Loading...
PVAC Minutes 08/21/2001 WAugust21,2001 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AUGUST 21,2001 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Public Vehicle Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:25 a.m. In WORKSHOP SESSION at Community Development Services Building, 2800 N. Horseshoe, Room C, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: Bryan L. S. Pease Clifford W. Flegal, Jr. Pat Baisley ABSENT: Eric Hyde William J. Csogi Tom Lugrin ALSO PRESENT: Ekna Hu, Code Enforcement Tom Palmer, Assistant County Attorney Page 1 August 21,2001 (Workshop commenced without Mr. Palmer present.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: We'll call the workshop to order. Let's do a review of driver IDs since that was -- oh, no, inspection sheet was first. I'm sorry. My question is this pass/fail at the bottom. What criterias determine whether they pass or fail? Does one item fail the car? MR. FLEGAL: No. I think what's that meant to be -- or at least the way I'm interpreting this, you want the "P" or "F" put down beside -- so where it says air-conditioning, heating, operating condition, if it puts an "F," that means it doesn't work. It's by item number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Oh, okay. So what I envisioned was somebody circling the P or F. We need, maybe, a better clarification on -- and maybe at the top that says, "Please place P for pass or F for fail on each item," would that -- you know, just a little instruction? What do you guys think? MS. BAISLEY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That would probably be a good idea. I thought-- you know, because if it's at the bottom of where you sign that, I thought, well -- MS. BAISLEY: Right, exactly. It should be. MR. FLEGAL: Put it up there with a little explanation-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, does this mean they don't sign this sheet if they have items that are wrong? MR. FLEGAL: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, it says, "signature certifies all below is correct," not necessarily -- MR. FLEGAL: The information is correct. CHAIRMAN PEASE' I got you. MR. FLEGAL' Item number and repairs needed. Remember we asked them to put that on the back. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I got you. Page 2 August 21,2001 MR. FLEGAL: The only other note I had on my old sheet was Item 21. I think it was Bill had commented because of the light problem on -- I can't remember whether it was a Ford or something -- MS. BAISLEY: Brake lights. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: After marking it. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. And I just wrote in there, "All lights"-- and I made a little comment -- parenthesis, factory installed must be maintained because -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: So, actually, what we need is all -- on Number 21 -- all factory lights installed-- MS. HU: I wrote it in there, and I turned it in to Palmer, but he said it wasn't a good suggestion was the point. I don't exactly remember why. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. Let's defer to Mr. Palmer when he gets here on that. MR. FLEGAL: I think the comment was they were trying to make somebody fix a light that wasn't really there, and that's a really bad reason to reject him. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Right. MR. FLEGAL: I had a note on the back that we were going to -- we were asking about certification that the corrections were made. Did Tom say we didn't need that 'cause I don't see it here? I made a note that we were going to have a certification. I certify that I've done this stuff or something. Here we just -- he just signs it. MS. HU: Write an oath is what he was -- MR. FLEGAL: Kind of like an oath. MS. HU: Yeah, I asked him. He said he was -- MR. BRADENTHAL: He said either the company that did it, or if you did it yourself you had to sign for it. MR. FLEGAL: Right. Yeah. Because this way -- I mean, you Page 3 August 21,2001 know -- hypothetically you could get some guy off the street to sign it, so we don't know who it is. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What did Mr. Palmer say? MS. HU: Well, I asked him for the wording of the -- that he had suggested, and he said it's fine because it has the ordinance number written on the bottom and he added, "Written proof of all required repairs must be provided to county staff." MR. BRIDENTHAL: This says Department of Agriculture, but all this stuff on this sheet is stuff county people inspect for a meter. Only thing agriculture is concerned with is a meter. MR. FLEGAL: No. They -- this agriculture number-- they give the number to the repair shop. They're the ones that certify the repair shop. MR. BRIDENTHAL: I'm thinking about meters. CHAIRMAN PEASE: But it should say -- I think it should say Department of Agriculture number if applicable, and the reason is if it's a windshield wiper -- for instance, if it's Item No. 12, that there's a torn or worn wiper, well, that's something that I can repair, and I don't have an agricultural number. MS. HU: I think this is why we put just the signature and the date. MR. FLEGAL: Repairs are on the back. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MS. BAISLEY: That's CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's what I'm looking at, the repairs. But you got to get it inspected at a shop. I agree. on the front. Let me clarify where I was looking. I was looking on the back where it says Department of Agriculture Number here under corrections. That's where I say -- I suggest "if applicable" because I may make the repair if it's a worn windshield wiper blade. I can make that repair, and I don't need a licensed repair Page 4 August 21,2001 shop to do that, and the implication on this form is that you have to have that. So that's my message. Put in parentheses "if applicable." MS. HU: And going back to the oath, Mr. Palmer gave me this sentence to use instead of the old signature. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Maybe we should put that same sentence on the back. MR. FLEGAL: There he is. (Mr. Palmer enters workshop.) CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Flegal, what do you think about that? MR. FLEGAL: I could live with that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Just, I think it could be on the back, that could be appropriate. MR. FLEGAL: another one of these? I have no problem with that. Do we have CHAIRMAN PEASE: Did you catch that? What we're talking about now, Mr. Palmer, is this signature line here moving it to the back as well. MR. PALMER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It's kind of a statement, but then we suggested the Department of Agriculture on the back being "if applicable" because if there's a windshield wiper blade we can repair it. We don't have a Department of Agricultural number. The implication is that you have to have it by the certifying company because it's on the front. MR. PALMER: That would work. CHAIRMAN PEASE: What else did we look at? Oh, we also talked about moving the pass/fail -- getting rid of that in the comer in the top -- putting -- explaining to put P or F for each line. MR. PALMER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Because the implication there was that Page 5 August 21, 2001 they either passed or failed, and there was no criteria for passing or failing. MR. PALMER: Right. That's what I thought too. ! thought this meant sort of an overall pass/fail grade. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. PALMER: And what you're saying is each one of these things should be -- MR. FLEGAL: Should be a P or an F, yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Any other suggested changes? MS. BAISLEY: But you're going to have one signature here on the back by the Department of Agriculture proof shop. What if it went to four different shops to get this done and you could have taken your exhaust to one place and taken your air-conditioning and heating to another place? It's not necessarily going to be the same person here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You're saying maybe we should take a few lines out and put a few more lines for signature and agricultural, or you would say --0 MS. BAISLEY: I think we should maybe just have the number alongside here. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Over on the right-hand column, yeah. Do we have room? Can we do that? MS. HU: I think if we take the item number out of it and then just make sure we match it with the top. Have the corrections made, line and signature, date, and ag number, if appropriate. MR. PALMER: Actually, that could go underneath here (indicating) so that person can just sign and then put the date and put the number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So where that line says signature-date -- MR. PALMER: Underneath there you can put -- in other words, underneath the word "signature-date" on the right column on the back Page 6 August 21,2001 page insert the words, "Department of Agriculture Number if applicable." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Then get rid of the signature and Department of Agriculture line on the bottom on the back. MR. PALMER: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. Do we really want to look at this one more time, or are we close enough now that we can say -- MR. FLEGAL: I would think if the corrections are made as we just talked about -- why don't you just let her -- before she runs a ton of them -- bring one to show you and say this is the final one and you can say, okay, and let her do it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Or fax it over or e-mail it over. MR. FLEGAL: Just e-mail it to everybody. MS. HU: I'll e-mail to save a couple trees. CHAIRMAN PEASE: E-mail to everybody. That's a good idea. I don't want to keep rehashing this thing. MR. FLEGAL: No. Because you can always find something to change so ... CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let's go to driver ID. MS. HU: I have to admit I forgot the expiration date. I noticed it just earlier today, but we can easily put that underneath the name or next to the ID number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: ! don't see anything wrong with it. Put it on there, expires such-and-such a date, MR. FLEGAL: just one line. MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: big. Uh-huh. I'd recommend that the ID number be twice as There's plenty of space for it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I would-- Page 7 August 21,2001 MR. FLEGAL: Expiration date under his name or something. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I would make it predominant on the expiration date, too, because it's not going to be calendar year, right, or is it calendar year? MS. HU: I thought we agreed it was going to be fiscal year per renewal. CHAIRMAN PEASE: doesn't need to be that large. Okay. So it is calendar year, so it Everyone knows it expires at the same time. We probably should look at that one one more time, don't you think? MR. FLEGAL: No. Just double the size of the ID number. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And go with it? All right. Let's go with it. Go ahead and e-mail that out, and we'll just do that, too, at the same time. Insurance requirements, that was on there. MS. HU: That was requested by one of the members. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. MS. BAISLEY: That was me. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. What page is that part of?. MR. PALMER: Starts on 20. MR. SHRINER: Bottom of 20. MS. BAISLEY: I received a letter, as well as I think you did, from Jack from USA Taxi. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I didn't get one, no. MS. BAISLEY: Okay. I thought it was addressed to you. I didn't bring my copy, but it was -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I got one a couple months ago from Jack, yeah. I don't have it with me. MS. BAISLEY: It states the cost of the actual increase in -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'll go ahead and put it on the record here Page 8 August 21,2001 (as read): "I have researched" -- this is a letter from Jack Bridenthal, USA Taxi, May 9, 2001. "I have researched this" -- he's talking about the amendment of taxi ordinance --"I have researched this with our current carrier, Insurance Company of New York, and the 300/1,000,000/300 is not a standard package, but 300 total (one injury multiple PD) would cost an additional $1,100 per year. One million total as above 300 would cost an added $1,861 per car per year. Why the change? See below requirements of various governments: Hillsborough County, 100/300/50; Clearwater, 100/300/100; St. Petersburg, 10/20/10; Bradenton, 25/50/25; Miami, 50/100/25; Fort Lauderdale, 100/300/50; Sarasota, 100/300/50. Above figures are not mine, but I am sure they are correct from Insurance Company of New York." We had this discussion, though, and we discussed this county isn't the same as Tampa or St. Pete. Might be more comparable with Boca or West Palm, but we did -- didn't we back down a little bit on our insurance? Yeah, we went to 100,000 for property damage from 300. What part is from Pat, from your perspective? MS. BAISLEY: The million dollars is what, I think, the taxi operators are objecting to; is that correct, Jack? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Pardon me? MS. BAISLEY: The million dollars' worth of coverage? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Well, yeah. The million but what we have is as high as any that he researched. I don't know about maybe -- you know, he didn't write in any of those other cities. So I don't know what West Palm has. MS. BAISLEY: Fort Lauderdale is in here, and that's 100/300/50. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't think we are comparable to Fort Lauderdale either in terms of property and -- except down by the Page 9 August 21,2001 water. MR. BRIDENTHAL: 100/300/100 now? CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: increased. MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: We're higher on the insurance. Aren't we What -- what year was this ordinance? This insurance was amended and, I think, in '95 I think sometime. Think about it, these are minimums. If a large company wants to carry all the insurance in the world, that's fine, but the guy I'm thinking about is the little guy who can't afford another thousand dollars' worth of expenses in a year's time. MS. BAISLEY: Right. MR. PALMER: I'd recommend we leave it the way it is. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, on the injury claims that have come up over-- since '95 to 2001, has the amount of claims increased over those six years? MR. PALMER: I have no idea. We -- I remember that we raised these from 50/100 around '95. MS. BAISLEY: I think close. MR. PALMER: These are minimums. MS. BAISLEY: It's going to kill the little guy. MR. PALMER: It is. It's going to hurt the little guy. MS. BAISLEY: Hurt the guy with one or two taxis out there. MR. SHRINER: Sir, excuse me. Operating out of Collier County and going into Lee County to the RSW Airport, RSW requires dropping off or picking up a half million. MS. BAISLEY: That's correct. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Not dropping off. MS. BAISLEY: To pick up there. MR. SHRINER: To get on the premises, it's going to a half million. Page 10 August 21,2001 MS. BAISLEY: To pick up there, you have to have a half million. MR. BRIDENTHAL: You can contract with them to drop off. MR. PALMER: Well, that's fine. The driver who wants to pick up on the airport get the required insurance. That's not -- Collier County doesn't care whether somebody's qualified to go and pick up. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, but the point is, though, even the airport requires more than 300,000. MR. PALMER: Well, then let the airport require what the airport requires. CHAIRMAN PEASE: This is based on a six-year-old number. MR. PALMER: I think that this is hard enough-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: Everything's going up in six years. Cab rates went up during that time as well. MR. PALMER: It's of no concern to Collier County whether or not somebody has a particular insurance coverage for some particular pickup point. That's not within the scope of the county. If they have a 500,000 insurance requirement, that's fine. If anybody wants to pick up, then let them meet those requirements. MR. FLEGAL: Let's ask the basic question. If we leave it like it is, 100/300/100, is the -- I guess bottom line, if something happens, of course, anybody's going to sue everybody and their brother, but is the county protected from somebody coming back saying, gee, you guys should have told these guys to have more insurance? MR. PALMER: I don't think the county's got any legal obligation to do any particular insurance on it. That's why some counties have 25/50/25. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let me go in this direction a little bit just -- we're looking at something that's going to hopefully not be changed in the next five to six years, as well, so we're talking about a ten-year -- potential ten-year span. I know you can change any time, but these Page 11 August 21,2001 things don't happen that easily to change the ordinance. Talking about a 10- to 12-year span of old rates. Is the public, which is our charge -- is the public protected sufficiently at $300,000 for the next six years ? MR. PALMER: Who can say? Look what some of these counties have, 20/50/25. We have no obligation to have any particular amount of insurance. These are minimums. People can carry whatever insurance above these rates that they want to. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So your suggestion is to take out the whole paragraph? MR. PALMER: No. My suggestion is to leave it the way it is. It's a big hit, $1,000 a year for a small business a year for a small cab driver. MS. BAISLEY: They're not going to be in business. They're going to be out of business. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Whose responsibility is the $1,0007 Does that go to the driver or the taxi owner? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Company. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Company pays that, not the driver. So we're not talking about the little driver; we're talking about the little owner of the taxi company which, in some cases, may be the same thing. MR. PALMER: Some of these people are sole proprietors. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. I understand. MR. BRIDENTHAL: If you look at a one-man operation, he's going to have to have $2 more start-up on the cab rate. One man run 1,800 calls a year, that's $1. If it cost him $1,800 more per car per year, he'd have to have a dollar more on each fare. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I'm open to some compromise, but I think the existing has been there for six years. It's going to be another six, and I think it's too low now based on the legal system Page 12 August 21,2001 and what they are. I understand the needs of the taxi, and I am very sensitive to that. So maybe the suggestion is to do a half, which is comparable to RSW, which would seem to be a fair compromise. I mean, the cost to go from three hundred to five hundred thousand can't be that much. MR. BRIDENTHAL: CHAIRMAN PEASE: $1,100, isn't it, on that letter there? We didn't check a half million. MS. HU: Jack is giving information about Florida itself, but I understand that in other states up North these rates are way low as to what I hear compared to what they have up north. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Such as, can you be more specific? MS. HU: They have about three million for bodily injury, and it's just way up there. MS. BAISLEY: If you look at the ordinances from up north, they're much more comprehensive than this ordinance also, and they require a lot more things than we do here. MR. BRIDENTHAL: His research here on three hundred total coverage rather than one-three-one would be 1,100 a year. A company like Accent that runs one car, he'd have to have a dollar a fare. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We're at one hundred, three, one hundred and we're talking about-- MR. BRIDENTHAL: And we're equal to the highest in the state now, or I don't know about Lee County. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We have the highest of everything here. MR. BRIDENTHAL: That's for sure. MR. FLEGAL: Price you pay for living in paradise. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I'm open -- I'm open to further discussion when we have a full board. MR. FLEGAL: Rather than hurt any of the people that are in business, I mean, since it is a minimum. I'm not against leaving it like Page 13 August 21,2001 it is. I understand wanting to raise it, but at the same time trying to balance that with -- I don't want to force people out of business just to get higher insurance rates. I don't know how many accidents there are in a year or how many claims there are in a year. This might not be any, for all I know. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Oh, yeah. There's half a dozen on each company. Highest one I ever heard of settled was -- I think Checker had a 200,000 settled a couple years ago. CHAIRMAN PEASE: insurance amount. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Usually they settle for just under the Yeah. I carry a half-million-dollar general liability policy. That won't cover everything. That covers if somebody breaks their leg on my front porch or gets out of the cab and breaks their leg. It don't cover any vehicle accident. MS. BAISLEY: You're not going to hurt the bigger operator. You're not necessarily going to hurt me or Checker Cab by doing this. You're going to hurt the little guy who's got three or four cabs or one cab and he's trying to make a living. He's not going to be able to with those limits. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Flegal, I'll go with you. MR. FLEGAL: Well, I mean, I think we only have, what, six cab companies quote unquote, true cab companies? MS. HU: I'd say five. MR. FLEGAL: And this, of course, applies to all of them, so -- and we have a lot of one stretch or whatever they want to call themselves, which may or may not be a good thing in the county that we have so many of those. I don't know, and Lord knows how many claims they've ever had. Rather than put a lot of those, I guess, on the verge of going out of business, I'm not adverse to leaving them the way they are for that reason. I would like to see them higher, but I'm trying to balance out with putting somebody out of business, and Page 14 August 21,2001 I don't think that's our intent, really. CHAIRMAN PEASE: No, it's not. MR. FLEGAL: So leaving them like they are is probably a good deal. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. I go along with that. Let's go to ordinance changes, and we're at page 21 of Draft 4. MR. PALMER: No. You should have Draft 5. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, I just got it today. MR. FLEGAL: We just got it so -- that didn't change anything. That just changed what we went over already, hopefully. MR. PALMER: It didn't change a lot. It changed just a few things you asked me to put in last week. I don't think it changed anything on this page. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Under Section 1.4.2.5.5, let's go through staff 1 and A. Let's see, I don't know if that was put in or not, occupational license, time frame needed. I'm assuming that's what's underlined here. No, it doesn't. It doesn't say when you have to have it. Is that what the staff's issue was? MR. FLEGAL: I don't know. I think that's -- an occupational license is only good for a year. You have to renew them every year. So, I mean, why do you care about the time frame? It's automatic. MS. BAISLEY: Maybe they are referring to the time frame when they first get their permit? MR. FLEGAL: Well, I think our ordinance already states that to get a permit you have to get an occupational license, doesn't it? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. MR. FLEGAL: So and it's only good-- they expire September 30th. I just renewed mine, so I can't remember. MR. PALMER: Probably on a taxable year. MS. BAISLEY: But aren't you making them provide you with the actual occupational license or the application for the occupational Page 15 August 21,2001 license? Maybe that's what the question is. MR. BRIDENTHAL: You send a copy of the occupational license. MS. BAISLEY: I understand, but when they first get their permit. Like, if we approve somebody today that's sitting here, can they go down to your office today and get that with just the application for the -- MS. HU: The occupational license, you mean? Get the occupational license or our certificate to operate? MS. BAISLEY: Can you get the certificate to operate with just the application for the occupational? MS. HU: No. We need the occupational license. MR. FLEGAL: Well, just walk over there and get it. Fill it out and give them 30 bucks. MS. BAISLEY: Depending on where your property is, they might have to come out and inspect it. MS. HU: That's for a certificate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So they still can't, basically, roll the wheel until they've got their occupational license; right? MS. HU: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So I don't get it. Okay. Mr. Flegal, you had a valid copy of the State of Florida Department of Highway and Safety. Did that get put in? MR. FLEGAL: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. And also you had notarized. Did that get put in? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: on January 31 st instead of March 1 st. MR. FLEGAL: I was just curious, we say everything expires February 1st, but we're going to give you a grace period. Why? I All those changes have been made. Also -- okay, the State of Florida expires Page 16 August 21,2001 MR. PALMER: MS. BAISLEY: MR. PALMER: same ordinance here. mean, if it expires, it expires. When your driver's license expires, the state doesn't say, "Well, that's okay. You can drive without a license for 30 days." MR. BRIDENTHAL: I wondered why that was in. MR. FLEGAL: I think when it expires, it expires. We don't need any grace period, and I don't want to hear, "Well, they're busy." Tough; it's a business. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Maybe they want that $8 a day. CHAIRMAN PEASE: It's easier to get it done in December than it is March anyway. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. Just go down and get it. I don't think there should be grace periods. The expiration date is the expiration date. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Pat, your thoughts? MS. BAISLEY: I don't have a problem with that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, can we make that happen? MR. PALMER: Where is this? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Page 22. MR. FLEGAL: Page 22. It says, certificate to run from February through January of the next year, and it says, come up here -- and then it goes down, sets the fee (as read): "All certificates for hire which are not renewed prior to February 1 go on probation." I don't think so. I think when they expire at the end of January, if you don't have a new one by February 1st, you're out of business. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Go a couple more lines to 11. Let's work from -- I got a five. Page 22. I'm not working -- we're not working on the MR. BRIDENTHAL: Twenty-two, eleven. MR. PALMER: Why don't we work from -- Page 17 August 21,2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: Well, the challenge is nobody's reviewed this because we just got this. MR. PALMER: They are highlighted. All the changes are highlighted in gray, and they're not on this page. I can't find where you-- where you're sentence is your talking about. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Page 22, line 11. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yeah. It's -- MR. FLEGAL: I think if you start there, like, on line 7 it says, "All for hire certificates which are not renewed prior to February 1st shall become void." You don't give them any probation period, and there's no extra $8. I mean, none of that. You're just out of business. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You have to come up before the board again. MR. FLEGAL: They're running a business, and if they can't keep their licenses renewed, they shouldn't be in business. Very simple. Sorry. MR. PALMER: All right. Take out lines half of 10 and 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and start, "It shall be a violation ofthis article." MR. FLEGAL: Right. MR. PALMER: Okay. Got it. MR. FLEGAL: Just so we don't give them any probation. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Let's see. MS. BAISLEY: Shall we mention in there that they will have to reapply for a new certificate? MR. FLEGAL: No. We can just say it's void. It's automatic. I mean, they're going to come down here and say, "Gee, I'm a day late." Tough. Get up another 250 bucks to get up another application. That way they'll learn to do things on time. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Next one you have, Mr. Flegal, I don't know if it was put in. I think it got put in -- we'll check it -- regarding insurance. Page 18 August 21, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. FLEGAL: Okay. insurance lapses. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Oh, I think we've already passed insurance. It's actually D. It says 142.55D. But all the insurance stuff was -- oh. At the end. I remember that now. Yeah, that if the Well, this is shown it's struck, but you've suggested "shall be immediate and become null and void." MR. FLEGAL: I have to go back and find it. Just a second. MR. PALMER: This has been relocated to page 21, lines 13, 14, 15. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. That's why it's stuck there? MR. PALMER: Uh-huh. It fits better on page 21. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does that match the change you were wanting to see, Mr. Flegal, "immediate and become automatically null and void"? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah, that's fine. I can live with that. I just wanted us to get -- I didn't want anybody running around without insurance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Anything else on 142.557 Okay, 142.56. Mr. Flegal, you wanted to see immediate-- make the certificate null and void under each unapproved transfer? MR. FLEGAL: Right. They put that in. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. You also wanted "summarily." MR. FLEGAL: Well, that's in -- now you're getting into 57. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm sorry. That is 57. Fifty-six, any other comments on 56? Okay. Fifty-seven, you wanted "summarily." MR. FLEGAL: I understand why we can't probably do that, so I'm not upset. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Staff wanted a driver sworn affidavit. Did that get put in? They wanted renewal registration of certificate to Page 19 August 21,2001 operate shall include the name of the owner, central place of business, address, proof of insurance, valid registration, driver sworn affidavit. MS. BAISLEY: Well, they're going to get the driver sworn affidavit when they do the-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: With the sticker. So that doesn't need to be in there. Okay. Staff also wanted to add a section for notice stickers. Stickers should include rate and notice. MS. HU: I think that's going to be covered with the ID, so we don't need to -- driver ID. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All right. Let's see here. MR. FLEGAL: Are we out of 57 yet? Fifty-eight, I have a question. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Go ahead, fifty-eight. MR. FLEGAL: Maybe Tom can help me. In these disciplinary proceedings, I see that we're asking the general public that if they have a complaint it's all got to be by sworn complaints and they got to reference article numbers. I mean, the general public probably doesn't even know this ordinance exists. Why are we saying the only way they can make a complaint is by swearing and referencing? I mean, you don't do that in any other ordinance. You just call in and say, "My neighbor's grass is too tall" or "He's got a bunch of junk in the yard." Why are we making them do all that? MR. PALMER: This is not a change. This has been in here since day one. MR. FLEGAL: I understand. Maybe this is the first time I've caught it, but I read through this and said, "Gee, this sounds like it's awful hard to make a complaint." MR. PALMER: I don't think it is. I don't think it is. The staff can help people. We should not be jumping on businesses based on unsworn complaints that may be total BS. If somebody's got a Page 20 August 21, 2001 complaint, let them -- let them -- all you do in a sworn statement is say-- it's not under penalty of perjury-- is write in the form. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, why are we putting these things in the cars with a phone number to call -- MR. PALMER: They can call. CHAIRMAN PEASE: -- for the public to -- and then after they call they have to go down and do a sworn statement? MR. PALMER: Yeah. Yeah. Because this doesn't happen that often. People can make vindictive sworn complaints. The county's got a lot of problems with a lot of unfounded BS complaints. It starts an investigation. It starts the expenditure of staff time and effort, and it seems -- it documents who said what to whom. It documents why staff is investigating somebody. Something goes awry and the person says, "I didn't say that. I didn't tell staff that. They're making things up." It documents a record when the complaint is made, and this business about other ordinance in here is because there were some weaknesses in this ordinance in regard to Hummer Ride and the sign ordinance. It isn't clear to what extent they apply. If somebody comes in here and says they're violating this, staff can help them put together the complaint. They don't have to go looking through ordinances. But there ought to be some specificity here because people come in and they generally make complaints about "X Cab Company is doing things wrong investigate." It's a question of saving staff time, about focusing the investigation on some specific alleged violation. It's protective of both the company and staff. We're having a lot of problems in this county, a lot of vindictive unfounded complaints. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And I hear your point, and I agree that it is easy for one taxi operator to go against another or one company to go against another or one sedan company going against another. But at the same time, why are we putting these things in these cars, Page 21 August 21,2001 because nobody in their right mind -- if they see a problem, they're going to call. Maybe they'll call in from their cell phone from the backseat of the car, but they're not going to do a sworn statement. Now, maybe it needs to be if you're -- and you can't even say if you're a commercial operator you're going to do it because then you'll just say, "I was a guest in this car." MR. PALMER: First of all, if you want staff to accept complaints over the telephone, fine, amend the ordinance. I don't think it's good policy. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Then why did we go through all this whole thing.'? MR. PALMER: Look, this whole thing about sworn complaints been in here since 1991. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Has it CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: Has it CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm not arguing that. been a problem? I'm just asking -- been a problem? We're starting a new procedure, Mr. Palmer, with the phone number in the back of the car or in the car visible. MR. PALMER: Whatever you want to do, go ahead and do. It's going to be a problem. I don't recommend starting investigations of taxicab companies based on phone calls. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. So what do you recommend when the sticker is in the back? MR. PALMER: I recommend that the person calls up and the person says, "Fine. Write me a letter. Tell me about what happened. Say in the letter that this is -- that this is a sworn letter," or take out the sworn. The fact about it, then, nobody's under oath. Anybody can say anything. I do not recommend starting investigations of any business where the revocation or suspension of their rights is based Page 22 August21,2001 on a telephone call. MS. HU: They're not going to be based on just a telephone call. They're going to based on the investigations that are going to be performed after the telephone call. MR. PALMER: The question is, are you going to instigate an investigation based on only a telephone call? MS. HU: Well, we do that for every case that we -- that we deal with, and I tell you through experience I've had a couple of complaints that especially people that are from out of town that were driven to the airport and they're calling -- to begin with they're calling on a long distance call, and they don't -- MR. PALMER: All right. If you're doing that right now, then you're violating the presently existing ordinance. MS. HU: Doing what? MR. PALMER: The presently existing ordinance does not allow the institution of investigations based on telephone calls. MS. HU: I'm not doing that. I've taken complaints -- which is nice -- and I write a letter to the certificate holder letting them know that we -- somebody called and gave us a complaint, and that's very nice. We can't do anything about that because the person, in fact, did not turn in a sworn complaint. MR. PALMER: This has to do with the initiation of disciplinary proceedings. This does not have to do with writing a letter to a company saying a complaint had been made. The question is, is having a record to support something that could lead to in and of itself, a factual foundation, that could lead to a discipline proceeding of a cab company? MS. BAISLEY: I think that if you're serious about something you're complaining about, it's not too much to write a letter that's sworn. MR. PALMER: No. In fact, you don't have to have it notarized. Page 23 August 21,2001 All you've got to do is say, "this is under penalty of perjury." The county has right now been put on notice about a possible federal lawsuit about investigating people based on redundant, unfounded, superfluous, malicious complaints, and the county's got to do something about it because the county has investigated one employee eight times for the same thing, eight separate investigations and the same allegation. We got a letter from a lawyer yesterday saying, "What gives here? This is overkill and harassment." It seems to me if somebody wants -- if the idea is I want somebody's certificate suspended or revoked, it's not asking too much to put it in writing. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I understand. Okay. So you're saying she can still do what she's doing? MR. PALMER: Yeah. This has to do with the initiation of disciplinary proceedings. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Tom -- excuse me. This doesn't even say anything in it about if you finally would put somebody from the staff on the road finding their own violations. MR. PALMER: Well, that's a different question. If staff or a member of code enforcement is an eyewitness to a violation, then it's all firsthand information. We're not relying on something we're being told by some third party. MR. BRIDENTHAL: There's nothing in there about that doesn't have to be-- MR. FLEGAL: That's not true. First -- first item A, even the staff has to file a sworn complaint. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Oh, I see. MS. HU: Right. Although it does state and the Rules added, it says, for violations of this article by filing a sworn complaint or notice of violation, a notice of violation is -- we start a notice of violation with a phone call. That's how we start a case. So if Page 24 August 21,2001 somebody calls and gives us a complaint, per se, we can start a case which is a notice of violation. It's the same thing. MR. PALMER: Actually, I had in mind here, this notice of violation to be a more formalized written notice to a cab company that's kind of like, in most instances -- I don't know in your case -- like a form like a ticket. MR. FLEGAL: It's like you do on other code enforcement stuff. MR. PALMER: That's what I had in mind, and I don't mean an oral notice of violation. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Is this supposed to go to PVAC or to -- MR. PALMER: Well, there's a -- there's a change put in the ordinance based on last week that I've added to page 28 that says (as read): "This chapter may be enforced by any Collier County Code Enforcement Board." But under the presently existing ordinance, the Code Enforcement Board has no enforcement jurisdiction under what's on the books today. MR. BRIDENTHAL: But this says the complaints are to go to PVAC. MR. PALMER: Yeah. MR. BRIDENTHAL: We were told to turn them into code enforcement. MR. PALMER: Well, you turn them into code enforcement, and then they get funneled to the PVAC which in a broad sense is under code enforcement, but it's not under the jurisdiction of the Code Enforcement Board. Right now the only disciplinary board in regard to these companies is the PVAC. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Say this gets finalized, would we send a complaint to Bryan as chairman of PVAC? MR. PALMER: No. They always come to this board, and if this board wanted to refer them to code enforcement, they would. MR. FLEGAL: Item B says you file your complaint with the Page 25 August 21,2001 county manager or-- which is also the staff, which would be code enforcement department. MR. PALMER: That's right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Then C says they'll give us a copy. MR. FLEGAL: Then they would forward it up to the committee to take care of, but if they see something wrong they, have to file something with the committee. You file it with them; they file with US. MR. PALMER: If you want to put the word "written" in line 28, we can do that, because when I say issuance of a notice of violation, "issuance" means you can't really issue an oral notice. So we can put the word "written" in there if there's any ambiguity about it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So, staff, we will start with A again. Staff is required -- if they see something, they have to fill out a sworn statement, or they just send the letter, a written notice of violation, on that, or is the phone call still acceptable? MR. PALMER: A notice of violation is a more formalized document. I had in mind there a ticket-like document. That is not just say that somebody has complained and that your driver cussed out a passenger last week. That is more like a notice, but it's not leading to disciplinary action. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Can we use "written notice" in there? That would help them, I think. MR. PALMER: Yeah. This has to do with disciplinary proceedings, something prerequisite to a serious matter that has the possibility of some action being taken against the cab company or driver. Staff can help people with this. One of the problems with it is people come in here and they give you a generalized complaint and leave it up to staff to search the ordinances for what may be a violation. That can take a lot of time. Page 26 August21,2001 MR. BRIDENTHAL: There might not be a violation. MR. PALMER: Yeah. May not be a violation. You need specifics. People come in with "XYZ Cab Company is a lousy cab company, and they're breaking the rules. Thank you." That kind of thing. MS. HU: Well, we can't -- even if somebody called and says, "My neighbor's loud and obnoxious," that type of complaint, we can't take a complaint like that. MR. PALMER: The question I'm trying to get in here is the specificity of the threshold before staff starts taking time and effort in response to these complaints. There's got to be a filtering process where nobody is starting time and effort of county staff based on every time somebody rings in a phone call. We need some kind of a threshold. MR. FLEGAL: Okay. MR. PALMER: And it says here -- see C -- (as read): "Or upon knowledge however obtained that raises staff suspicion that violation has occurred or occurring." In other words, however obtained -- a law enforcement officer could call you, some eyewitness, actually somebody -- some code enforcement officer can see something, be an eyewitness, they could call you. You could accept that because that has a prima facie validity. When people call in from the outside world, you don't know who these people are. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Mr. Palmer, let me try and understand the procedures here. A formal complaint is made-- MR. PALMER: Written complaint or just a phone call? CHAIRMAN PEASE: No. Written complaint is made. They come in and notarize it or whatever you do. MR. PALMER: Don't need to notarize it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They research it. They find out that they are not in compliance. The owner says, "I don't care what you think. Page 27 August 21,2001 I'm just doing my own thing." Then the next step is, they get -- they are indicating when this is going to come up before the committee; is that right? MR. PALMER: I've never seen it. Is the notice of violation just saying you either have to correct something, pay a fine, or have a hearing? I don't know what the form is. I know that code enforcement basically gives them a certain period of time to correct it, because the idea here is to correct things. If they don't correct it, then there is a hearing on the merits. If there is a violation termed as a matter of fact, then certain possible penalties flow from that. MR. FLEGAL: I think part of the confusion is -- the form they use for code enforcement on all ordinances, can that be used on this? And I think they said last time they feel that they have no authority to do anything against this ordinance currently; that's why they wanted some teeth. There is a ticket they issue right now in everything but probably this ordinance. MR. PALMER: This ordinance gives in a couple of instances summary power. For example, on 142-57A, the certificate issued on this provision may be summarily suspended by staff or county administrator if it is determined by staff to protect the safety of persons or resist violations of these particular sections. Mostly these are safety. Like a vehicle is in such bad shape it could harm the driver or passenger or insurance has lapsed. Those are perfectly valid reasons of such a serious nature that could be a summary suspension; that is suspension. MR. FLEGAL: Right. MR. PALMER: Any revocation of a business' right to do business, whether it is a matter of law, due process, require a hearing. Because that's a permanent revocation of a person's right to do business. MR. FLEGAL: I understand that part, but what they are having Page 28 August 21,2001 a problem with, I think, is that when they get a complaint that maybe they don't have a taxicab light or the lights are out or the doors are falling off, there's nothing in the current document that gives them any power to do anything against that cab company, and that's their problem right now. MR. PALMER: You mean the PVAC or staff?. MR. FLEGAL: The staff can't go -- code enforcement can't go and do anything to these people. MR. PALMER: Well, the PVAC can. MR. FLEGAL: Yes. But that's -- you know, that's a long drawn-out process. They've got to bring it before the committee to do something. What they were looking for is like you're saying in the issuance of these little tickets, which is what they use in all the other ordinances. They could go to Jack and say, "Under paragraph X your lights aren't working, and that's a violation. Here, we're going to give you 15 days or 5 days to get these lights fixed, or you're going to get fined." And Jack would go get it fixed, and everything would go away. Right now they can't do that. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Nothing like that in there. No penalties, no enforcement. MR. PALMER: Not at the staff level. I didn't know that staff wanted that power. That can be put in here. MR. FLEGAL: They need to handle this ordinance like they handle all the other ordinances. MS. HU: I know that code enforcement investigators have the right to enforce this ordinance per -- I believe it's Ordinance 2065 or 95? MR. PALMER: Has that been incorporated in here? I'm not aware that it has. MS. HU: No. But that's a complete separate ordinance which includes -- it gives them the right to exercise and enforce this Page 29 August 21,2001 ordinance, but that's only investigators. MR. BRIDENTHAL: It gives them the right to enforce any ordinance per a higher ordinance. MS. HU: Right. Right. MR. PALMER: I haven't seen that ordinance. I'm not sure what's included in there. If you give me a copy of that page, because they don't include all ordinances. They've got a laundry list of ordinances that they have a jurisdiction over, but it's not by any means all inclusive. MS. HU: I will get you a copy after. MR. PALMER: I'm not disputing that, but I don't know that for a fact, and I'd be surprised that's the case. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Because they have no training on that. MR. PALMER: Well, no. It isn't based on training; it's based on -- the Board of County Commissioners did an analysis a year or two ago and gave a list of ordinances of which they had jurisdiction. They did not include, by a long shot, all ordinances they could possibly enforce, such as, for example, the False Alarm Ordinance. So that there are others in this county that they could be on that list that the Board of County Commissioners decided not to add to that list. I don't know whether this ordinance is on there or not. I'd be surprised that it is. If it is, fine. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Nobody can enforce it. MR. PALMER: No. But the PVAC can enforce it. MR. FLEGAL: Only the committee. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We want us to be the last resort. We don't want to be the front line. Staff should be able to have the power to ticket within so many days of lack of correction just like any other violation. MR. PALMER: We can do that. There is not a problem. We can do that. That's just the first I've heard of it. Page 30 August 21, 2001 MR. FLEGAL: I think that would help them, and it would help the operators too. MS. BAISLEY: They would receive a notice of violation, then, before they would receive an actual ticket demanding a court appearance or fine? MR. FLEGAL: MS. MR. and if the A committee appearance, yeah. BAISLEY: Whatever. BRIDENTHAL: In the county you can walk up to a cab cab door falls off, then who can do that? MR. FLEGAL: That would be kind of a safety factor, so they could automatically do that right now. MR. BRIDENTHAL: You're saying-- they are saying code enforcement can't enforce? MR. FLEGAL: Well, but see, that's -- the enforcement investigator can't. Staff-- if she gets a phone call from one of the investigators driving down the street and he says, "Hey, I just saw a cab, and it's missing a door, but he's driving down the street," then Ekna could go to Michelle and say, "Look, our guy just saw this. We need to summarily yank this guy's permit right now." They have the power to do that right now, but they can't do -- if you didn't have, say, your little permit on your little bumpers that you're supposed to have, you're just around picking up people, tough. She's got to bring you before the committee. Got to find out who you are first and, see, I think that's wrong. I think they should be able to get to these people, and we need to give them this power. MR. PALMER: We can do that. CHAIRMAN PEASE' Okay. Mr. Palmer, you can work on that. MR. PALMER: I can talk with them and find out what they want to do. This will be one of these things, "You're in violation, you've got to serve time to correct." If you don't correct, the fine -- Page 31 August 21,2001 "the sum amount will be automatically imposed", kind of a thing. Yeah, I will get with you on that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And then if you still don't correct, you go before the PVAC and yank the permit. MR. PALMER: Or suspend it or-- you know. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Suspend it, whatever. MR. PALMER: My understanding is in most of these cases throughout the code enforcement jurisdiction 99.9 percent of these things get handled summarily. People that go before the board, in general, are unreasonable people. Reasonable people do what they are supposed to do, and the problem gets solved. CHAIRMAN PEASE: And that's all we want. MR. PALMER: Yeah, of course. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Anything else on this? MR. FLEGAL: That's fine. MR. BRIDENTHAL: I have a comment to Tom, and I think he's been here long enough to know the answer. Long before my time in the cab business I understand all the permit fees were doubled to give code enforcement salary or money to do enforcement, but then it wasn't put in the ordinance for them to go out and do enforcement. Like, you know, you hire a new code enforcement man next year, do nothing but junk cars in Naples Manor. That's what I understand our permit fees were to take care of an enforcement person to be on board to be out in the field. MR. SHRINER: It's not in the ordinance. MR. PALMER: That's an administrative matter that's up to the county manager. That wouldn't go in the ordinance normally to say that the county will hire a full-time employee. MR. BRIDENTHAL: No. What I mean, it's not in the ordinance that a code enforcement person has power to go out and write citations. Page 32 August 21,2001 MR. PALMER: Well, there is now on page 28. I added on 142.60. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I don't have a page 28. MR. PALMER: This is because you're working-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: I am on the fifth draft. MS. BAISLEY: No. I got the fifth draft too. MR. PALMER: I didn't copy these copies. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I'm using your sheets. MR. PALMER: I'm saying I got this thing to the staff the day after the last meeting. I expected staff to mail these things out to you the next day and have at least a week or ten days before the meeting. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Must be missing a -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: One at a time. If we could e-mail the whole draft, the letter, or photocopy as soon as he does that, that would be a plus. What does it say on page 28? MR. PALMER: It says (as read): "This chapter may be enforced by any Collier County Code Enforcement Board." CHAIRMAN PEASE: Sounds like the right thing to say. MR. PALMER: That was instructed to me at the last meeting. I don't know why I'm busting my butt to get these things back to the board and the staff the next day and you don't get them until the day of this meeting and have two pages missing. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Ekna's going to correct this, aren't you, Ekna? You're going to e-mail it to everybody. MS. HU: Yes, I will. MR. BRIDENTHAL: Mine ends on 26. MR. PALMER: That's because somebody forgot to copy the last couple of pages. MS. HU: Well, I have page 26 myself, and that was the original. MR. FLEGAL: Are we down to 59? Page 33 August21,2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: We will have to work-- Mr. Palmer, some of us are going to have to work off the old document because we don't have that. On 59 staff wanted driver's sworn statement. We don't need that now; right? MS. HU: No. MR. PALMER: I'm sorry. Where are you? CHAIRMAN PEASE: Fifty-nine. MR. FLEGAL: We're in section 59, is it in here? MR. PALMER: Renewal of certificate. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They want a driver's sworn statement, but they don't need that because we're doing that individually. MR. PALMER: The only change to this provision is the sentence that starts, "Renewal registration certificate to operate shall be under oath." Those are added words, and that was done at somebody's request. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Mr. Flegal, you suggested include the companies, county staff, and control meter calibration and certification. MR. FLEGAL: I think we got out of that at one point in time because we didn't want to make the county have any liability for fixing meters or doing any of that stuff. I think a long time ago we got rid of that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Then the last that I have in suggested changes -- and I haven't cross-checked it-- are their definitions on community transportation, and I do not see that, Mr. Palmer. I'm not sure if we need it. Somebody suggested definitions on -- this might have been yours, Mr. Flegal, community transportation commercial driver's license. MR. FLEGAL: They don't need a commercial driver's license nowadays, as I remember. Didn't we change that? That's not required in these types of vehicles. Page 34 August 21, 2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: A definition -- community transportation definition. Let's start with that. MS. HU: That would be in the front -- beginning of the ordinance. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Beginning of the ordinance page 2 alphabetical. MS. HU: Right. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Was that your suggestion? MR. FLEGAL: No. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Somebody suggested the definition, need for community transportation. Does that mean they thought maybe the community may need to be excluded or something? MR. PALMER: I don't know what the logic behind that is. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Do we use that phrase anywhere in this ordinance? MR. PALMER: No. And I consider it a very technical definition to the extent it has any applicability and must be really done precisely, but I don't know how it is intertwined with the ordinance. MS. BAISLEY: It is on page 4 about the community transportation operator, bottom of page 438. MR. PALMER: I'm sorry. Where is it? MS. BAISLEY: Bottom of page 438. MS. HU: Section 142.28. MS. BAISLEY: That exempts them from this ordinance. MR. PALMER: It's defined already in the statute. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So we're okay there? MR. PALMER: MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: transportation as defined in Section 427.011, Florida Statutes. Yeah. We can just refer to the statute. We don't regulate that. In fact, it's an exception. It says community We Page 35 August 21,2001 don't need to incorporate that in there. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Let me ask a question on that since we're talking about it. Does Checker Cab do the work for community transportation? MS. BAISLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. So maybe, Mr. Palmer, there needs to be clarification because they sub out the work to a taxi operator, so would it be that it could be construed that the subcontractor doesn't need to comply? MS. BAISLEY: They do not have permits on their vehicles that they use for that service. They have little Kias running around with Community Transportation on the side. CHAIRMAN PEASE: All of those are Checker Cab? MS. BAISLEY: Those are actually Checker Cab. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MS. BAISLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Operating? Then it's okay. They're not using a Checker Cab for community transportation, you're saying. MS. BAISLEY: Sometimes they do. MR. PALMER: They have their own regulations. Somebody oversees them, some state agency that have their own criteria, and they're responsible to see to it that that criteria is met so we don't have overlapping jurisdiction. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Somebody suggested the definition of color scheme. MR. FLEGAL: Well, that's in there, I think. MR. PALMER: Yeah. That's in there on page -- MS. BAISLEY: I think we talked about that when we went through this. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Yes. Okay. Then subcontractor. MR. FLEGAL: We had subcontract vehicles. I don't see a Page 36 August 21,2001 subcontractor. MR. PALMER: I think that's in the text. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Might be the same. MR. PALMER: I think I expanded some text in the middle of the ordinance to cover that, clarify that. Oh, it's on page 12 of my ordinance. It's E. MR. FLEGAL: Subcontracting vehicles for hire. Yeah, that's a whole new section. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. Okay. I don't see any other suggested changes by anybody. Do we want to look at a final at the next meeting -- official meeting? When is our next meeting? MS. HU: First of October. CHAIRMAN PEASE: October 1st. MR. FLEGAL: Now that you made all these changes and Tom knows that everything's finally done -- MR. PALMER: I'm going to have to get with staff about this ticket business. MR. FLEGAL: I mean, as far as this document goes. How they issue the ticket is a little -- as a side thing. I think you should see it before. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You want to have one more workshop? MR. FLEGAL: I don't know that you need a workshop, per se; maybe a workshop at the end of the meeting to just -- everybody will have it in advance, go through, get everything put in we talked about. I'm pretty sure it has, and then you get one final look, and then what you should probably do is it would be the committee's recommendation, you have a cover letter drafted up that the committee recommends this ordinance for final review by the commissioners for publication or however you say that, because that's what they asked us to do, look at the ordinance and see how it should be revised. We're done. Page 37 August 21,2001 CHAIRMAN PEASE: We do October 1 and finally say, "Yes, this is good to go." Then everybody gets a copy. What's that take, two weeks for everybody to get a copy of it? MS. HU: Maybe even less. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So mid-October we've got that. Then we have a public meeting. Two weeks after that -- MR. PALMER: I'm going to get this ordinance back to her within this week so everything flows from that. The amount of work I have left in this ordinance is a couple of hours after -- at the most -- after I talk to her about this ticket business. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So if we do October 1, mid-October, when would the public meet again, 1st of November? MR. PALMER: We're in August. I don't know if we ought to wait until October. Move this along. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I agree. I think we ought to do this two weeks from now. MS. BAISLEY: I agree. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So that's, like, September-- around the 1st of September. If you find the space here, we'll do a workshop. Then we'll put it on -- do we need an actual vote on this by the PVAC? MR. PALMER: Yeah. But we can have a special meeting. Now, the question in my mind is whether or not we take the ordinance to the board with an executive summary and advertise it or whether or not they wanted some sort of preliminary approval before they said go ahead and notice. Does anybody have a clear understanding of that? MR. FLEGAL: I don't know what they asked in the beginning other than, I think, Bryan said they asked us to take a look at the ordinance, period. That's all I heard so ... CHAIRMAN PEASE: Are you talking about the deregulation Page 38 August 21,2001 issue? MR. FLEGAL: No. The -- the whole ordinance which is what we just did. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The county commissioners never asked us to do the whole ordinance. We did that on our own because it hadn't been done in so long. MR. BRIDENTHAL: deregulating? CHAIRMAN PEASE: that. The county asked you to look into Not me. They asked staff to look into But so I don't -- the question is on timing. MR. PALMER: Here's what I recommend that we do: We give the board an executive summary on the summary part of the agenda explaining that this board has gone through the ordinance and has recommended changes and briefly list the most important ones and get authorization to publish the ordinance and bring the ordinance back to the board for public hearing. I think -- and I think my prediction is that they will summarily approve. We'll advertise it in the paper and bring it back for a formal public hearing for adoption. CHAIRMAN PEASE: That's pre any -- first we look at it in September. MR. PALMER: Once the board has signed off on it, then get-- notify the Board of County Commissioners that we've done this and we'd like to have this ordinance published and brought back for public hearing and approval. The executive summary will delegate that authorization. They'll do that, and we will advertise it in the paper and bring it back for one public hearing for adoption by the Board of County Commissioners, in which case if they approve it, it's a new ordinance. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. We don't do that. All we do is submit this summary to the county commissioners and then they do all the public hearing and everything. Page 39 August 21,2001 MR. PALMER: They take care of that. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Okay. My only question is the timing aspect of it. MR. PALMER: If after this board approves it -- let's assume that happens sometime in September -- then the next time -- the next meeting, if we can get it on the agenda, there's about a ten-day filing period for the agenda -- it'll be a one- or two-page executive summary that will essentially say, "We worked on the ordinance. Here are some of the major changes, please authorize us to advertise this in the newspaper and bring it back to public hearing." They'll say "yes" probably, then it's two weeks later or whenever the next meeting. We'll have time to get an ad in the paper, bring it back to the board, and have the public hearing. So by the time it goes to the board it'll be done in at least a month or less. MR. FLEGAL: If you have another, quote, workshop, slash, emergency meeting, say, the first of September, we go over the final draft, everything's cool, then you have an emergency meeting where the committee says, "We approve this and want to send it forward." Then you do the executive summary immediately to the commissioners. They get it within a couple days and probably -- MR. PALMER: It goes on their agenda -- summary agenda. Then they approve it, and then we immediately advertise. So once this goes to the board the first time with the authorization to go, within a month we should have a new ordinance. MR. FLEGAL: It should be on their agenda probably before the end of September if we do it the first of September. MR. PALMER: That could happen. October at the latest. MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. Or the first meeting they have in October and then it could all get approved before the end of October. CHAIRMAN PEASE: So this could be a done deal by the end of October? Page 40 August21,2001 MR. FLEGAL: If we get along. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Which gives every transportation company the month of November and December to get their vehicles -- and January -- MS. BAISLEY: Because they're not going to know anything about this stuff that we've been working on and the driver requirements. MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: Give them a couple months to get organized. That raises another question. Question: Should staff send out a draft ordinance to at least the big companies for comment? Sometimes that brings back constructive comments. CHAIRMAN PEASE: You've got the majority of the big companies in this room. MR. PALMER: We do? CHAIRMAN PEASE: missing? MR. BRIDENTHAL: Checker. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think, don't we, Pat? Who are we Checker. We're missing one. MS. BAISLEY: Carlton. CHAIRMAN PEASE: They don't have taxis, though. MR. PALMER: Do they have -- CHAIRMAN PEASE: For-hire vehicles. MR. PALMER: Generally speaking, without -- we -- obviously, the expenses of sending this out to every certificated company would probably be prohibitive, but it lends itself to counter an argument that this went a rental and nobody knew anything about it and if I'd only known about it, I could have told you that paragraph 3 5 is bad, and it gives more of an inclusive process. I'm just thinking, are there a couple of companies that you could send this out to to get back with you by fax or phone or anything else so that any such input could be brought to the board at the final wrap- Page 41 August 21,2001 up workshop, slash, public hearing? It's just a question. We often do that, and sometimes it's constructive. MR. FLEGAL: There's probably a half dozen companies, I mean, like, Pat and Checker and maybe the Ritz and the Registry that have a lot of vehicles. MR. BRIDENTHAL: This doesn't hardly affect the plain cars. Do you see any change in your-- CHAIRMAN PEASE: There's a few. There's a few. MR. FLEGAL: It shouldn't be much. CHAIRMAN PEASE: The driver issue certainly is a surprise to of people. MR. FLEGAL: MR. PALMER: a lot That shouldn't be -- Onerous. CHAIRMAN PEASE: I think if we're going -- if we're to do it, I think we ought to let every operator know about the changes, not just a select few. MR. FLEGAL: I think you're getting into a cost -- MS. BAISLEY: Instead of sending the entire ordinance out to these people, can't we just tell them in a simple letter that we are making adjustments to the ordinance and if they want to review it, they can come down and pick one up? That would just save the expense of sending one to everyone. MR. PALMER: That's another idea. Send them a letter and say, "We're working on the ordinance. It may affect your business. Would you like a copy?" CHAIRMAN PEASE: pick it up. MR. PALMER: Right. ball in their court. CHAIRMAN PEASE: MR. PALMER: We'll e-mail it, fax it, send it, or you can Right. And that way it sort of puts the I like that. That works. Page 42 August 21,2001 MS. HU: I think so because I -- most of the -- mainly the smaller companies are the ones that make a bigger fuss than the bigger companies. MR. PALMER: And once in a while you get a good suggestion. MR. FLEGAL: But we need to do it quick so we can still meet and try to do this the first of September, as fast as we could to get a workshop, slash, emergency meeting. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Do you see a vote being taken at the September meeting for this? MR. FLEGAL: I would think so. If we get the final, quote, unquote, done deal, then we look it over and say, "Gee, everything's in there. Looks great. Haven't had any comments back. We're done with the workshop. Close the workshop. I call an emergency meeting as long as you have three or four to do that. I'd like to take a vote on submitting this to the Board of County Commissioners as our recommendation." MR. PALMER: That's a special meeting. But that'll have to be -- you'll have to give some reasonable posting of that, you know, a couple days in advance. All meetings of the board of this nature have to be noticed, but it's just a matter of posting it up on the bulletin boards and say that the PVAC will have a special meeting next Monday at two o'clock or whatever it is so anybody that wants to attend -- MR. FLEGAL: She can do that as soon as she can find a date. MS. HU: I think the fifth or the 6th. The first week of September is Labor Day Weekend, so the 4th is Tuesday, the fifth is Wednesday. So if you want to go to the fifth or the 6th, either Wednesday or Thursday. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does this letter have to go out to these transportation companies before that meeting, or is it something that's after? Page 43 August 21,2001 MR. FLEGAL: I would think you'd want to send it out, like, tomorrow if she could do it, and I know that's probably not possible, but get the letter out as quick as possible so they have a short period of time to say, "Oh, an ordinance. I really don't care. They're going to do it anyway." You'll get a lot of people that do that automatically. MS. BAISLEY: Then they can't say they didn't know anything about it. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Can you get that accomplished in sufficient time before the September fifth or 6th? MS. HU: Yes. MR. PALMER: Give them a deadline as to the time that-- a time to get comments, and there's a deadline in order to get the comments back to you or it's too late. MS. HU: So then we can have the meeting on Thursday, and we'll make sure that they have this in by the 4th which is the beginning of that week. MR. PALMER: Yeah. That sounds like a reasonable time frame. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We'd still want to have our October meeting as well? MR. FLEGAL: Yeah. CHAIRMAN PEASE: We're not going to talk about -- MR. FLEGAL: No. You're not going to do any licenses. Your special meeting is really just to approve this and get it in the pipeline as quick as you can. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Right. Okay. MS. BAISLEY: Finished. CHAIRMAN PEASE: Does this conclude the workshop? So done. Workshop closed. Thank you very much. Page 44 August 21, 2001 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:38 a.m. PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BRYAN L. S. PEASE, CHAIRMAN TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF DONOVAN COURT REPORTING, 1NC., BY CAROLYN J. FORD, COURT REPORTER Page 45