Muni's Taxi Medallion Revenue Projections Now Officially Bullshit

• Hi, Whoops ... the last post should have read "at least 20 medallion will be sold at $250,000" that is a quarter of a million dollars. Thus 20 * $250,000 = $5 million Sorry. Ed Healy

• Hi Joe, I'm a medallion holder who was involved in drafting the Pilot Plan. I'm not a big fan of the MTA but your contention that the $11.5 million was some kind of bluff or fantasy is not the case. The final details of the plan took longer than people expected to complete and there were staffing problems with Taxi Services. They are now set to roll and will be selling the taxi medallions by the first week of June at the latest. They will be selling at least 20 medallions at $25,000 per. This will equal $5 million by the end of the fiscal year. In the meantime, as many as 20 more medallion holders will also be selling their medallions at the above figure with 20% or $50,000 each going to the MTA. This will equal another million which means that approximately $6 Million will go to the MTA this fiscal year. Another 40 medallions will be sold - probably by the first 3 or 4 months of the next fiscal year - which will complete the original $15 million projection. So, there was no fantasy or attempt to deceive on the part of the MTA. For legal and other technical reasons, the Pilot Plan simply was unable to get off the ground quickly enough to sell the necessary taxis this year. The remaining $10 million or so will go toward next year's budget. Ed Healy Medallion Holder # 572

• Paul -- If you liked the Queen Latifah version of "Taxi" -- which was horrible and I won't argue about this -- you'll love the original French version. In any event, I can only reiterate what I wrote to Arthur. Without commenting on the merits of the medallion plan -- which was not my intent and could not be taken as my intent by any sober reader -- the notion this would be a revenue bonanza for the MTA in fiscal 2010 was a pure fantasy. I don't deign to speak for the public. I aim to inform them. Best, JE

• Yo Joe Eskenazi, aka the Snitch, the only thing that is officially bs is your article and i kinda liked the movie with Queen Latifah and Jimmy Fallon. lighten up, bro. life is short. relieve yourself of the notion that you are being objective or that you speak for the public. you certainly don't speak for anyone in the taxi industry. best, ph

• Dear Joe, 1. Your artical stated that " it faces potential litigation from angry cabbies' unions." For one thing there are no legitimate taxi cab unions in San Fransisco. The UTW likes to point they represent the taxi cab drivers in S.F. but they do not. They are the only group in S.F. that calls themselves a union, so your statement should read union instead unions, singular not plural. That is why I thought the information in your artical was from Mark. 2. Although no medallions have been transfered yet, they are being processed to be sold, and have the buyers and lenders in place to sell medallions benefiting drivers and the city alike. These will be sold and the city will make money and many drivers will be better off because of this pilot program. What I am saying is before you write such a negative artical again please get all your facts straight because revenue predeictions are NOT bullshit, and I'm sure a journalist can use better language. Sincerely, Arthur Lembke

• Arthur -- Thank you for your trenchant commentary on my "artical." It seems, however, that you've missed the point entirely. Your conspiracy-mongering is incorrect; I don't even know who Mark Gruberg is. The thrust of this story has little to do with the details of the medallion program you so thoroughly endorse. Rather -- and I think this really was self-evident -- I contend that MTA officials and the mayor's office pushed ridiculous revenue projections via the sale of medallions. Those projections started at about $15 million and dropped to $11.7 million, then $11.2 million -- and the intake is now predicted to be $2.5 million. As you know, the MTA hasn't yet earned a cent on medallion sales. And that's a problem, because it budgeted -- and spent -- as if it would earn tens of millions of dollars. <i>That's</i> the point of this "artical," sir. So far, medallion sales haven't done anything for MTA other than provide a bogus item allowing the agency to turn in "balanced" budgets despite the fact that everyone knows that tens of millions of dollars aren't accounted for. So, in the end, I'm confused by your comment as it has nothing to do with anything I wrote in my story. By the way, if you're going to accuse a journalist of "one misstatement after another," it'd do nicely to point out even one. Best, JE

• The artical by Joe Eskenazi is the worst piece of journalism I have ever read concerning taxi medallions. Your writer should research his subject before printing one misstatement after another. I'll bet dollars to donuts that he recieved his misinformation from Mark Gruberg, and the UTW. The pilot program was inacted after over one hundred and seventy five hours of hearings with all fractions of the taxi industry and a citizens committee, and was headed by Chris Hayahsi, the director of taxi's, who did a tremendous job of getting all sides of the taxi industry together. Mark and his small group were upset because they did not get everything they wanted. This pilot program is a win-win situation for the city, which will recieve much needed money, and will allow taxi cab drivers to purchase a medallion for less money than they would have to pay in gates for years. And also, will allow fulltime taxi cab drivers who have medallions to retire with some dignity and will make the streets of San Fransisco safer by not forcing old or ill taxi cab drivers to drive their taxi cabs when they are really unsafe to do so, in order to keep their medallion. Please, in the future, see to it that your writers research their subject before putting it in print. Sincerely, Arthur Lembke, retired medallion holder with over twenty five years of driving taxi cabs, and thirteen years on the board of directors of a major cab company in San Fransisco.

• &#64;Haggie Pretty much.

• SF cabbies could get non-stop but airport runs from orally fixated, heavy tipping, nymphomaniacs and still find something to complain about...

• One solution, And, there is only one. Elect a mayor who doesn't kow tow to the cab companies and every other corporate interest. Hell, do an issue now about all major potential mayoral candidates on both sides of spectrum now and you'll beat the shit out of the Guardian. Vet em with the same 5 defining questions and make em answer. It will give your readers a head start on evaluating the candidates actions between now and November 2011. h.

TotalComments: 10