MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
TAXICAB COMMISSION OF COLUMBUS, GEORGIA
July 11, 2007
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Wallace Archie, Lt. Julius Ross, Mr. James Brooks, Mr. David Cassell, and
Ms. Diane Quick.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mr. James E. Nash and Mr. Robert Kidd
A meeting of the Taxicab Commission was held in the Ground Floor Conference
Room of the Government Center. Chairman Archie noted that a quorum was present
and called the July 11, 2007 meeting to order at 3:15 p.m.
Approval of Minutes:
The minutes of the January 3, February 7, and April 4, 2007 meeting were tabled
at the request of Chairman Archie.
New Business:
A) Inspections:
Chairman Archie informed the Commission that he and Lt. Ross had some
discussion concerning the two inspections per month conducted by the Columbus
Police Department. He explained that he would like for the Commission to
discuss the issue and based on the discussion, a recommendation be given and
taken to the appropriate person in the Police Department. Chairman Archie said
the reason he is so concerned is because there is a driver who has had his car
ready since July 5th and he cannot work until July 17th because the inspection
is not until the July 17th. He stated that he thinks this is totally unfair.
Mr. Brooks suggested that drivers who pass the White?s inspection be allowed to
drive under White?s inspection only until the Police Department conducts their
inspection rather than miss two weeks of work. He clarified that if a driver is
pulled over he/she should present a copy of the White?s inspection and inform
the officer of when he/she is scheduled for the inspection given by the
Columbus Police Department. Mr. Brooks then asked if it was written in the
ordinance how often cab drivers should be inspected and if not how is it
determined without it going through the Commission. Chairman Wallace said he
does not think the Council or Columbus Police Department has to ask the
Commission?s permission to do anything.
Mr. Cassell read the ordinance as it pertains to inspections. Mr. Cassell said
the only thing the ordinance states is ?inspections for taxicabs newly placed
into service may be accomplished at any time as set forth by the Columbus
Police Department.?
Lt. Ross stated the Police Department has been doing this forever; there are
hiring cycles in the private industry. He then said the company is probably
the one that?s doing the newly hired driver an injustice by hiring him/her
without telling him/her that there will be a two-week delay on him/her being
able to work.
Chairman Archie explained as a driver, he would know of the two-week inspection
because there is a list that is sent out, but as a new driver with no job, with
a family, with a car, that wants to go to work is being kept from working. The
individual is ready go to work but cannot because the Police Department only
inspects every two-weeks.
Mr. Brooks said he thinks the reason for the two-weeks is to give the Police
Officers more space between inspections due to the number of officers on
patrol. Lt. Ross stated it?s definitely a manpower issue. Mr. Brooks said
this is exactly the same reason we talk about the cost of doing business.
Lt. Ross said he recognizes what is being said and if the Police Department had
the people to do it he doesn?t think they would hesitate to do it. He said the
Police Department?s point of view is known and he does not object to the
proposal. He also stated he has argued the commission?s side at the Police
Department and they know the commission?s point of view.
Chairman Archie asked Lt. Ross what is wrong with taxi drivers having their own
inspection, why can?t they inspect their own cars? Can it be someone appointed
by the Police Department to inspect cabs? Ms. Quick added why couldn?t White?s
do it? Lt. Ross responded by saying he does not think the City can pass that
liability on. Ms. Quick asked what kind of liability is it. She said we pay
them to inspect the cars and they have to sign off on it. She also said they
do the same thing the Police Department does except check the meter.
Lt. Ross said in our book we call this an inspection/registration the decal is
the registration on the car. He also said the safety inspection is something
that we do depend on White?s for, which is confirmed during our inspection. He
advised that the Commission could make that recommendation.
Chairman Wallace asked if the Commission was in agreement and asked if someone
would give a motion that the Commission write a letter to the Police Department
informing that, as a Commission, we don?t think it is right for a driver to
have to wait two weeks to go to work. He said the letter should also state that
the driver should be able to work under the White?s inspection until the next
Police inspection.
Chairman Archie said this is totally unfair and the Commission should vote on
it to inform the Police Department that we think it is unfair. Ms. Diane Quick
made a motion for the Commission to write a letter to inform the Police
Department that the Commission feels it is unfair that inspections are done
only twice a month and also state the reason why this is an issue. The letter
should also include a suggestion of having inspections once a week preferably
Tuesday; if it rains on Tuesday the inspection should be postponed until
Thursday. We suggest that the driver is permitted to work with the White?s
inspection until the next Police inspection with the understanding if he/she
misses the Police inspection he/she cannot work until the next Police
inspection, motion second by Mr. James Brooks. Mr. Cassell said he did not
like the verbiage of the letter stating, ?it is unfair? and said he does like
the verbiage of the letter stating, ?we recommend?. The motion was approved by
a vote of four to one with members Wallace Archie, Diane Quick, James Brooks,
and David Cassell voting yes and Lt. Ross voting no. Chairman Archie assigned
the duty of writing the letter to Mr. James Brooks.
Note: Without departing, Chairman Wallace Archie turned the meeting over to
Lt. Ross to give research results concerning 24-hour dispatch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------
Old Business
A) 24-hour Dispatch:
Lt. Ross read from his notes of the work session he attended with the Council
stating; let?s resubmit the request of Mr. Jeffery Johnson to eliminate the
24-hour dispatch service requirement back to the Taxicab Commission and ask
them to substantiate the reasons for requiring this 24-hour dispatch service.
Also ask them to provide a written recommendation along with some justification
with respect to the 24-hour dispatch service. Lt. Ross informed the Commission
that Council also wanted the Revenue Department to look at the fee structure,
an overview of the industry and they also wanted copies of Atlanta and Macon?s
ordinances.
Discussion went on between Commission members providing different views and
ideas concerning 24-hour dispatch. Chairman Wallace Archie said right now we
are not considering changing the ordinance we are simply making a
recommendation to the Council of if we want to lose 24-hour dispatch there
would be stipulations:
If 24-hour is advertised by a cab company they must provide 24-hour service.
If a company has a minimum of four cabs they will not be required to have
24-hour dispatch.
If a company possesses five cabs or more they will be required to have 24-hour
dispatch.
If 24-hour is not required hours of operation should be advertised and also
placed on your answering service
B) Home-Based Business:
Lt. Ross informed the Commission that Council would like a recommendation on
home-based business as it pertains to the taxicab industry. He said they would
like some research to be done to justify the recommendation. Lt. Ross said he
had done some research himself and Savannah does allow home-based business. He
then said apparently several other cities have the home-based business option.
Lt. Ross said it seems as if everyone at the table is against home-based
operation. Mr. Cassell said he does not know if he likes it but he can?t say
that he is against it. Mr. Brooks pointed out the fact that there can only be
one cab allowed in the driveway and if the business grows it would have to be
moved to a commercial approved area. Discussion went on about this matter for
about twenty minutes.
Lt. Ross said if we were to recommend approval for a home-based business to
Council, there would be two conditions and probably some other related things.
The two conditions are:
Neighborhood Approval
Only one cab per residence, which is stated in the ordinance
Lt. Ross said the Council asked if we would revisit the price on the door. He
said the City Attorney suggested that what is on the meter should also be on
the doors. He said we would need to have this information together by July 21,
2007.
Meeting adjourned @ 5:05 p.m.
________________________________
Tameka J. Colbert
Recording Secretary
Attachments
No attachments for this document.