Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxi Medallion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board declines to overturn SFMTA denial after split vote on taxi medallion appeal
Summary
An appeal for a regular taxi medallion drew testimony from SFMTA alleging fabricated waybills; the Board voted 3-2 to grant the appeal but lacked the four votes required by City Charter to overturn a department action, so the SFMTA denial remained in effect.
The Board heard appeal Ten-1094 from an applicant identified in the record as Mister Smithson, who sought review of the SFMTA's denial of a regular taxi medallion. Jarvis Murray of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency told the Board that log-on records for 2009 showed 74 electronic log-ins while the applicant had submitted 121 paper waybills for that year, raising suspicion that some waybills were fabricated. "We believe those waybills are fabricated," Murray said, pointing to many waybills stamped with identical 10-hour intervals.
The appellant explained that vehicles frequently go into repair and that paper waybills and spare vehicle use can legitimately produce discrepancies. The appellant described mechanical problems and spare-vehicle usage to explain gaps in electronic log-ins. Martin Smith of ElectroCab offered to provide mechanical records to corroborate breakdown history.
Board members questioned how SFMTA reconciled smart‑card, log‑on and waybill records and noted blind spots where corroborating evidence (for example, airport records) is absent. Several commissioners expressed sympathy for the appellant's lengthy wait for a medallion but also acknowledged probative evidence raised by SFMTA.
Commissioner Frank Fung moved to overrule the department and grant the medallion. The motion passed 3-2 on the roll call, but the City Charter requires four votes to overturn a departmental action; with no further motion to reach that threshold, the department's denial remained in effect and the appellant did not receive the medallion.
The Board did not adopt a new factual finding that superseded SFMTA's analysis; the hearing record will remain available to the parties and could be revisited if new corroborating evidence is submitted.
