Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxi Medallion Rehearing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies rehearing request in taxi-medallion revocation case
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied a rehearing request by counsel for medallion holder Syed Bashir Rahimi, finding no new material facts or extraordinary circumstances; the board cited the record and testimony, including an SFPD account of a Jan. 11 traffic stop, before voting 4–0 to deny rehearing.
The Board of Appeals for the City and County of San Francisco on Jan. 14, 2009 denied a request to rehear the revocation of taxi medallion No. 1135 and attendant card No. 62705, rejecting arguments that the December 17 hearing produced a manifest injustice.
Leah Parmenter, attorney for appellant Syed Bashir Rahimi, asked the board to grant a rehearing so she could submit a comprehensive legal brief she said would show “manifest injustice” at the earlier proceeding. Parmenter argued that prejudicial testimony unrelated to the waybill allegations had been introduced at the prior hearing and that she had not been given sufficient time to prepare a defense; she asked the board to permit reopening so the record could be fully developed.
Jordana Thigpen, executive director of the San Francisco Taxi Commission, told the board that the commission’s rules and the board’s rehearing standard require either extraordinary circumstances or new material facts that, if known earlier, could have affected the original outcome. Thigpen said those standards were not met and defended the commission’s handling of the continuance request, adding she had provided the board with a written response and witness reports.
SFPD Officer Raleigh Huni testified about a Jan. 11 traffic stop involving the taxi. Huni described pulling the vehicle over for an unsafe left turn, finding the driver’s license initially appeared expired and recounting that the driver later produced documentation showing an extension. Officer Huni also described the driver as agitated at the scene and said, “I think he's a danger to the public just because of his demeanor.”
Commissioners pressed Parmenter for specifics about what ‘‘new’’ materials would be presented at a rehearing and whether those items were absent from the prior record. Parmenter said her request was based on manifest injustice stemming from the denial of a continuance and asserted there were additional historical records and legal arguments she could submit.
After discussion, Commissioner Peterson moved to deny the rehearing request. The motion carried 4–0 (Vice President Fung absent). The board directed that a notice of decision and order would issue.
The board’s action preserves the Taxi Commission’s December decision to revoke the medallion and card; the rehearing request was denied for lack of new material facts or the extraordinary circumstances the rules require.
