I really enjoyed SPUR’s voter guide.

Or, ignore it all and just follow these tips:
No on 98 AND no on 99. No on F and yes on G. I don’t care about the rest though surely they’re important to worry about for some reason.

• I notice that fares run together in my memory more than before. I’m not sure of the cause. Do I pay less attention to customers? Am I becoming the cab driver that can chat up any customer without really listening to what they’re saying? (No, I don’t think so, but I still worry about it.)

  Maybe I start to see the same patterns of people over and over. What sets one business commuter apart from the other?

  Or, maybe I’m now waiting too long after my shifts to write these posts. (It’s probably that.)

• Late mornings and early afternoons the Kaiser calls are off the hook — 2, 3 or 4 orders waiting for cabs, most of them armed with City paratransit scrips, ready to spend a nice clip going across town. I like Kaiser calls.

  The dispatchers call those orders as “Geary and Divis.” Or, when there are too many, they simply say “2 [3, 4] times for the Kaiser” or “Kaiser calling back.” Good times to be a cab driver in the City.

  I picked up a guy Monday from the Kaiser. He was older, extremely tall and moved slowly but precisely. When he walked it looked like a slow motion film. A 30 frames per second video played back at 20 fps.

  He was black but with rather light skin and noticeable freckles. But, his defining feature was his glasses. They were perfectly round, thick plastic frames. He wore classy khaki pants, a sports jersey and a dress shirt. He had great style.

  When he sat down in the cab he handed me a twenty. “That’s your tip.” Making the assumption that is best to be made in such situations, I assumed he meant, “That will cover the fare plus your tip.” People do that sometimes.

  He gave his destination neither as a request nor as a command. Just a statement of truth. A fact. Our destiny, as sure as the sun would set tonight and rise tomorrow. “We’re going to make a stop at the Cala [Grocery store at California and Hyde] and then back to my apartment at [address].”

  As I’ve said many times before, I don’t normally enjoy waiting. I have a well-founded propensity toward constant motion as I usually earn more while in motion than waiting, even if the meter ticks up for time at $0.45/minute. But, I didn’t argue. He seemed set in our path.

  We pull into the Cala and he gets out. I try to relax. I’m getting better at it, even in these situations where math constantly ticks through my head calculating how much money I’m losing while waiting for this guy to scan through the frozen food aisles.

  What I perceive to be minutes later (but is probably just a minute later) I turn around and look in the store. Maybe I’ll see him grabbing something from the impulse aisle so we can keep going. He’s still outside. Searching for a cart. He hasn’t even entered Cala. I try to relax again. Of course, the meter is still running.

  I listen to some NPR. I flip around from one NPR station to the other. Ralph Nader’s on KALW. Interesting enough.

  15 minutes later I blow my top. This is insane. The meter’s up to $15. I grab a cab receipt and write down my phone number, grab his medicine from the back seat and $5 change for his $20.

  I find him in the Cala in the frozen food section. But, I couldn’t maintain my anger at him. Restated, I couldn’t direct my anger toward him. It just wouldn’t go. I just wanted to laugh. Actually, I wanted to help him shop. Maybe things would go faster. And, he shared my taste in food. Frozen popcorn shrimp, nice! “There are things at this Cala I just can’t get anywhere else in the City.” Tell me about it.

  I said, “Look sir, you’re really nice and all but I really can’t wait this long. I need to find other fares. Here’s your change from the meter, your medicine, and a card with my number. Call me when you’re done and I’ll pick you up.”

  “Oh no, don’t give me any change, that’s your tip. I’ll pay you whatever’s on the meter. I’ll just be another few minutes.” Oh, really? Now the numbers tip in his favor. And, to his credit, his Cala cart was approaching capacity. “Okay, I can wait a few more minutes.”

  A few Nader tirades later and he finally emerges from Cala. “Thanks for waiting,” he said, “It’s hard to get cab drivers to wait for me to do my shopping. That’s the last thing on my list for the week. Now I can relax the rest of the week.”

  I took him a few more long blocks up to his Nob Hill apartment. He paid me another $30. “Woah, sir, you’ve paid me 50 bucks. This is a lot. Are you sure you’re okay with that? I have no problem giving you some change.”

  “No, no, take it, you were very helpful. I’ve done everything on my list.”

  I thanked him profusely and finally said what was on my mind, “You have some awesome glasses.”

• I picked up an Indian guy and his girlfriend from the CalTrain station on Tuesday. I don’t think they take cabs often.

  He asked, “We are going downtown, are you going that way?”

  I wasn’t trying to be smart, but this just popped out of my mouth, “That’s not really how it works. I’m a cab driver, I’ll go wherever you tell me.” They told me to go downtown.

• I scored an Oakland Airport fare off the street from 555 Market, the site of my former office job. Karma?
• I dropped a guy and his elderly mom off at her retirement home from one of the hospitals. She was a bit out of it, so he was handling her paratransit scrips. He wasn’t sure where to sign and I pointed to the line and said, “Just fill in this field here. Did I just say field? I’m not even sure what the proper word is.” You see, I’ve been working a website quite a bit in my spare time.
• I picked up a bouncer from a downtown club Tuesday morning. He had finished his graveyard shift and was heading home to his NoPa apartment. He talked about work. He worked a lot. 7 days a week. He made a lot of money. He spends it all.

  I felt like asking him, does that really make you happy? Do you like working 7 days a week? Why not just spend less and work 4 days a week? Or 3?

  I’m proud to share that I’m living below my means, (finally) paying off my credit card, and working only 3 days per week. I earn about $25k per year and live in one of the most expensive cities in North America. My secret? I don’t buy things. (Nor do I have kids.)

  I didn’t feel it appropriate to lecture him though. I think it’s a lesson people have to learn for themselves. Of course, I have no problem lecturing you on this blog.

• I picked up a guy from a nice SOMA apartment building heading to SFO. We had a fun chat about politics, Obama and the state of the Union. As I dropped him at the terminal he said, “I’m glad I had you as a driver. I always like your cab company, you have good drivers.” Thanks.

I point your temporary attention to a Flash website produced by UC Berkeley j-school grad students Eric Zassenhaus and Amy Jeffries.

The video clips thumbnailed along the bottom are accurate and colorful paintings of a typical taxi shift. Well worth a view.

But wait, there’s more. The site also features insightful interviews with Heidi Machen, the SF Taxi Commission Executive Director; Jim Gillespie, Yellow Cab President; and Thomas George-Williams, United Taxicab Workers member.

Since I drive a cab in the City and can’t shut up about local politics, I have some pointed reactions:

I don’t know who Heidi Machen is or how she got to be Executive Director of the SF Taxi Commission, but she doesn’t seem to have an accurate grasp of the industry over which she regulates. This is a bit scary.

When asked about the recent gate-fee increase, Ms. Machen responds with a bubbly response. “In many ways it’s very positive,” she starts, repeating again for emphasis, “in many ways it’s very positive, because, if indeed the taxi companies needed money to purchase the alternative fuel and hybrid vehicles San Francisco is looking at a clean taxi fleet in 3-4 years. Wow! That’s phenomenal!”

“If indeed?” If indeed? Ms. Machen, your job, for which you are paid a bulbous salary of some sort, is to be Executive Director of the Taxi Commission. There should be no “if” in your response. You should know whether or not taxi companies need money to purchase alternative fuel and hybrid vehicles BEFORE implementing fee increases.

Continuing, “On the other hand you look at the controller’s report and the controller said this would have an immediate detrimental effect on taxi drivers’ incomes. So, that can be a negative, obviously, because taxi drivers, a lot of them, may be hanging on marginally. On the other hand, maybe it encourages taxi drivers to become more efficient. Some would fear it would make taxi drivers more reckless.” Ponderously she summarizes, “I think there are some positives and some possible negatives that we’re looking at.”

My fear is she doesn’t seem to “get it.” A key sticking point: taxi companies need CPI gate increases but drivers also need correlated revenue increases. The discussion of green cabs is a sideshow distracting from this core issue.

On the other hand, Mr. Gillespie in his role as General Manager of Yellow Cab understands the situation perfectly. Unfortunately, his role is not an advocate for drivers but instead for revenue maximization for Yellow Cab. (This is not a judgment of his motivation, just a recognition thereof.) But, at least he “gets it.”

Thomas George-Williams, an active member of the local United Taxi Worker union “gets it” too. But, as most drivers are not members of the Union, its influence, regardless of Mr. George-Williams “getting it,” is unfortunately questionable.

Link

Mayor Newsom signed a bill last week that increases gate fees for most cab drivers by $5 (effectively a $.50/hr paycut) and increases the gate fee for Compressed Natural Gas and hybrid cab drivers by $13.50 (effectively a $1.35/hr paycut).

I first learned of the gate fee increase when I showed up for work this weekend. All around the cab yard there were signs posted alerting drivers of the gate fee increase which clearly identified the Mayor and Board of Supervisors as the culprit, not the cab company itself.

The Mayor’s office issued a press release that would, in theory, summarize this news. It does not. In fact, it paints a rosy picture that this legislation makes the City’s cab fleet more green and that cab drivers will jump for joy like leprechauns at the end of the rainbow to the news that we’ll all be driving Prius cabs.

What follows is the actual press release and a bit of cynical discussion, as usual.

Mayor Newsom Signs Alternative-Fuel Taxi Legislation

3/6/08 – Today, Mayor Gavin Newsom signed legislation that will enable the purchase of more alternative-fuel taxi cabs for use on San Francisco streets. The legislation will help the City meet its commitment to reducing green house gas emissions with a higher gate fee, which will allow taxi cab companies to purchase new alternative fuel vehicles and supply them to drivers. Taxi drivers also benefit with lower gas costs associated with more efficient vehicles that get better gas mileage, or use less expensive alternative fuels.

“Transportation accounts for over half of San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions, and it is imperative that we look to this sector for commensurate emissions reductions,” said Mayor Newsom. “The legislation I am signing today complements the pledge I made in 2006 for an all-green taxi fleet and provides a mandate for cab companies to convert their vehicles.”

Mayor Newsom’s 2006 State of the City Address challenged the Taxi Commission to create a 100% “green” taxi fleet. Approximately 15% of today’s fleet is either Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) or hybrid vehicles. This legislation is expected to increase that percentage to 100% by 2011.

Last week, the Board of Supervisors passed legislation codifying the Taxi Commission’s policy and added a gate increase of $7.50 per vehicle. Specifically, the legislation amends the San Francisco Police code by raising the taxicab gate cap to $96.50 and ratifies gate fees previously charged up to $91.50 per shift for the period of January 1, 2003 to October 27 2006; to authorize a $7.50 surcharge on the gate cap for low emission vehicles; and to require taxi companies to reduce average per vehicle greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2012.

“This legislation came about because the status quo gate cap cannot continue,” said Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier. “I’m pleased we found a way to green the taxi cab industry without bankrupting the companies and without doing so on the backs of cab drivers.”

The 2007 Taxi Emissions Resolution required that the San Francisco taxi industry reduce its total Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by 50% from current levels and 20% from 1990 levels by 2011. Under the resolution, the San Francisco Taxi Commission committed to work to achieve zero net carbon emissions by offsetting the total amount of GHG produced by the San Francisco taxi fleet with an equal amount of renewable energy or energy efficiency by 2015, and by 2020 will work to achieve zero gross GHG emissions by permitting only zero emission vehicles. Additionally, the Resolution urged the Board of Supervisors to enact legislation to raise the per-shift gate fee to subsidize the purchase of high-efficiency vehicles.

The magic of PR spin never fails to amaze me. Is it so hard for our elected officials to be honest? Do they actually believe the things they spin? They must not. They must understand the reality. Do we live in Disneyland? Are we on Mars?

The headline should read, “Mayor signs taxi gate fee increase, lowering pay for City workers.”

As the SF Taxi Live blog points out, the choice quote of this press release has to be Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier’s statement, “I’m pleased we found a way to green the taxi cab industry without bankrupting the companies and without doing so on the backs of cab drivers.”

“…without doing so on the backs of cab drivers?” Ms. Alioto-Pier, have you read the legislation you just passed?

Look, Mayor Newsom and Ms. Alioto-Pier, YES we need to match gate fees with inflation and increase gates slowly.

But, don’t pull bullshit like this and pass off a gate fee increase as green legislation. Your press release is dishonest and sidesteps discussion of an important issue: City taxi drivers will pay more for their cabs at a time when gas prices are already taking more money than ever out of their pockets. We should be discussing how drivers can ensure their take-home pay increases with inflation, just as cab companies’ gate fees do.

Mr. Newsom and Ms. Alioto-Pier, please be cognizant of the effects of legislation you pass. You may live in Disneyland, but your citizens do not.

Links

• SF Taxi Live Post
• Official Press Release

Marketplace painted a nice picture of Obama and Hillary’s voracious battle for the crown of ultimate NAFTA hater.

This is frustrating. Yes, they’re in Ohio. Yes, they have to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Instead, they should rise up above the normal crap and say, “Look America, NAFTA is here. I (didn’t support it/didn’t agree with my husband), but it’s not going anywhere soon. But, I *DO* support free, government supported retraining programs to help displaced persons find jobs. This is a *REAL* way that, if elected, my administration would work toward a solution for Ohio and American citizens that were hardest hit by NAFTA.”

Please remember: NAFTA is not bad. Free trade is not bad. But, free trade often displaces labor that is most easily displaced — which is most often low/unskilled labor.

Our government must recognize that the effects of free trade often hits hardest our lowest income members of society. As such, our government has a strong social duty to provide free retraining and placement programs for those displaced by trade.

Link

Wow, it looks like Nat Ford might actually know how to run a municipal transit agency.

Let’s hope the Board of Supervisors gets off his back and lets him do it right.

Link

On my ‘to write’ list is a manifesto of how to fix Muni. Lay out what’s wrong. Lay out what we need to do to fix it.

Dave Snyder of SPUR beat me to the punch. I met Dave last spring when I served under his leadership with a group of volunteers to pitch for approval from the Board of Supervisors to pass the 38-Geary BRT project into the next stage, environmental review.

This article is SPOT ON.

Link

I’ll admit right up front: I’m not sure what Congress actually does at their meetings in Washington. But, what I glean from an ear half-tuned to NPR is that it’s usually a discussion on legislation germane to American citizen’s lives and within the general jurisdiction of the legislative branch of our government.

So then why are our elected officials spending so much time on the allegations of steroid use of baseball players?

Last I checked, the Major League Baseball monopoly is a privately held corporation. Despite local decisions to support the construction of stadiums through significant public tax breaks and subsidies, MLB remains a large, arguably well-run, private corporation which often handles tough internal human resources issues such as substance abuse, as would any other large corporation with stringent performance contracts and important PR considerations.

So, I’ll return to my original question. Why are our elected officials spending so much time and effort on this issue?

As a lowly taxpayer and voter, I would rather our elected officials spend time and effort providing universal healthcare so that I can see the dentist without saving up for weeks on end or ending up in bankruptcy if, God forbid, I had cancer. Or, maybe they can work to reduce government spending so that the value of the dollars I earn doesn’t continue to endlessly nosedive. Or, maybe they can cut our losses in Iraq or tighten an unaccountable defense department that has a difficult time tracking its own purchases.

I guess all those public needs must wait until our elected public officials have fully dissected the internal HR substance abuse crisis of a privately held company. Gosh, how silly of me to even think this wasn’t mucho importante issue #1 for the American people.

When I drive an 11 hour shift and make only fifty or sixty bucks I feel pretty sour. This doesn’t happen often. But, it does happen a few times a month during this time of year when demand for cabs in the City is seasonally low.

My angry mind jumps first to the cab company. How can this evil cab company charge me so much for my taxi, gas and dispatch services when I’m just barely making money to pay rent? What sort of evil people must they be to squeeze pennies out of the pockets of immigrants and hard working laborers?

(I don’t usually feel these thoughts. In fact, I have a great deal of respect for the cab company I work for.) But, many cab drivers feel these thoughts often. Some of them have posted on this blog or others to express their frustration at high gate fees and poor treatment.

Many American workers have these same thoughts about their employers. Whole websites are dedicated to venting these thoughts about individual companies.

STOP! Take these angry thoughts elsewhere: Aim them at your government.

Robert Reich is former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton and a regular commentator on my favorite radio program, Marketplace. He has an hour full of extremely wise words on a past edition of the Commonwealth Club of California radio program. (Unfortunately, these wise words are only available in Real Audio format.)

Among many other thoughts he shares in this program, one I latched on to with the whole of my heart is that American citizens can never look toward corporations for true social change. A corporation is a machine. It is a machine with one relentless goal: to create value for its shareholders. Let’s not judge this as bad, good, or whatever. It just is.

Accepting the fact that corporations are value creating machines let’s revisit our anger from above. Let’s not blame Wal-Mart for bad wages. Let’s not blame the taxi company for a high gate fee. Let’s not blame health insurance companies for refusing to accept high risk subscribers. These corporate entities are nothing more than the result of an evolution of best practices to create value for shareholders.

The only true accountable way of making significant societal changes such as a minimum wage or universally available health insurance is ONLY through government regulation, not through the magic of an oxymoronic corporate conscience.

Links

• Commonwealth Club Broadcast
• KQED Forum Interview with Robert Reich

Dear Mayor Newsom

You didn’t have to spend City taxpayer money on private consultants. Anyone could have told you: Just like any other shared and limited public resource, public transit needs user fees.

Offering ‘free’ Muni is a destructive proposal. Muni rolling stock is not unlimited. Removing user fees distorts a natural and effective form of limiting the number of people that use Muni resources.

Muni needs to increase its quality of service. Removing user fees would decrease the quality of service. It would result in more crowded buses, leading to lower frequency and lower average system speeds.

Here’s the real Muni solution: increase quality (frequency, speed, reliability, cleanliness) on critical lines such as 38-Geary, N-Judah, or 14-Mission. Enforce real transit-only lanes that enable high speeds with true signal pre-emption. Prepare Muni to operate faster than a personal vehicle for trips on these ‘primary’ lines. Then, the City can increase user fees to $2 or even $2.50 for these primary lines.

Our residents don’t want free Muni. City residents are more than willing to pay for an effective transit system. It’s up to the City to provide an effective transit system and price it properly, not make a crappy transit system free.

Don’t get me wrong — I’m happy you’ve figured this out by now. It’s just silly that this advice cost tax payers $20,000+. I would have been glad to provide this advice for a bit less. Let’s say $10,000.

Let’s look on the bright side. At least you’re open to new ideas. Just talk to me next time and I’ll charge you half the rate of the consultants, and I’ll give you better ideas faster.

kfarr