Loading...
PVAC Minutes 08/07/2001 WAugust 7, 2001 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE NAPLES, FLORIDA, AUGUST 7, 2001 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Public Vehicle Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in WORKSHOP SESSION at Community Developmental Services, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Conference Room "C," Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Bryan L. S. Pease Pat Baisley William J. Csogi Clifford W. Flegal, Jr. Eric Hyde ALSO PRESENT: Michelle Arnold, Code Enforcement Director Maria Cruz, Code Enforcement Specialist Ekna Hu, Code Enforcement Tom Palmer, Assistant County Attorney Page 1 AGENDA COLLIER COLrNTY PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE August 07, 2001 9:00 AM Community Developmental Services 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Conference Room ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THAT TESTIMONY AAID EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. WORKSHOP ORDINANCE CHANGES REVIEW INSPECTION SHEET REVIEW OF DRIVER ID'S NAPLES TAXI - CHARTER OR TAXI SERVICE NEXT MEETING DATE: October 1, 2001 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: We'll come to order. Let's just do a little -- I think the vice chair's got it right. Let's knock out these three: The inspection sheet, the driver's ID, and the Naples' taxi charter-- taxi service, and then we'll go in the order of pages, 12 and beyond. Roll call? Do we need a roll call? MR. PALMER: No. You don't really need one. If you want to take one, you can. CHAIRMAN PEASE: No, we're okay. Let's talk about vehicle-for-hire inspection. Everybody can review it and then comment on it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does this list match up to the ordinance, the items? MS. HU: It does, yes. MR. FLEGAL: Where it says "repair shop number," is that what they call it? MR. CSOGI: No. That's why -- I've got a little note here. I think we should put, "Register in the State of Florida, Department of Agriculture No." That's what it's called. It's not repair shop number, or "Department of Agriculture No." CHAIRMAN PEASE: You'll give Ekna the correct verbiage for that. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. I could, actually, fax you over a copy of mine, and that way you could see it. And then ... MS. CRUZ: Is the signature, is that for the inspector? MR. CSOGI: Yeah. MS. CRUZ: Certified inspector? MR. CSOGI: At the repair shop, yeah. MR. CRUZ: Should we identify it as that -- MR. FLEGAL: Why don't we add inspector's signature -- certificate holder's signature. Page 2 August 7,2001 MR. BRIDENTHAL: Are all good shops registered in the State of Florida. MR. CSOGI: It's a law in the State of Florida. You have to be registered with them to perform repairs. The reason we were doing that is for -- you can just have your brother say, "Here, sign this." MR. BRIDENTHAL: I didn't know the agriculture regulated mechanics. MR. CSOGI: On 21, we were talking about this the last meeting. One of the companies brought this up. He had a third brake light that was added after the car was federally mandated to have that, and it wasn't working. So when he was going through the inspection process, they said, "You've got to get that working." And I thought we agreed that all lights that are factory equipped should be working, and if it's added on later, that shouldn't hinder the company. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Should it say "factory brake light," then? MR. CSOGI: Yeah. Or just put, "All factory lights must be maintained and operating." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MR. CSOGI: Do you know what I'm saying? MR. FLEGAL: All lights, parentheses, factory installed. How's that sound? MR. CSOGI: Uh-huh, or original equipment. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You and Ekna can compare notes. Any other communications or questions? MR. CSOGI: I have one other quick one. I don't know if anybody agrees or not, but this is a form, and the repair shop signs off on it. But it doesn't really mean anything if they sign off on that. We might maybe have a little oath or something on the bottom saying, "I swear everything on here is true and accurate to the best of my ability," because it carries a little more weight for guys because, "Oh, Page 3 August 7, 2001 I have to agree to that under oath," versus just signing it because there's no consequence to signing this form. Mr. Palmer? MR. PALMER: It wouldn't be a bad idea to put something like, "I hereby certify that the above indications are correct based on my personal inspection," something along those lines that certifies that the information put on here is correct based on the inspection performed by the person that signs. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Would you be willing to give Ekna the proper verbiage on that? MR. PALMER: Yeah, sure. Another thing I think is a little superfluous, I think we ought to take it out of the ordinance maybe, no. 18. I think it would be sufficient to say, "Door panels must be intact, "period. The words, "To prevent accidental injury -- door and window maintenance" strikes me as superfluous language. I recommend we take it out. Either door panels are intact, or they are not. Obviously, what you mean is that the door panels are not going to be hanging off where they would snag something or get your hand behind it, although I do think the language, that sort of qualified language on something like 19 is appropriate and leave that alone. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. MR. PALMER: I also recommend, "Please see reverse side for description of needed corrected measures," and I take it the idea is that when something is wrong, he'll have, "See Item 3, must do thus and so." He'll reference -- MS. CRUZ' It's on the back. MR. PALMER: Oh, yeah. Fine. Oh, good. Good, good, good. Yeah, excellent. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Could have a signature on the back, too, saying these things were all -- MR. PALMER: Like a post-inspection followup. Page 4 August7,2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: That was my concern too. Okay. Let's say there's three items you don't pass on. Now what happens? Because this form is going to go to the county? Or do they hold on to it and then they mark when it's been corrected and sign that? MR. PALMER: We can put some kind of a post-inspected followup on it below. You could probably get it on this one page. MS. BAISLEY: There is no date on this form either, so you wouldn't know 15 days from what date. MR. FLEGAL: Good point. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. Let's try and convert the back of this to the verification that the repair has been made and, again, with the signature line at the bottom. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. The certification on the front page is that he inspected it, and then he can have a certification on the back page that he corrected it. CHAIRMAN PEASE' Right. MR. FLEGAL: One is "I certify I inspected it," and on the back "I certify that I corrected it," or that the corrections were made or something. MS. HU: So not keep corrections, but corrections made. MR. PALMER: Down below there'd be, like, a followup, and it'll say, "All items corrected," and signed and dated or something, like, on the bottom because that's obviously what's going to happen in a case when they don't pass. I also think we ought to have a reference to the ordinance somewhere on here. MS. CRUZ' It's on the back. MR. PALMER: Oh, it is on the back? Oh, fine, good, good, good. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Maybe this verbiage on the back, since we're now converting that into the repair side, that should be maybe on the front. "all corrections or repairs should be made" if there's Page 5 August 7, 2001 room. MS. BAISLEY: It is possible that you would have more than one repair shop fixing your vehicle, because if you have a broken windshield, you might be taking it to Charley's Auto Glass. MR. PALMER: Exactly. MS. BAISLEY: But yet somebody else might be fixing your exhaust system. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Put it on the same line, then, and repaired by, and they sign it here, item number, what it needs, and sign. MR. CSOGI: On each line. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Yeah. MR. CSOGI: And put an additional row is what he's saying and that's where you sign off, the repair shops sign off on each row on each item. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is there room to do that? MR. BRIDENTHAL' Yeah. MR. CSOGI: Yeah. Probably as large as the item, number one. MR. BRIDENTHAL: She said if there's more than one shop fixed it, you need the repairs done by this guy on this line. MR. FLEGAL' Tom, would it be prudent when they have this in their file that somewhere on this form we ask them to attach copies of the receipts for the repairs, so if you have six or seven shops do six or seven things, you pick this up, and you have six or seven bills attached, so you know which shops did it? MR. PALMER: Yeah. That would be a reasonable request. MR. FLEGAL: It would be to their advantage, too, so I mean... MS. HU: So we don't need the repair shop number, the Department of Agriculture number. If it's going to be -- MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. Because that's on the inspection side. The backside where they have the corrections done is where we should say, "Attach copies of repair tickets or bills," or whichever it Page 6 August 7, 2001 is. I think that would -- because that way if they have more than one shop, you're really not -- I don't know the signature so much, but if you have there -- when you go in and have something done, you get a bill. And most of them are signed or stamped or something. If you just attached it to this, if you had six items here, you're going to have six bills. And you know that the ABC company, most of their tickets are probably going to have their shop number on it anyway, I suspect. MS. BAISLEY: And what do you do with something as simple as if they inspect your vehicle and your seat belt's unaccessible because it's tucked down under the seat? You don't need a shop to do that. You don't need a shop to do that; you can do that yourself. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. You can do that yourself, so you wouldn't have a ticket because -- You just going to indicate that you corrected it Repaired in-house, I would think. MS. BAISLEY: yourself?. MR. FLEGAL: bulb have CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, that leads to the next question. If a breaks, we repair all of our own bulbs. Now, do we need to a certified mechanic do that? MR. PALMER: Well, let's assume that somebody comes in and gets this list and says, "Okay, I want everything fixed," and he fixes them in ten minutes. Then he can -- some kind of a certification that says, "I hereby certify that I corrected items -- in fact, I wouldn't -- you're going to put the numbers in here -- only those things that need to be corrected, and he says I corrected Items 3, 7, and 9. MR. CSOGI: Well, I think that you should -- you can have anybody in the world you want to repair the car, but I think the inspection process probably would need to be redone again by a repair shop. MR. PALMER: Well, that's -- I think if somebody goes in and Page 7 August 7, 2001 corrects it, they ought to be able to certify that Item 3 was corrected by me. I'd hate to have somebody have to go back to the original repair shop, which may be miles away from where it got corrected -- make it as easy as possible. MR. FLEGAL: I wouldn't have a problem if Yellow or Checker or any of these people replace a bulb on a brake light or pull a seat belt that's stuck. You get to the point of ridiculous after a while. MR. PALMER: But let's assume it's something that's got to be repaired by somebody that's certified to do it, such as a braking system. I don't know that anybody in the world can repair a braking system on a vehicle for hire, can they? MR. CSOGI: What's that? MR. PALMER: Can any Tom, Dick, or Harry repair a braking system on a car that's a vehicle-for-hire car? MR. CSOGI: Yeah. MR. PALMER: They can? MR. CSOGI: Yeah, they can. There's no laws. MR. HYDE: If you get the proper machinery to grind it to change out pads, sure. Sure. Why not? You could probably do it in your driveway if you want to. MR. PALMER: Yeah. But that's an "if." CHAIRMAN PEASE: care of easily. MR. PALMER: Sure. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. Number 12 is an item an owner can take I think if the owner signs it -- if the certificate holder signs on the back, "repaired in-house," I don't have a problem with that. MR. CSOGI: Because the county's going to have a copy of this. When they come up for their annual, they can just verify what was checked on it six months ago or a year earlier, and it's fixed. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So it probably needs to stay that it may Page 8 August 7, 2001 be repaired in-house or through a certified -- MR. CSOGI: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- on the document. MR. CSOGI: I think just the front needs to be certified and the back just sign off that it was repaired, you know. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. I agree. This first page has got to be done, you're saying, if we're going to go in that direction. MR. CSOGI: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But the repairs can be done in -house and certified. MR. CSOGI: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That needs to state that on the back, Ekna. MR. CSOGI: And then the signature line is just going to be the owner of the company. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Or the -- MR. CSOGI: Or the repair shop. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. CSOGI: Okay. MS. HU: Do you want to put the shop number -- MR. CSOGI: No, not on the back. MR. FLEGAL: Because it may not be a shop on the back. MR. CSOGI: Right. MR. PALMER: Do you want the certificate holder certify the things that have been taken care of?. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We do now. MR. PALMER: Yeah. That makes sense to me. MS. CRUZ: Why don't we group these things, things that we're going to allow the certificate holder to repair. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, each one may have -- I don't have the ability to fix -- well, that's not true. We may have the ability to Page 9 August 7, 2001 fix the door hinges or the door interior if it was just some screws, but if it's more involved, I may have to take it out to a shop. MR. PALMER: Like steering mechanism problems; that's for a mechanic. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Where I'm capable but Pat's not or vice versa -- because I don't know that you can say this is what they can fix and this is what they can't fix in-house... MR. PALMER: Right. But the question is, is the individual certifying that somebody fixed it? It seems to me that it would be reasonable for the certificate holder to certify that things were fixed, and if they went to a mechanic to get a steering mechanism fixed, it's not a big deal to just provide a copy of the invoice. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Well, Ekna, now that we've totally trashed your form... MR. PALMER: No. As a matter of fact, it's a good form. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It is a good form -- it was a good start. She gave us a good basis. E-mail. Have you got this on the computer? MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MS. HU: Yes. MR. PALMER: Go ahead and e-mail it to me. I'll tweak it a little bit, and then we'll take a look at it next month, hopefully, a final version. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other comments, questions on this before we move on? Review of driver's IDs? Were those circulated? MS. HU: I have a few others. There are two versions if you haven't noticed. There's a slight difference. MR. FLEGAL: Just in the print. MS. HU: Those two are the same, Tom. MR. FLEGAL: I like one better because it's bigger. You got to figure somebody sitting in the back seat -- I don't know where it's Page 10 August 7, 2001 going to be mounted yet, so even bigger than that would be neat. MS. ARNOLD: That's what my comment was. The number at least bigger-- and then the investigation, the note on there -- so somebody can read it. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. Was size the easiest way to do this, I think, to get size parameters would be to go out in your car, put this on your dashboard, just kind of set it up, and sit in the backseat, and see if you can read it. If you can't read it, it's too small. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The size of it is okay. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. This size here is fine, but it's all this stuff. And that's a good way to check how big it should be. Just set it in your car and sit in the back seat and say, "Can I read it?" and remember some little old lady is going to have to read it too. MR. PALMER: The ones that I've seen have the name like this in, like, inch-high letters. And it's very easy to see from the backseat. MS. HU: I'll have my grandmother sit in the backseat. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is the name in this case the most important part, or is the ID number really -- The ID number. Both. Someone can remember the number much better MS. CRUZ: MR. CSOGI: MS. CRUZ: the name. than CHAIRMAN PEASE: So I would say the ID and the toll free -- MR. FLEGAL: I mean, we got a lot of blank space on this card, so you could put the name in big letters beside the picture and then the ID underneath. That still lets you beef up the words underneath. MR. PALMER: I also recommend that we not use italicized print for that. Use block. MS. BAISLEY: Did we find out if these IDs can be made here? Is somebody going to check the cost of those? MS. HU: We can go with -- those are self-laminated sheets that Page 11 August 7, 2001 are $2 a pack, and they come in 50 sheets. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You have the machine to do it in-house. MS. HU: We can get a machine, which is $300, and the sheets would be $70 for 200 sheets. And the camera is $800 because we need a digital camera to load it into the system. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There's no existing -- the county doesn't have existing laminating-type -- MS. HU: Not in our department we don't, and there's another neighboring department that does, but they don't laminate as big as that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's the biggest they laminate? MS. ARNOLD: Like a credit card size. MR. HYDE: ID cards. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That works for me. MR. FLEGAL: Well, I think-- whatever it costs, you know, eight, three, and a couple of seventies to get you some history, I mean, so you take the fee up five bucks. MR. PALMER: We may have the money in the budget now. It's a budgetary issue. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. I mean, I think it can be covered with not a whole lot of expense. MS. CRUZ: We're going to be adding this expense to what? MR. FLEGAL: Well, since this would be a requirement, I think when they come to get a permit, you know -- what do you charge now, $250? MS. CRUZ: Yeah. MR. FLEGAL: Is that the fee? MS. CRUZ: Right. MR. FLEGAL: So if you charge $255 or $260, that covers -- I don't know how many of these they have to get, but -- MS. CRUZ: 250 for the permit and 50 for the vehicle. Page 12 August 7, 2001 MS. ARNOLD: So that would be added to the vehicle. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. So each vehicle cost add $5. MS. HU: Do you not want to have the drivers pay for that as the -- MR. FLEGAL: That's the owner's problem. All the county should be interested in is -- you know, let's get our money back, and if the owner wants to charge -- if they hire 47 drivers, however they work with them, let them charge them two bucks, five bucks, whatever. MR. BRIDENTHAL: You can't add $5 to a permit because somebody might license ten people on that same car during that year. MS. ARNOLD: We're saying add it to the decal cost instead of the application. MR. BRIDENTHAL: That's not enough. If you add $5 to the decal and that car has 10 or 15 drivers during the year, you're talking about 15 times -- MS. ARNOLD: Oh, I see what you're saying. MS. CRUZ: We would have to add it as an additional charge. MR. BRIDENTHAL: It would have to be per. MS. CRUZ: Per. MR. CSOGI: I think it's per driver. MR. PALMER: It seems like a logical thing to do is to charge a certain amount of money for each one of these. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We're going to tell the driver it's their responsibility financially. You go down to the county code enforcement and get your picture taken. When you get back, then you can drive for us. MS. CRUZ: How are we going to control that? If we have one driver that comes in to get a decal for a particular vehicle, how do we know that there's multiple drivers for that vehicle -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: There will be. I have 30 drivers for 15 Page 13 August 7, 2001 vehicles. I have weekend drivers; I have night drivers. MS. CRUZ: We don't have control of your drivers. We only have control of the number of vehicles. MS. BAISLEY: This is not going to be attached to a vehicle. This number represents this driver's number. MR. PALMER: Exactly. It's like a driver's license. MS. BAISLEY: It's not a number that represents the vehicle. If you have a problem, then the company's going to have to go back and say that Kelly Campbell was driving this particular vehicle on that day. MS. CRUZ: How are we -- because the county is not going to be able to monitor that? MS. ARNOLD: What you're saying is that now you'll have to have each driver come down and get an ID? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. MS. ARNOLD: There will be a list of each driver, whereas before we didn't have any list. MS. BAISLEY: That's correct. MR. BRIDENTHAL: If there's any enforcement done, like there's supposed to be, you get into the back door of a cab, you don't see the thing, you're grounded. MS. CRUZ: But then I keep asking, how are we going to control the number of drivers? We don't know that. MR. FLEGAL: You don't care how many drivers there are. MS. BAISLEY: You don't care. MR. BRIDENTHAL: You don't care. MS. CRUZ: Yes, we do. If they have to post that, we would have to be concerned with who's driving that particular -- MS. BAISLEY: You don't need to know who's driving what particular vehicle on what day unless there's a problem. And then the company's going to tell you that Kelly Campbell was driving this Page 14 August 7, 2001 particular vehicle on that day. MS. HU: It's the certificate holder's responsibility to make sure that all their drivers have an ID just as well as it's their responsibility to get a background check. And I was going to suggest that since the certificate holder already do a background check that they bring a copy to us with their background check when they come and get their ID. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Isn't the background check on the owner in the ordinance, not the owner? (Sic). MS. CRUZ: There's also an affidavit that the owner signs that they've done -- that their drivers meet the ordinance requirements with no criminal records and all that. MS. HU: If we get a copy of it, I think it would be -- MS. ARNOLD: So that would be like our -- what we're asking for before we take -- just give out an ID to somebody else. So, actually, if you guys have a list of your drivers, that would be another way for us to know who. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Changes from day to day. MS. ARNOLD: Oh, really? The things that are -- there has to be some kind of confirmation that we would get from you-all because anybody could come off the street and say, "I'm a driver for this company," and we need to have something that you guys are saying that, yes, this is my person. MS. BAISLEY: They should have to come down to your office with a piece of paper from the particular companies, like from Yellow Cab. MS. ARNOLD: Okay. So you will be giving them the affidavit or whatever? MS. HU: Plus they would be bringing their background checks with them. Do the background checks that we do have a title with Yellow Cab? Page 15 August 7, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: No. MR. BRIDENTHAL: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What about drivers that drive for more than one company? Do they have to get two? I have some drivers that drive for the Ritz-Carlton and for us. Is one certificate good for no matter what company you work for? MR. FLEGAL: I would think. He takes this and puts this -- because he's not going to drive the same cab every day maybe. MS. BAISLEY: But he's going to be registered at the county here as driving for both companies. MS. HU: Well, I think this is why we made that format, and that's why it's so general. That's why it is only has a name and a number and -- MR. BRIDENTHAL: It doesn't have a company name on it? MR. FLEGAL: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: How would they know what company they're representing? How would the county know that? Do they need to know that on this day he was driving for the Ritz, and the next day he drove for Yellow Cab? MR. PALMER: No. MR. SHRINER: Where does the number come from? Whose number is going to be on the ID? MR. FLEGAL: It's just an ID number that -- MS. ARNOLD: It's just a random number. MR. SHRINER: It's the number of the driver's ID, so anywhere in the county he can operate with that number, so he can drive for any company. So what you're trying to do is get an identification that the county will recognize. It's definitely the driver's expense to take care of this. How you go about it, I don't know. I do have a digital camera that's available before you buy one. MS. ARNOLD: We have a digital. Page 16 August 7, 2001 MR. SHRINER: That's what you're trying to do. You're trying to make an ID that's recognized county-wide to see who's taking the people around in the county; is that it? MR. CSOGI: Yes. MR. SHRINER: That's all I have, and it's going to be their ID number. MS. HU: I think the person would know who they are driving -- or who's driving them around. MR. CSOGI: If they had a complaint is what you mean. MS. HU: Uh-huh. MR. HYDE: That was the whole purpose. The whole purpose was to identify the driver and to give the public a picture of the driver so that they knew who that person was, not that it says John Smith, but it's not really John Smith. So now there's a picture -- there's an ID number, which the county has on all drivers, and it really is arbitrary because if he drives for USA Taxi or Checker or Yellow, he can drive for all of them because he's sanctioned by the county to drive in this county as a per -hire driver. That was the purpose. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's scary verbiage, "sanctioned by the county." MR. HYDE: Well, that's what it is. If you've got background checks and you're giving him one of these, then you've ... CHAIRMAN PEASE: I know. I agree with you. That's what we're doing here. MS. BAISLEY: Well, he's going to bring to the county the affidavit, which is supposed to be signed every year by each of your drivers, and bring that down to the county to get this ID which says he didn't commit any of those crimes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The chair recognizes William Csogi. MR. CSOGI: One more recommendation on this. I don't know Page 17 August 7, 2001 if it's feasible or not, but the ID number, if we can somehow incorporate it over the logo to keep any unscrupulous people from -- MR. FLEGAL: Don't make it hard to read. If you put it over something, it's going to get difficult to read. MR. CSOGI: We could do the logo in light color. MR. FLEGAL: Anytime you superimpose something, the numbers get harder to read. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're saying it has potential to --. MR. CSOGI: I could put some White-out on that and put 002 and you wouldn't know the difference, especially from the backseat. But if it's over the colored logo, you're going to know if it's been whited out. MR. FLEGAL: Well, but -- if this is laminated, I mean-- it's like a driver's license. You can change a driver's license, you know. Open it up, change the picture. I mean, that's a lot of trouble. If a guy's going through all that trouble -- you're not going to have a system you can't beat. MR. CSOGI: It's not a lot of trouble for someone to have a piece of white tape and put it on when they drive. That's all I'm saying. It's not a lot of trouble at all. MS. HU: I'll try to get the emblem as big as the ID. MS. ARNOLD: We could look into the -- currently the county has for it employees a system where they could use our cards, although it's credit-card size, but we can produce those. And it's not something that's reproducible by anybody like Mr. Csogi's saying. Maybe we could look into that system compared to just getting it done on a word processor with a digital type of thing to see what the cost differential is. And that way we could determine what cost is for that ID tag itself. MS. CRUZ: That way you can't alter it. MS. ARNOLD: We can look into that. Page 18 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other questions or comments on the ID? MS. BAISLEY: I think maybe on the back of that we should have some kind of a notation as to if you're not driving for that particular company anymore, you have to go reregister so that the county knows which company you're driving for or not driving at all anymore for any for-hire vehicle, you should have to return that to the county. MR. FLEGAL: every year? MS. BAISLEY: MR. FLEGAL: Well, didn't you say the driver has to certify Right. So why not across the back -- you know, why don't you just put, you know, expires in one year or expires annually or something. MS. BAISLEY: That would be fine. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It should probably be on the front. MR. HYDE: I'd put it right on the front, expiration -- MS. BAISLEY: Something it's not good forever. MS. HU: For one year or annually? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. They have to certify every year, or bring in their affidavit and -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is that a calendar year or -- MS. CRUZ: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Same system. MR. FLEGAL: Then every driver is going to have to get a new one of these. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You guys are going to be busy. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Do you think somebody would rip them off if they were hung over the backseat on a chain like Maria has where they'd hang over the headrest right in front of the people? MR. FLEGAL: I don't know if we said where it has to be yet. I Page 19 August7,2001 don't know if we -- MR. BRIDENTHAL: Well, you were saying clear up on the dash. MR. FLEGAL: Well, I was just talking about where somebody could read it. MR. BRIDENTHAL: She's got a nice little chain. That chain could -- over the headrest. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Actually, we did talk about it. MR. FLEGAL: Well, people getting in and out maybe with luggage or a package or something would tear it off. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We did talk about it. What we said was except for limos, it was going to be in the visor. The limos is what we didn't determine where the position is going to be. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Visors are flat. MR. FLEGAL: I don't know if they are going to be able to read it up there because it's going to be kind of like this (indicating), and you're going to have to get down in the backseat, and you'll have grandma on her knees trying to read the guy's number. MR. PALMER: I've never been in a taxicab in Naples, but when I was driving a taxicab in Washington, D.C., everybody put it up on the visor in front of the driver with rubber bands. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's right. MR. PALMER: It worked fine. MR. BRIDENTHAL: But with -- today's roofs are pretty flat, and the visors sit almost flush instead of like this (indicating). Back in your day-- MR. PALMER: That may be. Another thing they did in Washington, D.C. Is every taxicab had something in the back seat that was put on with little turn screws. MS. ARNOLD: That you could slide in and out. MR. PALMER: And it had -- actually, D.C. Was zoned, and it Page 20 August 7, 2001 had a laminated zone map. So you could look at it and you could calculate you were going through three zones. And also there was a rate chart on it. But I don't know if that's available in cabs. Is that available in cabs in this county? CHAIRMAN PEASE: The dilemma is that the cab companies want to have the same thing applied to the sedan companies, and that is taxes-- that is when you're paying the price of a sedan, you should not have to look at it. MR. PALMER: Well, how about just saying that it must be clearly visible to all passengers, and let the driver decide where he's going to put it. MS. BAISLEY: What if that sits on some kind of holder on top of the dash? MR. PALMER: That would work too. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think that could be a safety hazard because we're adding something to the vehicle now. MR. PALMER: Well, she's talking about something like --just like the magnet or something that just sort of stands there and is semi-affixed. I recommend that we put a clause in here that says -- No. 1, it should be a violation of his ordinance to alter this ID card, and the other thing is -- and just say, "Issued by the county -- the operator must display the operator's identification from the county so that its clearly visible to all passengers." CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's good. MR. PALMER: Period. Let them decide where it's going to go. And people will take their vehicle and decide "I'm going to do this." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other discussion or comment? MS. CRUZ: I'd like to see a copy of a criminal record instead of the affidavit that the certificate signs because we're going to be getting a copy of that affidavit -- Page 21 August 7, 2001 MS. BEASLEY: The affidavit isn't by a certificate holder. If you read the ordinance, the driver is supposed to sign the affidavit every year. That's what my drivers do. They give me an affidavit every year that says they didn't commit one of those crimes. MS. CRUZ: But we don't get a copy of that affidavit -- MS. BEASLEY: That's not the point. No. You don't require it. But it is a requirement of the ordinance that a driver sign an affidavit every year. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So is that a statement rather than the actual report? MS. ARNOLD: That's my question. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is that acceptable? MS. ARNOLD: My understanding is what is supposed to be happening is there's supposed to be an actual check like we do -- MS. BEASLEY: We do that also, but -- MS. ARNOLD: So you, actually, are running a background check for each driver? MR. BRIDENTHAL: They are. MS. CRUZ: Is that done local? MS. BEASLEY: Local. MS. ARNOLD: We should get a copy of that report that's presented plus the affidavit -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Big difference in reports. She's got a point. You go down to the county here and get one just for Collier County. MS. CRUZ: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Versus our insurance company which does nationwide. MS. CRUZ: We do a nationwide. MS. ARNOLD: What does the ordinance say, though? Does it say? Page 22 August 7, 2001 MR. PALMER: Right now we're taking it out. It's on page 14 of my copy. This is the fourth draft in, paragraph B down near the bottom of the page. Right now it's every 12 months, but we're deleting that at somebody's suggestion and just having it done one time. But there's a provision that says that if the driver is convicted of one of these specified crimes, that staff must be notified. MS. ARNOLD: So we're deleting the requirement for them to do a background check? MR. PALMER: No-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: We haven't had any discussion on that. We're still on page 11, so we're -- because we're doing by topic and not by page -- MR. PALMER: addressed on page 14. MS. ARNOLD: MR. PALMER: Yeah. I'm just saying that this issue is Fourteen? This has to do with the question of somebody being found guilty of these specified crimes subsequent to the time of them being effectively certified as a good driver. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't see on this sheet of suggested changes that item on page 14 being taken out. Maybe I'm missing it, but I only see two items: one relating to calibration and one relating to the taxi meter itself. MR. PALMER: Well, I don't remember-- I made changes in this ordinance based on documentation that was given to me, and I don't remember specifically what drove this change. But that's -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Oh, you're talking about your page 14. MR. PALMER: Yeah. I'm talking about -- MR. HYDE: That's on the third draft. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is that different than the original? MR. PALMER: ! don't know. I only have a fourth draft. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Must be. I have the first draft, and it Page 23 August 7, 2001 don't say anything. MR. PALMER: It says -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's the section number? MR. PALMER: It's 142-37, sub B. MR. FLEGAL: Okay, Bryan. If you look on page 7 on your changes -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. MR. FLEGAL: Start at the very bottom, "Every certificate holder should be responsible," and I don't see that 12 months being changed. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't see where anyone from staff or this committee suggested that change, Mr. Palmer. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Every 12 months is crossed off on the draft. MS. ARNOLD: MR. FLEGAL: first Yeah. But we're referring to the checklist. We didn't get that far when we discussed the first draft, so I don't know who brought that up. It's not on this sheet anyway. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, let's deal with that -- do you want to deal with that when we get to it? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. : CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other comments, questions? MS. HU: I wanted to ask about the recheck for the inspection sheets. Are we going to be going 15 days after the inspection was made, or how are we-- we're going to get this inspection sheet after they've corrected everything. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Correct. MS. HU: So it's up to them that they make sure they correct it -- MR. FLEGAL: Right. We told them on the inspection sheet they have to correct it within 15 days, hypothetically. If you've got an inspection sheet dated the 1 st and the corrections were made the Page 24 August 7, 2001 31st, he violated the ordinance because the ordinance says 15 days. I don't know what we'd do to him, but he didn't correct the way he was supposed to. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You can't get a sticker -- you don't get a sticker for your car unless they have that inspection sheet; correct? MR. PALMER: That's right. You can't have -- turn in an inspection sheet that's got some needed corrections that haven't been corrected. MR. FLEGAL: No. What we're saying is -- she's asking about since it says 15 days -- MR. PALMER: Yeah, I understand. MR. FLEGAL: We don't have a mechanism, I don't think, where if you correct in on the 20th day-- MR. PALMER: No. MR. FLEGAL: -- you can do anything about it. MR. PALMER: No. As a matter of fact, it says, "should," and that was to take care of the incidents where, in fact, you can't do it. MR. FLEGAL: The shop could be busy. CHAIRMAN PEASE: In effect -- I think you're onto something here. Wouldn't the correct verbiage be, "Prior to receiving your decal"? MS. ARNOLD: Rather than the 15-day requirement. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Isn't that what it is? They have to get it repaired before -- if they want a decal, the only way to get it is if they have a clean sheet. MR. PALMER: Sure. MS. HU: That would have been a change in the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Well, if that's the case, we certainly -- I don't think that staff wants to accept something that's got three corrections in it and trust that they're going to get it done and come back in 15 days. Page 25 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. BRIDENTHAL: But you still got to put something in there that makes this ordinance worth anything because the ordinance is currently nine years old and has never been enforced. Do you think anybody on the street -- there's two cars that have been running the last year-and-a-half with no stickers. I'm paying big insurances. I'm paying for the phones, yellow pages; this guy's running with no sticker for a year-and-a-half. Nobody's ever done anything with him. MR. PALMER: That's an enforcement problem. That's not an ordinance problem. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Right. But you got to say that somebody's going to enforce it. MS. ARNOLD: Did you ever report that? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Everybody's reported that. He even runs an ad in Sunday's paper. That should be enforcement's responsibility to call those phone numbers and ask for a cab. MS. HU: Which company is this? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Sunset. MS. CRUZ: Sunset has not been in business for almost two years. MR. BRIDENTHAL: He's still running it every day. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Code enforcement has to know about it in order to follow up on it. MS. CRUZ: I thought of this this morning. Every time we meet we hear about all these complaints, and nobody ever calls us. If you guys see these vehicles out there between meetings, why don't you guys call us and let us know. MR. BRIDENTHAL: What did you do about the complaint I sent in yesterday? ' MS. CRUZ: I haven't seen any complaint. Page 26 August 7, 2001 MS. HU: Neither have I. MR. HYDE: That's also off the subject. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. Let's get back on track. Let's go to Naples Taxi, charter or taxi service. What's the discussion there? MR. FLEGAL: I don't know. MS. HU: You were -- I believe that's the company you said was still in business. MS. CRUZ: They are carrying the word "Taxi" on their business name, but they are not providing a taxi service -- a meter- type service. MR. FLEGAL: But I thought Mr. Palmer said that their name was so old before the ordinance was changed that there's really nothing we can do about that. MR. PALMER: The ordinance doesn't have retroactive application. If we want to get that name out of the business, it ought to have some kind of an amortization period put into it that says that preexisting companies such as this one have so much time to comply, because I don't know what expenses are going to be involved in taking that word out. It depends on whether or not he's got -- it's going to cost him $10,000 to change all kinds of documentations, signage, and who knows what. So that might be a good idea to find out. And normally what you do in a case like that to bring something -- put into a noncomplying condition by an ordinance is give the person that's in violation because of the new condition a reasonable time to correct. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I thought we had this discussion during our regular meeting, and we determined this company was grandfathered in. MS. HU: A motion was made. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm not sure how it applies to the Page 27 August 7, 2001 ordinance why we're talking about it. MR. PALMER: I'm saying if, in fact, the county would want to bring noncomplying companies such as this one into compliance, the proper way to do it is to say that people who are thrown into a nonconforming condition have a year, five years, or whatever the time period may be to bring their business into compliance so they don't have to incur extraordinary expenses and kind of do it by attrition. This happens in cases like signs that are up, cost $10,000, and all of a sudden they're illegal because of a change in the sign ordinance. You don't make them take it down in the next week. You give them five years or a certain period of time to essentially amortize the problem. MS. BAISLEY: I think the discussion came up was Naples Taxi was in existence for quite a number of years, but it was recently transferred to another owner last September. And since that time he has not operated the taxicab nor has he ever operated the taxicab, I don't believe. And that's what we were trying to find out, if the new owner has ever operated a taxicab. MR. PALMER: Well, the question -- if it's already grandfathered, the change of ownership doesn't change a thing. The fact is he was either grandfathered or he wasn't. Nothing in this ordinance says that noncomplying conditions must be corrected upon the transfer of ownership of the company. Now, ordinances can say that, but there's nothing in the ordinance that says or implies that. MR. FLEGAL: Why don't we put that in, and then this problem will go away within a year if he sells it or the next time he sells it. MR. PALMER: We can put something like that in the ordinance. MS. HU: How do we know when they-- MR. HYDE: Well, the certificate holder would have to change, Page 28 August 7, 2001 so, therefore, you'd have to get a background check, and he'd have to go through the same procedure. CHAIRMAN PEASE: He did that. MR. PALMER: And the ordinance states if there's going to be a transfer of ownership -- I think it -- actually, it talks about what constitutes it, the county's got to be notified; right? MS. CRUZ: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All he needs to do to be in compliance, if I'm not mistaken then, is to go get one taxi with a meter, right, and then he's in compliance? MS. HU: Right. I called Naples Taxi, actually, and I spoke to Midge. She said they don't have metered taxis, per se, but they do have Lincoln Town Cars that can charge 3.75 per mile, but they don't have any metered cars. MR. PALMER: Well, that's a violation of the ordinance. You cannot take that kind of a vehicle and effectively operate it as the taxicab. You either operate under charter rates or you don't. MR. BRIDENTHAL: There are no charter rates. MS. BAISLEY: We just approved somebody they could charge by the mile. MS. HU: We approved somebody in the last meeting, which her rates were per mile. MR. PALMER: On what kind of a -- MS. HU: It was a charter service, and she was charging per mile. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They were higher than the taxi rate, correct, if I remember right? MR. SHRINER: Yeah. They were two dollars a mile. They were lower than taxi rate. That's what brought it up, but since there's no -- in the ordinance nothing that says there has to be a rate on a sedan, I thought it was kind of rolled over. I don't think you made Page 29 August 7, 2001 any real official ruling on it. I think it was just -- she didn't need to furnish you with the fact that she was going to charge so much a mile because she was a chartered car. I'm not trying to be complicated, but I think that part of it falls out of this particular discussion. This Naples Taxi I think continues to do business a couple weeks at a time. You can't have your phone service -- yeah -- and I don't think this company is implying that that should be grandfathered in. That's my outside opinion. MS. ARNOLD: They were never explained to, but now they are operating as the -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let's go back to the broader issue, which is do we want -- on the ordinance -- do we want to address those that are grandfathered in under the taxi doing charter work, which I would assume be the ones down in Marco and Naples Taxi by giving them so many years to comply, or do we want to leave them grandfathered in? What's a consensus of the committee without taking any votes? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Marco's are both "taxi" in the name, too, aren't they? MS. BAISLEY: And Maxi Taxi has that in their name also. They don't have a taxi. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Classic Taxi, A1 Cab. MS. HU: There were four taxis that have that in their name. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Csogi. MR. CSOGI: I think if it changes hands, it kind of gets around to what Mr. Palmer was saying. If somebody is selling the business, they are going to recoup the costs that they spent out having that business for the prior year. They are going to recoup the cost if they have a $20,000 sign in selling the business. So if it changes hands, the new person should be put on notice, "Hey, you have to go back to the county and be a taxi or a service." MR. PALMER: And take a hypothetical case, worst-case Page 30 August 7, 2001 scenario. Let's assume I've got a business, and I'm a nonconforming business of the type you just described. And I'm going to sell the business, and it's going to cost my buyer an additional $10,000 to bring this nonconforming thing. That, in effect, is going to deduct $10,000 from the value to the buyer. MR. CSOGI: Right. MR. PALMER: And the question is, do you want to do that? It's a question of policy. I don't have the slightest idea what sort of expenses would be incurred in correcting these kinds of problems by the company. I think the county -- my suggestion is the county make some effort to find out whether or not this is serious expense or whether or not this is minimal. I don't know. MR. CSOGI: The expenses are redoing the advertising on the cabs and/or the phone book. You don't really advertise anywhere else, do you? MR. HYDE: No. But it's in your legal papers as well. If it's in your corporate name and your tax form, there could be a lot of things that you have to change out. MR. FLEGAL: But that's not expensive. MR. CSOGI: Corporation's $300 -- MS. BAISLEY: But if you're selling your business to somebody else, they have expenses in redoing those things anyway so... MR. HYDE: Well, as you're doing it at the actual time of sale, I don't see where that should be that big of an issue. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So do you want to grandfather in the four, and any future ones are dealt with at the time of sale or approval for the -- MR. CSOGI: I think they all should be at the time sale -- have to go to the new bylaws. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm going back to Maxi Taxi who's been operating this way for how many years? Ten? Page 31 August 7, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: More than that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Fifteen years with "taxi" in their name, and they, in effect, are a charter company? MR. CSOGI: I think it's deceiving, myself. I really do. MS. BAISLEY: That's why it was put in the ordinance in the first place is because it's deceiving, that you couldn't have that in your name unless you operate that-- MR. FLEGAL: Let me ask Mr. Palmer a question. If we ask them to change, these companies that have been in existence for a long period of time -- MR. PALMER: Uh-huh. MR. FLEGAL: -- because we haven't done anything about it over the last 10 or 15 years, we just let it ride, you, in essence, have waived your right to ask them to change. MR. PALMER: No. That's not true. If you want to put that condition in the ordinance, you can do it. MR. FLEGAL: Well, I haven't gotten that far yet. MR. PALMER: Oh, okay. MR. FLEGAL: Because we haven't done anything to them today, I would find it very difficult for code enforcement to go to them and say, "You're not in compliance with the current ordinance because you're a charter service and not the taxi. Change the name on your cab." I don't think that's going to fly if you waltz them into court. MR. PALMER: No. Because that's an issue of retroactive application of the ordinance. MR. FLEGAL: Right. MR. PALMER: But that would not preclude the county from putting a provision in the ordinance that gives people a period of time or a triggering event such as the sale of the business would require this nonconforming matter to be brought into compliance. Page 32 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I think that's what should be done and that may take another who knows until they sell the business, but you would then solve these four that are laying out there. Whenever they do some kind of a sale, transfer, or whatever, they are going to have to come into compliance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Why does it matter whether they are a taxi or charter, just out of curiosity? MR. FLEGAL: I'm kind of like Mr. Csogi. I think it's misleading to see somebody running around town. with the word "taxi" on their vehicle and -- and they are actually a charter service. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But why does it matter? Why do we have two different distinctions anyway? MR. PALMER: It could matter if it's a bait-and-switch tactic. If somebody calls and says they want a taxicab, they can say we're not a taxicab, but we can give you a good deal on a charter. That's a form of a bait and switch. I don't know whether it's of any concern, but that's the potentiality. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That makes the switch. MS. CRUZ: What does the word "taxi" mean in general? MR. PALMER: A taxi is usually an on-call taxi service that can be instantly contracted for one trip. MS. CRUZ: "Taxi" means providing transportation service? MR. PALMER: Transportation on basically a one-trip basis basically on very short notice or even a flag down. MS. CRUZ: So mainly when people put the word "taxi" on their business name, they are trying to advertise or give or provide a transportation service. Whether they have the meter or not, they're doing the same purpose; right? MR. PALMER: Well, the thing about it is this ordinance -- and I take this case away for a moment -- the ordinance does not allow a charter service business to effectively transport people in the same Page 33 August 7, 2001 manner as a taxicab. And there's something in the ordinance that, if it hasn't been taken out, that says you can't reduce your rates, separate your rates, cut your rates in half, and so forth, to effectively operate a charter service as if it were a taxicab. I can't find it offhand, but it's in the ordinance. MR. CSOGI: It's saying here, taxicab not more than eight passengers, and it's controlled by the rider, which is a little bit different, and it has a top light, which is different from a charter. MS. CRUZ: Taxicab, the word "taxi." MR. FLEGAL: Okay. I don't think we do it a lot in this town, but in big cities, you're standing on a street comer and you see a taxi. You can step out and wave it down. I don't know if we do that on Fifth Avenue. But if this guy is driving down the street and it says "taxi" on the side of his vehicle, and I wave him down and all of a sudden he's a charter service, I've been mislead. MR. CSOGI: Right. MR. FLEGAL: It's not a taxi. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Could cost you $20 for a $10 trip. MR. FLEGAL: He could say jump in, and could say to take me to the Registry, and I get up there and they guy says, "Okay, that's $35." "Holy hell, to go from there to there?" MR. BRIDENTHAL: If it's a charter car, it won't say taxi on the side. MR. FLEGAL: Well, that's what we're saying. "taxi" written on it, and we'd like to get rid of that. MR. SHRINER: They are grandfathered in. These have MR. CSOGI: You should have been on Fifth Avenue Friday night. There was a limo there outside of Annabelle's, and he wrote "taxicab" in big letters on pieces of white paper, and he stuck them in Page 34 August 7,2001 all his windows. MR. FLEGAL: Oh, you're kidding. MR. CSOGI: I'm not. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is that the owner of the limo that we just approved for the restaurant.'? MR. CSOGI: No, no, no, no. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Checker has a whole bunch of those running with cardboard taxi signs in them, and it's absolutely illegal. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Ekna, I hope you're taking notes. MS. HU: Okay. I saw a Yellow Cab the day before yesterday without a top light, and it had letters on the side doors. MS. BEASLEY: That probably was one that wasn't put in service yet. MS. HU: It was a particular vehicle which we inspected in the taxi inspections. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Take notes. And let's get back to the ordinance here. Is it the consensus of the committee that they'd like to see the ordinance read "X" number of years, or when those four companies elect to sell that it will be brought under compliance? What's the verbiage you'd like to see Mr. Palmer write? MS. BAISLEY: Can't we have both? MR. PALMER: Whichever occurs first? Yeah, you can do that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Will it go five years? MR. FLEGAL: Oh, I think that's way too long. I don't think it's that expensive, personally. MR. CSOGI: I don't either. MR. HYDE: You should do it when you actually do your renewal. MS. CRUZ: What effect is it going to have on the customers. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Maxi Taxi has a base of customers -- MS. CRUZ: If I'm always using Naples Taxi, and they change Page 35 August 7, 2001 their name, and I look it up and call information, they're not going to have Naples Taxi anymore. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Unless they buy a taxi and put it in service. MS. BAISLEY: They should have done it in the first place. MR. CSOGI: Right. And giving them a few years will give them time to notify their customers. MR. HYDE: I'd give them at least two years. MS. BAISLEY: In a year's time, they should be able to notify their customers and put an ad in the paper that says, "Our name is changing." MS. CRUZ: Don't forget that the committee made the mistake and granted them the license under that name knowing that he didn't have any meters. MS. BAISLEY: Well, I think he came here -- if you go back in your records and look -- with a picture of a taxicab, which he never put into service. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's one, but not Maxi and not A-Okay and all the others, Classic. I think one year's too short. If five's too long, maybe we could go three. MR. BRIDENTHAL: What are you going to put in their names? Are you going to put Classic Cars? That sounds like a car dealer. Classic Charter? MS. BAISLEY: Classic Transportation? CHAIRMAN PEASE: If he puts a top light on one vehicle and gets his charter, they'd also have a charter permit as well. Eric, what do you think on length? MR. HYDE: Well, the issue is if I'm calling it a taxi, and I'm not a taxi, if it walks like a duck, and it talks like duck, and it's got a water-tight butt, it's a duck, okay? If it's not a taxi, then you're not a taxi, so take it out, and you've got two years to figure out what you Page 36 August 7,2001 want to do. If you want to be a transportation or charter service, then get a charter license. MR. BRIDENTHAL: They really don't do local service. They call us or some of the other ones for cabs. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Two years from Eric. Bill? MR. CSOGI: Two. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Pat? MS. BAISLEY: Two would be fine. MR. FLEGAL: Two. MS. ARNOLD: So they could change it to "Naples Cab" but not "Taxi." MS. HU: I believe the ordinance also regulates "cab." MS. BAISLEY: I don't think that's right either. MR. BRIDENTHAL: "taxi" and "cab" are the same thing. MS. HU: "taxi" and "cab" is what's listed in the ordinance. MR. PALMER: The word cab is misleading to me. I don't distinguish between a taxi -- a taxicab and a cab. They are not charter-service vehicles. Charter-service vehicles are sort of upscale, usually done on sort of a more formal contract basis, and it's usually a high-class vehicle. It's a different thing. MS. ARNOLD: It does seem odd, though, that we would require them to change their name if we were going to allow them to keep their name provided they have one taxicab. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MS. ARNOLD: As long as they are operating as a charter company, they don't have the names on their vehicles, and it's just their company name. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They need to do what Pat did. Pat, you have a taxi and a charter; right? MS. BAISLEY: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's what they need to do. If they Page 37 August 7, 2001 want to keep the name, they need to have one with a top light. They only need one to be in compliance. We're not saying they need to change their name. They just have to be in compliance. MS. ARNOLD: But that's my point, though. What harm is it doing to the community if they are called Naples Taxi and they have one taxicab, but the majority of their vehicles are running as a charter? MS. BAISLEY: But their vehicles aren't really running as charter-service vehicles, because when she called up there they said they were charging 3.75 a mile. MS. ARNOLD' Well, that's what we should be addressing rather than what they call themselves. Do you know what I'm saying? If what your concern is that they're running it like the taxicab, but they don't have a meter and they don't have a top light, then we should be addressing that rather than what they call themselves, shouldn't we? MR. HYDE' I think it's, actually, both. If again -- if you're going to go back and say, "I'm going to operate one vehicle as a taxicab company," well, then that's fine, and you've got four other ones that are charter-service companies -- MS. ARNOLD: But the name is still the same. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Flegal. MR. FLEGAL: Let's get down to who does it harm. The ordinance as written as issued states, (as read): "no initial certificate shall be issued to any business that has taxi or taxicab in its name unless it will be immediately providing taxi service." Naples Taxi does not provide taxi service. Get that damn word out of your name, period. MS. ARNOLD: I know what the ordinance says, but my point is that we're suggesting that he can go ahead and get a taxicab, and get one taxicab, and operate that one taxicab, and the balance would Page 38 August 7, 2001 be fine, and call the charter service the same exact name. CHAIRMAN PEASE: No. I think that's what needs to be in the ordinance is if they are going to run as a charter, they need to have a separate name. Yellow Cab has Yellow Cab, and on the taxi they have Airport Connection on the charter. MS. ARNOLD: Okay. That's what we should be saying. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Right. I agree with you, Michelle. MR. FLEGAL: So right now his name is illegal. Get rid of it. Jesus. CHAIRMAN PEASE: He needs to do some things to get into compliance. MR. FLEGAL: English is English. MS. CRUZ: But we issued the certificate. MR. FLEGAL: I understand that, and the only way we can correct it now is to have Mr. Palmer put something in because we let it lay for 20 years. MS. CRUZ: I don't think it's fair with the impact of the cost and everything that we caused this individual we want to now make him now change his name because we found a discrepancy -- MR. PALMER: Well, that's the question. People are saying it's minimal cost. I think we ought to find out. MS. CRUZ: I don't think it's minimal cost. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We're not requiring him to change the name. We're telling him he has to be in compliance. The alternative for him is put his cars with meters on them. He can do that. He can change his name. He can start a charter company, move all his fleet to the charter company except one that's a taxi, and keep the name. He's got a lot of options, not just change his name. MS. ARNOLD: But my only point for raising that question is that do we really want them to have separate types of names, like Page 39 August 7, 2001 you're doing. For your charter service, you have your charter name, and for your taxi service, you have a taxi name. Is that really what we want, and if so, that's what we should be including in the ordinance, not worry about what Naples Taxi is calling themselves. MS. BAISLEY: Most people are not doing that though -- don't have two different names. MS. ARNOLD: But does the ordinance require that? No, it doesn't. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does Graham Transportation do both? MS. BAISLEY: They don't have two different names, I don't think. MS. CRUZ: Yes, they do. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do they do charter and taxi? MS. HU: Yes, they do. MS. CRUZ: They have Graham Transportation and Corporate Cab. MR. SHRINER: He was on a track that I was looking at before, and if it's a taxi company and you call a taxi company and then the dispatcher decides that they are going to use one of their limo cars -- MR. HYDE: That's the bait and switch. MR. SHRINER: It is, but it's not addressed in the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Yes, it is addressed. I know it may happen all the time, but it's addressed in the ordinance. MR. SHRINER: But the color of the car, if it's purple, if it's a taxi -- you're not supposed to make your sedan look like a taxi. You're not supposed to have a rate like a taxi. So I don't believe and take it very ambiguously, please, that you should be able to call to a taxi company and end up with a limo. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't know if I agree with that because if the guest -- if they are denied the opportunity to get a cab and say, "you have to take something else," that's wrong. That's bait and Page 40 August 7, 2001 switch. But if they call Yellow Cab and they say, "You know, maybe I'd like instead of a taxi, I'd like a sedan," she should have the right to say, "Yes, we have a sedan." It's one central phone system. MR. SHRINER: You have your limo, and this is whoever, but if you're asking for the taxis to be separate from the sedans and the limos, so if someone calls in expecting to get a taxi, I think they should get a taxi with a meter. I'm addressing it more or less from a standpoint that you have a lot of gypsy operations that there will be a taxi company, and then you have these sedans that are getting calls. They have fixed radios in the sedans. And that's probably not in the ordinance either. They have a dispatcher here and a radio here that lets them operate right with the taxi company. I mean, they are right in there with the taxi company, and a cell phone which they operate under Palmer's Limo Service. So they operate that, and when the people get in their cars for XYZ Company, they say, "I'm really Mr. Palmer and here's my card. Call me next time after you call them." And in your ordinance, which you're writing for the next five to ten years, going from the way it's been for the last 10 or 20 years, you're going into being a more -- it's a bigger city, a bigger community. You have a big responsibility. It's on you to do this and have it all in there. But like I said again, I don't mind, but it just doesn't seem like whether you have two different numbers or how you do it -- I don't know how it's going to be done, but I just think you have a taxi company here and you have a little here, and you have cars that are going to be parked in the same lot, but you should distinguish there. And the dispatcher for the taxi shouldn't be dispatching limos on call. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I disagree with you on that part because with economies of scale, you've got one radio system. To say that Pat or any other company has to have two separate radio Page 41 August 7, 2001 systems, I disagree with that. MR. PALMER: I do too. But any dispatcher knows the difference between a taxicab and a charter-service vehicle. And when somebody calls up and gets a taxicab, under this presently existing ordinance, they are not allowed to have a charter vehicle run at charter company rates. MR. BRIDENTHAL: But they do. MR. PALMER: I know they do. That's an enforcement problem. Let me read this sentence that's in the ordinance now (as read)' "no charter-service vehicle operator should 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." Now, that's so you don't have this idea about somebody calling up and saying, "Why don't we give you a charter vehicle?" The idea is here we're separating -- and it's not a problem now -- but in some counties -- and we reserve the right to do it -- is you have a certain limited number of taxicabs, and you don't have a certain limited number of taxicabs if the charter-service vehicles can start directly competing with taxicab companies at taxicab rates. And the presently existing ordinance does allow that, and whether or not you want to continue that policy is an issue, but people would say, "Well, sure I'd like to get a "-- the customer says, "I'd like to get a nice vehicle at taxicab rates," however, the ordinance does not allow that kind of direct competition. MR. BRIDENTHAL: An ex-Checker driver told me the other day that they carry a mileage chart for taxicab, and they punch their trip meter, and they charge the cab rate, and it's not legal. MR. PALMER: No. It's an enforcement problem. And I'm surprised about this vehicle getting a 3.75 rate for a charter service. That is starting to get into taxicab rates. Page 42 August 7, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: she could do that. MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: But at the last meeting we told that woman that Well, that's fine. Well, that's okay. We can go back and say, "Sorry, we made an error. CHAIRMAN PEASE: can't be on a per-mile basis MR. BRIDENTHAL: that's the way it should be? CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're not allowed to do that.". What we can say is that the charter rates · They have to be per trip or a -- Do you think that's right? Do you think That's the way I price mine. I price mine on a per trip. It's ninety bucks in a sedan from blah to blah. MR. PALMER: Well, I think this sentence I just read covers it, but it could be clarified. It says, basically, you've got charter rates, and if you're going to have charter rates, you must charge charter rates. You can't say, "Well, in this case, I'll treat myself as a taxicab, and I'll charge you rates as if I were a taxicab, even though my vehicle is a charter vehicle." That is presently prohibited in the ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And they are in compliance with that because the current rate is two-tenths is blah. Mr. Flegal, you've got us out of jams before. Can you get us out of this bog? How do we get out of this bog? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I hear a lot of discussion about, you know, people in the business, and it's going to cost them money. Look, we haven't enforced this ordinance. That's not this committee's problem. It's an enforcement problem, but we want to correct it. I think what you do is put in the ordinance now that within a two-year period you're going to be in compliance, period. If that costs you money, tough. This city is growing at such a rate I don't see it as a big problem for somebody to invest some money to change their name and meet the ordinance. Page 43 August 7, 2001 Why do you want to keep changing the laws for the businessman? You're eventually going to do away with all the laws, and you're going to live in a county where anybody can do whatever the heck they want. That's not what it's all about. There's a law; live with it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. Let's give them two years to be in compliance because there's multiple ways to come in compliance. Let's go ahead and do that, and let's take a five-minute break, and we'll get on to the pages. (A break was taken.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: We'll go to the actual pages. Lord help me opening this can of worms up one more time, but there was some discussion that took place during the break. Does anybody have any comments for the record? If you could please keep this to five minutes, that would be a big plus. MS. HU: I have a big question. I've gotten a couple of complaints from various companies, and I can adjust them, but how are the companies themselves -- how are they going to be affected ? MR. HYDE: Such as? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Who are you talking about? MS. HU: Any complaint in general. MS. CRUZ: You mean what kind of enforcement action are we-- MS. HU: Right. What are we doing about it? I understand -- now that we're going to be putting these IDs in there, and they are going to have the number, and they are going to be calling, and they are going to be giving me complaints. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, what do you normally do when you have a complaint? MS. HU: We adjust it. We send a letter to the company and let them know what the complaint or the issue was. Page 44 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Nothing will change on that. MR. PALMER: Well, it will change with a responsible company. A responsible company does not want drivers who were antagonizing their passengers or otherwise precipitating complaints. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's not what I meant. I meant her procedure. The procedure she's doing now will not change. MR. PALMER: That won't change, no. MR. FLEGAL: You're talking about enforcing this? MS. HU: Right. What if a company has ten complaints? Does it just go on file? MS. CRUZ: What's she trying to say that we have no teeth. MR. PALMER: We do. MR. FLEGAL: Code enforcement -- unfortunately, I happen to be on the Code Enforcement Board. You enforce all other ordinances. You write your little tickets or you bring them to the Code Enforcement Board. This is an ordinance. Enforce it. What's the problem? This is not this committee's problem. This code enforcement department should be enforcing ordinance s; that they do or don't is not my problem either. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Nobody gives anybody any time to do it. MR. FLEGAL: Then they need to ask for more people. MS. CRUZ: This ordinance does not give us any teeth to enforce. None whatsoever. It doesn't even give us the authority to write a notice of violation. MR. PALMER: Oh, yes, it does. As a matter of fact, it gives you the authority to suspend or even revoke certificates. MS. HU: Per the committee. MR. PALMER: Well, if we want to have the Code Enforcement Board to have concurrent jurisdiction over the enforcement of the ordinance, we'll just put it in here and say, "The ordinance can be enforced by the PVAC or the Code Enforcement Board." Page 45 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: Is that what all ordinances say? MR. PALMER: No. Most ordinances that I write incorporate what's called Section 1-6 of the county code, which is in Chapter 1, which has a whole laundry list of various forums which may enforce ordinances. Right now I do believe this ordinance is limited to PVAC, but it could be expanded to any number of forums including, if necessary, the possibility of the county attorney's office bring a lawsuit in court to get injunctions and so forth. So we can address that issue? MR. CSOGI: I have a question for Maria. What if they don't have a certificate to operate? So they write them up -- MS. CRUZ: What do we do ? MR. CSOGI: What do they do? MR. PALMER: Certificate to operate, you can go to court and have an injunction issued by a judge to cease the activity. It's a violation of this ordinance to operate a vehicle if you don't have -- it's just people -- we just don't have jurisdiction over people who have certificates. We have jurisdiction over people who are doing things without certificates that require certificates. MR. CSOGI: But what step does Maria take? She writes them a letter. If they don't conform, then it has to go in front of code enforcement, and they take it from there? MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: existing ordinance. MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: Well, let me ask a question -- That's one way to do it. -- on page -- the current ordinance, page 37, the I don't have -- what section is it? It says Section 142-60. Okay. Tell me what that means. Section 1-6 of the ordinance is a section that is Page 46 August 7, 2001 a laundry list of many forums and many enforcement actions which have been incorporated by reference into this ordinance. MR. FLEGAL: So this ordinance is enforceable. MR. PALMER: Yes. As a matter of fact, I probably put that in here five years ago because it's the kind of thing that I put in the ordinances that I write. That, in fact, allows a matter to be brought in court as a misdemeanor. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Ekna, on the agenda -- for I'd like for it to have an update section on complaints every quarter where it's brought to us because we, as a committee, we don't hear the complaints and what you're doing about it. Here's the complaints received in the last 90 since we've met last, and here's what we've done, and it will be on the record. Mr. Palmer will be available if we need to go further steps. MS. HU: I would like to give the example of Hummer Ride. We couldn't do anything before we met with the committee, and we as code enforcement could not take any steps until we went to the quarterly meeting. And this is why I believe it's taking -- MR. PALMER: Now, you said code enforcement. Is that what you meant, code enforcement, or did you mean enforcing this code? Code Enforcement Board or enforcing this code? MS. HU: Code enforcement. MR. FLEGAL: Department to enforce the ordinance they say. MS. HU: Right. Enforcing the ordinance. MR. PALMER: Who can't? MR. FLEGAL: They're saying that the code enforcement department can't enforce this ordinance. MS. HU: Right. Because we need to wait for a motion from the committee -- MS. CRUZ: Right. If you go back to page 32 of the existing ordinance. Page 47 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I'm still back to this 1 through 6. Does that give them authority, Tom? MR. PALMER: Certainly, I don't know -- you're saying that your staff cannot take any enforcement action unless it's formally approved by this board? MS. HU: Right. MR. PALMER: Does its say that in this ordinance? MS. CRUZ: Yes, it does. MR. PALMER: Where? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Read that. MS. CRUZ: Page 32. MR. PALMER: Which section? MS. CRUZ: Once we receive a sworn complaint form -- that's another thing. A lot of the complaints are not coming in because a lot of people do not want to give their names. MR. PALMER: What section is it? MR. CSOGI: 142-58. MR. BRIDENTHAL: I don't want to chase a notary all over the country again. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That cuts down on the riff-raff. MS. BAISLEY: Competitors calling in. MR. BRIDENTHAL: I don't want to chase over to the bank. You still have to sign it. MR. FLEGAL: I guess my problem is, this suspension or revocation is one thing. I don't understand that we have an ordinance. That's why I asked Tom about Section 1 through 6 that can't be enforced other than by a committee. I find that a little difficult to accept. So that's why I'm interested in No. 1 through 6. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Maria, what's the section you're citing that says that? MS. CRUZ: 142-58, page 32. It says, (as read): "a person that a Page 48 August 7, 2001 certificate holder has violated this article shall submit a sworn complaint to the county administrator or his designee." And then it goes on and then it says, (as read): "upon submission of the sworn complaint, the county administrator shall conduct a preliminary investigation and determine whether the complaint submitted warrants the finding of formal charges. "and then it goes on and it says (as read): "if the charges are warranted, the county administrator shall file the complaint with the chairman of the PVAC." MR. CSOGI: It also says in Mr. Palmer's fourth edition, what Mr. Palmer's adding -- MS. CRUZ: I'm reading the one that is -- MR. CSOGI: I know, but I think we are alluding to that, though, 142 -58, paragraph C in the fourth draft, it says (as read): "Upon submission of a sworn complaint or upon knowledge, however obtained," because I know up to now it says that. MS. CRUZ: But what she's saying is that the only way that we can enforce or the only action we can take right now is to go through the committee. Normally, with all the other ordinances, it allows us - - it authorizes us to write a notice of violation and either take them before the Code Enforcement Board where the board will find them in violation and start fining. MR. PALMER: But there is a provision in here about some summary action if the matter involves safety, public safety. There's an expedited procedure, I believe. I can't find it offhand. Let's assume we find that the vehicle is dangerous. We don't go through all these steps. There's something in here about summary action. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Flegal, what's the difference between the committee you chair teeth-wise and this committee? MR. FLEGAL: I'm the quasi-judicial. I can issue an order, and it's just like a judge, and if you don't do it, you're in big trouble. Page 49 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's the procedure? They get cited by code enforcement, and they have to report before you? MR. FLEGAL: They get cited, and then code enforcement gives them so long to fix it, and that may be who knows how long. And eventually if they don't code enforcement brings it to the board. We hear both sides just like a judge does, and we make a determination that you did violate something, and then we decide how long you're going to have to correct it, and if you don't correct it, we're going to fine you. And if you still don't correct it after we filed all the paperwork in court, we can ask the county attorney to foreclose on your property provided it's not homestead. CHAIRMAN PEASE: How much of what you do there would have benefit for this committee? MR. FLEGAL: It's no difference. It's an ordinance. If they don't do something, I would assume they would go through the same procedure. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, is it spelled out? MR. PALMER: Well, we could put in -- it may well be that the code enforcement ordinance, which I believe don't have the working knowledge of, already allows the Code Enforcement Board to have jurisdiction over these kinds of violations. Depends on the scope of the code enforcement ordinance, and it may already apply. The fact of the matter is the purpose of a Code Enforcement Board is to correct violations, not to fine people. And the purpose of all these ordinances is to correct a problem, not to fine people. And there's a lot of-- this ordinance is a workable document to have responsible companies correct things. And if they don't correct them -- and, invariably, matters that get before the Code Enforcement Board for a hearing on the merits have unreasonable respondents. Reasonable people do what they are supposed to do. Only people that ought to be living in log cabins in North Dakota are the Page 50 August 7, 2001 people that get before the Code Enforcement Board. And I think we are going to find that here to. MR. FLEGAL: Back to your -- excuse me a second. I found I have a copy of this Section 1 through 6 that's referenced in the current ordinance, which is called "General Penalty, Continuing Violations," and it starts out by saying in this section the phrase (as read): "Violation of this code means any of the following," and the first one says (as read): "an offense or misdemeanor by ordinance or by rule or regulation authorized by the ordinance." I think they already have the teeth. They just need to enforce it. I mean, it goes on. MR. PALMER: Yes. And also there's the provision of the scope of the Code Enforcement Board, which I don't have familiar knowledge, but it's probably pretty broad. It tells how much they can penalize them up to MR. FLEGAL: $500 and-- MR. PALMER: broad. MR. FLEGAL: That is an omnibus provision that's really Well, what they have now, I mean, they're current, quote, ticketing system that you use the certificate has printed right on there that you can have a $500 violation. I know; I've seen them. MR. PALMER: Another thing is about this idea about three months. Any time staff believes that there is a problem that is not summarily correctable -- and there is a provision in here added, that allows for summary suspension of certificates for specified reasons -- you can always call an emergency meeting of this board and handle a matter and take ten minutes and authorize some sort of direct action, that we don't have to wait three months. MR. BRIDENTHAL: What do you do when they don't have a certificate? Page 51 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: That still would qualify under-- MR. BRIDENTHAL: Would that come under sheriff?. MR. PALMER: No. You can direct the board to take whatever action is permissible, under whatever forum, to stop this activity. Now, that may mean in a particular case the county attorney's got to go to court and ask the court to get an injunction. But this idea about waiting three months is not a fact. We can always have a special meeting of this board to correct a problem that's not correctable summarily. CHAIRMAN PEASE: If the people that did the building codes did the transportation code violations, would enforcement step up? MR. FLEGAL: Excuse me? You lost me. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Would the people that do the building code (overlapping conversation) people, if the people who are going out to the sites and looking at the trash that's on the yards, if they were also the ones responsible for the transportation -- MR. FLEGAL: They are. MR. PALMER: That's code enforcement officers. MR. FLEGAL: They are. MR. BRIDENTHAL: They're not trained like these two girls. They don't know the rules. Your other outside people don't know. MS. BAISLEY: They don't have a clue. MS. CRUZ: The thing is that -- what you're telling us, Tom, is that we can go ahead and when we get a complaint, number one, it's got to be a sworn complaint, signed -- MR. PALMER: Well, it does now, but we're modifying that. MS. CRUZ: We could go out there and once we found a violation or someone committing a violation, whether it's the certificate holder or a driver -- MR. PALMER: Or somebody that's operating outside of the scope of any certificate -- Page 52 August 7, 2001 MS. CRUZ: Can we issue them a notice of violation? MR. PALMER: This board? MS. CRUZ: No. We, code enforcement under this ordinance. MR. PALMER: I'll have to take a look at 1-6. I take it there's two applicable sections. 1-6 may do the job. I don't know if it does offhand, or the code enforcement ordinance itself may have a basket wide enough to cover this ordinance. MR. BRIDENTHAL: They don't have to have a sworn complaint if they see the violation, do they? MR. PALMER: Well, no. Any code enforcement officer can cite a citation if he sees a violation. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Yeah. But the rest of them don't know anything about the rules. If they could get Maria out -- MR. FLEGAL: Well, they can be trained. MS. CRUZ: What I'm trying to get cleared up here is what options do we have, what enforcement actions can we apply -- MR PALMER: Well, let me see what 1-6 says. If that solves the problem or-- MS. CRUZ: It's never been cleared up for us. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think what they're asking for is this is the steps. Step A is you're going to get a written notice; Step B is you're going to have "X" number of days to comply; and Step C, if you don't comply, this is going to happen. MR. PALMER: That's right. MS. CRUZ: That's not what it's saying under -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: But that's what you'd like to have. MS. CRUZ: Yes. That's what we do with all the other ordinances. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Second complaint or third complaint you can tow the car. MR. FLEGAL: No. They are not allowed to do that kind of Page 53 August 7, 2001 stuff. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Why not? MR. FLEGAL: Probably because it's not written. They're allowed to issue these citations. MS. CRUZ: We don't tow vehicles. MR. FLEGAL: Then they would have to come to the Code Enforcement Board and ask us. If everybody agreed on the board, we could issue an order and say, "We're directing the county to go tow the car." We do that. We've had them fill in swimming pools, tear down houses, do all kinds of stuff. That's just the way it is. MS. CRUZ: Or another thing is that if they come before the board, the Code Enforcement Board and they are in compliance at that time, the board can adjudicate them. And when they repeat the violation again, then a fine would automatically kick in. MR. PALMER: 1-6 does not grant jurisdiction of the Code Enforcement Board, therefore, we have to look at the Code Enforcement Board ordinance to see what it applies to. Does it give the code enforcement department MR. FLEGAL: the right to go out? MR. PALMER: that you just asked. 1-6 is silent on that -- to answer that question CHAIRMAN PEASE: So if you could take a look, Mr. Palmer -- we haven't gotten to that section necessarily, the enforcement part of the ordinance, but if you could prelook at steps that could be taken so they are comparable to -- MR. PALMER: Or we just add in here, "This ordinance may be enforced by the PVAC and/or the Code Enforcement Board." CHAIRMAN PEASE: But also steps of what happens, the chronological steps of what happens if you continue to stay in noncompliance. That's what they are saying they would like to see added to the ordinance. Page 54 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I think one of the problems is that all of a sudden we have words mixed up. The Code Enforcement Board should be left out of this. We're worried about the code enforcement department, which is a county department that enforces ordinances. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But I'm using your board -- MR. FLEGAL: I think we're getting mixed up. Mr. Palmer just said that it could be done by such and such and the board. The board doesn't do anything. We have no power until it's brought before us by the department. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's what this committee needs. This committee needs the same thing that your board does. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. But your basic problem, if I understand what Maria's saying, they feel that they don't have any power -- MS. CRUZ: Right. MR. FLEGAL: -- to currently go out and enforce this ordinance. MS. CRUZ: Right. MR. FLEGAL: That's why you have to separate department and board. Forget board. Stick to department. She's saying she was no authority for any of her investigators to go out and investigate and cite somebody for violating the transportation ordinance. MS. CRUZ: We can investigate, but if we find a violation, we have to take it before you guys. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Mr. Palmer, can you take a look at the enforcement and the language? MR. PALMER: We've already done that. MS. HU: If we wanted to make sure in this ordinance what is already in that ordinance -- MR. FLEGAL: I've read other ordinances, and it doesn't say anything about Code Enforcement Board. It's just code enforcement, Page 55 August 7, 2001 which is a department which is kind of like a sheriff. MR. PALMER: We've got a definition in here already on the fourth draft on page 4 saying staff. It's defined as (as read): "Staff refers to employees of the code enforcement department who administer, enforce, regulate, and interpret provisions of this article." That's about as broad as you can get. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Where's the section that talks about the steps of code enforcement -- the penalties for not being in compliance? We'll go ahead and jump ahead on this one issue. MR. PALMER: It's on Section 142-57, Suspension and Revocation of Certificate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What page? MR. PALMER: I'm looking at this for a moment. It's talking about (as read): "the certificate issued may be summarily suspended," and it says now by the county administrator. That changed to staff. (As read): "If it is determined by staff that says suspension is required for safety or provisions or there exists a violation of subsections 3, 4, or 5 below." This allows for summary staff suspension of a certificate. And 3, 4, and 5, are these convicted business making false statements. That's a broad power of staff's authority to suspend certificates. MS. CRUZ: Go to B. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What page? MS. CRUZ: Same page. MR. CSOGI: 142-58. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What page? MS. CRUZ: I have it here. It says -- (as read): "no certificate shall be revoked except after a public hearing by the PVAC." MS. BAISLEY: You're talking about revoking the whole person's certificate. You're not talking about the -- MR. PALMER: No. This is suspensions. Certainly you're not Page 56 August7,2001 going to allow staff to summarily revoke a certificate, but you can allow staff to summarily suspend a certificate, which means they have to stop operating the business. No way in the world is it going to be lawful for a staff employee to revoke anybody's certificate. That's a quasi-judicial matter that requires a hearing of a board. And there's no way around that as a matter of law. That's a due-process issue. MS. CRUZ: I don't think that we, the staff, should be given the decision to suspend any certificate. MR. PALMER: Well, we haven't gotten to that yet. You're complaining about having your hands tied down, and I'm making it looser, and now you're saying it's too loose. We can get to that when we get to it. MS. CRUZ: No. I'm not saying it's too loose, Tom. If you go to 142-58, that's what I'm talking about. MR. PALMER: 142-58 is revocation, not suspension. MS. CRUZ: No. It talks about -- I'm sorry, but it talks about -- now we're adding a notice of violation. I just noticed that, but it talked about that once we received a complaint, the procedure is to go in front of the committee. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let's go back -- let's go to page 11. MR. FLEGAL: One thing I think-- we got way off because we got Draft 4 and all this. Why don't we -- does anybody have the original damn ordinance? That's what you should be talking about when you're trying to resolve Maria's problem. MR. PALMER: Well, I can tell what the original ordinance is because it's everything isn't struck through. I can tell what the original is by disregarding the underlines and strike-throughs. It has the exact text of the ordinance that's in the code book now. So if you look at 142-57, the words that are underlined are not there, and the words there are struck through are there. Page 57 August 7, 2001 MR. HYDE: So what were you saying that you can't do this? MR. FLEGAL: Well, under the existing? MS. CRUZ: I'm saying that the only enforcement action is to take it before the committee. MR. CSOGI: The committee decides the disciplinary action. It says it in 142 -- MR. FLEGAL: 142-57 says that. MR. CSOGI: Right. Line 4. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Which is why we're going to add to our agenda every quarter, but in the new ordinance you'll have some more teeth. MR. FLEGAL: It says under A (as read): "currently, the certificate issued under the provision of this division may be revoked or suspended by the Public Vehicle Advisory Board." Now, that's Public Vehicle Advisory Board is the commissioners. MR. PALMER: But the existing ordinance says (as read): "The certificate issued under this provision may be summarily suspended by the county administrator, which by definition includes his designees, if it is determined that such suspension is required to protect the safety of any persons" -- that's a safety issue -- "or the minimum insurance requirements are not in effect." In other words, if staff presently finds -- under the ordinance on the books today finds out that somebody doesn't have insurance, they can summarily tell the business, "You cannot operate those vehicles until you get the insurance in place." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Or doesn't have a permit to operate, which would be a safety issue. MR. PALMER: A safety issue and that includes any substandard thing in the vehicle that's a safety problem. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Or not having a permit would be a safety Page 58 August 7, 2001 issue. MR. PALMER: That's a matter of interpretation. MR. CSOGI: He's got a fully perfect brand-new Town Car, and it's not a safety issue. CHAIRMAN PEASE: How do we know that if it's not permitted? MR. FLEGAL: Now wait a minute. Tom, going back to your sentence, I agree with you. It says that the county administrator can summarily suspend-- MR. PALMER: In these limited instances. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. But Item 1 says (as read): "violated any of the provisions of this article." So that's anything that's in the ordinance. If he violates it, the county administrator can suspend, is that not correct? Item 1 says (as read): "Violated any of the provisions of this article." MR. PALMER: No. That's in the second sentence that says (as read): "the certificate (inaudible) of this division may be revoked or suspended by the PVAC only if the holder thereof has violated another provision." That PVAC means the board, not staff. And so the first sentence -- The first sentence is limited to insurance and MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: safety. MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: summary suspension. Okay. And that's a very common provision for Summary suspension is sort of a harsh remedy. It tells people that, "I as a member of the staff of the county are telling you to stop operating your business." Now, generally speaking, that has to be a limited delegation of authority based on serious problems, not based on because somebody has some minor violation of the ordinance. That's why the PVAC is a judgment matter based by the board after evidence is presented to find out what Page 59 August 7, 2001 they should do about it. It may result in a suspension or revocation, and it may not. MR. BRIDENTHAL: How about if they don't have permission to start with, you can't suspend them. MR. PALMER: Well, you can go in and get an injunction. And that's covered by 1-6, which says essentially that if this ordinance is violated, the county has the power to go in and get an injunction to stop the activity that's in violation. And that means operating a taxicab service without a certificate. That is a violation of this ordinance and is enforceable under 1-6 by going to court and getting an injunction. MR. FLEGAL: Question about safety. So if we have an unlicensed, uncertified driver toting people around, is that a safety issue? MR. PALMER: Yeah, it is. That's a safety issue. MR. FLEGAL: So safety does have some broad teeth, and it can be -- other than a light bulb out. MR. PALMER: Exactly, exactly. Or you've got a vehicle that's got -- could have an accident because of steering or brakes. All those things are serious safety issues. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. So he can designate the staff if there's, quote, unquote, just because somebody calls and complains about Pat has a taillight out or they don't like a cracked fender, that's not a big deal --. MR. PALMER: Of course not. And any ordinance must be enforced with some sort of reasonable discretion. People apply it in a reasonable manner, and they -- in this case, not because of arbitrariness, but they think the facts warrant something in this case that's different from something in another case. Every case is handled somewhat differently based on the facts known to staff when these kinds of decisions are being made. Page 60 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: We have an hour and ten minutes. MR. BRIDENTHAL: If it's not permitted, you don't know if they have insurance -- MR. PALMER: Of course. Obviously, if you do not have a certificate, you do not have insurance issued by an insurance company under a company certified by this ordinance. So in that case you don't have insurance coverage of the transportation you're providing. MR. BRIDENTHAL: So if it's a 2000 Town Car, it's still illegal if they're transporting without a permit. MR. PALMER: Exactly. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. We are way off the track, and we are not going in time order of the ordinance. Can we please start with -- I think we probably need to defer rates because Michelle's not here, and we don't have an indication from the county what they're doing on the rate, whether they're going to keep it in or deregulate it. So I think we should go with the theory that it's going to stay in unless they are going to tell us differently. MR. FLEGAL: Well, let's back up. Isn't the purpose of the committee to make a recommendation to the county what to do so, I mean, the county shouldn't tell us. The county can take it out if they want, but we're supposed to tell them, "We think you ought to keep it in, or "We think you ought to take it out." CHAIRMAN PEASE: We were not designated by the county commissioners to do that. We can certainly exercise that right as a committee, but what was stated by the county commissioners, bypassed by PVAC altogether and said one year to staff. Now, Michelle has said she will do that in conjunction with this committee, but we are not under any obligation or mandate by the county commissioners to do that. It's welcome to do that, and if you'd like to do that, we'll be glad to do that. Page 61 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I guess I'm missing the point of the committee reviewing the ordinance was to get our recommendations of how they should redo it, and then if the staff wants to make their recommendations, that's fine. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There's two different issues. The ordinance review wasn't based on the county commissioners talking about rates. We started to say that we need to look at this ordinance because we haven't looked at it in a long time. That's different than what the county dictated staff to do in terms of rates. MR. FLEGAL: Then let staff do their thing, and then as we're looking at the ordinance, let's say that section stays in, period, or we recommend that they take it out. MR. PALMER: There's a general review. I don't think the board was making any distinction between staff and the PVAC. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So you're willing to review the rates. MR. FLEGAL: Well, if we're reviewing everything in the ordinance -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does anybody have any questions about page 13, Draft 4, Rate -- that's where we left off, correct, or am I wrong on that? MR. FLEGAL: Well, it starts at the bottom of page 12. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Bottom of page 12. MR. PALMER: 142-357 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Schedule of rates and charges. MR. BRIDENTHAL: I missed the last meeting, but did you change about taxi meters by a person employed by the county? They can't do private work. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't have the notes. You can get with Ekna after the meeting and find that out. MR. PALMER: Well, we said -- the man from the state here at the last meeting stated that the county could have an individual Page 62 August 7, 2001 certified to do this. That's a possibility, that if the county wants to hire such a certified person and employ them, they can, or they can contract with them. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does anybody have questions about Section 142-35, Schedule of Rates and Charges? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay, Mr. Flegal. Go for it, buddy. MR. FLEGAL: As the underline and highlight in yellow, which I assume underline means that's the recommendation from the -- MR. PALMER: Yeah. That's new text. MR. FLEGAL: Which is rates not be regulated. I think that's wrong rates. It should be regulated. My problem is that if you don't regulate the rates now, the elderly people and the people on lower- class incomes who depend on taxicabs to get from Point A to B, even though they may be short runs -- and I understand all that jazz -- instead of paying whatever the current rate is to go two miles if that's all they go to get to the doctor's office or something, they are now at the mercy of whomever to charge whatever. And they may limit them to get from Point A to B, and I don't think that's a good move on protecting the citizens of the county. And if the taxicab companies -- and I said taxicab companies -- want to justify that they need more money, I've been on the committee three years, and they've never submitted any documentation that they need more money. We asked them to do it one time, and they didn't do it. Nobody was interested. We gave them a little increase. They ran their mouths that that wasn't enough, but they wouldn't justify why they needed the money. I think they should be regulated, period. Sorry. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think what Mr. Palmer did was he put everybody's changes in one document. MR. FLEGAL: I understand that. I'm just saying, we're reading Page 63 August 7, 2001 this, and it's right here saying it's deleted, and I'm saying no. want it-- MR. PALMER: done here. MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: recommendation. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. HYDE: I agree. I don't The recommendation to me was do what I have I understand that. I'm just saying no. And your idea is leave it alone. Leave it like it is. We regulate it. That's my Eric Hyde. And I understand the issues of the cab companies, and I appreciate the input from the cab owners and the certificate holders and those issues, however, I've only lived in this town for five years -- obviously not as long as Mr. Flegal -- but I can honestly say that I remember when I came on the board I asked specifically two individuals that why don't you ask for a rate assessment or ask for an annual or an every two year or come up before the board and tell us why you think this is necessary? And from that day forward there has not been one single individual that came forward and said that, "We think it should be because it's this, it's this, it's this, it's this." And they did not say that the phone rates went up from this rate, and the mortgage rate went up from this, and the vehicles went from 15,000 to 32,000. They just said, "That's proprietary information, and we don't want to tell you." we even directed staff to ask for input, and we got very little or anything that wasn't consequential back. So I think the situation should be regulated until somebody wants to own up and say, "Here's what we've got." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Pat, what's your thoughts? MS. BAISLEY: I think it should be regulated. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Bill? Page 64 August 7, 2001 MR. CSOGI: I think it should be regulated. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, go ahead and strike out -- MR. PALMER: Why don't I just put it back the way it was. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's fine. MR. PALMER: All right. MS. BAISLEY: But if we're going to leave it the way it was, what are we going to do with this charter-service rate that was in here, "shall not be prorated, discounted, divided, or otherwise reduced to resemble"? How are we going to distinguish what resembles those things? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Page 13 of Draft 4. MR. PALMER: It resembles a taxicab rate if it looks like paragraph B. MS. BAISLEY: But then that woman who came here last time - MR. PALMER: Well, she is not in violation of this thing because she was -- it says (as read): "except under it's regular charter-service rates." She's operating under her regular charter- service rates. MS. BAISLEY: So if a charter company has a regular charter- service rate of 3.75 per mile, that's considered acceptable under this ordinance? MR. PALMER: Yeah. Because it does not resemble the rates below, and you made the point earlier that, in fact, it's not in direct competition because it's higher than a taxicab rate, and, therefore, if somebody wants to buy that vehicle, they have to pay a bonus to get a charter vehicle in that instance, basically, to do what's essentially a taxi service, but they are paying a higher rate because they have a charter vehicle to do it. I do not view this incidence is in violation of this sentence, although it's getting close. The closer these rates get to paragraph B, Page 65 August 7, 2001 the more problematic it would get. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So you're saying down the road as -- it could be a problem. MR. PALMER: It could be a problem if the rates we grant are very close to B. MR. FLEGAL: Then we'd have to manipulate that sentence somehow. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is that all right with doing that down the road? MR. HYDE: Yes. But my question is, normally, when I go back in and have to renew my certificate, I thought I was supposed to also give my rates. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Only the first time; not anymore. MR. HYDE: So then that may be an issue where we would be able to head it off. If you're leaving your rates the same, you attach your rate structure. If you're changing it, and now -- let's say we raise the rate to 3.75 for the first mile -- not this year, but next year. Then when the rate structure for the charter structure comes up, you can say it has to be exceeding the charter service because, obviously, it needs to be an upgrade, if you want to call it that, or however you want to word it, so that we can make sure that those rates are not in conflict with the cab owners. MR. PALMER: I can put a sentence in here to take care of that contingency in the event that this would be raised up to bump into somebody's already authorized rate that that will have to be adjusted so that they're not in competition. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. That would take care of that. MR. PALMER: I can tweak this. MR. HYDE: What we, obviously, don't want to do is we don't want to have a charter service competing with a taxicab. MR. PALMER: Directly or pricewise. Page 66 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Also under ordinance a lot of this is going back in, Mr. Palmer, in that first paragraph at the top of page 13-- MR. PALMER: Actually, everything that starts with the word "rates" is going in on the top of page 13. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There are companies right now that are charging -- this is for charter and taxi -- charging extra for handling golf clubs. I don't do it, but I'm aware of a couple who do. I'm not sure that that's an important thing for this committee to be regulating, whether or not they are charging for golf clubs or not. But -- MS. BAISLEY: You're talking about a taxicab company? CHAIRMAN PEASE: No. It says charter service or taxis. The implication is that this also deals with charter because it says that no charter-service vehicle shall transport, blah, blah, blah. I just want some clarification. Are our charter companies allowed to charge extra for golf clubs? MR. FLEGAL: You're losing me, Bryan. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. The sentence that I'm questioning is (as read): "There should be no extra charge for handling luggage or baggage." There are companies right now that charge additional for golf clubs. MR. PALMER: I don't consider golf clubs luggage or baggage. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: then. That's not normal. If that's the consensus, fine. I go along B, anybody have questions or comments about B? C, well, that's on old hourly rate. MR. PALMER: One question that was brought up by the man from the State last time is whether or not these rates coincide with the calibration of meters. We may have to do a little rounding here. Does anybody have that information? Does anybody have the figures Page 67 August 7, 2001 that have to be adjusted to -- MR. BRIDENTHAL: Yeah. MR. PALMER: You do have those? MR. BRIDENTHAL: I can't charge forty cents a minute and thirty-five cents a mile, I think is what he said. Both those numbers have to come out -- MR. HYDE: They don't work. MS. BAISLEY: They don't work. MR. PALMER: What numbers work? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Forty cents a minute and thirty-five cents a mile do not work. MR. PALMER: Okay. What works? MR. BRIDENTHAL: You need the same number on both sides. MR. PALMER: What's the number we need? MS. HU: We needed to decide whether it was going to go up or down. Were we going to rate it according to the time, or were we going to rate it according to the miles? MR. PALMER: It's both, but the question is, we got to get numbers that coincide. MS. HU: Can't we refer to the -- MR. PALMER: Ah, here we go. MR. BRIDENTHAL: They have them set before they work it dropping just before the tenth or something. MR. PALMER: I'll need a copy of that page. Can I go ahead and adjust this as needed to round it so that it jives? MR. HYDE: I'd round it up. MR. PALMER: Yeah. MR. BRIDENTHAL: They've got them so they work, but they have to drop just before the tenth or something to come out to that rate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: He said he's going to get it close to that Page 68 August 7, 2001 rate; not identical. So you're going to work, Mr. Palmer, with the -- MR. PALMER: I think we can solve a problem by taking for each additional two-tenths of a mile up forty cents; right? That will solve the problem. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Then we still have to get all the meters reset. CHAIRMAN PEASE: pricing. No. You could leave it at your current MS. BAISLEY: That would be less. You can charge less, but you can't charge more. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You can charge less. Item C, now, this hourly rate probably goes back seven years. Is that the right number still, Pat? MS. BAISLEY: It is $24 an hour -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. BRIDENTHAL: what he just changed. Still? You can't change that without changing MS. BAISLEY: Those two have to go together. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. So that's correct info. Any other comments or questions about C, changes? We're going to put that all back in, Mr. Palmer -- MR. PALMER: Except am I going to take 035 and make it 040? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah, to get it all to match. CHAIRMAN PEASE: D, rechange procedures. This was only struck in relationship to -- MR. FLEGAL: Getting rid of rates. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Getting rid of rates, so that will go back in. MR. PALMER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN PEASE: B-2, any questions, changes there? Page 69 August 7, 2001 Does everything that's struck go back in now or not? It looks like it would. MR. PALMER: Yeah. That text should go back in because that's the factual foundation for the adequacy of rates. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So does anybody have any questions, comments, changes there? C-37 That looks like just a cleaning up by Mr. Palmer there. Number 47 MR. FLEGAL: That should go back in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. Any changes to that other than going back in? Hey, we got a page done. MR. PALMER: Four goes back in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: One down, hopefully six to go. I have low, minimal goal expectations. MR. PALMER: Well, actually, we're getting into things now that are sort of minimal, minuscule, little things. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Keep it going. Keep it going. All right. Section 142-36. MR. FLEGAL: My only question there -- and I don't have any problem with any of the changes -- why did we go from three years to one year asking them to keep records? MR. PALMER: Somebody suggested that was adequate. MR. HYDE: And it was part of the actual renewal process, and then it changes so often that it would keep it constant every year. You start a new one. You keep doing it. It's annual. CHAIRMAN PEASE: One is sufficient for code enforcement, is what I think they said. years to see if-- MR. HYDE: Yeah. MR. FLEGAL: Nobody is going to go back two or three To see if Monica was around. Okay. I was just asking why it was changed. Page 70 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Who can remember that? MR. FLEGAL: I was just asking why it was changed. I couldn't find that, so I don't have a problem with it. I just wanted to know why. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Any other questions, comments on 36? Thirty-seven. MR. PALMER: Staff recommended that they have a State of Florida operator's permit. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. Good recommendation because Florida Statute says you have to have one. MR. PALMER: If you operate a motor vehicle, you take a job or in any trade, you must have a Florida driver's license, period. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That takes care of A. B? MR. PALMER: You want to put that 12 months back in? MR. CSOGI: Yeah. MR. FLEGAL: I don't think he should do once in his lifetime. I think he should do it every 12 months. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But we're saying here, sworn affidavit, not a copy of the actual report. MS. HU: I would like a copy of the background check. MR. HYDE: And that was the question that we raised earlier. The local one doesn't cover Florida. And you could have done something in Orlando or Dade -- Orange County or Dade -- and had an issue, where I think we need to have consistency throughout. MR. PALMER: I don't get your point. I'm sorry. MR. HYDE: A local -- for example, if I was arrested for drug possession in Orange County, and you did a local one, it wouldn't come up. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You go down to Collier Courthouse or the police station and get just a county-wide -- Page 71 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: They just check Collier County for anything you've done wrong. MR. PALMER: All right. But that's not addressed in the ordinance, and the ordinance doesn't limit it to Collier County by a long shot, so that's an issue -- MS. BAISLEY: But the ordinance doesn't even say the certificate holder has to obtain this. MR. CSOGI: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right now it would be a sworn statement -- MS. BAISLEY: Right. MR. CSOGI: It doesn't say in Florida or Collier County, though. It doesn't say anywhere. I could get one for California and said that I complied. MS. HU: Is it a price difference in national or local? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Why wouldn't you do it for the United States? MS. HU: Fifteen dollars. If we're going to do it for the certificate holder nationwide, then I believe we should do it for the drivers nationwide. Background check. MR. PALMER: The thing about this provision we're addressing now is that it's the obligation of the certificate holder to do this. MS. HU: Right. MR. PALMER: Not the county. And to provide to the county - - and the county staff a sworn affidavit that swears, under oath, that this driver has not been convicted of any of these things, so that's -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: But you don't need that if you're requiring the driver to present a background check before he gets his permit. MS. HU: A copy of-- MR. HYDE: Before he gets one of these. Page 72 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: One of those, right. Why should the operator have to duplicate the effort? MR. PALMER: Fine. The thing about it is, is there a provision that says that the driver must do this -- MR. HYDE: That's what we're talking about. MR. PALMER: Okay. That's not in here now. MR. FLEGAL: Not yet. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's where it should be, in B; right? MR. FLEGAL: Well, let me ask the question. If we ask the driver to provide a nationwide background check, which right now the county gets for $15, is that accessible to each driver? Can he go get one of those someplace and pay $15 to get it? MS. HU: They can do it through the Internet. MR. FLEGAL: I don't know, so that's why I'm asking the question. I don't want to put something in here, and then all of a sudden the driver says that he doesn't have access to one of those unless I pay $200. MS. CRUZ: You can get it from the Federal Department of Law Enforcement in Tallahassee. MS. BAISLEY: To counties or state or government kind of things, because those websites are only accessible to counties or states or government. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So maybe the permit -- MS. BAISLEY: It's not accessible to people like me, to an individual. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Maybe the permit to the driver should be $20. It should be $5 for the paperwork and $15 for the criminal background. MR. FLEGAL: Well, that's what I'm saying. Is that accessible to him? If he can't go get one of those, we shouldn't tell him he has to. Page 73 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm saying make it $20 and have the county do it. MR. PALMER: And have him pay for it annually. MR. FLEGAL: And when he comes to get this (indicating) -- MR. PALMER: That will work. MR. FLEGAL: -- for $5, he pays you another $15 and get a nationwide check. How's that? MR. PALMER: Can you do that and want this? Can you do that for me, and I'll pay you $15? MS. HU: Yes. I have a question, though -- MS. CRUZ: Cost you more. MR. BRIDENTHAL: So now each one of those will cost 20, but it gives you a background check with it, nationwide. MS. HU: Maybe that will help the turnover too. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Good idea. MS. HU: Do the certificate holder do a background check? I'm a little confused here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. MS. HU: They already do? MR. BRIDENTHAL: County. MS. BAISLEY: We do a county background check. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We do a sworn statement. MS. BAISLEY: And the sworn statement. MR. FLEGAL: But sworn statements are worth what they're worth. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And, Mr. Palmer, in B you'll make those changes for the driver permit -- MR. PALMER: This will be the responsibility of the respective drivers, and the county will do it, and they will pay $15. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Twenty. MR. PALMER: Oh, five for the ID and $15 cost for the search, Page 74 August 7, 2001 sure. MR. FLEGAL: And that's -- if the price changes, then price increases. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You need to put verbiage in there for price increase of background checks. MR. FLEGAL: Maybe don't put the number in there. Just put that the driver has to assume the cost to get his decal and background check. MR. PALMER: One of the things I could do is to says it's presently $5 for that and $15 for this, but this could be modified by resolution by the PVAC, which I've got in a couple of areas where you can tweak regulations. That way if the people know what it is now -- so there'll be something in the ordinance. If you tell them $5, they'll say, "Where do you get that?" You see, you get those kinds of questions. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Anything else on B which extends to the next page, 15? MS. HU: Bryan, you're going to hate me, but -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I already do, Ekna. What? MS. HU: I'm just -- if the certificate holder already does a background check-- MR. FLEGAL: But it's only for county; that's the problem. CHAIRMAN PEASE: There's no requirement of the owner to do a nationwide background check, so we're clearing that up. MS. HU: Is it too much to ask for it if they do a federal background check? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm going to put it on the driver's responsibility, not mine. And he can take this permit and go next door to Yellow Cab tomorrow. Why would I want to pay that? MR. FLEGAL: I mean, if he wants to work, let him spend his money. Twenty bucks ain't a lot to get a job. Page 75 August 7, 2001 MR. PALMER: There's a couple of minor problems. That is that some of these sections refer to Florida Statutes. Obviously, nobody's going to be convicted in California by Florida Statute, so some of these are generally applicable, like murder and manslaughter. Every state has that as a crime, but these things that are limited to Florida, obviously, you are not going to find in California. That's understood. So in other words, that nationwide text are only going to have relevance to Florida to the extent that it's referring to a Florida Statute. If it's general, like vehicular manslaughter, undoubtedly, every state has that, and you can be convicted of vehicular manslaughter in every state in the United States. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Are you saying that the criminal background check may or may not show up Item 2, sale or possession of any controlled substance -- MR. FLEGAL: As defined by a specific section in our statutes. We don't know that the New York statutes coincides exactly the same. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do we need the Florida Statute section in there then? MR. PALMER: Well, the problem you're going to get with that is you're going to have problems of interpretation when something comes in and it says he violated some number in Ohio. We're not going to know what that is unless somebody's got some kind of a chart about the crimes in Ohio. It's going to be a problem except for things like armed robbery is armed robbery everywhere. Assault with a deadly weapon is assault with a deadly weapon almost everywhere depending on little nuances about what's a deadly weapon. So this is not going to be a problem on these major felonies. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So you have some gray areas, you're saying. Page 76 August 7, 2001 MR. PALMER: Well, what I'm saying is that if we don't talk about Florida Statutes, it's going to be very unusual that anybody else defines this as controlled substance as controlled substances in other states because they vary all over the place. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So does that mean that if he is charged or she is charged with something in Ohio, that we can't deny them the opportunity to drive? MR. PALMER: All right. One way to solve the problem is say "any crime involved in the sale of any controlled substance as defined by the respective jurisdiction." MR. BRIDENTHAL: Or considered a felony. MR. PALMER: Do you want to make it a felony? We can do that. We can take this specificity out and say "substance defined by the respective jurisdiction as a felony." Do you want to do that? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think so. We shouldn't have any gray areas. MR. PALMER: All right. MR. FLEGAL: I don't think anybody wants these types of people working for them anyway. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. PALMER: And we'll get that back, and that will say, "Convicted of possession of a controlled substance." It will probably be in those words. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: changes, deletions? MR. FLEGAL: approved driver is." MR. PALMER: through. That's fine. C, page 15 of Draft 4, additions, C doesn't make any sense. "if at any a then The word "time" should not be stricken Page 77 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm not sure what the sentence that says (as read): "the certificate holder shall maintain a permanent registry containing information on the identity of each driver." That's -- the county is doing that now. MR. PALMER: Well, this is in there now. Whatever you want to do is fine, but this is in there now. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So the change would be in that would be the county. MS. CRUZ: Shouldn't they keep a record of who's driving for them? CHAIRMAN PEASE: It's going to change so often, I mean -- MR. FLEGAL: But they still -- MS. BAISLEY: You would still have a record of the driver. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You would still have a record of the drivers, but I'm not sure that it's important for the county to mandate that. We're already going to have it. MS. BAISLEY: But those criminal records checks that you're going to obtain, too, that should be given back to the certificate holder or at least the copy of that so that the certificate holder knows what's on there also. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, he's got to -- MS. BAISLEY: Because that certificate holder might have other standards, which are not in this ordinance which would prevent them from driving for them. We have other things that we don't allow drivers to -- MR. FLEGAL: I think the permit holder should ask his driver, "when you go to get your little card, and you have to take this with you, we also want a copy of whatever you're giving the county. Ask the county to give it to you." CHAIRMAN PEASE: And you can do that from your own company. It doesn't have to be mandated by the county ordinance to Page 78 August 7, 2001 say that they have to give it to you. You can just say that as a matter of policy -- MR. FLEGAL: It's a condition of employment, you got to give me a copy of this, period. MS. BAISLEY: Then you're not going to know if somebody's driver's license is suspended or revoked until you either check their vehicle report -- which we would do on a regular report -- or they come and tell you that. That could be a couple months. Well, the county's not going to know either. MR. FLEGAL: MS. HU: No. MR. PALMER: All right. What this sentence says -- and I've thought about that. You look at the last few words (as read): "this obligation, either the certificate holder and the driver, immediately upon the driver or certificate holder becomes aware of conviction." If you don't know, you don't know. If you do know, you notify the county. It has no affirmative obligation to find out. comes to your attention, let the county know about it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. Section 142-38. out? But if it Why take it MR. PALMER: That was a recommendation of somebody. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Probably me. MS. CRUZ: I don't have it in my changes. Drink and drive, guys. MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: notion to take it out. MR. FLEGAL: That should stay. I mean... I wondered why -- that certainly wasn't my Let's put it back in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't see it listed on anybody's suggested changes. Let's put it back in. 142-38, which will really be 39. MR. PALMER: Yes. This will be renumbered because 38 goes Page 79 August 7, 2001 back in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Services. Any questions, problems? Section 142-40, Advertising the MR. HYDE: Can we go back to 142-38 or what's going to be 9? Who enforces that? MR. PALMER: First of all, that's a violation of state law, but it's also a violation of this ordinance. MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: comes out. MR. PALMER: But the sheriffs department does enforce it -- Well, it does. -- and they don't pay. The sheriffs department There's no question about it. But the fact of the matter is it also makes it a basis to suspend or revoke a driver's certificate, which is not included in the state law, at least by this board. The state may revoke it, but the reason this is in here is this gives this board independent basis to suspend a driver if he is caught violating this section. MS. CRUZ: This is talking about passenger. MR. PALMER: I'm talking about 38 -- consumption of alcohol. CHAIRMAN PEASE: 38-39. MR. HYDE: Yeah. It would be the sheriff, though, right? MS. BAISLEY: And he does. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Forty, we had a lot of-- first of all, it should not be struck. That was under the pretense of deregulation, so 40 shouldn't be struck, but there were a number of comments. MR. PALMER: Put it back in? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Staff recommended that the sentence, "All advertising for vehicles for hire printed after July 31, '94, in the telephone directory or newspaper distributed in the county shall Page 80 August 7, 2001 include the applicable certificate number." They suggested that sentence be struck. Do you know why, Maria? MS. CRUZ: No. In my notes I have that you requested the whole section be stricken out. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I did, but I have that you did not want it all struck -- not you personally, but staff. MS. CRUZ: I don't know why. MR. FLEGAL: Why did we have it originally that it was only after a certain date? MR. PALMER: This did not give the ordinance retroactive application to things that were immediately at that time going to the phone company to be printed. MR. FLEGAL: I think as of now you put an ad in a phone book, put your number in there. MR. HYDE: It's like having your license. MR. PALMER: The idea there was that somebody could look at the phone directory and find a certificate number. It would actually save staff some time. That was the idea. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Staff also said how about holding a phone number as a company not authorized by the county. I'm not sure what staff meant by that. MS. CRUZ: Phone number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: How about holding a phone number as a company not authorized by the company. MS. HU: I believe we -- in the ordinance, currently, we have to have a phone number in the county, in Naples. MR. CSOGI: Local number. MS. HU: Right, a local number. MR. FLEGAL: So they don't have to call long distance to get Page 81 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm not sure what staff's saying there. MR. HYDE: Well, for example, if you're -- and I think it's viewed two different ways. Number one, if you actually mandate it that in every single ad that you had that you had to put your license number, such as your agricultural license for the mechanic thing, or if you're a licensed contractor, a pool contractor, you have to put your license in on that. MR. PALMER: Right. MR. HYDE: Well, the same situation would then apply here. If you're running a Yellow Page ad, and, say, it's Checker Cab or USA Cab or whatever, then you put your license number on it. If you go through the Yellow Pages and you find that there are seven other people that are in there and none of them have their licenses and they are not even applicable, then in order to do that, you have to have a license, and it would easy for code enforcement to go down the list and make sure that everybody's in compliance with the ordinance. MS. CRUZ: No. Because if we have an out-of-county company, they can advertise in the Collier Yellow Pages and not necessarily operate in Collier County. So they are not going to have a license number from us. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, so Lee County it's okay to do that you're saying? MS. CRUZ: Yeah. They can advertise -- see, whoever is responsible for advertising these companies in the Yellow Pages, they don't know what the county requirements are. You come in there and you want to advertise a business, they're going to take your money and advertise the business. MR. HYDE: Well, that wasn't the issue -- MR. PALMER: This is for Collier County certificate holders. MR. HYDE: Exactly. MS. CRUZ: But what you're saying is that in order for them -- Page 82 August 7, 2001 only the Collier County licensed companies. MR. PALMER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So if you're from Lee County and you don't have a license, it's permissible to advertise in the Naples phone book? MR. HYDE: Yes, it is. MS. BAISLEY: You are going to be in violation of the ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So it's okay to put the ad in and to put the number in to call, and it's okay not to be permitted in the Naples phone book. Now does that make sense? MR. FLEGAL: No, wait a minute. But if you're doing business here, then it's a violation of this ordinance. MR. HYDE: Right. MR. FLEGAL: You can have the ad in the phone book. You can't stop anybody from advertising in the telephone book. You can't do that. But if I call Fort Myers or however I get a hold of this guy, and he drives down here, as soon as he drives down here to pick me up, he's in violation of this ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Collier County code enforcement doesn't have jurisdiction over Lee County, so they can't enforce -- . MR. FLEGAL: But when he gets here to pick up at the Registry to take the guy down to Fifth Avenue, which I don't know why he'd call somebody in Fort Myers, but when he does that, he's in violation. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Pat, Yellow Cab of Fort Myers, I don't know if that's your company or somebody else's. Let's say it's somebody else's. They advertise in the phone book, no permit, local phone number, and starts doing transfers in Collier County or least your going under the assumption that they are going to advertise in the Naples phone book that they are going to operate in Collier County. Page 83 August 7, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: When they pick up in this county, they are in violation of this ordinance, and they need to be cited, but you have to catch them. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So they are not in violation of running the ad. They are in violation of actually doing the work. MR. FLEGAL: Of doing work. You can't stop people from advertising in the phone book or newspaper. MS. BAISLEY: I don't think you can. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Next, page 16, 142-39 through 41, somewhere in there. MR. FLEGAL: ! don't have a problem with that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Oh, I've got a big problem with that. Damn it, I want prostitution in there, hey, and that's for the record. COURT REPORTER: It's in there. CHAIRMAN PEASE: He said with a smile. I'll never run for county commissioner, now, Mr. Flegal. Section 142-4 -- whatever it is -- division two certificate to prevent to operate, Section 142-51. MR. HYDE: Oh, I remember this one. CHAIRMAN PEASE: This could hang us up here. MR. FLEGAL: I thought that was pretty straightforward. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I'm looking here at the notes. PVAC, it says they suggested -- who's PVAC? Is that us? Was it at a meeting or something that we said this? (As read): "No person shall operate or permit a motor vehicle owned or leased or otherwise control by him the individual or entity." I don't think anybody has any objection to that, do they? (No response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Then it looks like what we added was (as read): "If a then certified, this is all still under PVAC -- "in a then certified individual or entity," where is that showing up? Page 84 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: It's B, isn't it? CHAIRMAN PEASE: B is only to results, the word "results," so that whole section was added by PVAC. MR. FLEGAL: The only question I had, I guess, when we talked about this originally was to get this additional certificate, and I understood Mr. Palmer saying we know something about him. We're only charging them half the fee. I think if you get another certificate you pay full price, but that's only me. That was my only comment. I don't have a problem with what we're wanting to do other than -- MR. PALMER: The assumption was here that the staff would have most of the relevant information, in other words, if they would as a full-blown new applicant. That was the idea. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other questions? MR. FLEGAL: Let me ask a general question just to make sure, since you already do this, I think. MS. BAISLEY: I did it the first year. I have not gotten a separate certificate the last couple of years because I was the only one that paid for one the first year. MR. FLEGAL: When you do your insurance for Yellow Cab and then on your other operations, do you just get those added to your current insurance, or do you have insurance for each operation? MS. BAISLEY: I have insurance for each operation. MR. FLEGAL: That's what I thought. So, yes, we have knowledge when she got Yellow Cab. But when she comes in -- I mean, they're still going to have to check various things so... CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mine's different. I got a wholly-owned subsidiary under the corporate umbrella, so, therefore, my insurance covers all subsidiaries. MR. FLEGAL: That's how I was looking at it. If they were going to do some work -- MS. BEASLEY: Well, my certificate has all names on it -- Page 85 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: But I'm looking at things that they would investigate like insurance and background checks -- MS. BAISLEY: How many people have separate certificates? MS. CRUZ: That I know of?. We've got Graham Transportation and Corporate Cab -- MS. BEASLEY: MS. CRUZ: No. That was just done recently. It's been done a year ago -- maybe two years. And I believe Checker has an additional certificate. Graham and Checker. MS. BAISLEY: I did it the first year, and I paid $250 because it wasn't determined yet what the rate was supposed to be. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And that's why I didn't do it. MS. BAISLEY: Nobody else did it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I didn't do it because it wasn't determined, but it looks like it's going to be determined. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other questions on A or B? MS. BAISLEY: But this needs to be made -- the other certificate holders need to be made aware of this because there's other people besides just us. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I assume if we have a new ordinance every certificate holder gets a copy of the new ordinance. MS. CRUZ: Do they read it? MR. FLEGAL: When they come in to get a permit, I remember they certify it something or say they read the ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. FLEGAL: So, I mean, don't stand there and say, "Gee, I didn't know." That's stupidity. You certified that you read it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We have to get the ordinance out in time before the permitting process. Anybody else on A or B? And just to make sure I'm a hundred percent on the clarification, the word "subcontracted" in this case Page 86 August 7, 2001 does not apply to the short-term scenario where I call, I don't have a car, I need a sedan, and I call her and say that "I need a sedan at 5:30" because I can't cover that run. I'm permitted to do that; right? MR. PALMER: This has to do with hiring vehicles in to cover peak periods like a high-school prom-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Temporaries. Okay. Section 142-52, Application for Certificate to Operate. Any questions? MR. PALMER: There are really no substantive changes here. It's dovetailed to coincide with subcertificate cases. MR. FLEGAL: Down on line 35 and 36 where we specify "taxi" or "taxicab," do you also want to put "cab" by itself?. MR. PALMER: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Also, on 52A, Mr. Flegal suggested in written form -- 142-52A, it says, (as read): "The application fee shall be written verified under oath and shall furnish the following information in written form," is what you have, Mr. Flegal. MR. PALMER: Do you want to say the written application form? A form, to me, implies something in writing, but if you want to put the word in there, "the written application form," we can do that. Is that what you're saying? CHAIRMAN PEASE' What you're saying is that you don't want it in verbal format the individual name and address? MR. FLEGAL' Well, I guess here -- well, it's -- the application form. So if you're making an application, to me, that's a piece of paper. MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: was written. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Exactly. That's my thinking. I'd have to look at the original to see the way it It said "fee," and I think that's why you Page 87 August 7, 2001 put the rest of the verbiage in there. MR. PALMER: "fee" is a typo. It should have never said "fee." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. And I think you're covered there. 142-523, Mr. Flegal, you had a suggested change. I think that's in there, must be submitted as struck, and that's what he has, so you're okay with that. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Number 6. Yeah, we're okay with that. That's been done. And then No. 6, the fictitious name, that was yours, Mr. Flegal, at the bottom of 6. Nobody has a problem with that addition? (No response.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: I guess not. Let's see. MR. FLEGAL: Let me back up. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I've got to look at my original where -- maybe we haven't gotten that far yet. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It was only six months ago. Why don't you remember? MR. FLEGAL: But we're moving along. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Are we ready to go to 7? MR. HYDE: So we're not approving these A-frame, elongated sign things. Just that little top light; right? MR. CSOGI: We're supposed to put a size in there. MR. FLEGAL: I thought we talked about that at some point. Was that our regular meeting or something else. MR. CSOGI: I think it was at a workshop. MR. PALMER: I think we might have taken care of that somewhere else. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Why are we not wanting a written description of the color scheme? MR. FLEGAL: Isn't that somewhere else too? Page 88 August 7, 2001 MR. PALMER: I think I got that in some of these specifications, provisions. MR. FLEGAL: I think that's in a different section, Bryan. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It may be on page 18, line 4 where it says, "Vehicle Color Scheme." Would that be the duplicate? MR. FLEGAL: No. I think when you get back to 55. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Oh, really? I'll trust your judgment on that. MR. FLEGAL: We were on, what, 7? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Seven, and we have vehicle color scheme. Do you know what you wanted in there, line 4? MR. CSOGI: Is that where we were discussing lettering on the back window, also, or is that in a different section? MR. FLEGAL: I think that's in that other section, too, any kind of lettering. I think Tom put that back further in 55. MR. CSOGI: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Where are we? Number 9. Okay. Nobody had any thoughts on 10 through the rest of this section originally. Does somebody have any now? MR. FLEGAL: My only question was when we get to 17, we took out that the application must be accompanied by the fee. Why would you say you submit an application without any money? CHAIRMAN PEASE: No suggested change on that. MR. FLEGAL: I think that should be back in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I agree. Any other comments, questions on this whole section? On 14, first sentence, line 31, Mr. Palmer. What's a bank PR financial institution? MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's PR? I think that's supposed to be "or." That's "or." I thought we had some PR firm now. Page 89 August 7,2001 Okay. Are we ready to go on to 142 -53? MR. PALMER: The only change in this whole thing of substance is lines 31 and 32. Staff wants to get rid of that obligation to publish. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Where is that? That's on page 19, lines 31 and 32, in Section MR. PALMER: 142-53. MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: Why don't we want to publish? Staff wants to eliminate that. I would say they don't publish who has pool licenses and all these other licenses, so why are we making them say who has transportation licenses. I would understand that. MR. PALMER: Seems sort of superfluous. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And the county certainly could cross- check without the permit number. MR. PALMER: All the other changes in this section are just tweaks and just grammatical formatting, but there are no other substantive changes to that provision. CHAIRMAN PEASE: One of things -- I'm sorry. I jumped ahead too far. Are we on 53? MR. FLEGAL: Have we gotten to B? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Go ahead. Any questions on B? MR. FLEGAL: My question is: It says an applicant shall pay the fee within 30 days of the approval. He doesn't get his decal until he pays the money; right? MS. HU: Right. MR. FLEGAL: In other words -- okay. I just wanted to make sure you couldn't come in and get your decal, and then you have 30 days to pay your money. MS. CRUZ: No. Page 90 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: C, any questions about C ? MR. CSOGI: How does C address the P. O. boxes? MR. FLEGAL: Oh, I had one other questions. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is it on C? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah, on C. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, let's go with Mr. Csogi's question on P. O. boxes. MR. CSOGI: People are coming down from Lee County, and they are just getting a P. O. box and a local number, then doing business out of Fort Myers. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We weren't allowing -- MR. FLEGAL: I thought we said before that's not allowed. MR. CSOGI: It doesn't say that, though. Just says an occupationally licensed business address. And I don't think a safety (sic) box is that. MR. PALMER: An occupational licensed business address is whatever's on the occupational license. And people that only do temporary business in the county do not have to obtain an occupation license in that county. So these are people -- if these people have to have an occupational license for the county, then they are a resident of Collier County for the purposes of occupational license application. And the occupation always has an address on it. And all it is is for the county to be able to tell where they're operating. It's primarily used if there's questions about the use being applicable to zoning, to make sure that the business they're talking about fits the zoning classification of where it is. Records can be kept anywhere. Records -- so if, in fact, a safe deposit box allows you to keep these records, that could be the place listed on the occupational license. MS. CRUZ: Why are we making them get an occupational Page 91 August 7, 2001 license? MR. PALMER: I don't know that they are required. MS. CRUZ: The main purpose is for them to get a license through this board to operate a transportation license for this county. Why make them go through -- we don't do that with contractor licensing. MR. FLEGAL: I was going to say is, do they have to do it if they're a pool company coming it or a contractor coming in ? MS. CRUZ: They have to get a license through contractor licensing to operate in this county, but they do not have to get an occupational license if their office is not going to be located in this county. MR. PALMER: Well, that's right. Certain contractors come into this county with occupational license? But if they have a certain presence in this county, they must get an occupational license, and these are matters of fact. MR. FLEGAL: Now we're asking them, though, to have an address to keep their records in this county, so I would like since we're doing that, they should also have an occupational license. MR. PALMER: And I also believe that somewhere else in this ordinance it's presumed, if not stated, that people that are certificated will have an occupational license. That's a presumption that's always been, that people that are certificated by Collier County necessarily have enough presence in Collier County to require an occupational license. If they are transitory, they don't have to be certified by this board. MS. CRUZ: That conflicts with part of the ordinance, that even if they pick up once in this county, they have to have a certificate to operate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's right. MR. HYDE: That's correct. Page 92 August 7,2001 MR. FLEGAL: And since we're asking them to keep all their records and stuff here, I don't have a problem of asking to get this $30 license. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't either. MR. HYDE: Do you have an occupational license? MR. CSOGI: Uh-huh. MS. CRUZ: But you guys have a physical location in this county. Some of these people are not. Their main office is over there, but they want to be legal to pick up in this county, and they go through this whole process. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do you have to have an occupational license? MS. CRUZ: And, really, the $30 or the $15, depending on the time of the year that they get the occupational license, doesn't make any sense for us, or even going through zoning, and that creates a lot of problems between zoning and us. Because now we're saying that, okay, it's fine for them to get an occupational license issued to a safe deposit box, which is a bank building. MR. HYDE: Which is commercial. MS. CRUZ: Which is commercial. And we all know that they are going to operate from there, and we all know that they are not keeping their records there. MS. BAISLEY: Exactly. MS. CRUZ: Who's cheating who? MR. FLEGAL: Then again, that's an enforcement. MS. CRUZ: We only need to see the records if we have a complaint or if we -- MR. PALMER: This whole idea was not my idea and never was my idea. If I had my way, we would not require people in Collier County who do not otherwise have an occupational license to have records in Collier County, but merely require that they produce Page 93 August 7, 2001 records in Collier County upon request. That's the way the Public Service Commission does it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But what I heard was you had no enforcement -- code enforcement. When this came up years ago, code enforcement had no authority to make a Lee County company submit any paperwork. MS. CRUZ: We had no enforcement to go to Lee County to enforce it over there. MR. PALMER: What I'm saying is, you can make it a condition -- if somebody is going to get a certificate from Collier County, a condition of that certificate will be to provide records to code enforcement if they request them for those people who have a certificate but do not require an occupational license in Collier County. If you require an occupational license under the occupational license provisions, then in those cases you must keep the records in Collier County. That's the way to do that in my opinion. So if you're one of these people that has a certificate, but you don't have a situs in Collier County from the prospect of occupational license, keep your records in Lee County provided you agree to give them to Maria if she asks for them, to bring them down to Collier County. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'll buy that. MR. HYDE: I agree with that because you're making people jump through hoops. MR. PALMER: I know this wasn't my idea at all, and I fought it when it came up, and I thought it was an owners' provision. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But you never suggested that. MR. PALMER: I may not, but I went around and around about this unnecessary operation expense for small businessmen. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What you just said, write that down. MR. PALMER: All right. I'll put it in here. We can do that. Page 94 August 7, 2001 That makes sense to me. For example, the Florida Public Service Commission, if you have a corporate office in Georgia, you keep your records in Georgia, but if the Florida Public Service Commission needs them, you bring them down to Tallahassee. CHAIRMAN PEASE: required to do that. MR. PALMER: Yeah. And they sign a statement that they're It's a condition of whatever certificate they've gotten from the Public Service Commission. I'll tweak it. MR. HYDE: That goes back, and that will make a lot of things easier. MS. BAISLEY: And that follows through with their vehicle permits or whatever -- MR. PALMER: The original was that anybody did business in Collier County have an office and a desk and a phone and pay rent to somebody. That was somebody's suggestion. MS. BAISLEY: That's what's required in other counties. When I try to do business in other counties, that's what's required of me. If I want to go to'the City of Fort Myers, that's what I would have to do. MR. PALMER: Well, I seriously question the legality of that. That's probably illegal if somebody wanted to contest it because it has no rational basis. They did that in Chicago because they were trying to make it hard for a cab that was competing with the "fair- haired boy" with the city council of Chicago. The Supreme Court said that you can't do that, that you're just giving this guy a hard time. And, essentially, I don't know why in the world -- if you're transitory in Lee County, you've got to have an office up in Lee County. MS. BAISLEY: If you want to pick up in the City of Fort Myers, you have to have an office in Fort Myers. MR. PALMER: Well, that's a bunch of baloney. MS. CRUZ: That's the different regulation. Page 95 August 7, 2001 MS. BAISLEY: Well, if you want to pick up in this county, you don't have to have an office in this county. Where's the difference? MS. CRUZ: All of our ordinances are not the same as another county. MS. BAISLEY: But you're saying it's different, and it's not different. MR. FLEGAL: She's just talking about transportation. Lee County -- MS. BAISLEY: Right. The City of Fort Myers. Lee County has no permits. MR. PALMER: I consider that an unrational (sic) provision. From a legal standpoint, what is the policy of having you have an office if you're a transitory person in Lee County.? MS. BAISLEY: I don't know what their reasoning behind it is -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: The main goal is the paperwork-- the ability to get the paperwork, the ability to pull a sticker off a car. And if you can put that in -- MR. PALMER: We can put that in, certainly. As a matter of fact, how many times have you had to ask people for records in the last five years? MS. CRUZ: None, ever. MR. CSOGI: We just did it. MR. PALMER: That's on the basis of-- let's assume she demands to see somebody's manifest. MR. CSOGI: We just did that. MS. BAISLEY: This happened years ago, Admiralty Transportation's vehicle in Fort Myers, and Admiralty refused to bring that vehicle down to Collier County, and Collier County was not allowed to go up to Fort Myers to look at the vehicle. MS. CRUZ: Well, see, something like that -- once we amend this, and we get some teeth in this ordinance, we can send them a Page 96 August 7, 2001 notice of violation that you need to produce records. If you don't, then we take it before you guys, and you guys make a decision. You failed to do this; you failed to comply with this requirement; suspend the permit; revoke the permit. MR. PALMER: Exactly. CHAIRMAN PEASE: If you could accomplish that task, I believe the committee is in favor of that. MR. PALMER: So the only people who will have to keep their records in Collier County are people who are required to have a certificate of occupancy under the certificate of occupancy regulations -- I mean, an occupational license. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They all have to keep their records. And they all have to make they available to code enforcement. MR. PALMER: But I thought we said if you are occupationally licensed in Collier County -- and there are some that will be and some that won't -- but if you're occupationally licensed in Collier County, you keep those records at the address of the occupational -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: We're not going to get involved with where they keep them, just that everyone signs a statement that says that these records are available, and if we want a car in this case to look at it, to inspect it, to do whatever we have, you're require to do that. MR. PALMER: All right. So you don't even want the provision that necessarily kept at the occupational licensed address. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's right. MR. PALMER: Okay. Fine. MR. HYDE: I'm leaving. MR. PALMER: Make the vehicle and/or the records necessary. MS. CRUZ: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We have ten minutes. Mr. Flegal. MR. FLEGAL: I don't know what -- I've lost track of where we Page 97 August 7, 2001 are, but under C in the same group, on the bottom of page 18 -- I'm really on page 20. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What line? MR. FLEGAL: Down at lines 23. Somebody had said we ought to put in there (as read): "except two vehicles," blah, blah, blah, I have a little problem with that. First of all, I think it's unfair, discriminatory, because if a guy's single or a gal's single, she's only allowed one vehicle at her house. Now, you're saying to get married or have kids or whatever and you can operate a couple of cabs out of your house. I still think it should be one, period. I don't care if you have husband, wife, daughter, whatever. One cab running in and out of the neighborhood's enough. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, did you get that from -- MS. CRUZ: Me. MR. PALMER: Maria had a problem with a husband and wife. MS. CRUZ: Affordable Limousine, husband and wife. Can we just strike out husband and wife and not specify -- MR. FLEGAL: No. I think what we said a long time ago was that when you're off duty and you're taking your vehicle, that's fine. We understand you have to get home. That's not a problem. But actually running your taxi business out of your home where you're sitting there getting the calls, and you run out, jump in the car, put the garage door up, and go do a fare and come back. No. You need an office like Pat has or like Bryan has. MS. BAISLEY: We said one was permissible. MR. PALMER: That's what the present ordinance says. MS. CRUZ: But let's get realistic here. Husband and wife. They both live at the same location. They have an occupational license from their home, which they are allowed. We know that the vehicles are going to be at the house with that decal. The phone rings; they get a call; one car leaves. Phone rings; they get another Page 98 August 7, 2001 call; where's the other car going to leave from? MS. BAISLEY: It's going to leave from there because they're forwarding their phone to their cell phone. MS. CRUZ: But, realistically, where are they going to be? They're going to be at the house. Both of the vehicles are going to be at the house. We know that. They're not going to take one vehicle and store it somewhere in the industrial area where it's the only location that zoning allows to operate a vehicle for hire. MS. HU: So why don't we limit it to two vehicles? MR. PALMER: We are. That's the proposal. MR. FLEGAL: I don't know. I just think when you're dealing in a residential neighborhood -- or we know we have people doing this out of a condominium, which I have read. Condominiums say you can't operate any business out of a condominiums. MS. CRUZ: I have a suggestion. MS. BAISLEY: -- it not being a husband and wife. Now it's the husband and an employee driving to your house in the morning. MR. PALMER: That's what we're trying to prohibit. MS. CRUZ: Let's cross off the husband and wife. Let's make a suggestion. We have certain regulations that apply only to taxicabs and certain that apply only to charter services. Let's make this that only the charter-service vehicles-- only two vehicles -- two charter- service vehicles may be operated from home. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What's the difference between a charter service and a taxi? MS. CRUZ: Because of what he's saying, that some homeowners' associations don't want -- and you can't tell from a charter service that it's a commercial vehicle because the only thing that identifies that vehicle is a commercial vehicle as that decal on the back. Now, the taxicab, you have the top light, you have the lettering - Page 99 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Is there a specific example that triggered this? MS. BAISLEY: Affordable years ago. They're not even in business anymore. I don't think anybody else has brought this up, have they? MS. CRUZ: No. But the problem was there, and we usually try to fix the problem -- MR. PALMER: In case it would recur again. MS. CRUZ: Right. MR. PALMER: However, we could say only one taxicab may be operated out of a home occupation, however, two charter-service vehicles-- the assumption is the taxicab comes and goes more than a charter-service vehicle-- MS. CRUZ: And it's more visible. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But that's a bad assumption. MR. PALMER: Is it really? MS. BAISLEY: Uh-huh. MR. FLEGAL: But a charter-service vehicle could be two stretch limos in the guy's driveway. MR. PALMER: That would be taken care of by the regulations there, probably. MS. BAISLEY: I don't like it. CRUZ: I don't like husband and wife. HU: Otherwise we're going to have them show proof of MS. MS. marriage. MR. CSOGI: That's another area. MR. PALMER: That's done all the time. What we're going to get in here if we don't have this is we're going to have employees coming to people's houses. MR. CSOGI: Right now we allow one. Page 100 August 7, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: One. MR. CSOGI: Whether it's a taxi or a charter. CHAIRMAN PEASE: By and large, 99 percent of the time we have not had any problem with that. MR. FLEGAL: I think we ought to leave it at one. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Except for those living in sin. MR. FLEGAL: Well, that's their problem. I don't want to know about it. MR. PALMER: Do you want to take that sentence out then? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think that's the direction of the PVAC. Five minutes to go. Do you think we can get through insurance? These are pretty simple concepts we're getting MR. PALMER: into here. MR. FLEGAL: Insurance is pretty straightforward. We've asked them to raise the rates. CHAIRMAN PEASE: One comment that was sent to me by fax from USA Taxi was that the suggested changes in the amounts are not standard. I don't know what he meant by that. He was concerned about the 300,000 being an unusual insurance standard. I don't have any way to gauge that. MS. BAISLEY: A lot of other ordinances for taxi operations don't require that high of a limit. They are much lower, in fact. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I know the reason why we suggested going up was that this is, like, a seven-year-old document, and $100,000 doesn't even cover one car in this town. MS. BAISLEY: But if you review ordinances from other counties, you're going to find that -- MR. CSOGI: Lease insurance is one hundred, three hundred, fifty so it's different. The first number would be one hundred. MR. PALMER: Well, we can say at least three hundred, and let it go at that. If people want to do five hundred or six hundred, fine, Page 101 August 7,2001 but not greater then that. The word "that" in line 40 on page 20 should be "than," however. And then down below, and at least $300,000 for property damage. That way it doesn't have a finite number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. That's at least -- yeah, I agree with that. At least you're not locked into one particular. MR. PALMER: Yeah. MS. BAISLEY: But that would be the minimum requirement. MR. PALMER: At least. MS. BAISLEY: And what the other operators are going to tell you is that the minimum requirements in other counties in the state are much, much lower than these. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't think the -- MR. PALMER: That's not based on the data that she found. MS. BAISLEY: You found the same thing out, didn't you? MS. CRUZ: They were a lot less. MR. PALMER: They were a lot less than this? I thought they were higher. MR. CRUZ: No. We were higher. MR. FLEGAL: But I think Collier County is a different county then anywhere in Florida when you're dealing with property, whether it be homes, buildings, cars, the amount of money people have here. This county is different. MR. PALMER: And not only that, the difference in premium between $100,000 and $300,000 is nickels. MR. FLEGAL: I wouldn't think it's a lot. MS. BAISLEY: It's not substantial, but what I'm saying is it's grossly different than other people's ordinances in this state. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, our county's different, but also this ordinance will probably last another five, six, seven years, and it may be that long before we look at it. Page 102 August 7, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I like the high rates because of the county. We're trying to protect the public anyway. MR. PALMER: Did you find out from insurance companies what the premium break is on anything like this? I bet you it's minuscule. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Bill, you're awfully quiet. What do you think? MR. CSOGI: $300,000 for property damage is kind of high in my opinion, but how much damage can a car do to a property? We're not talking about -- MS. BAISLEY: obtain the 300,000. MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: I think that part might be hard for operators to You do? On smaller operators. Well, it's a policy question. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So nobody has any objections to bodily injury? Nobody has any objections to -- it's just the property damage that you think is too high? MR. CSOGI: I don't know what the insurance companies -- what the big deal that is anyway. I don't know if they can split it up that way. MS. BAISLEY: I don't know even know if you're going to get 300,000, 1 million on taxicabs. MR. PALMER: You're going to get 1 million on personal injury, aren't you? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think that's critical. MR. PALMER: The issue is the amount for property damage; right? MR. CSOGI: Right. MR. FLEGAL: While we're talking about that, I see based on -- I think it was my comment -- were we struck out on page 21, which Page 103 August 7, 2001 basically is the charter service. What I had written in and I seemed to have missed, we had a section for cabs, and we had a section for charter services. And to me, since the money was the same, why don't we just say permitted vehicles -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I agree. MR. FLEGAL: -- so we didn't repeat it twice? That's all I was trying to do was shorten the paragraph. But ! guess we missed -- holders operating, that's on line 37. MR. PALMER: I see. ! got you. Combine it into one. MR. FLEGAL: So that everybody has to have the same, charter service, taxicab-- MR. PALMER: Well, what do we want to do about property damage minimum coverage? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Generally, don't they write the bodily injury and the property are usually the same number or not? MR. CSOGI: No. It's usually less. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't have a problem going less on property damage. MR. PALMER: Leave it at one hundred. MR. CSOGI: I say leave it at one hundred. MR. FLEGAL: That's okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: A hundred on that? Any other questions on insurance, Section A or B? MR. FLEGAL: That's pretty good. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It looks like B is-- it looks like that's just clean up stuff on B. These are really just fine points. MR. PALMER: Yeah. requirement in line 35. CHAIRMAN PEASE: line right here on No. 4. 142-55 next. And get rid of the registered mail Hey, dang, we did good. I'm putting a We're stopping. We're going to start with Page 104 August 7, 2001 And when is our next meeting? We have another workshop; right? MS. HU: I thought we wanted to go biweekly. Is that what you want to do? MR. CSOGI: That's what we decided on for the workshops. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let's do it two weeks from now, August 21st. MS. HU: Does that work for everyone? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Will you let Eric Hyde know, please. MR. PALMER: Is there any idea when we get this thing pretty well done to send this out to any number of cab companies for their thoughts, comments, and so forth? CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think you are opening up a big can of worms if you do that. MS. CRUZ: At this point? MR. FLEGAL: I do too. CHAIRMAN PEASE: These workshops are public knowledge; right? MR. PALMER: Yeah. But the only thought is coming back after this thing is passed and the screaming "if I had known about this" kind of a thing. I know in many instances with the Board of County Commissioners if an ordinance affects a lot of business they often like the ordinance to go out to the affected business so they can either put up or shut up. CHAIRMAN PEASE: If you're suggesting a final workshop after it's all finished for a final review -- is that what's you're suggesting? MR. PALMER: No. I'm suggesting that send a draft of this when we get done to four or five cab companies as a courtesy and say, "Please look at this. Is there anything in here that you've got heart burn about?" Page 105 August 7,2001 We did this on the ordinance in regard to vehicle towing. We sent it out to all the vehicle-towing companies. We sent it out to a lot of banks and so forth on the false-alarm ordinance. It just precludes the possibility of somebody coming in and saying, "Look, County Commission has done a stupid thing, and if we had just known about it, we would have come in and squawked before the ordinance was passed." It's just a suggestion. MR. CSOGI: How about instead of sending it out, we send a letter to everybody notifying them of the final workshop date, and prior to that workshop date, if you want a copy of it to review, please contact Maria? MR. PALMER: That's another way to handle it. That's good. On an as-requested basis. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Workshop is closed. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:05 p.m. PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BRYAN L. S. PEASE, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, INC., BY PAMELA HOLDEN, COURT REPORTER Page 106