, since the vehicles will not be operated for nearly half the week and are therefore not economically viable. The solution to the enforcement issue is to paint the taxis a particular color. One member of the public, Jennifer Entine Matz, has suggested painting the entire fleet International Orange (the color of the Golden Gate Bridge). Perhaps peak time medallions could issue to vehicles painted International Orange, and some other distinguishing mark could be assigned for each color scheme (such as a stripe). That way, a peak time vehicle could instantly be spotted if it was driven out of order. However, SFPD has not been capable of keeping rogue taxis off the streets, so it remains to be seen whether enforcement of peak time medallions is even an option. As to the investment issue, it is true that these vehicles would cost more over the life of the vehicle, due to the fact that they would not be earning money on particular days. Based on the current composition of the industry and the state of Proposition K, staff believes that individuals would be interested to hold a medallion even if it was a peak time medallion. Peak time medallions may be difficult administratively to manage. If the ramp taxi program is any indication of how a specialty medallion program would work then we have a guideline for the problems we could potentially experience with a peak time medallion program. Given the administrative complexity and investment and enforcement issues, the Commission should proceed cautiously in considering peak time medallions, particularly if the Commission elects to adopt CNG/hybrid as another restrictive class. For questions about this report, please contact: Jordanna Thigpen (415) 503-2183 Jordanna.Thigpen@sfgov.org