Loading...
PVAC Minutes 04/02/2001 RApril 2, 2001 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2001 Met on this date at 9:10 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building F of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Bryan L. S. Pease Pat Baisley Clifford W. Flegal, Jr. Eric Hyde William J. Csogi NOT PRESENT: Tom Lugrin ALSO PRESENT: Michelle Arnold, Code Enforcement Director Maria Cruz, Code Enforcement Specialist Tom Palmer, Assistant County Attorney Page 1 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2001 9:00 AM COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER TURNER BUILDING (ADMINISTRATION), THIRD FLOOR 3301 E. TAMIAMI TR., NAPLES, ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, A~;D THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THAT TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. I. ROLL CALL II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: III. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 2, 2001 NEW BUSINESS: Request for apDroval to O~erate a Charter Service A. Debbora A. Olson B. Charles S. DePaula C. James Cormier d/b/a C & C Coach, Inc. D. Herman Pfeuti d?b/a Southwest Transportation E. Ralph A. Marchione d/b/a Private Car Luxury Transportation, Inc. F. William D. Potter d/b/a Med-Assure V. OLD BUSINESS: VI. REPORTS: VII. DISCUSSION: VIII. A. "Notice" stickers - Charter service vehicles B. Ordinance Changes NEXT MEETING DATE: July 2, 2001 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: call the roll? MS. CRUZ: Good morning. enforcement official. Patricia Baisley? MS. BAISLEY: Here. MS. CRUZ: Clifford Flegal? MR. FLEGAL: Here. MS. CRUZ: Tom Lugrin? (No response.) MS. CRUZ: Bryan Pease. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Here. MS. CRUZ: William Csogi? (No response.) MS. CRUZ: Eric Hyde. MR. HYDE: Here. I call the meeting to order. Could we For the record, Maria Cruz, code CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any people who would like to speak, if you could fill out a slip in the lobby. If you're already on the agenda and you're coming up before the board, it's not necessary to fill out a slip, but if it's for something other than you being approved, feel free to do that in the lobby and turn those in. Do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda? I -- I just -- we're going to add on discussion, speakers, any speakers. There will be a five-minute time limit. MR. HYDE: Mr. Pease, I have a question. Yes. And please let the record show Csogi. God, I get that wrong every time. CHAIRMAN PEASE: that Mr. -- MR. HYDE: Csogi. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. CSOGI: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I"m sorry. Page 2 April 2, 2001 MR. CSOGI: Under additions or deletions, I've got a question for Mr. Pease concerning Hummer ride and what happened with that. Would that be under new business or old business? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, let's put it under -- do you want to put it under old business? MR. CSOGI: I have something relevant to that also, another CHAIRMAN PEASE: And I'd like to move ordinance changes out of the meeting and into the workshop. Any other additions or changes? Do we have approval of the agenda? MS. CRUZ: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. MS. CRUZ: Excuse me. There is another addition under discussion. That will be Item C. It's a -- rate changes, and I was -- that request was provided from a public member. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. I think that will -- actually, if we can -- it would be -- if we could put that behind the speakers, any discussion that may want to take place with the committee. So we'll do speakers -- under discussion, speakers, then any discussion that we need and then the notice stickers, if that's okay with you. Do we have approval for the agenda? I make a motion that we approve the agenda MR. FLEGAL: as changed. MS. BAISLEY: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. It was -- the motion was made by Mr. Flegal, seconded by Pat Baisley. All of those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Same sign. Motion carried. Do we have approval of the minutes? MR. FLEGAL: I make a motion we approve the minutes as submitted. Page 3 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Made by Mr. Flegal. Is there a second? MR. HYDE: Second, Eric Hyde. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Eric Hyde. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Same sign? Motion carried. New business, request for approval to operate a charter service. Debra Olson. Is Debra Olson here or a representative? Could you please come forward to be sworn in? (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) MR. FLEGAL: Mr. chairman, there are no -- in my package there are no corporation papers or anything like that, and this is supposedly an application for a corporation. MS. CRUZ: Mr. chairman, I believe the applicant needs to explain to this board, the name, issue. I understand that the name that was provided on the application, it is the correct name. MS. OLSON: Yeah. MS. CRUZ: And the papers that were provided in the application, it's for a different corporation, and we'd like to request those items -- those documents be removed from the application. MR. FLEGAL: I don't have any documents on the corporation. That's my problem. MS. CRUZ: You do have a document regarding Island -- I believe it's Island Charter. MS. OLSON: I don't believe they're in here. MS. CRUZ: There are not? MS. OLSON: No. MS. CRUZ: I apologize. No. She -- she did provide at the Page 4 April 2, 2001 Charters, and she requested it to remove those. I believe the name that she wants to operate the business in is Airport Livery Express, Inc. That has been filed, but she has not received any documentation from -- from the corporate office. And she also advised that at this time she would like to have the application approved in her name only, and then when the name issue gets resolved, she'll make that change. MR. FLEGAL: I have a question for Mr. Palmer. If we approve an individual and then the individual starts a corporation, isn't that some kind of a transfer that has to be approved by the board? MR. PALMER: Yeah. However, in a case like this where she's forming a new corporation which apparently is to conduct this business, if you wanted to, you could delegate to staff, subject to the review of the corporate papers issued from the Secretary of State, to au -- automatically allow the transfer to have the business conducted in the corporate name, if you want to. It's essent -- it's a one-man -- one-person corporation. It's essentially the same principle, except she'll have the -- the corporate veil so that she won't be exposed to personal liability. But it would be reasonable, I would expect, to go ahead and authorize staff to go ahead and transfer it automatically subject to their review of the corporate charter when it's issued. MR. FLEGAL: Miss Olson, you know on -- when you get your insurance, you're going to have to list Collier County as an additional insured? MS. OLSON: Yes. I'm aware of that. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other discussion? Do we have a motion on the application for charter service for Debbora Olson? MR. CSOGI: I'd like to see the applications when they come Page 5 April 2, 2001 MR. CSOGI: I'd like to see the applications when they come in front of us be complete. I mean, this seems to be an ongoing thing we're approving stuff in front of staff at a later date. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Some of that's relative to timing. You know, our meetings are quarterly, and they don't always have the full three months to do that. I appreciate what you're saying and staff, you know-- MR. CSOGI: And that's why we're here. That's why we meet. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But they -- if they start the process in March, they may not have the paperwork. MR. HYDE: I make a motion that we approve pending the proper paperwork from Tallahassee or from the state as well as, then, changing the name from Debbora Olson to the correct corporate name as it comes through on addition (sic) that the insurance be changed as well. And I assume that there will be a commercial or driver's license that would apply versus an individual under the same statute. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Motion made by Mr. Hyde. Is there a second? MR. FLEGAL: I second it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Mr. Flegal. All those in favor say aye. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. Oh, I'm sorry. Did you oppose? MR. CSOGI: Yes, I did. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm sorry. shows one opposed by Mr. -- MR. CSOGI: Csogi. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- Csogi. MR. CSOGI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: One -- the record -- the record You're welcome. Page 6 April 2, 2001 The next request for approval to operate a charter service is Charles S. DePaula. Please come forward and be sworn in. (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) MR. CSOGI: Mr. Pease, I've got a question on the application, whether we should consider it or not on page 18, paragraph A. Actually, it's going to be paragraph B, No. 4. It's going to be if the certificate holder has been convicted of a crime. MS. ARNOLD: This is -- for the record, Michelle Arnold, code enforcement director. This is the DePaula application. I think you may be one tab ahead. MR. CSOGI: Okay. I apologize. I can't read my notes. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. chairman, if there are no questions, I'd make a motion we approve the application as submitted. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Made by Mr. Flegal. Is there a second? MS. BAISLEY: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Pat Baisley, Mrs. Bais -- Miss Baisley. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.} CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. MR. DePAULA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Next request for approval to operate a charter service is James Comier -- I hope I'm pronouncing that properly -- doing business as C & C Coach. Come forward and be sworn in, please. (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) MR. CSOGI: Miss Arnold, that was Mr. DePaula; right? MS. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. MR. CSOGI: Okay. On his application, I've got in Question Page 7 April 2, 2001 15 just what I was referencing. I didn't think I was reading it wrong. This is hand typed from him. It's page 12 of the -- of the packet. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. But exactly it's three years. MR. CSOGI: Is there a three-year clause? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. B, last sentence of B. And it also relates to the driver, which we didn't -- we didn't ask if he was the driver. MR. CSOGI: It says certificate holder, not driver. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Should be responsible for ensuring that each of its drivers. MR. CSOGI: It also says certificate holder. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But it is still a three years. MR. CSOGI: Three years? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. CSOGI: Where does it say that? CHAIRMAN PEASE: B, the very last sentence of B on page 18. MR. PALMER: Mr. Chairman, there's -- it's true that the statute of limitations in effect on this type of defense is three years. But there is -- there are a few items listed on page 24 of the ordinance of a five-year period of time. But this violation is not one of those. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. It went to reckless driving. MR. PALMER: That's right. MS. CRUZ: Mr. chairman, for clarification purposes, there was a -- during the process of the copy -- making the copies, your next applicant -- application for Comier, page 22 and 23 belongs to the DePaula application packet. MS. BAISLEY: Oh. MS. CRUZ: I apologize for that error. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Thank you. Page 8 April 2, 2001 Ready to proceed with Mr. -- is it Comier? MR. COMIER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Thank you. Okay. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Cornier, I have one question. You have a letter in here from Mr. LeMaster about insurance. What agency is he with? MR. COMIER: He's with Nationwide in the North Trail of Naples. Nationwide doesn't -- doesn't currently write a policy that would cover this business. He does -- he did find a market for the policy, though. It won't be with Nationwide. It will be through his agency. MR. FLEGAL: It's just company on it so -- MR. COMIER: Yeah. currently write a policy. -- the letterhead didn't have any He's a Nationwide insurer. They don't He found another market for it. MR. FLEGAL: My curiosity was -- I mean, anybody could write -- MR. CORMIER: I -- I realize that, yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other discussion? Do we have a motion on the applicant, James Cornier, doing business as C & C Coach? MR. HYDE: I make a motion that we approve. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Motion by Mr. Hyde. Is there a second? MR. FLEGAL: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Mr. Flegal. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. MR. COMIER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Next applicant for approval to operate a charter service, Herman Pfeuti doing business as Southwest Page 9 April 2, 2001 Southwest Transportation. Is Mr. Pfeuti here or a representative? Okay. Come forward and be sworn in. (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're Mr. Pfeuti? MR. PFEUTI: Yes, I am. MR. CSOGI: I got a question on your address you listed for business. I've got a letter here from Naples Limousine stating that that's their address for business, stating that they don't want you to use that address. MR. PFEUTI: I didn't use that for the address. I have a different address. I changed -- MR. CSOGI: You had it in your application and -- MR. PFEUTI: Only on the original one. And then I changed it. I resubmitted with an address in Industrial Park, Railhead. MR. CSOGI: What's the -- I don't see it on here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's the address of that letterhead? Because -- MR. CSOGI: It's going to be 6201 Shirley Street, Naples, Florida 34109. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's the only one I didn't see. I saw a lot of other ones. MR. CSOGI: That's on page 3, No. 4, line C. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MR. CSOGI: There's a business address. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Because I saw the West Valley Drive and also a -- MS. BAISLEY: Excuse me. But where did this letter come from? MR. CSOGI: It came from Charlie at Naples Limousine to my office. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Could you -- could you pass that, please? Page10 April 2, 2001 MR. CSOGI: Sure. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Then there's 97th Avenue North, 654 -- MR. CSOGI: We need to clear it up. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Where is that? MR. PFEUTI: The address that I submitted later on, right, I don't have a page number here, but it's actually on 1340 Railhead Drive, Unit No. 11. And I was going to use Charlie's address, but then he said not to, and so I -- I have a new place up here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're buying -- you're buying the business? You're buying Southwest Transportation? MR. PFEUTI: Yes, I am. MS. CRUZ: Mr. chairman, that would be the design certificate, and the page is not numbered, but it's right after page No. 30. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Well, is -- page 30? Okay. So the seller's address is 97th Avenue North. MR. PFEUTI: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So the titles will be changed over to the new address or owner at that time. All right. Okay. MS. BAISLEY: Maria, was Southwest Transportation certificate renewed on the renewal of the certificates in January? MS. CRUZ: Yes, it was. MS. BAISLEY: Okay. MR. FLEGAL: I have a question for Mr. Palmer. Someone selling Southwest Transportation, which is the current certificate holder, that sale has to be approved by us, right, transfer of sale, whatever? MR. PALMER: Well, I -- effectively approval of this application would approve the sale because the sale is prerequisite to him operating -- owning this business. Page 11 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: You could purchase it pending approval by this board. I'm not saying that's what happened. I'm saying you wouldn't necessarily have to have the approval of the board before you purchased it. MR. CSOGI: I think it says the transfer of the certificate has to be approved by the board, not the sale of the business, is the way the ordinance reads. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That could be. MR. CSOGI: I read it last night. That's what it says. So these vehicles, they're all owned by Southwest right now, that are on the application, and you're just purchasing the business, and these will be your vehicles. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Exactly. MR. CSOGI: And these are all permitted by us, correct, apparently. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Correct. MR. FLEGAL: Is Southwest a company or -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. Isn't there supposed to be a letter or something that discusses the sale? MS. BAISLEY: It does. It's in here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What page is that? MS. BAISLEY: They're not numbered. MS. ARNOLD: It's the -- it would be 32 if we had numbered those last few pages. It's the page right after the land use and zoning certificate, contract for purchase and sale. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MS. BAISLEY: But this letter makes no mention of the vehicles being sold; just the name, the telephone number, and the client list. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Palmer, I guess my confusion is, if Southwest already has certificates, then we need to approve a transfer of a certificate. But here we've got a company called Page 12 April 2, 2001 Saco Valley Trader coming in for a new certificate. Are -- are we going to have two certificates? MR. PALMER: No, then we will not have two certificates. It doesn't -- are you going to operate this business under a new corporation that's called the Saco Transportation -- MR. PFEUTI: Saco Valley Trader; that's the corporate name. MR. PALMER: Is the seller keeping the old business? MR. PFEUTI: No. MR. PALMER: Is that going to be dissolved? MR. PFEUTI: His -- because his is Southwest Transportation, Inc. -- MR. PALMER: Yes. MR. PFEUTI: -- by South -- Southwest Transportation. But the Southwest Transportation, Inc., that's MR. PALMER: a corporation? MR. PFEUTI: MR. PALMER: Yes. Is he going to dissolve that corporation? MR. PFEUTI: That I don"t know whether he is. I think so. I believe he is, but I'm not sure. MR. PALMER: Are the vehicles licensed in the name of that corporation presently, or are they leased to him? MR. PFEUTI: They're leased to him, some of them, yeah. And some of them he owns. MR. PALMER: Is he going to transfer the titles to you -- MR. PFEUTI: Yes. MR. PALMER: -- or your new corporation? MR. PFEUTI: Yes. MR. PALMER: That would be the normal practice, is that the certif -- you have to prove the certificate of the transfer of the new corporation, and, of course, this would be subject to the vehicles, terminating the leases with the old corporation and then transferring title to the new corporation or -- you are going Page 13 April 2, 2001 to -- is the new corporation going to own them or lease them? MR. PFEUTI: They're going to be leased to the corporation. MR. PALMER: You're going -- the corporation is going to lease them. MR. PFEUTI: Uh-huh. MR. PALMER: All right. Then the ques -- then the lease is of course -- terminate the leases of the old corporation or -- or assign them, and then the new corporation will have a lease, lessor-lessee relationship with the vehicles; is that correct? MR. PFEUTI: Uh-huh, that's correct. MR. PALMER: So the certificate -- the transfer of the certificate will have to be approved by this board obviously. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. If we're transferring the certificate, then, I mean, is he going to end up with two? MR. PALMER: No. He's going to have a certificate in the name of the new corporation. He's not even sure whether they -- the old corporation will be dissolved or not and, frankly, I'm not sure it's any moment to the board what happens to the old corporation. The old corporation is no longer -- as far as we're concerned has no real relevance after -- if the certificate is transferred to the new corporation and the vehicles are either owned by or leased to the new corporation. MS. BAISLEY: Some of the vehicles that he's mentioned that he's going to be using are titled to Southwest Transportation, Inc., right now. MR. PALMER: Well, we could ask him about that. He just said they're going to be leased to. Instead of being leased to the old corporation, the -- the new corporation is going to enter into leaseholds in regard to those; is that correct? MR. PFEUTI: That's correct. MR. PALMER: Do you want to explain to the board the details? Page 14 April 2, 2001 MR. PFEUTI: The one that you're talking? Are you looking at the van, or are you talking about -- MS. BAISLEY: The Lincoln. MR. PFEUTI: The '99 Lincoln? I will buy that Lincoln after I get my certificate. I will buy that Lincoln, and I will own -- I will own that Lincoln. MS. BAISLEY: And the '97 Ford also? MR. PFEUTI: The same thing with the '97 Ford, yes. MR. PALMER: You're not going to have any affiliation with the old corporation after this transfer takes place? MR. PFEUTI: Not at all. MR. FLEGAL: Then there's really -- you're really not transferring a certificate because the certificate's to Southwest, and if that's -- if he's going to buy the two vehicles from them and he's buying their name of that company and the telephone list and we're going to issue -- wouldn't we issue a new certificate to Saco and then the old certificate would be gone because Southwest isn't here anymore? MR. PALMER: Well, the question's -- I'm not sure if it's really relevant. If there's going to be one existing certificate after the transfer, that is the old -- the old certificate is either going to be transferred or going to be terminated. But I -- I understand after - - after this deal goes through the old corporation is not going to have an active certificate to operate these businesses. MR. PREUTI: No, because-- MR. PALMER: So there will be one certificate. MR. PFEUTI: Right. Yes, a noncompete agreement anyhow. MR. PALMER: So the question is whether or not you want to basically terminate the old certificate and issue a new one or treat it as a transfer to the new -- the new company. The fact is there's one certif -- there will be one existing certificate after the deal closes in the name of the new corporation. Page 15 April 2, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I guess where I'm -- what I'm looking for is just to insure that there's not two certificates, we either have to, I guess, in a motion or whatever, transfer the certificate from Southwest to Saco, period, or issue a new certificate to Saco based on what they've submitted and then turn around and delete, recall, whatever, the Southwest. MR. PALMER: Well, do we have any documentation in the file that where -- that states that seller recognizes that he will no longer have a certificate to operate after the deal closes? MS. CRUZ: Not at this time. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But we can make that part of your motion. MR. FLEGAL: What I'm worried about is if we give him a certificate and we don't do anything about Southwest, Southwest still has a certificate to go operate. MR. PALMER: That's the -- the ambiguity. And also we would want to know that the seller understands that he will not hereafter have a certificate to operate, that there's another -- another hypothetical case would be he could keep a certificate active and there would be a new certificate. Obviously, we want to close that up. I think it would be a good idea to get something from the seller to -- to -- it is here acknowledging that he is not going to have a certificate to operate on. MR. HYDE: Yeah, it actually -- it's listed under the contract for purchase and sale. Seller acknowledges that this contract also serves as an agreement not to compete in transportation business in Collier County for a period of five years once purchaser has the certificate and seller has received money of the purchase money. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But that does not mean that he cannot sell that corporation to somebody else. MR. FLEGAL: Right. Page 16 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: So we still need the documentation. MR. FLEGAL: The certificate is still there. He can sell it to his uncle. MR. PALMER: It would be better to nail it down with an express statement by the seller that he -- that he understands it will not be a certificate to operate affiliated with him after the transaction. MS. BAISLEY: I think it is noted in the ordinance somewhere, and I can't find it quickly here, but the certificates are not transferable. MR. FLEGAL: Page 30. See what that says. It's where my little note is -- no certificate may be sold, assigned, or otherwise transferred -- no certificate may be sold, assigned, otherwise transferred, mortgaged, or ownership structure of a corporation or partnership which is a certificate holder altered in any manner without approval so -- MR. PALMER: In other words, the board has the power to authorize an assignment of a -- of a certificate if it wants to. But how do you plan on doing it? Do you plan on issuing a new certificate to the new corporation? MS. CRUZ: That's correct. MR. PALMER: Okay. MS. BAISLEY: But we should be sending a letter out to the previous owner that says his certificate is no longer valid. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I -- I think you can make that part of your motion to staff to -- to do so. Do we have a motion, or is there other discussion? Mr. Hyde -- the chair recognizes Mr. Hyde. MR. HYDE: I wrote it down because I -- it got too confusing. I just couldn't figure it all out. I make a motion that we approve pending the following: that, No. 1, we receive an express statement from the actual Page 17 April 2, 2001 owner of -- I'll go back and make sure -- Southwest Transportation -- that he will conclude his operation and his certificate will be null and void. Then second part of that is that we issue a new trans -- a new certificate to the new corporation, Saco -- MR. PFEUTI: Valley Trader. MR. HYDE: Thank you. -- Saco Valley Trader, Inc., as well as indicating that of all of the vehicles, once they are either purchased or lease agreements are signed, will also be conducted under that name, as well as the insurance and any other documentation that is still required by code enforcement. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is there a second? MR. FLEGAL: I'll second. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second -- motion was made by Mr. Hyde, second by Mr. Flegal. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. MR. PFEUTI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Next request for approval to operate a charter service is Ralph Marchione doing business as Private Car Luxury Transportation. Is Mr. Marchione here? Will you please be sworn in. (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) MS. CRUZ: Mr. Chairman, if I may add, on this application a contract for purchase and sale of the business was just provided just now, and we do have that in possession. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MS. CRUZ: Would you like to see that? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. Would you bring that forward, please. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Send that this way, and then we'll send Page 18 April 2, 2001 it back. MS. BAISLEY: Maria, who is the current certificate holder of Luxury Private Transportation -- or is with MR. FLEGAL: Private Luxury. MS. CRUZ: I believe his name is Scott Jones. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Marchione, are you buying a corporation, this current certificate holder -- is he just a private person this name or -- I'm confused? MR. MARCHIONE: He was doing business as Private Car Luxury Transportation. We've incorporated the name -- MR. FLEGAL: Okay. MR. MARCHIONE: -- in the process so -- MR. FLEGAL: He wasn't a corporation. He was a person doing business as -- MR. MARCHIONE: Yes, sir. MR. FLEGAL: -- as Private Car Luxury Transportation? MR. MARCHIONE: Yes, sir. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. MS. BAISLEY: The insurance certificate that's provided with this application is actually Scott Jones' insurance certificate doing business as Private Car Luxury Transportation. It's not an insurance certificate for this application. MR. FLEGAL: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is it assumed that you will be making the change into your own insurance? MR. MARCHIONE: Yes. We're actually transferring -- staying with the same company. Being it is the same name, we're transferring that pending approval of the board. MS. BAISLEY: But there is no indication here from an insurance company that he as a new owner would be provided that insurance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Uh-huh. That is something that staff Page19 April 2, 2001 could insure that -- if we get to a motion. MS. BAISLEY: Yes. MR. FLEGAL: These vehicles all currently registered to the existing company or -- MR. MARCHIONE: Yes. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. Because I didn't see any registration here so -- and you'll be buying the vehicles from him? MR. MARCHIONE: Yeah. That's part of the sale, that we will transfer titles. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MS. BAISLEY: Wait. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. HYDE: I got it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other discussion? Okay. I'll be glad to. Do we have a motion? MR. HYDE: I make a motion that we approve, again, as in the -- the last issue, that we receive a statement from Mr. Jones with the express statement that he will not operate and that his certificate -- again, in this case I'm not sure if it's going to apply that we need to issue a new one because it's a transfer of ownership. Looking to Tom if that's correct, or if we need to issue a new certificate outright because the company was actually purchased because they're nontransferable. MR. PALMER: Well, they're transferable with the approval of this board. MR. FLEGAL: Wouldn't it have to be a new one, Tom, because this is a corporation? And what he's buying is not a corporation. He's just buying their name that he's changed. He's now incorporated it. MR. HYDE: Versus a d/b/a. MR. PALMER: Well, is the prior corporation going out of business? MR. MARCHIONE'- Well, it wasn't a corporation. He's no Page 20 April 2, 2001 longer going to be in the transportation -- MR. PALMER: Oh, he wasn't incorporated? What was his business name? MR. MARCHIONE: It was Private Car Luxury Transportation, although he was not incorporated. MR. PALMER: Period, okay. MR. MARCHIONE: He trademarked the name. MR. PALMER: Right. MR. MARCHIONE: We have since changed that. MR. PALMER: You're not buying his corporation -- you're buying his business, but it wasn't a corporation. MR. MARCHIONE: That's correct. MR. PALMER: I think it's probably a matter of semantics. You can either authorize the assignment of it or -- or terminate the old and issue a new. The fact of the matter is there will be one existing certificate in the name of Private Car Luxury Transportation, Incorporated. Does it make any difference to you as a -- as a formal matter at staff level whether something is considered to be assigned with the approval of board or terminating one certificate and issuing another? MS. ARNOLD: What we would be doing is issuing a new certificate for this business and terminating the old. MR. HYDE: That's what I figured. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So do you actually put new stickers on the cars then? MS. ARNOLD: (Nodded head.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Would you restate your motion, please. MR. HYDE: Yes. In that case I'll go back to the previous motion that we had that we would do -- we approve under the following guidelines from staff. Number 1, that all of the documentation is then changed to Private Car Luxury Transportation, Inc., that we have a Page 21 April 2, 2001 statement from -- express statement from Mr. Jones that he will no longer be operating it, as the business is actually being changed and sold, and that he will no longer be in the transportation business and that a certificate will be null and void. Also that all insurance from the vehicles as they currently stand will then be operated and changed over to Private Car Luxury Transportation, Inc., as a contingency of making this happen. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do we have a second? That was a motion made by Mr. Hyde. MS. BAISLEY: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Pat Baisley. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. MR. MARCHIONE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The last applicant for request for approval to operate a charter service is William D. Potter doing business as Med -Assure. Please come forward and be sworn in. (The oath was administered by the court reporter.) MS. BAISLEY: Mr. Potter, you're going to start with three vehicles? MR. POTTER: Was the original plan, but I think we've now reduced it to two. MS. BAISLEY: And your business address is going to be -- MR. POTTER: Well, we have tentatively made arrangements for an address on Arnold Avenue in the industrial section. MS. BAISLEY: MR. POTTER: address. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. The one we have there is our residential That's a popular street for Page 22 April 2, 2001 transportation. MS. BAISLEY: It sure is. MR. POTTER: It certainly is. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And I'd like to say I was the trend setter. MR. FLEGAL: Are you getting anything out of this? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Not a dime. Any other discussion? Do we have a motion? MR. FLEGAL: Mr. chairman, I make a motion that we approve the application as submitted. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Motion by Mr. Flegal. Do we have a second? MR. HYDE: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Hyde seconds. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.). CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. Good luck. MR. POTTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Old business? Mr. Csogi? MR. CSOGI: Yeah. I have a question on what Mr. Flegal brought up about two, three meetings ago on the Hummer ride. I read the ordinance last night. The protocol, I believe, is to send a letter to the county manager, and they're supposed to review the violation and then have a hearing in front of us. Did we ever initiate that process, or what was ever done with it? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Can you recap the issue with the Hummer, please. MR. CSOGI: It was Hummer Ride Inc. We approved the application to operate, and then he -- specifically we told him -- because in his application we told him no advertising on the side of the vehicles, and he started advertising on the side of the Page 23 April 2, 2001 vehicles. And then Mr. Flegal brought in a Naples Daily News display ad, I think a picture where they caught -- took a picture of him going down Fifth. And we are going to pursue that. MS. ARNOLD: I would have -- ask Tom to speak to that issue because we requested a -- a legal opinion from Mr. Palmer. And he responded to us back in December. I have a copy of that if you want -- MR. PALMER: I actually referred to a couple of ordinances that it may be slightly more direct attack on it. I think it's a signed ordinance. Other ordinances -- MR. FLEGAL: I guess the bottom line is -- the question still is, what are we doing? MR. PALMER: I don't know. There's been no feedback to our office about anything. CHAIRMAN PEASE: From whose office? MR. PALMER: From anybody. I just sent that memo out in a re-- MR. CSOGI: I read the ordinance last night, and it says that the county manager is supposed to receive a letter either from us or a private citizen. The county manager is supposed to do the investigation and then present the findings to us, and we're supposed to have a hearing. So if we can, I guess we should draft a letter to the county manager to initiate that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Where do you -- can you tell me what page that's on, please? MR. CSOGI: Sure. Just a minute. Could I also see the memo, please? You can look at it. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You can look at it first if you want to, Mr. Hyde. MR. CSOGI: Okay. It's going to be page 32, paragraph A. The county administrator may initiate disciplinary proceedings Page 24 April 2, 2001 against certificate holder for violations of this article by filing a sworn complaint with the chairman of the PVAC. And that's going to refer to page 31 I'm thinking -- "violate any other provisions of this article.". MR. FLEGAL: My question was, I thought he violated A-4. MR. CSOGI: A-4. MR. FLEGAL: Made false statements under oath. MR. CSOGI: Exactly. That's what -- yeah, A-4, so he -- he violated any provision of this article, being A-4. So, therefore, the county administrator needs to disinitiate it. So it says No. B on 32, any person who believes that a certificate holder has violated this article shall submit a sworn statement to the county administrator. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. The question came up -- back -- and this is -- has been a long time ago. When the applicant was before us, he stated he was going to advertise, and we brought it to his attention that he was not permitted to do that. He told us under oath that he specifically would not do that. And then, I guess it was, like, two months later, there's a big picture in the Naples paper which I brought in, I believe I gave Mr. Palmer, of his Hummer ride down on Fifth Avenue with advertisements all over it. And at that time I said, '~/hat are we going to do about it?" and so far I haven't heard or seen anything. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I will also add back in December-- but I thought it had been nipped -- he did solicit our company to do transfers from the airport with advertising of the corporate name on the sign, and I advised our employees at that time that they could not do so, that it was in violation of the ordinance. MS. BAISLEY: Did he review his certificate? MS. CRUZ: Yes, he did. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, we need to go forward. What's the best way to go forward? That's one option. But I think we Page 25 April 2, 2001 can also do something from here, correct, or not? MR. CSOGI: I think we need to have a sworn statement to the county administrator, and they're supposed to initiate it, from what page 32 says. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer? MR. PALMER: Well, the county administrator really means designee of the county administrator. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They struck that, though, from the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Well, I think someplace else it refers -- says that the county administrator includes designee. Obviously the county administrator individually doesn't review these applica -- these things. The thing that strikes me is who is going to make the complaint. A member of this board cannot make a complaint for a matter that's going to come back before this board. So somebody is going to have to initiate the investigation other than a member of this board. There's a number of ways. It could be handled -- is this board being the finder of fact forum, or it could be prosecuted through the code enforcement board. It can be either one. My memo, I think I said there were violations of possibly three ordinances. One of them is the sign ordinance. This is essentially a moving billboard. The sign ordinance does not allow moving billboards in any way, shape, or form. It also, I think -- I mentioned there, it may be a violation of the occupational license ordinance for this kind of an activity, as well as a violation of our ordinance. So there could be three avenues of getting at solving the problem. I hadn't heard anything. I just assumed that he had terminated this activity. I don't know whether it's an ongoing activity or not. But, in any event, this board can handle it, if you want to get the process going, or the matter could be referred to Page 26 April 2, 2001 the code enforcement board as a sign ordinance violation or an occupational license violation. MR. CSOGI: Excuse me. The reason I brought this up was -- and I'll pass these out to everybody, is because it seems to be spurring other companies to do the same. And I wasn't at the last meeting. I apologize. But you guys approved City Cab. And in the last couple months I've been seeing City Cab with a great big billboard, and I see a bunch of these vehicles, and they've got advertising all over them. And as a courtesy I went up to one of the City Cab operators and identified myself and let them know that they couldn't do that. And he told me to go fly a kite, that they're going to continue to do it so -- If you need more copies. I got more copies for Michelle and -- MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Palmer? MR. CSOGI: -- so it looks like -- you know. MR. FLEGAL: In line with what you -- the statement you just made, I guess my question would be, under -- on page 31, under Section 142.57, it states (as read}: "The certificate issued under the provisions of this division may be revoked or suspended by the PVAC if the holder thereof has -- in Item 4 has made false statements." so the outside public, if they've never come to one of these meetings, they're going to not know that. So you're going to say, who's going to make the complaint. I know he did it. It's in the record. So why do we need an outside complaint? MR. PALMER: Well, I didn't say that we did. Somebody had mentioned that this morning. I said that if there's going to be an outside complaint. I was just going on what they said -- I haven't -- I don't know this ordinance word for word. Somebody mentioned an instigation of a -- of an investigation and referred to an outside complaint. I'm not sure that's necessarily required in every case. MS. ARNOLD: Tom, can we just pursue, based on the Page 27 April 2, 2001 conversation and the concerns that are being brought to our attention at today's meeting, an investigation and then bring this particular company in and -- and as well look at the City Cab company to inform them of potential violations of the ordinance? MR. PALMER: Well, let's -- let's keep the two apart for the time being. It seems to me that you know, as a matter of fact, that at least there's a supposition that this Hummer is advertising by using the Hummer as a moving sign. MR. FLEGAL: Correct. MR. PALMER: And that this is in violation of specific statements made to this board because this issue was raised with the board, and the applicant said, "1 will not conduct that activity.". MR. FLEGAL: Correct. MR. PALMER: Therefore, I believe this board could tell staff to issue an order to show cause to the applicant of the Hummer vehicle that there will be a hearing scheduled or a next public meeting to get to the merits of this kind of a -- of a -- of a case. And, in fact, order them to appear here at your next meeting for a -- for a fact-finding hearing on this matter. And if you -- then you can take appropriate action based on what you find. But I think you've got enough evidence right now to instruct staff to issue an order to show cause as to why his certificate should not be terminated for -- and, in fact, telling this board it would not conduct an activity that was not authorized, expressly prohibited, and if the facts show that, in fact, that activity is being conducted, in my opinion, that would be a factual basis on which to terminate the certificate, if that's what you would choose to do so after you make findings of fact. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, would any person who made a motion to -- regarding this situation would they also have Page 28 April 2, 2001 the opportunity to -- to exercise, if they so chose, Item 2 on page 31, which is discontinuing operations until such hearing date? MS. BAISLEY: That's not what that applies to, is it? HYDE: Yeah, I don't think it is. BAISLEY: That means if you don't operate a vehicle for MR. MS. 30 days. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. MS. BAISLEY: Your certificate is -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, let me go at it a different way. Does the -- does any member who makes a motion have the right to ask them to cease operations until said public hearing? MR. PALMER: If you look at the first sentence of 142-57-A, the only provision for summary suspension is when the -- there's a -- an immediate safety issue involved where you haven't got the time to go through a hearing. You stop it now because in the meantime between that time and the time that you have the mat -- matter, somebody could be hurt or killed. This is not that kind of a case. So due process in this kind of case, absent that emergency situation, is to notify the app -- the owner of the vehicle of a preliminary intent that you feel that they're -- in other words, he's got to come in and show to us why his certificate should not be suspended. Then -- but you haven't made any findings of fact. You're not prejudging the case. But right now we have reason to believe, and that's high enough of a standard to do an order to show cause, and that is -- as far as we know this moving billboard activity has not ceased, and if it's continuing then it would be a factual basis to revoke the certificate. But you have to give the applicant notice and then have a -- and basically invite him here. Now, if he doesn't show up, you can have the hearing in his absence. His presence is not necessary to proceed with the fact-finding hearing. Page 29 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do we have a motion to direct staff to do that? MR. PALMER: I can help her with the order to show cause and so forth. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. chairman, I would make a motion that we direct staff to do that with Mr. Palmer's assistance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Motion by Mr. Flegal. Do we have a second? MR. CSOGI: Second. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second from -- by Mr. Csogi. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.). CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. MR. PALMER: And on this next part, I would reque -- recommend that staff send a letter to this company and tell them to cease and desist, that this is unauthorized advertising. MS. BAISLEY: But is that unauthorized on a taxicab because that's not a charter service vehicle. I mean, it might be against the signage laws in the county. MR. CSOGI: Isn't it in the ordinance here you're not allowed to advertise? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I believe it is. See what page it is. MR. PALMER: Yeah. I -- I don't think that these kinds of things on tops of taxicabs have ever been authorized. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. -- Mr. Palmer, I guess my first question to staff would be, I remember when we approved this application. And I think you showed us a picture of his cabs and what it was going to look like. This was not on top of the cab. MS. BAISLEY.' No. I don't think it was. MR. FLEGAL: Therefore, that's not what we approved. Therefore, he shant not advertise because this board -- this committee did not approve this. Page 30 April 2, 2001 We approved his lettering that's -- as I remember, that's what the picture showed, just his lettering of City Cab and his phone number and such. There was nothing on the top of the vehicle. MR. CSOGI: Cliff. MR. FLEGAL: Ahh, there we go. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They cropped it. MR. FLEGAL: No, I can see the -- I can see the buildings in the background. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL.' Yeah. approved; not this. Is that a building? That's a building. So that's what we I make a motion we advise staff to send them a letter telling them to remove them post haste. MR. CSOGI: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Motion by Mr. Flegal. Mr. Palmer, do you have -- before we go on with the second, do you have any comment? MR. PALMER: No, sir. I'm just looking for the provision. And maybe we can nail this down a little more specifically. But I do not recall anything in this ordinance that implies that somebody can, in effect, rent out his taxicab for any kind of advertisement on the roof or on the back of the hood and so forth. You see this in a lot of cities where it's authorized or allowed, you know, Joe's Pizza. But in most local governments it is not a permitted use of a taxicab. It's -- and we may want to address that issue in regard to going over the ordinance. But my recollection is that right now this kind of activity has never been authorized or impliedly authorized in this ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. A motion was made by Mr. Flegal. Do we have a second? MR. CSOGI: Yeah, I seconded it. Page 31 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second by Mr. Csogi. All those in favor say aye. (Unanimous response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Motion carried. We're going to go ahead and go on with the speakers. We have three people that would like to speak. Please limit to five minutes. Please come forward when we call your name. First is John Meres. Please state your name and start your discussion. MR. MERES: John Meres. Good morning. I have a question about the licensing and permitting of the cabs and vehicles for hire. Is it possible to get a -- a listing, or is there a listing of all the vehicles that are permitted or licensed in the county for this year? CHAIRMAN PEASE: That is public record, and I believe you make arrangements with Maria to review those. MS. CRUZ: If I may add, Mr. Meres visited our office, and we had provided him all the information that's available. I did tell him that the vehicle list at this time is not updated yet and is not available at -- at the moment. But if he wishes, we can contact him as soon as this list becomes available so we can provide him with a copy. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You mean a master list is being done. I mean, he can go in and look at the file and see what's -- MS. CRUZ: And we had allowed him to do that. I also provided him a copy of all the certificate holders what their name and address is. I believe what he is requesting is a copy of all the vehicles that are licensed. We do not have that list updated at this time. MR. MERES: So there is a list of -- by permit of all the vehicles and by license number? MS. CRUZ: There will be a list available by permit number, by sticker number. And there will be a list available, if he Page 32 April 2, 2001 wishes, by VIN number, by license plate number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're loading that in the computer-- MS. CRUZ: That's correct. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- from a hard copy. MS. CRUZ: That's correct. MR. MERES: There's not one presently, though? MS. CRUZ: No, sir. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The information is still accessible. You just -- you need to go by file. MR. MERES: Okay. So there wasn't previously -- to this point there wasn't one or, I mean, for last year? MS. CRUZ: There is one from last year, but I understand that he wanted the list from this -- the current list. MS. ARNOLD: If you would like staff to provide you last year's list, we can provide you that list. MR. MERES: Well, I was just asking about both years. But there is definitely this year then, okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Thank you. Next speaker is Nick Whitney. MR. WHITNEY: Good morning. My name is Nick Whitney. I'm with Checker Cab here in Naples. I talked to Michelle Arnold last week, and she clarified some of the -- the concerns that I had, some talk going around about deregulation of the taxi industry. And I just asked the committee to -- to work with all of us. If this is a process that's going to take place, I'd be willing to work with the committee in any way we can. We do not favor deregulating the cabs. I think we need to make the industry as -- as good as we can, and by deregulating it, I think, in my opinion as a company, it will hurt the residents and the guests of the -- of our area. I have ordered some information from the International Taxi Association on other communities around the country that have Page 33 April 2, 2001 deregulated and would be happy to furnish that to any committee members or staff as soon as I receive it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Thank you very much. We'll be open to any information you want to supply. MR. PALMER: The county attorney's office is also responding to a request of legal services of about a month ago from staff to ascertain to the extent possible the regulation of taxicabs in municipalities and counties in Florida. I've had my legal assistant send out a general inquiry to all these governmental entities. I don't know what the response is yet, but we're trying to ascertain what the other 66 counties and what many of the municipalities in Florida do in regard to the regulation of taxicabs. I do know that Blue Wallace who has now been given oversight responsibility over the staff function here is adamantly against any deregulation of taxicabs, that is the general deregulation of rates and so forth. CHAIRMAN PEASE: This is in response to a county commission meeting in which they have -- staff has one year to respond on the topic of -- of not deregulating the industry, but deregulating the pricing aspect to -- to it. So I assume that's what that's in response to. MR. PALMER: It's in response to the general question as well as a specific focus on rates. But there are other questions about safety, insurance, integrity of drivers, and so forth that are important beyond rate regulation. We're looking at all aspects to the extent that we can get a response to this inquiry, general inquiry. She sent out this e-mail and letters to many, many entities. I'll have to talk to her and ask her what kind of response. It's totally voluntary, although normally when one government requests information, rather, they're quite receptive if it isn't an extraordinary amount of work to comply with such a request. So I think we'll get quite a lot of information. Page 34 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: So we'll have it updated at our next meeting then. MR. PALMER: I would think so. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MR. HYDE: One question. Mr. Palmer, was it raised by the county commissioners or a specific commissioner, or was it raised by an individual publicly that requested this -- MR. PALMER: You'll have to ask staff. I just got a request for legal services. They didn't state the foundation for it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I was at that meeting, and it was voted on by the board that staff have one year -- I think it was Pamela Mac'Kie that made that motion, and it was approved unanimously to have staff -- ironically not the PVAC, but the staff make that decision on -- on whether or not to do that. And -- but Michelle has agreed to -- to work with this body to make sure that it's cohesive. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. At the meeting during which the rates were discussed, one of the board members raised, you know, the question as to why or how we came to the point where we were regulating taxicab rates. And they directed staff to look into the entire process. And as Tom had indicated, that would include looking at other municipalities and -- and jurisdictions as to how they regulate the taxicab industry and bring that information back to them within a year's time. I think, because this body is charged with reviewing taxicabs and other vehicle for hire, it would be the logical body to confer with for expertise and recommendation to bring back to the Board of County Commissioners. So once Tom gets information, that information is going to be shared with you-all. And a recommendation will be brought to the Board of County Commissioners. Actually, they were asking for information. So that information will be brought back to them, and they would, I Page 35 April 2, 2001 guess, make a decision whether or not we want to continue doing what we're doing or change it somehow. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think we'll -- we'll probably, as we go through the workshop this morning, have a pretty good idea from -- from this board the direction in that regard as well because I think that's part of the topic. Our last speaker is Mr. Jack Bridenthal. Please come forward and identify yourself. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Jack Bridenthal, USA Taxi. We're not in agreement with Checker Cab. There's a little different situation. That company gets their money every week whether they charge a dollar or twenty dollars because they're on a lease situation. Those of us in the county that are on 50 percent meter rate are finding that this new rate with the area that we're in with poor people and short trips and so forth, other than our seasonal airport trips that we have right now that will be ending, that we'll be in a losing situation by the 1st of May or, at the latest, June. It's just not feasible to do trips for 2.75, 3.20, 3.90. What you have to remember is not only that meter, but they have to get to that person. So when a driver spends a gallon of gas, that's nearly $2 to do a $4 trip, he's getting $2. They're working for free. And, according to FP&L and everybody else, fuel is going up again. If it's going to be regulated, I think it needs to be back to the surcharge amount that we had, a dollar seventy-five a mile like you have now and a $5 minimum, or if it's going to be deregulated, I recommend like the big cities do, a big sign on the back fender or back door where you have to specify what your rates are. The competition will set the market because if somebody wants to charge $10 a mile they can. They have to post it. They won't do any business. I think most everybody in town would go along with the previous surcharge rate. A couple of our owners Page 36 April 2, 2001 aren't here today, through other more critical things, but we've talked quite a bit. And they seem to be of the same idea I am. Actually, we think the county overstepped their boundary ten years ago when they got into the rate business. This is the only private business with no county subsidy, no county money, no grants that the county regulates. It's not a public utility. The county has no business in it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. End of discussion. Next item of discussion -- does anybody have any discussion on -- on the speakers? If not, I'm going to proceed to the notice stickers. Okay. MS. ARNOLD: For the board's information, we do have a couple people here from the Bureau of Weights and Measures and one of which that Maria and I both worked or met with regarding the meter calibration and also making sure that the meters are actually calibrated to the rates that are adopted by the board. Allen Walker is one of those gentlemen, and if we could just recognize him and also refer to his expertise when we're talking about those specific things. And I don't know if Allen wants to speak specifically to the board, but I just wanted to let you-all know that he is here, and his services are available for questions. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Thank you. I would close the public format and -- and so I'll just mention that I did not hear a request for a review of the rates. What I heard was discussion about going back to the old. And so I personally don't see any need to discuss that item at this time unless -- MR. FLEGAL: I agree. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- somebody else does. MR. HYDE: Can I make one note on that as well? It was very interesting that if we went back to the fuel surcharge rates that we had previously -- I got gas yesterday. I paid 1.36. So I Page 37 April 2, 2001 don't know who's paying $2 a gallon. You know, premium high- test was 1.43. I chose regular. I don't know, maybe I didn't need the high-test, but it worked for me, and the rates seemed to be coming down versus going back up. That's just what I found when I personally put fuel in my vehicle. MS. BAISLEY: They are saying they're supposed to go up this summer again, though. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We can -- we can look at that at the next meeting, if there is a need. Well, you have the floor, Mr. Hyde. Your topic is notice stickers. Hit me with your best shot, buddy. MR. HYDE: On the charter vehicles, if I recall correctly, we were having discussions of putting stickers into the vehicles from staff, and we actually came up with a sticker, I believe; is that correct? It was the first step in going forward to saying if you have any -- this is the -- the number of the vehicle. If you have a question, please call so and so and -- and who to call because no one knew who to call if there was a complaint. You could complain, but to who? No one could figure it out. Then there was a discussion regarding charter vehicles versus cabs. If we were going to insist that, for example, in a -- in a stretch limousine, that we would also put this notice on a limo or on a -- a bus per se. And that's -- I think, was -- was the questions and whether we felt that it would be necessary or -- or not. Discussion? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I'm -- I'm fighting a losing cause here, and I know that. But for the record, you know, I'll just comment, because I -- I do think it needs a vote. I think it needs to go up or down because we did table it from the previous meeting. My comment is someone who's paying, you know, 55 to 90 Page 38 April 2, 2001 dollars an hour in a stretch limousine doesn't need to have these tacky blatant stickers on both sides, both sides of the car, as if they're too dumb to see one side or the other. I thought that was overbearing, and -- and also I felt like the industry, when you're doing that type of work, charter work, that it was not necessary to have another government bureaucratic item involved because I think the industry as a whole does a very good job with that aspect. I also understand Pat's point from the previous meeting that there are operators in Marco Island that are working under the -- the charter sign. And in reality they're probably operating as a taxi. And that may not be true through the whole industry. But by and large, in general I'm opposed to two stickers on -- in the car on the charter vehicles. I -- I -- I understand the optional side, and I would, you know, beg for your agreement to make that an optional item and not a mandatory. MS. BAISLEY: I still don't see what the difference is between the people traveling in the vehicles. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, there is -- there is a difference in -- in general. Normally there is a difference. It's prearranged versus a pickup at any place in the city or county. MR. FLEGAL: I think in the beginning when we wanted stickers, my memory tells me that the discussion was so that people could report bad service, you know, bad drivers, whatever. And I understand some of the larger corporations that are well managed -- and I think I brought up at the time that we have approved a lot of one-person, one-vehicle operations and that the stickers, I believe, are necessary because a one-person operation may not have the integrity of a large corporation. And you pick a number out of the phone book or whatever and you call and you get some rates and maybe the one-person operation has a better rate. Page 39 April 2, 2001 So you're saying, gee, I want a -- I want a limo, and I don't want to pay $55 an hour. This -- this operation is only 45, so I'm going to pick it. It happens to be, again, a one-person. And then they're treated badly. Yes, they're never going to call that number again, but they ought to be able to call somebody and say hey. And I think that's why the stickers are necessary. I realize you prearrange all this, but a lot of people prearrange based on price. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But when you prearrange, it's either going to -- nine out of ten times it's going to a credit card or billing. It's not a cash transaction in the same as a taxi. If you knew how many credit card items we've got to go back and prove to the credit card company and the guest that we did the transfer as arranged and it was done properly, they -- the guest has ample opportunity to not pay the bill, which is their biggest leverage. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. But credit cards are limited to $50. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, no. Credit cards they can wipe out the whole item if they're correct in what they're saying on their credit card. MS. BAISLEY: But that's specific -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- but also billing. But most charter companies are -- because they're prearranged, the payment is also prearranged in some format, whether that's by credit card or billing, but not cash, generally speaking not cash. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. But I would suspect in a one-person operation you're going to find somebody paying either cash or by check, possibly by credit card. And, again, if they have a quote, unquote, bad driver, they're going to call the owner, who happens to also probably be the driver and say, "1 didn't like the driver. He gave me a hard time or she gave me a hard time." and they're going to say, "Hmm, yeah, right. Okay. Sure." and nothing's Page 40 April 2, 2001 ever going to happen. I think I mentioned before, when you have a large corporation, you run differently than a one-person show, believe me. I don't have a problem with corporations. You probably are very efficient and listen to everybody that calls. But the one-person operation is what I'm trying to protect the public. MR. HYDE: But the -- from what I'm gathering, and maybe you can correct me, I don't think there's a clear delineation between a sole proprietorship or a mom-and-pop corporation versus a large corporation. I don't think that there's a difference in the charter business. If we've granted a certificate, then we've granted a certificate to operate. And hopefully we find that if we've approved them, that these people are acting in the best responsible manner for the citizens of Collier County, and that's what we're here to protect. Whether one does a better job versus the other one -- one listens; one doesn't. Trust me; I know about the chargebacks as well. I see them daily. But, you know, again, is there a difference between a charter operation and a taxi operation. I'd say, yes, there is. Is -- are corporate executives going to look at these little stickers that are on the windows as nicely as they were presented by staff and also in a charter bus versus do you have one driver, you could have 15 drivers that are on call depending on who operates the vehicle. That tag number is specific to that vehicle and not necessarily that driver, which is another issue. You have a limo that travels down the highway at 80 miles an hour. Then you've got another one that's traveling at 70 at the speed limit. And it's operated by the same vendor, but it's two different drivers, but they still have the same sticker in the vehicle so -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: At least look at a limitation of one sticker in the rear area instead of two. MS. BAISLEY: I can go with one sticker. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Across the board I'm saying for taxis Page 41 April 2, 2001 too. I mean I don't know that we ever said that -- nobody ever said the number of stickers. We just said a sticker. MR. HYDE: What staff did was is they put two; there's one on each door in the back, which I think is overbearing, obtrusive. I don't even like the one sticker, of course -- but which is just plain obnoxious. MS. ARNOLD: I think, as Mr. Hyde indicated, this was a just a first -- MR. HYDE: It was a dra -- it was a blush. It was. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. Blush -- at a discussion that we had prior. I think that we could look -- relook at the whole issue and coming up with some better way to identify the driver and the vehicle. As you had indicated, there's times when you have multiple drivers for one vehicle and you want to have them complain on the -- the problem rather than just the vehicle. And there's language in the ordinance currently that speaks to placards and where they should be displayed. And maybe what we ought to do is look at that specific language and come up with better ways to identify both the driver and, you know, a number for complaints and, you know, the rates and those types of things. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Which in the workshop would be a -- the area for that discussion -- MS. ARNOLD: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- if you want to defer to that. MR. CSOGI: I wasn't at the last meeting. I did read the minutes. Can I ask a couple questions? Do you have a sticker? Because I never did see it. I don't know if it was shown at the last meeting. You do not. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It's about this size (indicating). MR. CSOGI: Two of them are on taxicabs only right now just to get them out there, but they're not on charter vehicles. Page 42 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Correct. That's what the question was. MR. CSOGI: Let me ask you this: In the charter vehicle business -- you guys are in it. I know the transactions are done by credit card. The person gets in the car and exits the car after -- after you guys are all done. Does he get a receipt when he leaves the car? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. If they choose to get a receipt, they can have it. MR. CSOGI: Therefore, what I was thinking last night is that the charter companies be required on the receipt, instead of putting the sticker on the window, somewhere on the receipt that sticker is printed on there. Ask they're required to give everybody a receipt. It would be a little bit more discrete, you know, in just maybe giving them that way. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I like that suggestion. MS. BAISI. EY: Would that kind of work with your hotel situation -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: One at a time, please. MR. CSOGI: If I could, real quick, the ordinance states that if they ask for a receipt, they're supposed to get one. So we could maybe say that charters have to give a receipt with the sticker on it or the number or whatever. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The chair recognizes Pat Baisley. MS. BAISLEY: I'm just concerned about the people in the hotel industry because I know that they do not like their customers even signing anything or anything. MR. CSOGI: I'm not saying it's not signing. It's just saying it's a -- it's a piece of paper saying thank you for your services, a receipt. MS. BAISLEY: But it's going to be -- a lot of people charter other people's vehicles, and they don't want that person to know that that vehicle came from Yellow Cab. They want them to Page 43 April 2, 2001 think that it's a Registry Resort vehicle or Ritz-Carlton vehicle. Now, that receipt would say Yellow Cab of Naples on it or whoever. MR. CSOGI: The receipt would come from the driver of that vehicle. MS. BAISLEY: That's right. But it's not going to say the Registry Resort or -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's a valid point. MR. HYDE: One additional point. There are many times when corporations do not wish to have any way, shape, or form the people being transported given any kind of receipt or documentation as to the cost of that vehicle. MS. BAISLEY: Uh-huh. MR. HYDE: Most of these companies are publicly held companies, and they do not feel that their officers should know what's going on behind the scenes as far as the cost aspects versus transferring through a taxi, transferring through a -- a limo or a sedan and what the differences are. They don't -- those people don't want to be associated with that. They want to be transferred from Point A to Point B. There are no receipts. They are master billed, and you're lucky if they see it at the end of the bill review. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All valid points. Mr. Hyde, would you be open to staff's recommendation to discuss this in the workshop format? MR. HYDE: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. That ends the discussion topics as we're moving ordinance changes to the workshop. But I -- is there anyone that has to leave? MR. HYDE: Yeah. I've got to go. MR. CSOGI: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: If we can keep the court reporter on, Page 44 April 2, 2001 we're going to take a ten-minute break, and then we're going ahead and record the comments of the workshop, and we will not go beyond noon. We'll -- we'll stop at noon at the latest, but we'll start to attack the ordinance and see how far we get. All right? We'll take a ten-minute break. MR. HYDE: Thank you. Thank you, staff. (A break was held from 9:45 a.m. To 9:57 a.m.) (The following proceedings recommenced, Mr. Hyde no longer present.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Call the meeting to order, the regular meeting, and go into a workshop. MR. FLEGAL: I make a motion we adjourn. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is there a second? Mr. Flegal makes the motion. MS. BAISLEY: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Second is by Pat Baisley. The next meeting date is July 2nd. Thank you, vice chair. MR. CSOGI: Can we modify that next meeting date? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Because of the 4th of July holiday? MS. BAISLEY: That's usually my vacation week too. MR. CSOGI: Maybe a week later or a week before. MR. FLEGAL: Well, we'll have to see if the room's available; that's the problem. MS. CRUZ: That's right. I'll have to check the room availability · MR. CSOGI: Was that on a Monday? MS. CRUZ: That's on a Monday. MS. BAISLEY.' We used to have meetings on Wednesday. How did we get changed to Mondays? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think this room -- MS. BAISLEY: Mondays are -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- room availability only. Do you want to Page 45 April 2, 2001 try and do it the week before or the week after? The week after? MS. BAISLEY: The week after. What do you think? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let's check on the room availability. MR. CSOGI: That's going to be on a Wednesday. Yeah, the week after. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MS. CRUZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let us know. we got a motion -- did we adjourn yet? (Unanimous response.) · If we could check on that, please. Okay. Do we have -- do All those in favor say aye. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Opposed? Same sign. MS. BAISLEY: We have to get our stuff together. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. I call the workshop open. Is Mr. Palmer coming back? MS. ARNOLD: Excuse me? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, is he coming back? MS. ARNOLD: I would hope so because -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I asked him to stay, so I hoped he would. MS. ARNOLD: MR. FLEGAL: Let me call. He got sidetracked. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Because the first item, I think I may have to -- the first change was on my part, and it may tie into the deregulation issue. One of -- one of the concerns was the issue of taxi operators not liking the $2 surcharge going away and, therefore, they were going to go into the charter business. So I took a look at that. And so my question was -- and also with the comment that down on Marco there are charter operators that operate as ad hoc taxi operators, if there was a reason to have it -- the two separated. MR. FLEGAL: The two meaning ... CHAIRMAN PEASE: Taxis and charters. Is there a reason Page 46 April 2, 2001 to have charters and taxicabs separate? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I think we make the taxicabs have meters and all that and -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, that's-- MR. FLEGAL: I mean, there's some differences in the -- in the ordinance. And unless you went through -- MS. BAISLEY: They're allowed to be lettered, and the charter service vehicles are not allowed to be lettered. MR. FLEGAL: I mean, there's a lot of little ideosyncracies that we might have to find a way to change if you lumped them all into one basket. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Expanding on that even to eliminate the meters altogether and go into a zone rate charter system or if the county and staff come back and say we -- they -- they have the option to -- to get rid of rate levels that are sanctioned by the county. It was a -- it's a radical suggestion, but -- and I'll tell you where I'm coming from is the -- the county commissioners' meeting where the county commissioners are very much in favor of as much elimination of government as possible, and let the free market reign. So taking that to their level, my suggestion was or my thought was could we eliminate the difference between charter and taxi, eliminate the taxi meter, go to a rate- zone situation, eliminate the differences between the two, and we just have a -- a transportation permit. MR. FLEGAL: Well, if you're going to eliminate all this stuff, why even have a permit? You can drive up and down the street, pick anybody up, and charge them whatever they want. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That was my next suggestion, was to -- MR. FLEGAL: Take them out into the woods, kill them, and do all the other things. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- only permit the operator, not necessarily the vehicles. Page 47 April 2, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I don't like anything that lets somebody go around and pick up the public under disguise of the public thinking that this is some kind of a regulated industry and it's not being. I mean, you know, it's regulated everywhere. In New York they pay a lot of money for their medallions that they put on their cabs. I mean, I can just see vehicles driving up and down the street with a sign on it, you know, for hire and no kind of regulation. I-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Pat, coming from the taxi side -- MS. BAISLEY: Here we go. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And being the only person that's on this committee from the taxi, what's your initial gut reaction to something like that? MS. BAISLEY: You're going to say that -- what you're suggesting is to make zones for taxicabs? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm suggesting get rid of the meters and -- and until such time as the county comes back, staff comes back to whether or not we're going to be in the business of regulating rates, offer zone-type pricing versus a meter and -- and then charter-- all charters and taxis are one and the same. MR. CSOGI: Who sets the zone pricing? MS. BAISLEY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, temporarily that could be us until we could get back from staff or no -- you know, no pricing. MR. CSOGI: If we're setting the zone pricing, it's the same thing as the meters. We have our hand in it. MS. BAISLEY: That's somewhat similar to what some of the operators are already asking for, a minimum charge of $5. There would be something in there like that, a minimum. And then if you go from this zone to this zone, it's $10 or $15. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It's happening right now, Marco in particular. Those Marco charter companies are charging a flat Page 48 April 2, 2001 fee to go from Marco to the airport. Well, that's -- I thought that's what charter was. MR. FLEGAL: It is. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And that's why they're under charter, but it's really a taxi because those same operators -- operators will take you to a restaurant. They'll take you to the movies. They'll take you to anywhere on Marco Island, but it's a fee to get you from Point A to Point B on the island. MR. FLEGAL: Mr. Palmer, if we issued a permit -- and I don't care that somebody is in the City of Marco, you got your Collier County permit to operate, if you got a permit to operate as a taxicab, you follow the rates that are in the ordinance -- MR. PALMER: That's correct. MR. FLEGAL: -- period. MR. PALMER: Yes. MR. FLEGAL: It's not like, oh, I'm a taxicab, but I'm going to charge you a hundred dollars to drive you to Southwest Regional. You're a taxicab. MR. PALMER: That's right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, a taxicab will do that, though. MS. BAISLEY: They can still have a flat-rate structure. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They won't charge -- meter rate to Fort Myers, would -- would not be competitive in the marketplace against a charter company that doesn't have to fall under the same rules. That's my question, is why -- why do we put rules on taxi operators and they're asked to compete against charter companies that don't fall under those same rules? MR. PALMER: Well, the problem is is the charter companies are supposed to have these rates that they file with us. MR. FLEGAL: Right. MR. PALMER: And they're not supposed to split them. And this idea about taking somebody to a restaurant at a taxicab rate Page 49 April 2, 2001 or close to a taxicab rate is in violation of this ordinance. These are not -- these -- a taxicab and a charter company are not supposed to be competing for the same type of service. These -- these rates of these charter services are not to take people two blocks down the street to a -- to a restaurant. MS. BAISLEY: But they're doing it every day of the week. MR. PALMER: Well, then they're violating the -- they're violating the ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does that happen in Naples, as well as Marco, or is this just something that relates to Marco -- MS. BAISLEY: Yes. No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Naples too? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I guess my question would be, if we're doing it once, why does it work in reverse? Why do we permit the taxicab companies to set a rate for one -- to go to the airport? They're competing with the charter services. You're saying the charter service can't set a rate to drive you to the movies, but yet we let taxi companies say, "Oh, by the way, I'll take you to the airport for 50 bucks.". MR. PALMER: Well, no, I don't know that. That fact is if that -- if that rate is lower than the -- than the rate, the max -- these are maximums for taxicab companies. If somebody wants to take somebody for -- to Fort Myers for a rate, bottom line, that's less than if the meter was running, that's fine. There's no problem with that, if that's what you're talking about. But the -- the taxicab company cannot charge a rate bottom line when he gets the destination that's greater than his -- than the rates in this ordinance. MS. BAISLEY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So why have a distinction between taxi and charter if the market dictates the price? MR. PALMER: Well, one of the -- one of the ideas is this: Page 50 April 2, 2001 When I -- when I hire a charter company, I usually know that what I -- where I'm going and I know what the rate is going to be before I get there. It's not a metered rate. It's a flat rate. It says from Point A to Point B the rate is this. If you deregulate taxicab companies and somebody gets in a taxicab and it's -- and it's -- you don't usually negotiate with a taxicab driver before you get in, "What's going to be my rate to go out to Immokalee?" it's a metered rate. If you don't have this, then you're going to get somebody getting in a taxicab, get out to Immokalee, they're going to say it's $35. You're going to have that kind of a susceptibility of abuse if you don't regulate taxicab rates. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But that's -- that is available right now. MR. PALMER: Only if people violate the ordinance and cheat. It's a -- it's a lot easier if you do not have a set rate for something for people who are dishonest to cheat the system. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I don't know if it's necessarily cheating. Let's go back to the -- MR. PALMER: It is if you're charging more than the allowed rate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm not talking about more. I'm going back to where this comes from is the discussion that took place after we eliminated the $2 surcharge. We had several operators, taxi operators, that said, "I'm just going to change to a charter company." so my point is, well, why do we put more restrictions on a taxi operator? Why -- what prevents them from doing that? Why isn't everybody in a charter company? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I mean, if that's what they want to do, let them do it. MS. BAISLEY: But can't that charter service company pick up some lady at her home, and they say, "1 want to go to Publix." and they say, "That's going to be $5." that's setting the rate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't see why they can't. Page 51 April 2, 2001 MS. BAISI. EY: MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: ordinance. MR. PALMER: I'm just saying under the existing ordinance that is not allowed. MR. FLEGAL: That's not permitted because they submitted -- MS. BAISLEY: Why is that not permitted in charter services? MR. PALMER: And -- because it's specifically prohib -- I'll try to find the text. It's specifically prohibited in this ordinance for a -- a -- for a charter service to -- to basically cut its rates up and effectively operate at something resembling taxicab rates. I know where that is -- I'll find it in here. -- in a specific place, but it is in the MS. ARNOLD: The -- the problem with the ordinance is that it -- we don't -- it doesn't require a charter company to provide us with any of their rates other than the time that they come in initially to get approved by this board where the taxicab company -- so someone comes in and gets approval by -- as a charter company, they -- they provide us with their rate schedule, and then thereafter there's no additional information provided to - - to the county when they do renewals. With the cab companies, we do have the rates established in the ordinance, but I have a question for you, Tom. Are you saying that a cab company can come up with a -- a rate for driving somebody from Naples to the Fort Myers airport as long as its less? MR. PALMER: As long as it's less than what would be the metered rate. These metered rates are not max -- are not maximum -- they're maximums. Somebody can negotiate with the taxicab drivers, as I understand it, and say, "Take me to" -- let's assume they know that the metered rate to Fort Myers is $40. And they say, "Will you drive me to Fort Myers for $30?" and the taxicab driver says sure. I don't think that violates this Page 52 April 2, 2001 ordinance. These are maximums. MS. BAISLEY: And that also applies to the person who goes five days a week to their ]ob and has a flat-rate situation that is less than what the metered rate -- MR. PALMER: As long as its less. MS. BAISLEY: Right. MR. PALMER: Here's the -- it's -- it's Section 142-35-A. The last sentence reads, "No "-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: What page is that? MR. PALMER: This is on page 15. "No charter service vehicle operator shall transport or offer to transport any passengers under any rates except its regular charter service rates, which rates shall not be prorated, discounted, divided or otherwise reduced so as to resemble any taxicab rates. There should be no extra charge for handling luggage or baggage.". CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I don't know -- I don't know what resembling taxicab rates means. I -- if you're charging by the mile, the tenth mile? That would resemble taxicab rates. MS. BAISLEY: But if you charged $2 a mile without the tenth of a mile and the so much to get in the car and -- that's not -- that's the way the taxi rate is. A flat $2 per mile is not the way the taxi rate is; right? That's not going to resemble that, is it ? MR. CSOGI: Well, the taxi charge per mile and charter services charge a per trip. MS. BAISLEY: Right. MR. CSOGI: I think per mile is-- MS. BAISLEY: But taxi rates are so much when you get in the car, so much per mile, per tenth of a mile. MR. CSOGI.' But the big -- but it's per mile, though, is the big picture of the whole thing. Charters -- charters are a flat-trip rate, and that's it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The chair recognizes Mr. Flegal. Page 53 April 2, 2001 MR. FI. EGAL: I think to resemble a rate -- let's go to the English language. If you got in your taxicab at a condo and said, "Take me to the movies," and a bill was $6.20 and you call -- you call a charter company, says, "Oh, from there? Yeah, I'll charge you five fifty," that kind of resembles a taxi rate to me because -- MR. PALMER: Of course. MR. FLEGAL: -- you're only -- I don't care whether it's per mile, per person, open a door, close the door, roll the window up, that stinks. Resemble. If your charter rate is close to what the cab rate is, when I get to my destination, you're resembling a taxi rate, and you shouldn't be doing it. MR. PALMER: Why? MR. FLEGAI-: Plus, you shouldn't be discounting. When they come here and get a permit, they say, "This is what I'm going to charge. I'm going to the airport for $55. I'm going to Miami for 150," blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And if they are cutting it to take you from your condo to the movies, from your condo to the restaurant, whatever, they've divided, prorated or otherwise reduced, and that's against the ordinance, period. CHAIRMAN PEASE: July 10th -- July 10th I have six sedans sitting in the yard, and somebody calls me up and says, "The taxicab rate to Miami is $200. Will you run your sedan for $2007" I says, "Darned right I will," and I will. And -- so does that resemble a taxicab rate? It could be construed? Is that discount? Yes. MS. ARNOLD: But how are we allowing taxicabs to discount their rate and not -- MR. PALMER: My understanding was these are maximums. MS. BAISLEY: They're maximum rates. MR. PALMER: They've -- in fact, if I want to give somebody a 10 percent discount as a taxicab driver, I don't think that violates the ordinance. And it -- it has less significance if you're talking Page 54 April 2, 2001 about a run to Miami. The thing about it is locally in Collier County is the way I view this where there's real competition between the taxicab and these charters. The idea is a charter service is more of a luxury service. And it seems to me that somebody -- it's understood that when you get into a -- a charter vehicle that you're not going to pay effectively a metered rate to go from your house to a movie theater. That is not the business that charter services are in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But the rate could be comparable to a taxicab. Again, I'll give you the local, and it happened last summer. I can tell you somebody said, you know, "Will you -- will you run your sedans in July at -- at $45 a transfer?" well, if I got six of them sitting in the yard, I'll run them for $45. So what I'm saying is, in -- in practice the ordinance is being violated by probably almost every -- MS. BAISLEY: Almost every one. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Because the market dictates the price. Seasonal market, is somebody going to be discounting? Probably not. Off season? Probably everybody is. MR. FLEGAL: Tom, I guess I have a question. If -- if I go to page 13, Item B, and I start with Schedule of Fares, and I -- and I read that, when I get to the next page at the top, I'm reading this as, you have to have this rate statement, and it has to be, you know, available in the vehicle -- MR. PALMER: Yes. MR. FLEGAL: -- because it doesn't distinguish in that particular paragraph, I guess -- well, it does, I guess in -- but it states formative, explanatory, be ready -- readily understandable by the ordinary passenger, and B, the same as the rate for which the taxi meter is calibrated. MR. PALMER: Yes. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. So you just said they could cut their Page 55 April 2, 2001 rates. But if they've got their rates published, then they're cutting the rates, it wouldn't be the same rate as for which the vehicle was -- MR. PALMER: Well, it could be reduced, but it can't exceed. It's always been my understanding that nobody is compelled -- MR. PALMER: All right. We can clean it up. But my understanding is that anybody can discount the metered rate if they want to. They can't exceed it, but they can do less. That's my understanding the way the ordinance has always been intended, that these are maximums. MR. CSOGI: So, in other words, they could put a coupon out there, the taxi can put a coupon out there. MR. PALMER: If it wanted to, sure. Then it would be available to all passengers at that time of the season whatever and not just negotiated to a particular customer. MS. BAISLEY: That's the same as giving the senior citizens a discount in a taxicab, which is done frequently. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is it? MR. PALMER: Yeah. MS. BAISLEY: I mean, there's an ad in the paper right now from a competitor of mine that does that. MR. PALMER: I don't know that we could make it clear to say "maximum rates" or "the rate shall not exceed." every taxicab I've ever ridden in -- and that's -- I've never ridden in one in Collier County -- has a schedule of rates. It says -- in fact, in Washington D.C. It's on the door. It says so much money for the first 5th mile, and then it adds. You can tell the rate of a taxicab, at least in Washington D.C., before you get in the taxicab, because it's mandatorily put on the side of the vehicle. Now, what this says is -- you get in the cab, up over the right-hand visor, it's something that tells the passenger what the rates are. Now, if he says I'll give you a 10 percent discount on that, there's Page 56 April 2, 2001 nothing in the ordinance, to my knowledge, that prohibits that. It just says you can't exceed the ratings. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What would be the safety issues for the guest if the taxi meter and top light were eliminated and -- and a different pricing structure took place? MR. FLEGAL: Can I ask a dumb question of my chairman? We seem to be, for whatever reason, really focused in on rates and all that. How'd we get to this rate discussion? We don't set rates. We can recommend something to the commissioners, but they're the -- they set rates and do all the -- I mean, we seem to be wanting to change rate structures and to -- I don't understand why. CHAIRMAN PEASE: This is the spin-off, again, from the county commissioners. MR. FLEGAL: Have we been requested to do this? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Staff has been requested. And staff has one year from -- when was it? January? Is that when that occurred? MS. CRUZ: It's November. MR. FLEGAL: To change the rates? MS. CRUZ: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: To decide whether or not they, the county, is going to be in the business of regulating rates to a maximum amount, and they have mandated that staff come back by November with an answer, is it in the best interest of the county and the public to do that or not. Now, staff -- staff, thankfully, Michelle. This is -- PVAC was not asked to consult in any way to the county commissioners on this. It was left totally up to staff. However, staff-- Michelle agrees that it needs to be cohesive with this committee. That's what makes it an issue. That's why I'm saying when changing the ordinance, I'm not saying prepare for that. But I'm saying let's take a -- let's take a Page 57 April 2, 2001 fresh look. The problem, I think, with this ordinance is, it's been piled on and piled on and piled on and piled on to the point where sometimes it doesn't even make sense. And I'm saying let's rethink and relook at every aspect of it. And if it doesn't have a safety issue to the guest, then why -- why are we involved in it? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I guess that's my question. If we're going to change the ordinance, and we all sat down and supposedly read through it and we got pages and pages of changes, and so far we've spent 20 minutes talking about taxi rates, which is one small section of this ordinance, but we seem to be hung up on the rate. And I see no reason to do that other than either tell the county commissioners, yes, you should regulate the rates; no, you shouldn't. Period. Real simple statement as to what the rate should be. I think the taxicab owners need to say how much money they need. That was tried once, didn't fly with this committee because they didn't give us enough information. So we either tell the commissioners, yes, you should regulate it or, no, you shouldn't. That should be the end of this discussion. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We can -- we can defer to that. But one of the reasons why we're going through the ordinance from beginning to end is to relook at every aspect of it and see if any of it still makes sense. That's all -- that's all I'm bringing out is, well, is it? The question was, charter service vehicle shall be equipped with a taxi meter and top light. MR. FLEGAL: Well, what's that have to do with rates? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, it has to do with rates because it's a taxi meter. My suggestion is eliminate the taxi meter, because in practicality there is no -- the taxi operators can reduce their rates to what they want. The charter companies are reducing their rates, which is in violation, which is why we're talking about Page 58 April 2, 2001 rates. And we have an area of the county that's acting as a -- as a defunct under charter guidelines. MR. FI. EGAL: Well, the amendments proposed or that we want to talk about doesn't say anything about tax -- all we talked about here is taking out one sentence about a taxi meter in a charter service. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'll be glad to go forward with the next topic. MR. FLEGAL: And now you're saying -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: But it all ties in. MR. FLEGAL: -- take out something else. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Flegal, it does tie into the other items, as you'll see. MS. BAISLEY: And it does tie in with what the county -- board of commissioners has requested staff provide. MS. ARNOLD: Well, I think what Mr. Flegal is saying is that we should -- I think we should provide information -- the board hasn't made a decision yet as to whether or not we're going to eliminate the regulation of rates. We -- today, the way we're operating, we do have taxicab rates in our ordinances, and we do have charter services that are provided. We should look at this ordinance and say, "If we have taxicabs, does this ordinance address what we need to look at in terms of rates as one of many different issues that we look at?" we look at the color scheme. We look at other things when it comes -- when it relates to taxicabs, and the same thing with charter services. We should look at this ordinance based on how we're operating today and make sure that it's effective in terms of what we're regulating and what different things that we're looking at rather than having a lot of discussion as to whether or not we should eliminate taxicabs altogether. I mean, it is a choice of a company. If they want to rip out their taxi meters and become all charter services, Page 59 April 2, 2001 they can do that today. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. I'll go forward. MR. FLEGAL: I mean, it just seems like, you know, that if we're going to recommend changes to the ordinance, we should go down there -- and rather get hung up on "Well, this is right" -- no. We either take this sentence out, okay, we recommend take this sentence out of this paragraph, and then as you go through you're naturally going to have to take other things out because you wanted to take that out. But we seem to have gotten hung up on some kind of rate thing, and -- and we haven't even gotten to the paragraph where we would say we recommend to the commissioners that you eliminate Section X about rates. That would solve the whole problem. We recommend there aren't any rates. It's just free enterprise. You want to charge somebody 40 bucks to go from the Registry to Vanderbilt Beach restaurant, that's your damned privilege. We don't care. But we haven't got that far to eliminate that section yet. So why discuss it? MS. ARNOLD: If we have taxicabs operating in Collier County, we have to have a rate schedule, and that's required by law. And that -- that's some of the things that -- that the Bureau of Weights and Measures can provide for the board because they have specific things that they check for if it's a taxicab. MS. BAISLEY: But that's not required -- it's required by this ordinance, but it's not required by law that a taxicab have a meter in it, is it? MR. D'ARCY: Yes. If -- my name is Carlos D'Arcy. I'm a supervisor. I'm out of Miami. I work with weights and measures. If there is a -- if the taxicab is charging by miles -- by the mile, he has -- he cannot use an odometer. He has to have a taxi meter, and that meter has to be checked and sealed by an appropriate authority. And we are the ones that currently do it here in Florida. Page 60 April 2, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: ordinance? 531. And that -- is that a state or a federal MR. D'ARCY: Yes. It's a state ordinance. Florida Statutes, MR. FLEGAL: Okay. MR. CSOGI: So, therefore, you can't rip out the meters, then. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, unless you, you know -- unless you go forward with the other. And I will honor our vice chair's request to go forward. MS. BAISLEY: But you could allow taxicab companies to set their own rates. We wouldn't necessarily have to have the same rate for every cab company. I prefer to have -- MR. D'ARCY: Could I say something? Yes, you can take your meters out and go by zones. That's -- that's fine, and that will be great for us, too, because less work for us. If you choose to go that way, that's fine. Again, you guys would set up what your rates are for each zone, and -- and we have nothing to do that -- to do with that. But once you do have taxi meters, then we get involved. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. All right. Well, for now on page 3 the first item, I'd like to make that hold till pending -- pending county staff's recommendations. And also we're not voting on anything today, but we're just reviewing it. The next item, page 5, by suggestion was to eliminate the stickers on the vehicles. This one was -- might be a little sketchier. MR. CSOGI: And is that up there on the back bumper-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. MR. CSOGI: -- or the front windshield? CHAIRMAN PEASE: On the back bumper. On both a temporary basis, which is the one underneath it, and the regular vehicles. Page 61 April 2, 2001 Again, I wasn't sure -- this one's probably not as strong, but is that a safety issue? The original intent was -- of the sticker was what? I wasn't here, Pat. MS. BAISLEY: The original intent was so that somebody who was in the front of the vehicle could see that that was a licensed vehicle. Somebody that was at the rear of the vehicle could see that that was a licensed vehicle without walking around to the front. That's why there was one on the bumper and one on the front windshield. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's right and -- and the purpose of knowing that was regarding -- MR. PALMER: If somebody like a law enforcement officer wanted to ascertain whether that was a certificated vehicle in Collier County could do so just by looking at the left rear bumper. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. And that would be important from the safety of the guest standpoint. MS. BAISLEY: I would think so. MR. PALMER: Well, it's important from an ease of enforcement. We were having a problem with these vehicles coming down from Lee County operating in Collier County, and the police officer could not tell -- just by looking at the vehicle tell whether or not it was certificated by Collier County. That sticker's on there. He knows if it's certificated by Collier County and not a poacher. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I will cross those two items off. MS. BAISLEY: That was quick. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That was deregulation to the max. All right. Staff, 142-26, who verifies this caption? What -- what caption are you talking about, staff? MS. ARNOLD: What is that? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Page 5, 142-26, parenthesis 4. Who verifies this caption from staff? Page 62 April 2, 2001 MS. ARNOLD: Oh, okay. Currently the ordinance -- currently the ordinance requires that we look at the subcontractors operating in the county, and we're not -- I don't believe that we're doing that on a regular basis. And that was just a comment. It probably shouldn't have been included in this particular thing. The -- the subcontractors that are operating for some of our taxicab companies, I think we look at the cab companies to verify more so than us some of the -- the -- all of the article requirements. We're not -- we're not doing a lot of the checks, but we're relying on the cab companies to ensure that their subcontractors meet the requirements of this ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. So when somebody comes in for a temporary permit, you're saying you don't go out and look at the -- you don't have the vehicle there to look at the tags and -- MS. ARNOLD: No. And the occupational licensing, are we -- are we verifying the occupational licensing, and we're relying a lot on the cab companies to make sure that -- MS. BAISLEY: Are we talking about a subcontracted vehicle that you use for a day or a vehicle that somebody owns and has leased to, like, my company or your company? MS. ARNOLD: It says subcontracted vehicles, not necessarily based in Collier County. MR. FLEGAL: Michelle, I'm lost because you have 142-26, parens, 4, what is parens -- I don't have a parens 4, so tell me what I'm doing. MS. ARNOLD: It's on page 5 at the top, more or less, of the page. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're talking about the paragraph labeled "Subcontracted Vehicles"? MS. ARNOLD: Right. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. There's no parens 4. That's why I'm -- I'm trying to figure out what we're talking about so ... Page 63 April 2, 2001 MR. PALMER: Well, parens 4 is the entire definition section. MR. FLEGAL: Oh, okay. It starts out on page 3. MR. PALMER: So it -- it really-- it's in the definition of subcontracted vehicles. I was confused about it, too, didn't know what we are talking about. MS. BAISLEY: That applies to the temporary one-fee rate. MS. ARNOLD: For special events and those types of things. MS. BAISLEY: Correct. MS. ARNOLD: We rely on the company to verify that the subcontractors meet the requirement specified in the article. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. But doesn't that mean if -- if Pat want -- needed me for a day, that I'm operating under her occupational license. MS. BAISLEY: I would think so. MR. FLEGAL: It says by operating under a contract with a company that has a Collier County occupational license. So if -- if she comes in and says, "Gee, I'm hiring Cliff's car for a day," it's easy to check and see that she's got an occupational license. I don't need one because she's got one. That's the way I'm reading that sentence. Is that correct, Tom? MR. PALMER: My understanding was is that there had to be a document -- and let's assume a police officer or somebody stops the vehicle and says, "What are you doing operating in Collier County?" he has a little piece of paper saying I'm subcontracted today with Yellow Cab. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. It hangs right on the mirror. MR. PALMER: It does? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. It's a little -- plastic, and you can't change it. It's got the date and everything on it. MR. CSOGI: That's the temporary permit. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. What you do is -- what the procedure has been in the past -- like I went down there, bought Page 64 April 2, 2001 a couple for one day. And then I give them to that company. They have to hang them on their mirror, or I lease a car. MS. BAISLEY: I think maybe what she's trying to get at -- MS. ARNOLD: No, No. What I'm saying is that -- I mean, the occupational license is saying, yes, I understand they're operating under the -- the company's occupational license, but the -- there is nothing -- there is a lot of other verification that we look to the company to meet as far as all of the other items in this article, like, there -- whether or not they don't have a -- a -- a criminal record and -- and all those other things. We're relying on the company to go and do all those checks, and we're not doing those checks currently. MR. CSOGI: Temporary permits only? MS. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And some of those you have no time to do that. I mean, sometimes you just don't know until the day of or the day before. There's no time to get a criminal record on them. MS. BAISLEY: And it could be somebody who subcontracts a vehicle. If I hired a vehicle from somebody for a day, maybe that vehicle isn't registered properly either. It's not registered as a for-hire vehicle. And that's what they're not going to know. They're leaving that up to the certificate holder. MR. FLEGAL: Right. And I -- I don't see anything wrong with that, because if a law enforcement officer, for some reason, would stop this vehicle that was only for a day and find something wrong, I think the county is not at -- at fault for relying on the firm that leased this vehicle for a day to see that it met the requirements, because somewhere else in our ordinance it states that if -- if you're a vehicle-for-hire company, you are responsible to see that all vehicles meet the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Of course. Page 65 April 2, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: If they lease a vehicle for a day and it doesn't meet it, they're at fault, and we would have recourse to go back to them. MR. PALMER: Yes. And, of course, it would not excuse the - - the status violation that was occurring at the time. MR. FLEGAL: Correct. Yeah. So I -- I don't think you're doing anything wrong. MS. ARNOLD: No. I'm not saying that we're doing anything wrong. I just brought it up for discussion because it's not really clear if it's our responsibility or the company's responsibility. It says clearly that the subcontractor must meet all the standards of the -- MR. PALMER: Well, we can clean that up with a sentence or two. There's no problem with that. MR. FLEGAL: I think you relying on the company is the right thing to do. MS. BAISLEY: Right. Couldn't we even have the person who comes in to get this temporary permit sign a piece of paper that says that this vehicle that I'm applying for a temporary permit for is going to meet all the standards that -- MR. PALMER: Well, it could be a continuing promise that anytime I subcontract a vehicle I certify to you that it will meet the standards, and I will verify that. That will be a continuing promise to -- to the county. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Don't we sign something like that every year when we do our annuals that we've read the ordinance and followed the ordinance? MR. FLEGAL: No. But when you issue these temporary permits, do they have to sign anything or they just walk in, give you the -- X dollars, and you give them a permit? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Cash. Five dollars -- five dollars a day. MR. FLEGAL: They don't have to sign. Page 66 April 2, 2001 MS. ARNOLD: No, they don't. MR. FLEGAL: And so these permits aren't serial numbered or anything? They're just -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: They're serial numbered. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. MR. FLEGAL: So how do you keep track of them? MS. ARNOLD: We do keep track of them. But what I'm saying is that there is no -- we don't require them to go through and certify that they're going to meet all the county -- MR. FLEGAL: Well, but I mean that could be a one-line statement or something on whatever -- when you issue this permit and they give you your -- the money and you hand them the permit, they sign in, whether it's in a book or however you keep log of these, their signature which automatically certifies that, "Hey, we're meeting the requirements of the ordinance." I think that would be the simplest way to do it. MR. PALMER: Of course. MR. FLEGAL: So every time you come in -- because you don't know that they're going to hire the same vehicle all the time. Maybe somebody quits or whatever. Wouldn't that be an easy way to do it, I would think, if you're issuing these -- MR. PALMER: Sure. Well, you do that when you apply for a building permit. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. I mean, you know, you're issuing this form that they're going to pay money for. Have them sign for it. And that signature is on a piece of paper that says, "1 am certifying that the vehicle I'm requesting this temporary permit for meets all the requirements of the Collier County ordinances.". MR. PALMER: Right. MR. FLEGAL: Period. Then if it doesn't, they're on the hook, and they should be. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. That's -- when we get to the Page 67 April 2, 2001 meeting, I got a good motion right now. MR. PALMER: There's a broader issue, as I see it. I do not believe that the current ordinance allows for anything other than a temporary short-duration subcontracting relationship. I understand there -- these long-term six month or annual subcontract, my reading of the ordinance does not -- the ordinance does not contemplate a long-duration subcontracting. And if it does, I've got some suggestions. I -- this summary process works if you're going to release it for -- or subcontract for a day or two because there's -- time is of the essence in a lot of these matters. Time is not of the essence if you're going to subcontract for six months or a year. MS. BAISLEY: But isn't that what the lease is that we -- the county has supplied to the operators, to lease the vehicle from so and so to a business? MR. PALMER: Well, leasing and subcontracting are not necessarily the same thing. I was surprised to find out that there were people who were subcontracting on an annual basis, and I don't think the ordinance contemplates that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, it shows leased on our paperwork, doesn't it, or not? Don't we know who the leased vehicle owner operators are? MS. BAISLEY: That's what I'm saying. I think we're talking - MR. PALMER: A leased vehicle and a subcontract are not necessarily the same thing. MR. CSOGI: I -- I share his concern with that because I'm -- I'm in the automotive business, and I talk with a lot of, not charter companies, but taxi drivers, and I know that they subcontract annually their vehicle. And it's either a -- either a monthly charge, or they do a 60/40 split. And it's annual. They're responsible to take care of the vehicle and all. Page 68 April 2, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: But they, in turn, lease their vehicle to the taxi company with a business lease. MR. CSOGI: But they lease it from -- they lease it from the taxicab company. MS. BAISLEY: No. They lease their vehicle to the taxicab company -- MR. CSOGI: Okay. MS. BAISLEY: -- and the permit is -- belongs to the taxicab company. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But aren't there people -- MR. CSOGI: It's not the opposite way? They're not leasing the vehicle from you guys? MS. BAISLEY: No. Not in my case. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There's nobody in town that does -- usually, like, in Chicago Yellow Cab leases the car to the owner/operator. MS. BAISLEY: I think there are some people in town that are doing that. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. From what I gather, you know -- and that's the problem I have with the permits that we give out when they don't give us the number of vehicles that they are going to have, is we're licensing rental companies. They could get 20 cab companies, not have operators for them yet. And then when people come in and say, "Yeah, you can take this cab here. It's licensed to us. You subcontract it annually. You pay me $500 a month, and the cab's yours. You take care of the maintenance, you take care of everything," and they're just renting vehicles out. Nobody keeps track of that. And then we're relying, like Maria said, on the companies to do the background checks, criminal records, and all that. We're just verifying the criminal records and all that when the company gets the permit, and we don't know -- I don't know if they do it on an annual basis. Page 69 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Or a weekly basis -- in Chicago it was weekly. MS. ARNOLD: We do -- we do get the license of the vehicles that are operating under -- for whatever -- whether it's a charter. MR. CSOGI: For every permit? MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. Because when -- when we issue the sticker, we get that information for the vehicle. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, maybe we could look at suggestions for the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Well, I've -- I've got the same concern that you do. This could unravel. I feel a losing of control in -- in this business about subcontracting for -- on an annual basis. We -- we really are far removed from the driver in -- in a case like that. We don't know who this person is on an annual basis. This idea here of subcontracting was supposed to be on an emergency sort of fill-in situation, not to basically subcontract people for years. And I think we ought to look at that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: If you could -- before the next meeting in July, if you can come back with some -- some long term -- some suggestions in regards to the ordinance in terms of long- term subcontracting, which the ordinance doesn't even address. MR. PALMER: Well, my suggestion is that a long-term subcontractor get independently certificated, because he effectively is just -- it's a business relationship. But he effectively is out there doing these things. And just be -- and there's no time is of the essence on subcontracting if you're going to do it on an annual basis. Why not go through the process? CHAIRMAN PEASE: What if it's weekly or monthly? MR. PALMER: Monthly you're getting into that situation. Weekly, it -- as long as it's not recurring. The idea is that this -- and my understanding was that when I subcontract -- if I'm a sub Page 70 April 2, 2001 and I'm going to subcontract, I'm sort of dealing with people that I know, and I know they're responsible people. I've got a list of people I subcontract with, and I do these things. But if you're going to do this on a weekly basis, it's one thing. But it seems if you're going to do it for year, the county should know, then, have a clearer picture of a long-term relationship that, in fact, the driver and the vehicle are -- comply with this ordinance. And there's no need to rely on just the -- the goodwill of the subcontracting company to verify those kinds of things when time is not of the essence and we are -- we are fully qualified to verify that kind of information. That's -- just concerns me. The short-term thing, sure, that's a fill in. We've got a special event. But if I'm going to do this on an annual basis, it seems to me that why -- we lose a lot of control when we just allow the -- the subcontracting companies to carry the ball on these things that we have no independent verification as to what is going on in those instances. MR. FLEGAL: Tom, I think you're right. And I think the ordinance is quite specific that there is no long term -- MR. PALMER: Uh-huh. MR. FLEGAL: -- because on page five -- MR. PALMER: On page 5, subcontracted vehicles. MR. FLEGAL: -- it states very specifically, "must not be operated after the time period for which the temporary vehicle permit has been issued" -- that's temporary, and that's the only way you get it -- "which shall be the length of the temporary function or special event for which the vehicle for hire has or has been subcontracted." so, I mean, I think the ordinance is real specific. You could get subcontracted vehicles and a temporary permit. But it's for a special event or a function. MR. PALMER: That's right. Like senior golf tournament or something. Page 71 April 2, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: It's not for a year -- That's correct. -- or six months. It's pretty specific. Yes. I think we're talking about two different things here. One is a subcontracted vehicle for an event, a short period of time. The other one is the instance where a taxicab company leases its vehicle to the driver for a month at a time and says, "You pay me $500 a month. You go out there, and do whatever you want. I don't know anything." is that what we're talking about? MR. FLEGAL: Well, a leased vehicle to me. I mean, you could go to Ford Motor Company and lease 50 cars and make them taxicabs to your company. That's a different type of lease to me. MS. BAISLEY: No. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying the vehicle is leased from an individual to my company. I'm saying that my vehicle is registered to Yellow Cab of Naples. MR. FLEGAL: You're just leasing it -- leasing it to Tom to drive it. MS. BAISLEY: I'd say, "Tom, you go take this car for $500 you give me for the mileage. You do whatever you want to do" -- MR. FLEGAL: I don't think that's this. MR. PALMER: No, this is not that. MS. BAISLEY: That's what his concern is. MR. PALMER: No, this is not that. MS. BAISLEY'. That's what the concern is. MR. FLEGAL: Well, if you're -- if you're leasing -- if you're leasing it to somebody just to be a driver, you are responsible for the vehicle meeting this ordinance. MS. BAISLEY: That's what I -- MR. FLEGAL: You're also responsible for the driver meeting Page 72 April 2, 2001 this ordinance because you just can't go out and pick some guy off the street and say, "You're a taxicab driver" because he may not meet this ordinance, and that's up to you, the company. You've hired them or leased them or whatever word you want to tack on it. So that's your responsibility. MS. BAISLEY: I agree with you. I think your concerns might already be met here. I'm not sure, but -- MR. FLEGAL: Is that -- is that what you're -- MR. CSOGI: I don't know if it's being met because they're not supplying us with records when we ask for them on an annual basis. Our last thing for -- for -- for meter, when we did the meter study, we wanted logbooks. Nobody would even give us logbooks. So we didn't even know what operators are out there, like criminal records and everything else. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So I think if I hear you right, Mr. Palmer and you are suggesting that someone who is an owner/operator go before us in the same manner that the owner does? Is that what you're saying? MR. CSOGI: I -- I think that the permit should not only be by company, but they should be by driver. And that would get around this issue, so we'll know if, you know -- MS. BAISLEY: I'm still confused because what I -- MR. PALMER: Staff, when somebody is -- is doing this subcontract on an annual basis, to what extent do we certify the bona fides of the driver in that situation? We don't. MS. ARNOLD: We don't. MR. PALMER: There's where the problem lies as far as I -- we don't know this person from Adam. MS. ARNOLD: But -- but -- but I don't see how it's any different from any other driver whether or not they're subcontracted. MR. PALMER: Well, I think there is a material distinction if Page 73 April 2, 2001 they're going to do this on a long-term basis. MS. ARNOLD: As Mr. Flegal said, it's the responsibility of the operator to certify that they meet all the articles, because it's -- it's, like, they've hired that person as a driver. MR. PALMER: Well, they haven't, though. That's -- they haven't hired the person as a driver. An independent contractor by definition is not an employee, and they're not responsible for independent contractor. I think -- I was just thinking out loud -- in a long-term basis like that we ought to independently somehow certify the bona fides of the driver and not just rely on the taxicab company that's in the relationship with that person to rely on his alleged compliance with this ordinance, because we have no way to know whether he's complied or not. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're talking about driver as owner/operator, right, because the driver is an employee -- if the person is employed by the taxi operator and there's no split, no percentages, no anything, there's no lease involved -- MR. PALMER: That's a different case. An independent contractor by definition is not an employee. MR. FLEGAL: Right. MR. PALMER: An employer is responsible for the acts and actions of his employee. Independent contractors are not. And there's where the breakdown -- at least my feeling is that we're losing a little bit of control here, and on those instances that's going to be beyond the short-term thing, if that's what the ordinance is going -- in the future allow, then I would recommend that we independently certi -- certify the driver in cases like that. I'm just thinking out loud. MS. BAISLEY: But doesn't this ordinance refer to the driver as a driver, not an employee? MS. ARNOLD: Right. It's a driver. MS. BAISLEY: It's a driver. So whether he's an independent- Page 74 April 2, 2001 contractor driver or an employee, it's a driver. MR. FLEGAL: But if we went to court, we'd probably get shot down if he was a, quote, independent contractor. This probably wouldn't hold up just because we called him a driver and he signed some document that he's an independent contractor. MR. PALMER: Well, a driver can be an employee or independent contractor or sole proprietor. A driver doesn't address the business relationship of anything or anybody. MS. BAISLEY: I know that everybody's independent- contractor thing is different. But in my case it says that they will abide by all parts of this ordinance. MR. PALMER: Well, of course it says that. But my point is that Maria Cruz has no way to know in these independent- contractor situations whether or not the driver is good, bad, or indifferent. MS. BAISLEY: That's why I'd like to see the driver's licensed by the county. MR. PALMER: That's what I'm suggesting, at least in this long-term relationship. I don't know about employees. Any responsible employer is going to take it upon themself for their own protection to make sure that they've got adequate and responsible drivers. But that -- that impetus does not apply in an independent-contractor situation because I'm not responsible for an independent contractor, and I'm -- therefore, I don't have to so much protect my own interest in an independent-contractor situation. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MR. PALMER: Those are -- these are legal distinctions. I'm not sure you understand them. The reason you have independent contractors is so that you're not responsible if they have an accident as distinguished from an employee. Page 75 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. So we're going to take a look at when we actually meet on that item. MR. FLEGAL: I think a way to tighten up anything that might be other than an employee driver? Still looking for assistance -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: particular verbiage. -- from you, Mr. Palmer, on that MR. PALMER: All right. If -- if I can get the policy, it's very simple to come up with language that expresses your intent. But I'm -- I'm not sure what your -- your intent is, and except in the case of, like, independent contractors, other than a short-term duration, they will get independently cer -- the drivers will get independently certificated by the county. If that's what the policy is, I can put that in a couple of sentences easily. MR. FLEGAL: Something to protect, you know, the county and the citizens from the situation like this that may arise where we kind of don't have control over this -- MR. PALMER: We don't -- we don't -- we have no way -- or we do not independently veri -- we think this is all being done properly by the -- by the independent contracting company, but we don't know that at all, do we? MR. FLEGAL: No. MS. ARNOLD: Okay. So you're saying that independent contractors should be -- go through an additional process with the county to -- MR. PALMER: Unless it's by the short-term thing. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Criminal background check, some of the things we ask for from the owner? Is that what you're sug -- suggesting? MR. PALMER: The things that applied to the bona fides, the responsibility of the individual driving the car, background check, Page 76 April 2, 2001 criminal record, and insure ability. Those kind of things strike me off the top of my head as being the kind of things we would want to know about the driver. MS. ARNOLD: Okay. According to our definition, a driver means any person possessing a valid driver's license and who is, then, employed or permitted by the certificate holder to drive or operate a permitted vehicle for hire upon the streets of Collier County. What -- what we're saying is, if it's an independent contractor, they have to go through additional reviews with the county. Right now we're not requiring that. We require them to be treated similar to any other driver where, you know, the -- the company is responsible for verifying their criminal backgrounds, verifying all these -- that they meet the conditions of this ordinance -- MR. PALMER: I understand, Michelle. It's a question -- this is questions of policy. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, what's the difference in the risk factor between the two? MR. PALMER: When I am an employer, I am responsible for the actions of my employees. Therefore, I am going to be circumspect about who I hire and for my own self-protection have more of an incentive to make sure I've got a responsible, noncriminal, insurable person. If it's an independent contractor, I'm not -- I don't care so much, unless I can prove that abject -- or something that I knew or should have known. There are -- there are ways you can be responsible for independent contractors if you hire someone that you know or should have known was a totally incompetent person. But if you're -- absent that, unless there's some reason to know, you say, "They're an independent contractor. I'm not responsible for what they do." and there's where the distinction is. MS. ARNOLD: Well, but -- but the ordinance requires a Page 77 April 2, 2001 certificate holder to be responsible for insuring that each of their drivers are -- MR. PALMER: I know what it says, Michelle. The question is, we don't know for a fact that this is being done. And if it's a week -- a week thing, one-week event, it's not so egregious. But what if we find out there are all kinds of incompetent drivers out there because we're assuming that the independent contracting companies are doing these things and, in fact, they're not doing them? We don't know that they're doing them. And unless somebody gets involved in a catastrophe, and there's a lawsuit, and it turns out that this company's got 35 incompetent independent-contractor drivers, it won't ever come to our attention. MS. ARNOLD: But as far as insurance purposes, the company that -- the certificate holder is the one that is -- they don't release that responsibility, even if it's an independent contractor, because we require them to be the named person on the insurance. MR. CSOGI: So you ask to see their insurance policies that they submitted for prior year every year to make sure they have the same policy; correct? MS. ARNOLD: For each vehicle that has -- MR. CSOGI: Each vehicle? MS. ARNOLD: Yeah, uh -huh. MR. CSOGI: Okay. MR. PALMER: Well, I know of at least two instances where, in fact, there was a question about -- where I think that the insurance company or the independent contracting comp -- company -- MS. ARNOLD: MR. PALMER: MS. ARNOLD: Wanted to have their name. Comp -- couple of cases by mistake -- No, no, no. Page 78 April 2, 2001 MR. PALMER: Or if you can explain it. MS. ARNOLD: That was a question that was brought before you because somebody tried to have the independent-contractor name on the insurance policy. MR. PALMER: Have his own insurance. MS. ARNOLD: Right. And we said, no, it would have to be according to what the ordinance says; it would have to be the certificate holder-- MR. PALMER: Right. MS. ARNOLD: -- that's named as the insured. MR. PALMER: Right. MS. ARNOLD: And then we would have to be named. MR. PALMER: Well, this is a matter of policy for the board. It's a question -- it's just -- I agree that, in fact -- my feeling is, is we lose -- there's a lot out there we don't know. We're relying on supposedly some kind of sort of scrutinization by an insurance company and some kind of acom -- a scrutinization by the independent contracting company. But we don't know for a fact what kind of scrutiny is being given to these independent- contract drivers. MR. CSOGI: To add to that with the fuel study that we did, I did speak with some taxicab drivers that lease vehicles on an annual basis, and we asked the taxicab permitted companies to supply us with logbooks and all that. And some of the people that I talked with didn't know anything that was going on, so it didn't trickle down to them. We have no way to contact them because we don't know who the drivers are. So when we want to do studies, we don't -- we're not getting impact -- input from the drivers. We're getting it just from the companies. MR. FLEGAL: Tom, look at page 4 for a moment, please -- MR. PALMER: Yes, sir. MR. FLEGAL: -- where we give the quote, unquote, definition Page 79 April 2, 2001 of a driver and see if this might help in the future. If we added in there where it says, "means any person possessing," blah, blah, "then employed or permitted," could we then say, "and includes," you know, "leased drivers" -- "leased, subcontracted, or independent-contractor drivers"? MR. PALMER: Well, certainly we can do that, sure. MR. FLEGAL: I mean, would that help our cause, if we -- if we specify all these people that are kind of wandering free out there so that as you read the ordinance, whenever you see the word "driver," the firm that has the certificate knows that it includes everybody. There's no little cracks or crevasses that this guy's going to fall through. MR. PALMER: I -- I think the definition of driver presently is all inclusive. I think it includes everybody. It talks about -- you have two kinds of people. They're employed, be an employee of the company, or otherwise permitted or -- means otherwise permitted. So it means two things, employed or permitted. Otherwise you're -- you're driving a vec -- if you're permitted, the person by one reason they're saying you can drive that vehicle. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, if it's already included, then why do we need more government bureaucracy for the owner/operators? MR. PALMER: Well, my point is that we -- we are assuming, in the case of a long-term contracting situation, that all these things are being done. And my only point is that we don't know that they're being done. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But it falls -- you're saying the ordinance already falls on the responsibility of the cab company to make sure of that. MR. PALMER: Yes. But that's -- it does. But the -- but my point is that we don't know for a fact to what extent this obligation is being met by all these companies. It may be met Page 80 April 2, 2001 scrup -- scrupulously by some and hardly at all by others. That's my only point. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Point -- point taken. MS. CRUZ: Tom, I have a question. So what you're saying, that a subcontractor is also a driver, is the same thing as a driver? MR. PALMER: Well, my understanding is that they subcontract to individuals. And so that person is -- I assume is the person who's driving the vehicle. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Not necessarily. You can subcontract with companies. For instance -- MR. PALMER: Well, that even makes matters worse. If you subcontract with a company, what, does he determine the bona fides of his drivers? You see, if that's the case, that's even one step further removed from the county's knowledge of the -- of the abilities and the responsibilities of these drivers that we know nothing about. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There can be contract companies used from the east coast, from Tampa, from outside, from even Lee County -- MR. PALMER: I understand. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- that is not permitted. MR. PALMER: But on the ordinance presently right now, that's supposed to be limited to these events of a short-term duration. And if this is going to be done on an annual basis and you're even doing it to companies, and that's just one further step removed, about, well, who are -- who are these drivers, this - - this company is having drive its vehicles, either its employees or lessees or whatever they are, my only point is that we don't know. And if it's going to be a long-term relationship, maybe we ought to know. That's -- that's all I'm saying. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. This is something we can -- Page 81 April 2, 2001 we're getting hung up on this. MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. MR. PALMER: Well, it's an important matter. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It is important. MR. FLEGAL: We're trying to protect the public. And we keep getting further and further away from who's actually driving this vehicle that's carrying everybody around town. MR. PALMER: I was surprised to find out with this little business about the insurance a couple months ago the extent of a possibility of a total lack of control over this subcontracting business as a practical matter. Relying on a company, a third party to make sure that all of its drivers are qualified is a questionable practice in my mind. If it's a long-term relationship, why shouldn't we independently verify the bona fides of all of these drivers? That's just -- that's just to throw out a question. It's impractical on a special event unless they know six months in advance about who they're going to hire. But it's not impractical if you're going to subcontract people on a long-term basis. MR. CSOGI: I think if we were to do a fact finding on all the drivers, you'd be real surprised. I really do. MS. BAISLEY: I think you would too. MR. CSOGI: I really do. And the -- the reason I'm so concerned about this is because I did get input from companies on this very fact. "hey, there's other companies out there that do this, I know, because they used to be drivers for me. I fired them. They went to this company because of their background because this company hires anybody.". MS. BAISLEY: That's right. MR. CSOGI: And I think if we found out the facts of all the drivers, you'd be surprised they wouldn't meet the criteria. MR. PALMER: And it's not an onerous thing to have Page 82 April 2, 2001 somebody come in and verify to staff that they are a responsible nonfelon, insurable person. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. That's a -- that's an important topic for a motion of some sort for us to contemplate. We've got about five minutes left. At the current rate of one page per meeting, 15 meetings is what it's going to take to get through the ordinance before we make a motion. By then we'll have forgot. MR. PALMER: Why don't I do this: Why don't I take this -- unfortunately this ordinance we can't find in the computer, so we're in the process of typing it from scratch. However, why don't I go ahead -- and I can do this in the next couple of two or three weeks -- is to take the ordinance and get rid of all the underlines and strike-throughs that are in there, and that will be starting what I call the clean copy and then insert these things in here -- in an underlying basis and get it out to everybody, and you can look at it as a whole and see how it looks to you with these things added and see if it looks like it makes sense, it's what you want, and it's internally consistent. That might get us a long way along the line, because a lot of these may be clarifications and noncontroversial things that are going to be really no-brainers. Then we can focus on the matters that are really sort of like issues. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The chair recognizes Mr. -- MR. CSOGI: Quick thought. These gentlemen took a long trip to come visit us. Can we skip down to No. 9 and get to this while they're here so they don't have to come back, or do they enjoy coming here? I don't know. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I didn't even -- nobody advised the chair that anybody was here for any particular part of the ordinance. MR. CSOGI.' Well, it was No. 9, from what I understand. Page 83 April 2, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Page 9 or-- MR. CSOGI: No. No. 9 on the -- yeah, page 9. And it's going to be at 142-32, paragraph 1. I think what they're getting at, if I'm right, Michelle, is can they -- can the county be taught to certify so people don't have to go over? Is that what you're -- MS. ARNOLD: No. They met with us first to get a test site established in the county because that is their responsibility. But they are working with other municipalities or jurisdictions where they are either testing jointly or they've given certifications to some of the staff so that the staff could be doing some of the testing. And I think that's something that we can do, we can work out independent of -- of the board. They were here just to provide information to the board if there was any specific questions that you had with respect to what's required of a taxicab and how the testing is done, those types of things, if you guys were interested. MR. CSOGI: Well -- so if -- if our county's trained on calibrating the meters, we're allowed to do that? MR. D'ARCY: Yes. MR. PALMER: And that would be a big benefit to the companies, by golly. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. MR. PALMER: Didn't you say there was somebody up in Fort Myers that cer -- certificated to do this, or did I misunderstand on that? MR. D'ARCY: Fort Myers Police Department. MR. PALMER: Fort Myers Police. Is that all the types of meters, or are they limited to one particular type? MR. D'ARCY: No, sir. That's any taxi meter. MR. PALMER: So they -- so this -- these are -- it is not necessary then, assuming we can get their assistance, to drive Page 84 April 2, 2001 over to Miami to get Collier County meters calibrated? MS. ARNOLD: We're talking about two different things, though. They -- they test the meters to insure that they meet the requirements of the ordinance with respect -- that they calibrated according to their standards and that the meters trip the way the rates are established. MR. PALMER: Yeah. MS. ARNOLD: They're -- they do the testing. MR. PALMER: Right. MS. ARNOLD: They don't do the calibrations. Okay. Something that we would be doing when we issue a new certificate, we need to verify that the meters are calibrated and that they're not going to be charging people more than the maximum rates that have been established. MR. PALMER: There are two kinds of things. One of them is the vehicle -- it goes 5 miles when it says it goes 5 miles. MS. ARNOLD: Right. MR. PALMER: And the other question is, what is the bottom line add up at 5 miles. So there is really two things that you look at. MS. ARNOLD: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think you need to defer that until you determine whether or not you're going to have a rate structure for the county. I mean, if we go back to my original topic, that was -- MR. FLEGAL: Well, but you-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: It was said that we were going to wait on that to hear from staff. So I think on everything relating to meters, I think we ought to wait until we hear from staff. MR. FLEGAL'. Well, but the meters today have to be doing a certain thing. So the staff and the county need to be able to learn, because this ordinance and the rates may not be changed Page 85 April 2, 2001 for a year. It may be a long time. CHAIRMAN PEASE: This ordinance may not -- MR. FLEGAL: So today the staff needs to know what these gentlemen know and get qualified to do it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Except that by the time we get the ordinance reviewed and in place, maybe at the same time that the staff makes their recommendation on what they want to do with the rate structure. MR. FLEGAL: That shouldn't prohibit them from learning today how to do their job. MS. ARNOLD: These gentlemen are already going to be testing all the taxicab meters that are licensed to operate in Collier County. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's fine. MS. ARNOLD: They're going to be doing it already. And we're going to be looking into having someone on my staff trained to be able to know how that whole testing process works. MR. PALMER: Would that be both distance verification and -- addition verification, both aspects? MS. ARNOLD: Yes. MR. PALMER: And that can be delegated down to a county staff person who's trained and certified as being competent? MR. D'ARCY: Well, I have to talk to my -- MS. ARNOLD: You have to speak in the meter (sic). MR. D'ARCY: Oh. I thought your -- your first question, I thought you were referring to servicing the meter which is a qualified technician. When -- if we turn a meter down for overregistration or underregistration, that service personnel can then fix the meter and set -- MR. PALMER: I wasn't thinking about fixing it. I was thinking about when a person -- when somebody runs a measured Page 86 April 2, 2001 5 miles, the meter shows 5 miles. Mr. D'ARCY: Correct. MR. PALMER: And if you add up what the adds on are, at the bottom line, addition is correct at 5 miles or whatever the measured distance is. Can both of those aspects be delegated down to a qualified county employee? MR. D'ARCY: Yes. MR. PALMER: That's a different thing than -- than correcting or fixing a -- a meter that's not working properly. That sounds to me to be a different level of -- of expertise. MR. D'ARCY: Yes. The county can take over that -- that aspect and seal the meters. And all we do is come back occasionally and provide them with updates of whatever changes there are in the statutes. MR. PALMER: So if the county had a qualified person who could do all three; measure distance, addition, and modifications or corrections to a broken meter, is that something that's got to be something special, that a certified person has to do? MR. D'ARCY: That -- that other person has to be certified to repair. And they have to be certified by the state. MR. PALMER: By the state, yes. MR. D'ARCY: Yes. So that will be the service side of it. MR. PALMER: I see. MS. BAISLEY: We used to be -- MR. D'ARCY: We also check time also. So not only distance, but time is also checked. MR. PALMER: Oh. You mean sitting time if the clock is -- is running at a right -- the correct rate. MR. D'ARCY: Correct. MR. PALMER: Yes. MS. BAISLEY: It used to be years ago that the Bureau of Weights and Measures would call our office and have our Page 87 April 2, 2001 vehicles taken out to a remote location in Golden Gate, and they -- MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: Measured 5 miles or something. -- measure our meters like that. Is this done on sort of a random basis like knocking on the door "We're here today"? MS. BAISLEY: No. They called you ahead and let you know what they were doing, but that hasn't been done in many, many years. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. It's noon. I think what we ought to do is set up a workshop in a month. I hate that because I didn't want to go there, but I think judging the amount of discussion time-- MR. PALMER: And I'll try to get out -- I'll try to get out this clean copy, modified, in a week or two to everybody. And then you can red line it and question mark it. But I think a lot of these things will probably almost go in there without discussion because they're no-brainers. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: think -- MR. PALMER: Oh. I don't think so, Tom. I think there are some core issues. I Oh, there are some. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You get into the complexion of the board. I mean, there's a -- MR. PALMER: No. There are some, but there are also some that are nothing more than tweaking and basically saying what we mean in a more precise manner. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm -- I'm -- I'm in agreement to go ahead and have you do that. I think we do need to meet in a month with a court reporter so that if someone can't make it, then we have a copy, or if we need to refer back to our notes Page 88 April 2, 2001 about what our intent was, we'll have a record of it. It does not have to be in this room. We can do that over in your offices in a conference room. But I'd like to see that in a month, if you could find a date and a conference room for us and let us know when that works. Okay? Workshop is adjourned. Lunch is served. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:08 p.m. PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BRYAN L.S. PEASE, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY BARBARA A. DONOVAN, RMR, CRR Page 89