Proposal Would Regulate Unlicensed Taxis

so how much did scott white get from the taxi lobby again?

so how much did scott white get from the taxi lobby again?

We need more cabs not less. I like the idea of making sure they have insurance and the like so long as it does not result in less of them.

We need more cabs not less. I like the idea of making sure they have insurance and the like so long as it does not result in less of them.

MEH: Quick review of PDC website shows that White has received zero funds from the taxi cab industry/lobby.

@meh: Government makes legal taxi drivers jump through a lot of hoops to get and keep their licenses, yet there is no provision for local enforcement to control illegal operators. At least conceptually, White’s bill is a good one.

@meh: Government makes legal taxi drivers jump through a lot of hoops to get and keep their licenses, yet there is no provision for local enforcement to control illegal operators. At least conceptually, White’s bill is a good one.

My name is Chris Van Dyk. I work for the taxicab industry.

Mayor McGinn’s approach to this issue will show many of us how the next four years are going to play out, how he will approach fundamental issues, like public safety.

Taxi’s are highly regulated—because the unknowing consumer has a right to know that the vehicle he or she is jumping into is insured, and is safe, and the driver is legit. And so on. Under state law, only taxis can pick up fares off the street. If you pre-arrange the fare with a limousine service, presumably, you have done your own due diligence. On a streetcorner on a rainy night, the consumer don’t exactly have the chance.

For the privilege of regulation and the public trust that follows from it, taxis pay up to about $1000 per year per vehicle in various fees and charges. The regulatory function that is granted by the state to the city over taxis is self-sustaining.

Town-cars and limos pay $50 to to the state, for licensing, and flaunt the state law that says their trips must be pre-arranged, and the fundamental reason for taxi regulation—by picking up passengers willy-nilly at the ferry terminal, elsewhere downtown and at the cruise ship terminals, and at hotels. They hold themselves out to the public that they are ‘the same as’ taxis.

Under Mayor Nickels, the city initiated legislation to enable it to get these ‘rogue’ vehicles that are operating illegally under control. That is Rep. Scott White’s bill, HB 1775.

The mainstream, legit, limo industry worked with the taxicab industry and the City for a year to craft compromise legislation that would narrowly authorize and enable the City to enforce state law, and get these illegally-operating vehicles under control.

However, Mayor McGinn’s lobbyist in Olympia has indicated that, after all, this isn’t such a big problem—and has been quietly trying to kill the compromise legislation.

So if you want to find the political fingerprints on this deal, go look at who supported McGinn in the election—-and you will find evidence that Mayir McGinn is abandoning public safety, to represent the very narrow interests of one group who supported him–and did a great job for him–in the 37th District.

So this is a fundamental issue—and it is about far more than taxicabs and limousines and city regulation—will the new Mayor of Seattle represent all the people of Seattle or will he pander to one small group of supporters with a very narrow agenda, and an illegal one at that?

Mayor McGinn, where’s your backbone, where are your priorities, and who is running your show?

My name is Chris Van Dyk. I work for the taxicab industry.

Mayor McGinn’s approach to this issue will show many of us how the next four years are going to play out, how he will approach fundamental issues, like public safety.

Taxi’s are highly regulated—because the unknowing consumer has a right to know that the vehicle he or she is jumping into is insured, and is safe, and the driver is legit. And so on. Under state law, only taxis can pick up fares off the street. If you pre-arrange the fare with a limousine service, presumably, you have done your own due diligence. On a streetcorner on a rainy night, the consumer don’t exactly have the chance.

For the privilege of regulation and the public trust that follows from it, taxis pay up to about $1000 per year per vehicle in various fees and charges. The regulatory function that is granted by the state to the city over taxis is self-sustaining.

Town-cars and limos pay $50 to to the state, for licensing, and flaunt the state law that says their trips must be pre-arranged, and the fundamental reason for taxi regulation—by picking up passengers willy-nilly at the ferry terminal, elsewhere downtown and at the cruise ship terminals, and at hotels. They hold themselves out to the public that they are ‘the same as’ taxis.

Under Mayor Nickels, the city initiated legislation to enable it to get these ‘rogue’ vehicles that are operating illegally under control. That is Rep. Scott White’s bill, HB 1775.

The mainstream, legit, limo industry worked with the taxicab industry and the City for a year to craft compromise legislation that would narrowly authorize and enable the City to enforce state law, and get these illegally-operating vehicles under control.

However, Mayor McGinn’s lobbyist in Olympia has indicated that, after all, this isn’t such a big problem—and has been quietly trying to kill the compromise legislation.

So if you want to find the political fingerprints on this deal, go look at who supported McGinn in the election—-and you will find evidence that Mayir McGinn is abandoning public safety, to represent the very narrow interests of one group who supported him–and did a great job for him–in the 37th District.

So this is a fundamental issue—and it is about far more than taxicabs and limousines and city regulation—will the new Mayor of Seattle represent all the people of Seattle or will he pander to one small group of supporters with a very narrow agenda, and an illegal one at that?

Mayor McGinn, where’s your backbone, where are your priorities, and who is running your show?

Chris Van Dyk got his facts wrong. Today’s hearing, the city of Seattle was in-favor of the bill, and the lady from the city testified in support of the bill.
We (UAPAC) are in favor of meaningful regulation and better safety standard of the Limo and taxi industries. However, this bill (1775) is not about safety, is about competition. It is about the big taxi and well established carriers like Puget Sound, and Shuttle express trying to put many small immigrant limo operators out of business.
(1)The bill states: THIS BILL IS TO REGULATE CERTAIN LIMOS. We would love to know who the certain Limos are. It should be all Limos.
2. We are not sure who is going to pay the 250’00 annul enforcement cost. Is it per car or is it per company. I heard the big companies like shuttle express and Puget Sound who own 100 of limos want to pay per company not per car, and may say that we have 100 limos, and as a company we will pay 4000 per month, but each independent limo owner should pay 700 per car per month — that is not fair. The bill should specify who will pay how much. We want to also know who is going to bear the cost, is it only Seattle Limo or every limo that picks up or drops off a passenger in and out of Seattle ( shuttle express and most of the Puget Sound limos are located outside the city of Seattle)
3. The bill states EACH LIMO DRIVER SHOULD TAKE A WRITTEN TEST. We would like to know what kind of test. Is it English 101 or 102? English is great language, and we encourage everyone living in this country to learn, but our concern on this is that many Limo drivers English is not their first language and this may put a disadvantage to those who have limited English skills.
4. The Bill states that THE LIMOS INSPECTOR CAN STOP THE LIMO DRIVER IN ANYWHERE AT ANY TIME, AND DEMAND RECORD OF THE TRIP SHEET– IS THE TRIP PREARRANGED OR NOT, VEHICLE INSPECTION PEPARES, etc. even if a passenger is on board. This is an intrusion, and leads to open ended harassment of the limo driver as well as the passenger by the inspector. This will undoubtedly discourage people to use limo. There are better ways to do the inspection without intrusion.
We are in full support of proper regulation and punishing the bad apples, but not the hardworking folks who are trying to do a legitimate business. As community, we have more taxi drivers than Limos, and we want both to succeed. And our taxi drivers do understand the issue very well, and stands with the Limo drivers on this bill.
We have the above concerns, and willing to have a meaningful dialog with other stakeholders to come up with a genuine solution that works for everyone

Chris Van Dyk got his facts wrong. Today’s hearing, the city of Seattle was in-favor of the bill, and the lady from the city testified in support of the bill.
We (UAPAC) are in favor of meaningful regulation and better safety standard of the Limo and taxi industries. However, this bill (1775) is not about safety, is about competition. It is about the big taxi and well established carriers like Puget Sound, and Shuttle express trying to put many small immigrant limo operators out of business.
(1)The bill states: THIS BILL IS TO REGULATE CERTAIN LIMOS. We would love to know who the certain Limos are. It should be all Limos.
2. We are not sure who is going to pay the 250’00 annul enforcement cost. Is it per car or is it per company. I heard the big companies like shuttle express and Puget Sound who own 100 of limos want to pay per company not per car, and may say that we have 100 limos, and as a company we will pay 4000 per month, but each independent limo owner should pay 700 per car per month — that is not fair. The bill should specify who will pay how much. We want to also know who is going to bear the cost, is it only Seattle Limo or every limo that picks up or drops off a passenger in and out of Seattle ( shuttle express and most of the Puget Sound limos are located outside the city of Seattle)
3. The bill states EACH LIMO DRIVER SHOULD TAKE A WRITTEN TEST. We would like to know what kind of test. Is it English 101 or 102? English is great language, and we encourage everyone living in this country to learn, but our concern on this is that many Limo drivers English is not their first language and this may put a disadvantage to those who have limited English skills.
4. The Bill states that THE LIMOS INSPECTOR CAN STOP THE LIMO DRIVER IN ANYWHERE AT ANY TIME, AND DEMAND RECORD OF THE TRIP SHEET– IS THE TRIP PREARRANGED OR NOT, VEHICLE INSPECTION PEPARES, etc. even if a passenger is on board. This is an intrusion, and leads to open ended harassment of the limo driver as well as the passenger by the inspector. This will undoubtedly discourage people to use limo. There are better ways to do the inspection without intrusion.
We are in full support of proper regulation and punishing the bad apples, but not the hardworking folks who are trying to do a legitimate business. As community, we have more taxi drivers than Limos, and we want both to succeed. And our taxi drivers do understand the issue very well, and stands with the Limo drivers on this bill.
We have the above concerns, and willing to have a meaningful dialog with other stakeholders to come up with a genuine solution that works for everyone

Does any of the good fellow citizens knows how much a taxi lisence can be sold (no sales tax or earned income either) under the table and how much a Towncar lisence worth? And if finaly the bill pass and enforced and all the drivers are safe and regulated will they have the same access at the same ports and terminals and hotels or the Port of Seattle will keep selling its parking lot to specific companies that can afford it and make life unbearable to the rest of us?

Does any of the good fellow citizens knows how much a taxi lisence can be sold (no sales tax or earned income either) under the table and how much a Towncar lisence worth? And if finaly the bill pass and enforced and all the drivers are safe and regulated will they have the same access at the same ports and terminals and hotels or the Port of Seattle will keep selling its parking lot to specific companies that can afford it and make life unbearable to the rest of us?

Ms. Erica c. bernett

I know you might not know the whole picture, the limo has been regulated for many years. It is about Representative Scott white and city of seattle consumer affairs manager, Craig laisy, using their public office for personal gain. If you realy want the whole picture. we are here to tell our side story…………

Ms. Erica c. bernett

I know you might not know the whole picture, the limo has been regulated for many years. It is about Representative Scott white and city of seattle consumer affairs manager, Craig laisy, using their public office for personal gain. If you realy want the whole picture. we are here to tell our side story…………

Mr. white drugging new mayor mike Mcginn is a desprate move of cover up wrong doing by both representative scott white and craig laisy with cooprative of previous mayor craig nikles. The public deserve the whole story. let me tell you something. If you travel from downtown seattle to airport, you rather pay $35-40 dollar or $65-75 dollar. you choose. Mr white and Laisy choise is the second one. That what we talking about. We give the best choice and best service. that is an american way of doing business. We are not in the communist county mr white we are in united state of america!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr. white drugging new mayor mike Mcginn is a desprate move of cover up wrong doing by both representative scott white and craig laisy with cooprative of previous mayor craig nikles. The public deserve the whole story. let me tell you something. If you travel from downtown seattle to airport, you rather pay $35-40 dollar or $65-75 dollar. you choose. Mr white and Laisy choise is the second one. That what we talking about. We give the best choice and best service. that is an american way of doing business. We are not in the communist county mr white we are in united state of america!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr. Craig laisy has been in that department for a long time and it is about time other to have a chance to clean that department. i am sure all taxi driver went to his departement in dearborn and harrased on reapet occasion by his staff members. All this fiasco about limo business has been a dream of mr.laisy. I am one of the person went through his bureaucracy while establishing Orange cab, and now after somany years, we back the same game again and again. i am sure the current adminsration would have searious consideration about people down on dearborn street.

Mr. Craig laisy has been in that department for a long time and it is about time other to have a chance to clean that department. i am sure all taxi driver went to his departement in dearborn and harrased on reapet occasion by his staff members. All this fiasco about limo business has been a dream of mr.laisy. I am one of the person went through his bureaucracy while establishing Orange cab, and now after somany years, we back the same game again and again. i am sure the current adminsration would have searious consideration about people down on dearborn street.

MEH: Quick review of PDC website shows that White has received zero funds from the taxi cab industry/lobby.

No one is care for small bissines they want to gestroy as .Port of settle do not have pemition to ask for forhire license .The big compani did negotiontion with port of seattle and they have own license .
They worck togetha with port of seattle to destroy smolll bissines.