PVAC Minutes 12/03/2002 RDecember 3, 2002
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Naples, FL, December 3, 2002
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 9:00AM in the Auditorium of
the Sugden Library, Naples, Florida, with the following members
present:
Members:
Nick Whitney
Dan Shriner
William Csogi
Pat Baisley
Allen Walbum
Collier County Staff: Tom Palmer, Michelle Arnold, Ekna Hu, Lisa Koeholer
Page 1
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC VEHICLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
December 3, 2002
9:00 AM
Collier County Head Quarters Library
2385 Orange Blossom Drive
Sugden Library Theater
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 AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
PLEASE ENSURE ALL PAGERS AND CELL PHONES ARE OFF OR IN A QUIET POSITION.
I. Roll Call
II. Additions or Deletions
III. Approval of Agenda
IV.
Special Meeting
Approval of Minutes: November 12, 2002
Notices
VI.
New Business:
Request for approval to Operate a Vehicle for Hire Service
a) Pelican Transportation Service for Certificate to Operate
b) Pelican Cab Company application for Sub-Certificate
c) A-1 Limo of Naples application for Sub-Certificate
VII. Hearing
VIII. Old Business
IX. Complaint Report
X. Discussion
a) Elite Limousine log book review
XI. Announcements
Public Vehicle Advisory Committee
The Auditorium of the Sugden Library
Naples, FL
9:00AM
December 3, 2002
Minutes
December 3, 2002
The meeting was called to order at 9:20AM.
II.
Attendance:
Members: Nick Whitney, Dan Shriner, William Csogi, Pat Baisley, Allen Walbum
-Eric Hyde was absent.
Collier County Staff: Tom Palmer, Michelle Arnold, Ekna Hu, Lisa Koeholer
Additions or Deletions
-There were no additions, deletions, or changes to the agenda.
IlL
Approval of Agenda
Pat Baisley made a motion to approve the agenda. It was seconded by Mr. Whitney. All
were in favor. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0.
IV.
Approval of Minutes for September 12 and November 12, 2002
-Pat Baisley made a motion to approve the November 12, 2002 and thc September 12,
2002 minutes as written. It was seconded by Mr. Shriner. All were in favor. The motion
passed unanimously, 5-0.
Notices
-Michelle Arnold reported that there were no notices.
VI. New Business:
Page 2
December 3, 2002
Request for approval to Operate a Vehicle for Hire Service
A) Pelican Transportation Services application for Certificate to Operate
-Mr. Whitney focused himself from this topic.
-Michclle Arnold informed the committee that this was carried over from the last
meeting. The only outstanding issue was that the committee had requested a name
change.
-Mr. Whitney stated that he had changed the name. The name had been changed from
Dolphin Cab to Pelican Transportation in order to avoid confusion with an existing
company. He also asked for a sub-certificate for Pelican taxi for different types of
service.
-Mr. Csogi stated that the application listed Lambart Ln. for the business address and yet
there was a different address for a lease exchange. He asked why there were the two
addresses. Mr. Whitney explained that he had a lease ready on Exchange Avenue when
he went to get the zoning. After remodeling, the office numbers had been changed and
no longer correlated with county records. Because of this, Mr. Whitney used his home
address until the situation could be worked out with the county.
-Mr. Csogi asked if Exchange Avenue was going to be the correct address. Mr. Whitney
stated it would.
-Mr. Csogi made a motion to approve as long as Mr. Whitney hands all the paperwork
into the office with the name change to Pelican Transportation. It was seconded by Allen
Walbum. All were in favor. The motion passed unanimously, 4-0. (Mr. Whitney
recused himself from voting).
-Mr. Csogi clarified that the motion to approve included approval for a sub-certificate.
B) A-1 Limo of Naples application for sub-certificate
-Mr. Csogi read the paragraph in the ordinance pertaining to sub-certificates, "No sub-
certificate shall operate as a full certificate nor add a vehicle to the certificate nor
otherwise add a function that can be accomplished by amending the certificate." He
stated that A-1 is requesting a sub-certificate for a transportation under the full certificate
of Elite Limousine as a transportation company. He added that this was not within their
guidelines. Mr. Palmer stated that he believed that it was within the guidelines. As he
Page 3
December 3, 2002
understood the situation, the vehicle was operating under a different name than the
business.
-Mr. Csogi replied that it did not say anything about a "name" in ordinance 21 Sub
paragraph B.
-Mr. Palmer stated that the certificate should be amended to say that the business is
operating both as Elite and A-1. If this can be done, he added that the certificate should
be amended. But he believed that the purpose was so that you did not have more than
one entity, other than the name, operating under one certificate. Mr. Csogi stated that he
agreed if it could be amended to a cab and limo company, then that is what should be
done. His concern was that it should not be amended to have two different trade names
for the same service, because it would be deceiving.
-Pat Baisley added that they were both performing the same type of service; limousine
transportation.
-Mr. Palmer stated the guidelines say that it can be used to add one trade name to the
applicant's full certificate. He explained that this supercedes the prior argument. Mr.
Csogi stated that he agreed that they could add one trade name, but the preceding
sentence says that they can only add a trade name as long as it does not perform the same
duties that could be accomplished by amending the original certificate. He believed that
when they wrote this, the goal was that a separate service would be preformed. For
example: yellow cab and yellow limo company.
-Mr. Walburn stated that he agreed with this. He requested that they ask the applicant
what the intentions were for adding the trade name.
-Mr. Csogi stated that he already had their submitted application, therefore he wanted to
consult with staff and come to a decision rather than hear from the applicant again.
-Mr. Shriner stated that the only issue he had, is that when this is normally done, it is
from the same location. He believed that all sub-certificates should be located at the
same location as where the full certificate had been issued. He added that when it is a
separate location from the full certificate then he believed it was a separate business. Mr.
Palmer replied that the ordinance is silent on the issue of separate locations. It does not
say that they must have a separate certificate for a separate location. He added that he did
not understand what the policy behind this would be. He explained that what they are
interested in is knowing that qualified operators are operating professionally with safe
vehicles. They do need to know where they are located, but the fact that they are located
at two separate locations is irrelevant. Mr. Shriner agreed this was true, but asked where
Page 4
December 3, 2002
the log records would have to be kept. His concern was that if you had 50 companies,
half of them could have sub-certificates at satellite offices and then the question of where
records are kept will arise. Mr. Palmer replied that the purpose of record location is so
the records are available if the county needs them. He explained that it is irrelevant if the
records are kept at the branch office or at the satellite as long as they were attainable. Mr.
Shriner referred to his example of 50 companies, half having sub-certificates, and stated
that it would be a large area for staff to cover in attempt of getting records. Mr. Palmer
stated that staff didn't have to "do anything", that location was irrelevant, as long as the
records were made accessible to the county. He added that they can't superimpose
resolutions on the ordinance unless they adopt a resolution to do so and if the resolution
is not in conflict with any other part of the ordinance. Mr. Palmer explained that there
was nothing in the ordinance that stated the records for A-1 must be kept at Elite, only
that they be made accessible to the county.
-Mr. Csogi stated that the next paragraph reads, "sub-certificates are a courtesy to the
certificate holder, whereby all decisions by the PVAC to grant or deny a sub-certificate
are final". He asked what the ramifications were if they denied this request. Mr. Palmer
informed him that they could deny it, but he felt there needed to be a way to solve the
situation with the advertising error. Mr. Csogi stated that the advertising error was a
separate issue. Mr. Palmer then explained that if they denied the sub-certificate, then it
was the end of it, there would be no sub-certificate.
-Mr. Shriner stated that after hearing Mr. Palmer expand on the situation, he has no
knowledge of any other certificate holder with a sub-certificate at another location. He
believed that this would be an exception of what had happened in the past, if they chose
to approve it. Mr. Palmer explained that this was a new provision, which had only been
in the ordinance for a little over a year.
-Michele Arnold asked Mr. Csogi what was the purpose of placing, "No sub-certificate
shall operate as a full certificate nor add a vehicle to the certificate nor otherwise add a
function that can be accomplished by amending the certificate," into the ordinance. Mr.
Csogi informed her that he understood that it was for companies that have two separate
services. He used Yellow Cab Company using a limo and a taxi service.
-Mr. Walbum stated that he would like to hear from the applicant, because he believed
they could clear up a lot of the issues as to what the intent of the sub-certificate was for.
Mr. Palmer agreed with this. He wanted to find out what the purpose of the sub-
certificate was and have it on the record.
Page 5
December 3, 2002
-Mr. Walbum added that he believed it would make more sense if the petitioner got a full
certificate. Mr. Csogi stated that when you have a sub-certificate it can "piggy-back" off
the insurance and other items of the full certificate. He believed this "cost factor" was
probably driving the request for the sub-certificate. Mr. Palmer replied that the trade
name issue is what drove the request for the sub-certificate.
-Mr. Walbum stated that he wanted to know how the two companies were going to be
divided. Mr. Csogi replied that they did not have an application for a cab company under
a limo company. Mr. Walburn informed him that he agreed, but it appeared that they
want to piggyback the insurance, yet operate a separate stand-alone company. Mr. Csogi
stated that he believed this was a moot point, because if the application was incorrect then
they have not heard them in the past.
-Mr. Shriner stated that if it was for him to decide, he would go back to the original
company and lease that limo from that company and move on. He stated that he knew
this was not the issue they were discussing, and he added that he would do what the
majority does.
-Pat Baisley stated that she understood when one applied for a sub-certificate, they had to
have the same owner as the full certificate. She added that you can't have a separate
company under the same certificate.
-Mr. Walburn asked if they had any other documentation or application information to
review before they make a decision. Michele stated that there was no additional
information. She added that they have the insurance policies and the vehicle is registered
under Elite. Pat Baisley and Mr. Csogi noted that there was a difference in ownership.
Michele Arnold explained that Elite Limo was applying for the sub-certificate and
Debbie is the owner of the vehicle, but she sub-contracts from Elite. Therefore, A-1 is
attempting to get a sub-certificate under Elite. Mr. Walburn asked if they had a
certificate of insurance for Elite Limo. Michele Arnold stated that they do. Mr. Walburn
then asked if they had a list of the vehicles that are insured and licensed to operate under
the name of Elite. Michele Arnold replied that they did. Mr. Walbum asked why they
did not have it to review. Michele Arnold informed him that they did not have it because
this did not concern the vehicle, it concerned the application for the sub-certificate. She
added that the ordinance states if the staff has the information on file, then it is
considered a complete application.
-Pat Baisley asked who they showed for ownership of both companies. Ekna Hu
informed her that Elite was applying for the sub-certificate, not Debbie Weber. Rick
Page 6
December 3, 2002
Scott is applying for the sub-certificate and he is the owner of Elite. Mr. Walbum asked
who the owner was of A-1. Ekna Hu informed him that Elite Limo was the owner.
-Mr. Csogi stated that he didn't want to approve the application without the information.
He explained that they don't have the charges, color scheme, etc.. He explained that his
point is that they are applying for a sub-certificate, right or wrong under the guidelines,
but they didn't hand in any information as far as color scheme and registration. Mr.
Shriner stated that this was his point as well.
Rick Scott, owner and operator of Elite Limo, stated that the vehicle is registered with
Collier County under A-1. The vehicle has been leased to Elite since it began 2 ½ years
ago. He explained that Debbie Weber is his niece. He added that Elite meets all the
criteria for Collier County. The vehicle has been under Elite for a number of years and it
meets all the criteria as well. He stated that the problem rose from Debbie's mistake in
the advertisement in the yellow pages. He understands that the only way to resolve the
situation is to get a sub-certificate. He went on to inform the committee that everything
was in order, they complied with all the county requests. It is running as two separate
limo services, two separate locations with the satellite location located in Naples and the
base in Fort Myers. He does not understand what the issue is, because the problem rose
from an advertising error. He explained that they were informed it could be corrected by
a sub-certificate and there is no way that they can take the advertising out of the yellow
pages at this point.
-Pat Baisley stated that they could disconnect the phone number.
-Mr. Csogi asked if they had a problem with Debbie Weber applying for and operating
under a full certificate. Mr. Scott stated that they were led in the direction of a sub-
certificate to resolve the advertising error.
-Mr. Csogi stated that this did not all come up over an advertising error. He explained
that the error was because Debbie Weber was operating a separate company and was not
licensed to operate under A-1. Mr. Csogi stated that if she applied for a full certificate
then there would not be a problem.
-Mr. Whitney stated that for a sub-certificate it would have to be a limo service and a taxi
service, not just a limo service.
-Michele Arnold stated that she had asked Debbie Weber if she had a problem applying
for a full certificate. Debbie Weber had told her that she had no problem in doing so.
Michele Arnold added that her only concern was the timing issue, since this has been
going on for a few months.
Page 7
December 3, 2002
-Mr. Palmer stated that he believed what they were asking for was a clear reason for a
sub-certificate. He further explained that Debbie Weber doesn't have a separate business.
Debbie Weber owns a company, that owns a vehicle, and leases it to Rick Scott. Mr.
Csogi stated that this is what they were telling the committee, but it is not what they are
doing. The committee stated that they are operating a separate business. Mr. Palmer
asked how it is that they are operating a separate business. Mr. Walburn informed him
that it was because they were advertising, soliciting, and accepting business under A-1.
Mr. Palmer stated yes, this was an advertising conduit. He added that Elite operates,
insures, and runs the vehicle. The only way that Debbie Weber is involved is that she
owns a vehicle and leases that vehicle to Mr. Scott. He then re-stated that she did not
own a separate business, merely she owns a vehicle. They are applying for a sub-
certificate only so they can continue taking phone calls for A-1 limo, which is operated
by Elite. This is adding a trade name under Elite.
-Mr. Csogi asked why Elite didn't come in and ask for a trade name. Mr. Palmer
informed him that this is "essentially" what they are doing; applying for a sub-certificate
to operate under a separate trade name.
-Mr. Walbum asked if the calls were coming into someone other than Elite, the drivers
were being dispatched by someone other than Elite, and the cars were driven by someone
other than Elite, would it be a full certificate. Mr. Palmer stated that it would be a full
certificate. He explained that this is not the case here. Mr. Scott elaborated that this
vehicle is located in Collier, the phone calls come into A-1 limo in Naples answered by
Debbie, Debbie dispatches from down here. Debbie Weber explained that she uses Elites
Drivers, they drive down in their personal vehicles, and pick up the A-1 limo leased to
Elite.
-Mr. Walburn stated he had "anecdotal evidence" that they have operated this vehicle in
this county with drivers that are local and not affiliated with Elite.
-Mr. Palmer stated that, that was a charge... Mr. Walburn interrupted to say that he had
said "anecdotal". Mr. Palmer stated that "anecdotal" means one or two incidences. Mr.
Walburn agreed and explained that he knew drivers who were willing to come in and
testify that they operated this vehicle and were hired and paid by someone other than
Elite.
-Mr. Csogi stated that it was clear that a sub-certificate was a courtesy. Also, that they
could add a trade name, but a trade name should not be performing the same duties.
Page 8
December 3, 2002
Because the trade name was not performing a separate duty, Mr. Csogi made a motion to
deny the application for a sub-certificate.
-Mr. Shriner asked how long A-1 of Naples had been answering the phone. Debbie
Weber stated, since September of last year. Mr. Shriner said that people sometimes use
two phone numbers because they get two calls from people going through the phone
book, which is unfair competition.
-The motion was recalled. It was seconded by Mr. Walburn. All were in favor of the
denial. The motion for denial passed unanimously, 5-0.
VI.
Hearing
-There were no scheduled hearings.
VII.
Old Business
A) Log books for Classic Taxi and Checker Cab
-Mr. Csogi asked if Classic Taxi had sent a notice for their logbook. Mr. Walbum
had made a motion requesting the log book in the meeting on September 12, 2002 for
tag # A72DLZ. They also requested the logbooks for Checker Cab. Michele Arnold
stated that she would have to get back to them on this at the next meeting.
VIII.
Complaint Reports
-Mr. Csogi stated that they had requested Elite's log books for the date in question when
staff accepted a ride from A-1. He asked if they had received anything from Elite.
Michele Arnold replied that Rick Scott had indicated he had faxed most of the
information. She explained that the information he had faxed was limited. It had the
vehicle # and the name, but no information with respect to the trip, location, etc..
-Mr. Scott stated he did not send more due to the confidentiality of his customers. Mr.
Palmer stated that confidentiality was not an issue.
-Mr. Csogi asked if they asked specifically for that one vehicle or for the entire log
books. Michele Arnold stated her recollection was the complete logbooks for a specific
timeframe. Mr. Csogi stated that was his recollection as well. Michele Arnold explained
that Rick Scott was told by his attorney that he could protect the confidentiality of his
customers. She suggested that the committee direct her staff on what to look for and they
would review that information and report back to the committee.
Page 9
December 3, 2002
-Mr. Palmer asked what the purpose of this. Mr. Csogi stated that they had a substantial
case that was put together from code enforcement where they are trying to find out who
owns a specific vehicle. Mr. Scott stated that the vehicle was leased to him. Mr. Palmer
stated that it was established that the county called A-1 and the vehicle leased by Elite
was dispatched.
-Mr. Shriner asked Mr. Scott if his car on 6/7/02 took a trip to RSW. Mr. Scott stated
that it did. Mr. Shriner then asked if he had a state sales tax number and why he charged
6% sales tax. Mr. Csogi told Mr. Scott not to answer that question. He explained that
they are not the Department of Revenue and this is not relevant. Mr. Scott stated that
they do not collect tax. Mr. Csogi stated that this was not part of the ordinance and they
were not here to discuss it. Mr. Shriner pointed out that the ordinance states they must
comply with all state laws. Mr. Palmer and Mr. Csogi stated that it should then be
pointed out to the proper authorities but not be discussed here, and that this was done at
the last meeting.
-Mr. Csogi explained that there goal was that all operators in Collier County be
certificated. He informed the committee that what had happened was, they sent a notice
to A-1 and no one ever got back to them. Mr. Scott stated that it was because they sent it
to the wrong place. Michele Arnold had then told Mr. Scott to come in for a sub-
certificate. Mr. Csogi added that all they need to do now is come in for a full certificate.
Rick Scott verified that Debbie Weber does not have a problem with this.
-Mr. Csogi stated that the second point is that they had requested logbooks that were not
handed in. Mr. Scott stated he did send in parts, but left out some items due to
confidentiality.
-Mr. Csogi stated that he was willing to waive the hearing as long as Debbie Weber came
in and got certificated. Mr. Walburn stated that was all he wanted.
-Mr. Csogi stated that he had concerns that they would lack credibility when they asked
for something and it was never handed in. Mr. Palmer stated that they could bring a case
of "failure to abide by the ordinance and failure to abide by the responsibility to
respond". He added that the claim of confidentiality had no basis.
-Mr. Scott gave the copies of the logbooks to Michele Arnold. He stated that he was not
turning in his physical trip tickets, because there are phone numbers, credit card numbers,
etc... Mr. Palmer stated they did not want the credit card numbers, etc...
Page 10
Xe
December 3, 2002
-Mr. Csogi made a statement that the current situation is to table the issue, since Mr.
Scott handed in the information, everyone understands the situation and is working on
coming into compliance with the ordinance through the application for a full certificate.
-Mr. Palmer clarified that they are saying, they have the records and no further action
needs to be taken regarding the response of providing the records. Mr. Csogi stated that
was correct.
-Michele Arnold asked what they would like her to do with the records. Mr. Csogi
informed her that review is a moot point since they are coming into compliance, but to
hold on to the records.
Other Discussions
-Michele Arnold stated that they did not get the records from Classic Taxi or Checker
Cab, but she did not believe that they requested it. She added that they will get that
information for the next meeting. She clarified that the request for records was due to
Mr. Bridenthal's complaints.
-Mr. Shriner stated that he had spoken with Mr. Bridenthal that morning and Mr.
Bridenthal had stated that he wanted to re-iterate his complaints.
Adjournment- Adjournment was at 10:08AM.
Page 11