SR 09-12-2023 10E
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 12, 2023
Agenda Item: 10.E
1 of 8
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anuj Gupta, Interim Director of Transportation, Mobility (DOT)
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica
Municipal Code Chapter 6.49 on Taxicabs to Transition from Taxicab
Franchises to Taxicab Permits
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) and a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Introduce for first reading changes to the attached ordinance, SMMC 6.49,
Taxicabs, that transition the City from a taxicab franchise program to a permit-
based program.
Executive Summary
Taxicabs and ride-hailing services are part of the City of Santa Monica’s multimodal
transportation network. With the changing nature of the taxicab industry due in part to
the rise in the use of Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft for
ride-hailing services, staff recommends that the City shift from a franchise program for
regulating taxicabs to a permit-based system similar to a shift that the City of Los
Angeles adopted in 2022.
The current Taxicab Franchise Program is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2023.
One operator, Taxi! Taxi! meets the requirement of being “substantially located” within
the City as required by California state law AB 1069, Local Government Taxicab
Transportation Services, which became effective on January 1, 2019. Being
“substantially located” within a jurisdiction is defined as where the taxicab company or
driver is located. Under the permitting system, any company that meets the criteria
10.E
Packet Pg. 129
2 of 8
under AB 1069 may seek a permit. Staff recommends that the City transition to a
permit-based taxicab program to reflect the changing state of the industry.
To codify the transition, staff recommends amending SMMC Chapter 6.49 as follows:
• Amend SMMC Section 6.49.060 to eliminate the Annual Franchise Fee and
• Delete references to franchise and replace them with references to a permitting
system.
Background
Santa Monica’s taxicab franchise was established by City Council in June 2009 due to
an influx of the number of taxicabs within the City and complaints of poor customer
service from drivers; confusing and high fees; lack of discounted services for seniors
and residents with disabilities; and “bandit” taxis. In 2007-2008, when Nelson/Nygaard
conducted a taxicab study, 412 cabs were operated by 55 companies in the City. By
June 2009, the numbers increased by 24%, and 511 permitted cabs operated by 55 cab
companies served a resident population of approximately 91,000.
Since 2009, drastic changes have affected the taxicab industry, most notably the rise of
TNCs and shifting user behaviors due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In November 2010,
Council granted taxicab franchises to five companies: Bell Cab, Independent Taxi,
Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab for a period of five years. Subsequently, Council
granted a 2-year extension in 2015 and a 1-year extension in 2017 to all five taxicab
companies.
In 2017, AB 1069 was signed into state law to revise taxicab regulations to address
industry challenges due to the rise of TNCs. Most notably, by January 1, 2019, taxicab
permitting moved from a patchwork of local requirements to a countywide system that
only requires taxicab drivers and companies to obtain a permit in the jurisdictions where
they are “substantially located.” Under the requirements of AB 1069, that meant only
companies “substantially located” within Santa Monica could be eligible for the City’s
taxicab franchise. At the time, one taxicab company, Taxi! Taxi!, met the requirements
in AB 1069. At its November 13, 2018, meeting, Council provided staff direction to
extend Taxi! Taxi!'s current franchise agreement by five years ending on December 31,
2023.
10.E
Packet Pg. 130
3 of 8
In response to the staffing impacts of the Citywide restructuring, Council provided
direction to staff at its July 28, 2020 meeting to explore other options associated with
the taxi franchise, including but not limited to transitioning from a franchise model to a
permit-based system.
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
June 30, 2009
(Attachment A)
Introduction and first reading adding Chapter 6.49 to establish
taxicab franchises
November 9, 2010
(Attachment B)
Introduction and first reading of five ordinances of the City of
Santa Monica granting a taxicab franchise to Bell Cab, Metro
Cab, Independent Taxi, Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab
December 14, 2010
(Attachment C)
Introduction for first reading ordinances amending the taxicab
franchises with Bell Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners
Association, Metro Cab Company, Taxi! Taxi!, and Yellow Cab
Company to increase the maximum number of taxicabs per
company to sixty.
September 27, 2011
(Attachment D)
Introduction and First Reading of Six Ordinances Modifying
the Taxicab Franchise and Permit Annual Renewal Dates and
Make Other Clarifications and Changes to Santa Monica
Municipal Code Chapter 6.49
March 17, 2015
(Attachment E)
Taxicab Franchise Program Regulations, Non-Taxi Vehicles
for Hire Regulations, and Curb Space Allocation to Non-Taxi
Vehicles for Hire (e.g., Uber, Lyft)
November 10, 2015
(Attachment F)
Introduction and first reading of Ordinances extending the
taxicab franchise of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi, Metro Cab,
Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab
November 14, 2017
(Attachment G)
Introduction for first reading of Ordinances extending taxicab
franchises of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi, Metro Cab, Taxi!
Taxi! and Yellow Cab for one year
November 18, 2018
(Attachment H)
Introduction for First Reading an Ordinance amending and
extending the taxicab franchise of TMAT Corp., dba Taxi!
Taxi!
July 28, 2020
(Attachment I)
Staff presentation about constrained staff resources and
transitioning from a taxicab franchise system to a permit
system
Discussion
On January 14, 2010, staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for Taxicab
franchises with 13 applicants. On November 10, 2010, the City of Santa Monica granted
a taxicab franchise to five companies: Bell Cab, Metro Cab, Independent Taxi, Taxi!
Taxi! and Yellow Cab. In 2018, Council amended taxicab regulations in compliance with
10.E
Packet Pg. 131
4 of 8
California State law (AB 1069) and extended the franchise with one company that was
substantially located in Santa Monica: Taxi! Taxi!. With the adoption of AB 1069, only
one taxicab operator, Taxi! Taxi!, is “substantially located” within the City of Santa
Monica. Currently, Taxi! Taxi! has a fleet of fewer than 10 vehicles and drivers, and the
scale of taxi operations is drastically different than when the franchise was first
established, when they were operating 59 taxicabs.
Regionally, many cities are transitioning taxicab management from franchise models to
permit-based systems. In 2019, the City of Beverly Hills dissolved its taxi franchise. In
2022, the City of Los Angeles transitioned from a franchise to a permit-based system
that regulates a variety of operators and fleets. City staff has been in regular
communication with peer cities throughout the region to explore a regional permitting
function and best practices for local regulation. Based on discussions with the City of
Los Angeles, staff does not recommend moving forward with a regional permitting
system at this time due to the extended timeframes and jurisdictional and operational
challenges that would need to be resolved to establish this novel system.
Continuing the franchise beyond December 31, 2023, would presumably result in a sole
source procurement process for one eligible applicant. Therefore, staff recommends the
taxicab franchise be allowed to lapse on December 31, 2023. To provide staff and taxi
companies ample time to transition to the permit system, staff recommends pro-rating
permit fees for the first six months of the permit-based system and issuing new permits
extending the City-issued 2023 vehicle and driver permits through June 30, 2024. On
July 1, 2024, new permits will be issued, and the full annual permit fees will be due. To
address staffing constraints in multiple departments, staff plan s to transition the annual
permits and fee collection from the calendar year to the fiscal year and streamline the
fees overall.
Considering the current business model, the remaining taxi stands located throughout
the City will be converted into short-term parking or dynamic loading zones for a variety
of uses. The conversion will ensure that a variety of curbside uses have the space
allocated to mitigate negative behaviors such as double parking or bike lane blockages.
Over the years and during the COVID-19 pandemic, taxi stands have seen less and
less use and have been repurposed for a variety of uses such as Zero Emission
10.E
Packet Pg. 132
5 of 8
Delivery Zones, loading zones, and parklets. During a 2023 meeting with Taxi! Taxi!
representatives, they indicated that the stands are of little use to their current state of
operations.
As part of the transition, Mobility staff is converting the current franchise agreement and
franchise administrative regulations language to permit administrative regulations to
manage the program post-franchise.
Impact on Customers and Fares
Under the current franchise, Taxi! Taxi! is the only company that may utilize the current
curbside taxi stands. Other taxicab companies that are licensed within the County of
Los Angeles may provide taxicab service in Santa Monica on a pre-arranged basis only.
Staff proposes repurposing taxi stands to loading zones for a variety of uses or to
metered parking spaces, depending on the adjacent land use context.
Under the permit-based system, and unchanged from the franchise system, taxicab
companies other than those substantially located within Santa Monica can still conduct
prearranged trips; however, no street hailing will be permitted by companies not
substantially located within the City. Additionally, none will be permitted to stand and
queue for passengers. Taxi companies who meet the requirements in AB 1069 and the
Santa Monica permitting rules will be permitted to conduct street hailed trips.
Under the current franchise agreement, senior citizens (persons aged 65 and older) and
persons with disabilities (including persons with a Los Angeles County Transit
Operators Association Metro Disabled Identity Card) receive a ten percent (10%)
discount. The discount for seniors and persons with disabilities will be incorporated into
the Administrative Regulations. As an alternative to taxi service, the City provides
residents 65 years and older, or 18-64 with a disability, discounted Lyft and wheelchair
vehicle rides through the Mobility on Demand Every Day (MODE) program. MODE’s
service area is limited to the city’s boundaries and a few select destinations in Los
Angeles. MODE operates on weekdays between 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturdays
between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
10.E
Packet Pg. 133
6 of 8
Taxi trips are often taken to/from Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). With the
lapsing of the franchise and transition to a permit-based system, the City can continue
to set maximum rates for fares. The new permit program will allow taxi companies
substantially located within the City to be more competitive with TNCs and provide
incentives or coupons to customers. Further, the City of Santa Monica provides a cost -
effective alternative for passengers who need to go to/from LAX: Big Blue Bus Route 3
which generally operates 5 a.m. to 11:45 p.m. on weekdays and weekends, and Rapid
3 which operates 7 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on weekdays.
Additionally, since the creation of the original taxi franchise, Metro has made significant
progress in LAX transit connectivity, with the Airport Metro Connector project directly
connecting Metro rail and bus service to the new LAX people mover system currently
scheduled to open in late 2024.
Environmental Review
The ordinance is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15061(b)(3) “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that
the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The
ordinance’s proposed changes to the taxicab franchise consist of programmatic
changes and would not result in a physical environmental effect on the environment.
In addition, Section 15302 exempts Class 1 projects from CEQA, which include the
“operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of
existing public or private structures [or] facilities, including streets, sidewalks, bicycle
and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities.” The project consists of transitioning from a
taxicab franchise to a permit-based model. The transition is a programmatic change and
would not necessitate the construction of new vehicle travel lanes for operation.
Therefore, the ordinance for the taxi program qualifies as a Class 1 exemption.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The City will no longer collect the following annual franchise fees associated with the
program:
10.E
Packet Pg. 134
7 of 8
• Annual base franchise fee per taxicab company: $5,000
• Annual franchise fee per vehicle in taxicab fleet: $452 (current fleet is 10
vehicles)
The estimated annual loss in revenue is $9,520 annually. Any revenue changes needed
will be included as part of the midyear budget process. The remaining fees are
streamlined and included in the 2022-2023 Franchise Fee Schedule and will undergo
the same annual fee increases as all other fees issued within the City. A new fee
schedule will be developed to reflect the shift from the permit issuance and payments at
the beginning of the calendar year to align with the fiscal year.
10.E
Packet Pg. 135
8 of 8
Proposed Fees associated with the taxi program:
Business License Taxes $250.00 per vehicle
California State Mandated Fee (CASp) $4.00
New taxicab driver’s permit application fee $54.31
Renewal taxicab driver’s permit application fee $54.31
Taxicab driver’s permit re-examination fee $74.92
Taxicab driver’s permit transfer fee $74.92
Taxicab driver’s permit replacement fee $54.31
New vehicle permit fee $135.78
Transfer vehicle permit fee $135.78
Renewal vehicle fee $81.47
Replacement vehicle permit fee $43.45
Vehicle re-inspection fee $54.31
Prepared By: Barbara Jacobson, Transportation Planning Associate
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report
B. Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report
C. Attachment C. Dec 14, 2010 Staff Report
D. Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report
E. Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report
F. Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report
G. Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report
H. Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report
I. Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report
J. 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023
10.E
Packet Pg. 136
City Council Meeting: June 30, 2009
Agenda Item: 7-B
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Elaine Polachek, Deputy City Manager
Subject: Ordinance to Establish Franchise System for Regulation of Taxicab Operations and
Modifying Existing Provisions Applicable to Taxis and Vehicles for Hire
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance to establish a franchise-
based system for the regulation of taxicab operations and modify existing provisions applicable to
taxis and vehicles for hire.
Executive Summary
A recent study of taxicab operations in Santa Monica found a consensus among cab companies
and drivers presently operating in the City, the business community, and City staff that there are too
many cabs for the market. Further, there are multiple problems presented by the current open-entry
taxicab permitting system which prevent the City from reducing vehicle emissions, limiting the
number of taxicabs, setting uniform fares, and requiring taxicab companies to meet operating
standards. The 2009 survey of Santa Monica residents identified traffic issues as a top concern.
At their February 10, 2009, consideration of the taxicab study, Council directed staff to provide
information on a medallion-based system as an alternative to the recommended franchise system;
and to recommend economically viable criteria for selection of taxicab operators with an emphasis
on environmentally-friendly fleets, safety criteria, discounts for seniors and persons with mobility
impairments, operator viability, quality of service and enforceability of standards. Staff recommends
adoption of an ordinance to establish a franchise-based system for the regulation of taxicabs, which
would limit the number of taxicab companies to between four and eight companies, limit the total
number of vehicles in the taxicab fleet to 250, require franchisees to meet standards for their
vehicles and drivers, and be self-supporting through franchise, vehicle permit and driver permit
fees.
Background
In October 2006, the Task Force on the Environment recommended to City Council that it direct
staff to develop an ordinance initiating a franchise system and awarding franchises only to taxi
companies whose fleets met specific emission and mileage standards. At their February 10, 2009,
meeting City Council commented on the excessive number of cabs, especially in the downtown
area, and the need to reduce their impact on the City and on the environment. The City has also
received complaints regarding taxis cruising for business; poor customer service from drivers;
confusing and high fees; lack of discounted services for senior and disabled residents; and taxicabs
with Santa Monica permits operating as “bandit” taxis in Los Angeles and other cities. Traffic has
become an increasing concern to Santa Monica residents and in the 2009 resident survey, traffic
continued to be at the top of the list of issues of most concern to Santa Monica residents. In their
consideration of the LUCE, Council endorsed guidelines to manage and reduce traffic, supporting a
policy of “No Net New Trips” as the basis for traffic management and promoting sustainability.
Limiting the number of taxicabs and establishing enforceable standards would promote this policy.
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
1 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Since the City has no experience with alternative taxi regulatory mechanisms, a study was
conducted to help assess options for regulating taxicab operations. The study, conducted by
Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates, concluded that:
·Santa Monica has too many taxicabs and too many taxi companies for the population;
·The City’s present open-entry form of regulation, which relies on market forces, does not
ensure either quality taxi service or a healthy taxicab industry;
·The City should establish a taxi franchise system which uses a competitive Request For
Proposals (RFP) process to award franchises to at least four but no more than eight cab
companies, each with a minimum fleet size of at least 25 vehicles, and which limits the total
number of authorized cabs to between 200 and 300;
·Franchised cab companies should be required to meet financial, technical and service
standards for themselves, their vehicles and their drivers as a franchise condition in order to
ensure quality services.
At the March 3, 2009 Council meeting, staff recommended that Council adopt an emergency
ordinance establishing a moratorium on the City’s approval and issuance of new taxicab licenses
and permits in Santa Monica pending the establishment of a new system for regulating taxicab
operations within the City. Council directed staff to return with an ordinance but chose not to
impose a moratorium on new licenses in the interim.
Discussion
Santa Monica does not presently limit the number of cabs operating in the City and issues permits
to any taxicab owner who meets insurance and other minimal requirements. In 2007-2008, when
Nelson/Nygaard conducted its study, there were 412 cabs operated by 55 companies in the City.
Since then, the numbers have increased by 24% and there are now 511 permitted cabs operated by
55 cab companies to serve a resident population of 91,000. Twenty of these cab companies consist
of a single vehicle and 23 other companies consist of 2-10 vehicles. Taxi drivers in Santa Monica
currently average about $24,000 in annual income, due to the over-saturation of the market.
Despite heavy competition, taxis in Santa Monica mostly charge higher rates than taxis in other
nearby cities. Compared to nearby cities, Santa Monica has a much higher cab to population ratio.
The President of the Los Angeles Board of Taxicab Commissioners informed the City that as of May
23, 2007, taxicabs with Santa Monica permits are the single highest source of “bandit” cabs found
to be operating illegally in Los Angeles without meeting L.A.’s stricter standards for vehicles, drivers
and cab companies.
The current open-entry system does not provide a regulatory framework to enable the City to
establish requirements used by many other cities, including:
·placing limits on the number of cab companies allowed to operate in the City and
establishing rules governing their operation.
·limiting the total number of taxicabs that can operate in the City in order to allow both
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
2 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
companies and drivers to achieve reasonable earnings.
·establishing either a single fare structure or a maximum fare.
·limiting the age of taxi vehicles and/or establishing strict standards for appearance and
safety.
·requiring each company to have a distinctive name and color scheme, with unique vehicle
numbers, so that customers can easily distinguish among companies and City staff can more
easily enforce rules and investigate complaints.
·requiring effective radio/computerized dispatching to avoid drivers cruising/waiting for walk-
up business, ensure service to customers and improve driver/customer security.
·requiring driver training and testing in order to meet standards for knowledge of City rules,
geography and English.
·requiring each company to provide wheelchair accessible vehicles
·encouraging or incentivizing the utilization of vehicles that promote better air quality and/or
fuel efficiency.
·encouraging or incentivizing the provision of discounts for seniors and persons with mobility
impairments.
Medallion-Based Systems
At their February 10, 2009, meeting, Council directed staff to explore a medallion-based system as
a possible alternative. Medallion systems, like those used in New York, Boston or San Francisco,
impose a cap on the number of vehicles with provisions for the automatic renewal of vehicle
licenses and for the transfer/sale of licenses between vehicle owners, conditioned only on City
approval of the new owners' qualifications. The initial sale of the medallions would provide one-time
revenues to the City, but the medallion would then become a commodity to be re-sold by the owner
at market rates. Medallion systems are most common in large, dense cities with the need for large,
economically viable taxi fleets.
While the medallion system would limit the number of taxicabs, it makes enforcement of service
standards difficult as the City would continue to have the labor-intensive task of enforcing service
standards on the individual vehicle owners and individual drivers as opposed to a limited number of
companies under a franchise system.
In addition, the medallion system does not provide a structure to increase the taxicab driver’s
income. It is common for multiple medallions to be purchased by companies or individuals acting
on behalf of companies, who then lease the medallions to individual drivers. It has been suggested
that the City could establish a medallion system that limits medallion sales to single driver-owners,
using increased driver incomes as a means of assuring quality customer service. However, there is
no mechanism whereby the City could ensure that individuals purchasing medallions are not acting
as agents for other entities. Medallions are usually sold through auction by the local government.
The most recent auction held by New York City resulted in average winning bids in excess of
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
3 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
$413,000 per medallion from a minimum bid requirement of $189,000. With the high value of
medallions as a limited commodity, financing models have arisen, such as the Medallion Financial
Group, a publicly traded specialty finance company. With the cost of a medallion controlled by the
market, medallion owners often raise lease fees making it harder for drivers to make a profit.
Proposed Changes to Current Taxi Ordinance and Creation of New Taxi Chapter
Staff is proposing the creation of a new chapter of the Municipal Code (6.49) that establishes a
franchise-based system for taxi operations as well as regulations applicable to taxis. Chapter 6.48
of the Municipal Code would be revised to contain only the most basic requirements pertaining to all
vehicles for hire such as insurance, business license and direct routing.
The proposed taxi franchise provisions specify criteria for franchise applicants, establish a process
for granting and revoking franchises, and list basic rules applicable to operating taxis in the City.
The ordinance limits the number of franchises awarded, the total number of taxis in the City and
sets a process by which those numbers can increase or decrease.
The proposed ordinance would strengthen current provisions prohibiting illegal taxi operations and
impose additional requirements on franchised companies. Specifically, the proposed ordinance
established the following standards and requirements:
1. Use a competitive RFP process to award franchises to at least one but no more than eight
cab companies, each with a minimum fleet size of at least 25 vehicles and each with a
minimum percentage of vehicles that can accommodate a wheel chair;
2. Establish an initial total limit of 250 vehicles permitted to operate in the City;
3. Structure the competitive RFP process so as to encourage the greatest use of fleets
consisting of SULEV and other fuel-efficient vehicles and encourage bidding companies to
propose enhancements beyond the minimum requirements, as a means of selecting the
franchisees and determining how many cabs each company could operate;
4. Require that companies make available discounts to senior and persons with mobility
impairments;
5. Require that each company have a distinct name, color scheme and unique cab numbers;
6. Require a centralized dispatching system, based either on radio or computerized
technology; record keeping with both dispatch logs and driver logs; and a staffed place of
business (not necessarily in Santa Monica) where records are kept and may be inspected
and where customers may contact the company to make complaints or retrieve property;
7. Require that companies provide training to their drivers on City requirements, company
procedures, defensive driving, map reading, local geography, customer relations, personal
hygiene, security and public safety, and non-discrimination in the treatment of customers
based on age, disability, ethnicity and gender;
8. Require that companies ensure that drivers are proficient in English so they can
communicate directly with customers without the aid of cell-phone calls or other translation
assistance;
9. Require that companies be responsible for their drivers’ compliance with City regulations
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
4 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
and state and local laws, including provisions for company-specific fines and penalties for a
persistent pattern of driver violations, including franchise suspension or revocation for failure
to enforce compliance;
10. Require documentation of the cab firm’s financial stability adequate to meet the franchise
standards, with a liability insurance coverage requirement of no less than $350,000
combined single limit per vehicle;
11. Require vehicles to be no older than a specific number of years and be certified by a City-
designated inspection facility for safety, mechanical reliability, meter reliability, markings and
required signage;
12.Establish a single metered fare rate equivalent to the prevailing fare set by the Los Angeles
Department of Transportation; and two flat rates for trips to LAX, one for trips originating
north of the I-10 freeway and one for trips south of the I-10 freeway;
13. Establish annual franchise, vehicle permit and driver permit fees to cover all City costs of
administering the taxicab franchises; and
14.Establish mandatory record keeping requirements to ensure accountability.
Impact on Presently Permitted Taxicab Drivers and Companies
In order to reduce taxicab numbers to a reasonable ratio which will serve the City’s transportation
needs, the number of taxicabs now permitted to operate will need to be reduced by 50%. This
would result in a decrease of 250 taxis. Of the 55 companies now permitted to operate, 47 would
not meet the suggested minimum fleet size of 25 vehicles per company under the recommended
franchise structure. However, as the drivers and small companies themselves suggested at the
workshops, independent drivers, single owner/operators and small companies have the option of
forming their own cooperatives or associations and submitting eligible bids, thus not limiting
franchise eligibility to the larger taxicab companies. At least one taxi cooperative, consisting of
drivers who own and operate their own taxi vehicles, is currently operating in Santa Monica.
Vehicle Emission/Fuel Efficiency Standards
At its December 15, 2008 meeting, the Task Force on the Environment reviewed with City
Attorney’s Office staff the issue of federal pre-emption of local standards for vehicle emissions and
fuel economy and adopted a motion stating its support for the establishment of a taxi franchise
agreement that would maximize criteria for pollutant reduction, greenhouse gas emission reduction,
and petroleum displacement for future taxi operations in Santa Monica. Staff has reviewed the legal
implications of setting specific vehicle emission/fuel efficiency standards and has found that
attempts to impose stricter regulatory standards than those authorized by the federal Clean Air Act
and Energy Policy and Conservation Act have been overturned by courts based on the doctrine of
federal preemption. However, other cities, including San Francisco and New York, have been able
to achieve the goals of reducing emissions and dependence on carbon-based fuels through
incentives. Rather than limit taxicab fleets to compressed natural gas-powered vehicles or hybrid
electric vehicles, staff recommends a more flexible approach that would evaluate proposals in a
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
5 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
way that rewards bidders that commit to using fleets consisting of SULEV and other fuel-efficient
vehicles.
Discounted Fares for Senior and Customers with Disabilities
Residents have requested that discounted taxi service be available to seniors and persons with
mobility impairments. Bid evaluations will include points for companies that commit to providing
discounts to seniors and persons with mobility impairments.
Alternatives
As an alternative to adopting a franchise-based taxicab ordinance, Council could adopt a medallion-
based system as described above.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no legal limitation on the amount of franchise fees that the City may impose for the
exclusive/limited privilege of operating a taxicab business on public city streets. The costs to
support, administer and enforce a franchise system can be recovered through franchise, permit and
inspection fees paid by the taxicab companies and drivers.
The following taxi and driver fees are currently in place:
Taxicab
-Taxi Decal Fee: $ 75.60
-Processing Fee: $144.61
TOTAL: $220.21
Taxi Driver (new)
-Processing Fee: $144.61
-Photo Badge: $ 84.55
-Fingerprint: $102.70
TOTAL: $331.86
Taxi Driver (renewal)
-Processing Fee: $144.61
-Photo Badge: $ 84.55
TOTAL: $229.16
Staff recommends that the franchise fee and vehicle and driver permit fees be established at rates
both comparable to surrounding cities as well as to fully cover the costs of administering the
franchise operations. At this time, it would appear that fees in the following range would meet these
objectives:
Annual franchise fee per cab firm: $10,000
Annual vehicle permit fee per taxicab: $ 875
Annual driver permit fee per driver: $ 150
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
6 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Administration of the proposed franchise system would be performed by the Traffic Division of the
Police Department and would consist of annual review of the franchise-holder’s performance, on-
going processing of vehicle and driver permits, and supervision of the vehicle inspection/certification
process by a City-designated facility.
Prepared by: Pamela McGarvey, Acting Revenue Manager
Approved:Forwarded to Council:
Elaine Polachek
Deputy City Manager
P. Lamont Ewell
City Manager
Attachment 1 - Taxicab Ordinance
Taxicab Franchise - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2009/20090630/s2...
7 of 7 7/7/2019, 11:36 AM
10.E.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment A. June 30, 2009 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council Meeting: November 9, 2010
Agenda Item: 9-A
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Carol Swindell, Director of Finance
Subject: Award of Taxicab Franchises
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:
1) Hold a Public Hearing and Introduce for first reading ordinances granting franchises to Bell
Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association, Metro Cab Company, Taxi Taxi, and
Yellow Cab Company;
2) Adopt the attached resolution setting annual taxicab franchise fees and taximeter rates; and
3) Adopt the attached resolution setting the penalty structure and schedule of fines.
Executive Summary
A 2008 study by Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates of taxicab operations in Santa Monica
found that the City’s open-entry taxicab permitting system allowed the operation of too many cabs
for the market, and prevented the City from reducing vehicle emissions created by taxicabs, setting
uniform fares, enforcing requirements that taxicab companies meet specific operating standards,
and providing discounts for seniors and persons with mobility impairments. Based on the study’s
recommendations, on July 28, 2009, Council adopted an ordinance establishing a franchise-based
system for the regulation of taxicabs, which limits the number of taxicab companies to no more
than eight companies, limits the total number of vehicles in the taxicab fleet to 250, requires
franchisees to meet standards for their vehicles and drivers, and be self-supporting through
franchise, vehicle permit and driver permit fees. In compliance with the ordinance requirements, a
Request for Proposals (RFP) for citywide taxicab franchises was issued on January 14, 2010, with a
response deadline of 3:00 pm on March 19, 2010. Thirteen qualified proposals were received and
evaluated based on the criteria specified in the ordinance and the RFP. Based on the evaluation,
staff recommends the award of franchises by ordinance authorizing the operation of 50 vehicles
each to Bell Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association, Metro Cab Company, Taxi Taxi,
and Yellow Cab Company, for a citywide total of 250 taxicabs. The attached resolution sets the
annual taxicab franchise fees and rates and reflects amounts published in the Request for
Proposals (RFP) document. The second attached resolution sets the penalty structure and
penalties for violation of the taxicab rules and regulations.
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
1 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Background
In October 2006, the Task Force on the Environment recommended to City Council that it direct
staff to develop an ordinance initiating a franchise system and awarding franchises only to taxicab
companies whose fleets met specific emission and mileage standards. At their February 10, 2009,
meeting City Council commented on the excessive number of taxicabs, especially in the downtown
area, and the need to reduce their impact on the City and on the environment. The City also
received complaints regarding taxicabs: cruising for business, poor customer service from drivers,
confusing and high fees, lack of discounted services for senior and disabled residents, and taxicabs
with Santa Monica permits operating illegally as “bandit” taxis in Los Angeles and other cities.
Traffic is an increasing concern and in the 2009 resident survey, traffic continued to be at the top of
the list of issues of most concern to Santa Monica residents. Limiting the number of taxicabs and
establishing enforceable standards would promote the City’s sustainability and traffic management
goals.
In 2008, the City retained the services of Nelson\Nygaard to assess options for regulating taxicab
operations. The study concluded:
·Santa Monica has too many taxicabs and too many taxicab companies for the population;
·The City’s present open-entry form of regulation, which relies on market forces, does not
ensure either quality taxicab service or a healthy taxicab industry;
·The City should establish a taxicab franchise system which uses a competitive Request For
Proposals (RFP) process to award franchises to at least four but no more than eight cab
companies, each with a minimum fleet size of at least 25 vehicles, and which limits the total
number of authorized cabs to between 200 and 300; and
·Franchised taxicab companies should be required to meet financial, technical and service
standards for themselves, their vehicles and their drivers as a franchise condition in order to
ensure quality services.
On July 28, 2009, Council adopted an ordinance establishing a franchise-based system for the
regulation of taxicabs, which limits the number of taxicab companies to at least one but no more
than eight companies, limits the total number of vehicles in the citywide taxicab fleet to 250,
requires franchisees to meet standards for their vehicles and drivers, provides for rules/regulations
for enforcement of franchise requirements and be self-supporting through franchise, vehicle permit
and driver permit fees.
Discussion
On January 14, 2010, staff released a Request for Proposals (RFP) (Attachment A) for taxicab
franchises and held a pre-proposal conference on January 21, 2010, which was attended by
representatives of 33 taxicab firms/operators. Two subsequent rounds of written questions and
answers (Attachment B) clarifying the RFP requirements were conducted and the initial response
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
2 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
deadline of February 22, 2010 was extended to 3:00 pm on March 19, 2010, to provide all potential
responders adequate time to meet the RFP requirements. Thirteen proposals were received by the
RFP response deadline.
Evaluation
An interagency committee evaluated the 13 proposals. The evaluation team included five members
who scored and rated all aspects of the proposal and included two representatives from the Finance
Department, one representative from the Office of Sustainability and the Environment, one
representative from the Police Department, and one representative from the City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation Taxicab Regulation Division. The evaluation team also included other
experts who were consulted regarding specific aspects of the proposal and included a
representative from the Pier Restoration Corporation, Bayside District, additional Police Department
staff, and the Human Services Division. The five raters evaluated the proposal based on the
following criteria, contained in SMMC 6.49.040(b) and detailed in the RFP:
·Proof of financial viability, demonstrating ability to provide taxicab services in compliance with
City ordinances and regulations and the bidder’s proposal. (20%)
·Experience in providing taxicab services during the last 10 years, including demonstrated
quality of service and safety. (20%)
·Proposed business and management plan. (20%)
·Fleet composition, including age and condition of taxicabs, annual minimum number of
vehicles meeting Ultra Low Emission Vehicle and Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle
(ULEV/SULEV) and other low-emission standards. (15%)
·Local preference. (8%)
·Character of operator’s owners/members/principals/partners, verifying criminal/civil record,
taxicab regulatory, franchising, licensing, insurance and litigation history. (5%)
·Proposed discount fares for senior and mobility impaired customers. (3%)
·Dispatch and communication system. (3%)
·Driver training, testing, supervision and life/health/disability benefit plans. (3%)
·Operator/driver financial relationships including leasing, fees, memberships and all other
relationships. (3%)
The evaluators independently reviewed each proposal prior to convening over two days to discuss
and review the proposals in detail. During the discussion period, technical expertise and input was
provided by subject matter experts, in areas including environmental and accessibility. Each
evaluator calculated a composite score for each company using the score sheet (sample in
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
3 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Attachment C). The final weighted composite score was entered into an Excel spreadsheet to
calculate the total composite score (Attachment D). In a manner consistent with other City RFP
processes, notes and individual scores from each evaluator were not retained. Also consistent with
other City processes, only one original file copy of each proposal received was retained. Staff
surveyed other cities regarding taxicab RFP processes and found a wide range of methods to
communicate the resulting recommendation. Despite the wide variety of methods, one constant was
the communication of composite scores and not individual rater comments or evaluations. The
attachments to this report represent the material retained.
In summary, the 13 proposals received were:
TABLE 1
Taxicab Franchise Proposal Summary
PROPOSER # Current
SM
Taxicabs
# Proposed
SM Taxicabs
Now operating in
SM?
Based in
SM?
All Yellow Taxi
Inc
630 Yes No
Bell Cab 43 60 Yes No
Beverly Hills
Cab Co
29 80 Yes No
Euro Taxi 28 60 Yes Yes
Independent
Taxi Owners
Assoc.
12 50 Yes No
LA Checker Cab
Co/VIP Yellow
0/40 40/40 No/Yes, under
new joint venture
No
Lady's Yellow
Cab dba Yellow
United
27 40 Yes Yes
Metro Cab Co. 20 100 Yes Yes
SM Yellow Cab 9 30 Yes No
San Gabriel
Transit Inc/City
Cab
036 No No
SMCC Yellow
Cab
0100 No No
Taxi Taxi* 59 100 Yes Yes
Yellow Cab 40 60 Yes No
*TMAT Corporation also includes Lotus Taxi with 6 licensed taxis.
As of March 2010, the 13 proposers operated 316 taxicabs in Santa Monica. Collectively, they
proposed to operate a total of 826 taxicabs, more than three times the statutory maximum of 250
taxicabs permitted to operate by all franchise holders. Two proposers do not currently operate any
cabs in Santa Monica. One additional proposer does not currently operate any taxicabs in the City
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
4 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
but put forth the formation of a new joint venture with a current operator, dependent on award of a
franchise. Four proposals were received from operators with business operations currently based
in Santa Monica.
Proof of Financial Viability
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of equity funding, debt funding, balance
sheets, cash flow statements, income statements, financial plan for operation of the proposed level
and scope of services. Firm structure was reflective of the taxicab industry in general with
proposals from cooperatives/associations, in which vehicles are owned by members and either
operated by the member owner or leased to an independent contractor driver, and firms in which
one or more partners own the vehicles and lease them to independent contractor drivers. Members
of cooperatives/ associations are assessed annual fees to cover the organization’s operating costs
and share in the organization’s profits. Taxicab drivers are rarely, if ever, bona fide employees.
Almost without exception, taxicabs are either driven by the vehicle owner or leased to an
independent contractor taxicab driver. The recommended firms most clearly demonstrated financial
capacity within their organizational structure to meet the franchise requirements, with financing
commitments where necessary to meet expansion of their present fleet or acquisition of new
technology.
Experience Providing Taxicab Services
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of current ownership/ management’s
experience in providing taxicab service during the last ten years in any jurisdiction where
franchises/permits were held, scope of current taxicab operations and references from permitting
jurisdictions. All but two proposers were experienced in providing taxicab services in Santa
Monica. The two proposers which have not operated previously in Santa Monica have significant
experience in other jurisdictions in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The recommended firms
demonstrated a history of quality operation both in Santa Monica and in other jurisdictions.
Proposed Business and Management Plan
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of organizational structure and internal
relationships of owners/members to leasing drivers, experience of management personnel,
procedures for discipline of members and lease drivers, operating facilities and their location,
staffing plan, experience of management personnel, vehicle maintenance and storage, plan for
maintaining required taxicab service levels and procedures for addressing service deficiencies,
vehicle maintenance personnel/ facilities, disciplinary program for drivers/members/employees,
complaint resolution procedures, accident tracking/investigation, record keeping programs, and
programs or agreements which might limit Santa Monica service availability.
Not all proposers provided business plans which clearly demonstrate compliance with the City
regulations or the ability to provide the required increase in levels and quality of service. Several
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
5 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
proposals specified management personnel with minimal relevant experience in the taxicab
industry. The recommended firms demonstrated their ability to provide appropriate and
experienced staffing, meet technological requirements, monitor and enforce a uniform standard of
service from all drivers, maintain detailed records and provide meaningful reports to the City, and to
fund their proposed level of operation.
Fleet Composition
Proposers were required to specify a fleet of at least 25 vehicles, with a specific number of
proposed vehicles in each of the SULEV/ULEV/other categories of fuel efficiency/emission rating.
In addition, each proposal was required to specify a number of wheelchair accessible vehicles equal
to at least 10% of the proposed fleet size. Wheelchair accessible vehicles were not subject to the
fuel efficiency/emission ratings requirements because the required side-loading vans are not
currently available in economically viable high fuel efficiency/low emissions models. Proposed
fleets ranged from 30 to 100 vehicles, with all proposals based on expansion of their existing fleet,
no matter its present size in Santa Monica. Proposers were required to provide a specific
deployment schedule with the full fleet in operation at the end of five months. The evaluation
committee gave the most weight to those proposals which both proposed fleets with greater
composition of the most fuel efficient/least polluting vehicles and with the most aggressive
deployment schedule. In order to ensure that all franchise holders have an equal opportunity to
access the available market and that no franchise holder has an advantage based on the number of
vehicles available for service over other franchise holders, staff recommends that the number of
vehicles authorized for each of the five recommended franchises be set at an individual fleet size of
50 vehicles, of which 5 are to be wheelchair-accessible vehicles. The minimum vehicle
classification mix for each franchise fleet, as shown in Table 3 below, is recommended on the basis
of the original fleet mix stated in the proposals submitted in response to the RFP, as summarized in
Table 2.
TABLE 2 - ORIGINALLY PROPOSED FLEET
TOTAL
FLEET
SULEV ULEV Wheelchair
Accessible
Bell Cab 60 16 38 6
Independent Taxi Owners Assoc 50 45 0 5
Metro Cab Co. 100 56 29 15
Taxi Taxi 100 50 40 10
Yellow Cab 60 25 25 10
TOTAL PROPOSED VEHICLES 370 192 132 46
TABLE 3 - RECOMMENDED FLEET
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
6 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
TOTAL
FLEET
SULEV ULEV Wheelchair
Accessible
Bell Cab 50 16295
Independent Taxi Owners Assoc 50 45 0 5
Metro Cab Co. 50 45 0 5
Taxi Taxi 50 45 0 5
Yellow Cab 50 25 20 5
TOTAL RECOMMENDEDVEHICLES 250 176 49 25
The raters scored each company based on the proposed fleet distribution between SULEV, ULEV
and accessible vehicles (Table 2). In support of the Task Force on the Environment and Council’s
priorities, the recommended total fleet (Table 3) would consist of 70% SULEV or higher standard
vehicles, 20% ULEV vehicles, and 10% wheelchair accessible vehicles. Franchisees will be
strongly encouraged to increase the number of SULEV or greater class vehicles in their individual
fleets. The franchise ordinance provides for the City and recommended taxicab companies to
negotiate the final fleet composition and provides for the final ratio between SULEV and ULEV to
not go below the original proposed fleet composition.
By recommending an equal fleet size for each of the five recommended franchise firms, no one firm
is given an advantage in size over another and all franchised firms are offered an equal opportunity
to serve the Santa Monica taxicab customer. The recommended fleet size also represents an
increase for all but one firm and eases the financial burden which might be encountered by those
firms which proposed the greatest expansion of their existing fleet.
Local Preference
Each proposer was required to declare the address of their principal business location as a means
of determining whether the firm’s principal location was in Santa Monica or another location. Firms
which declared a Santa Monica location as the principal place of business as were provided the full
local preference point advantage in the final scoring over firms declared principal business locations
outside of Santa Monica.
Character of Operator’s Owners/Members/Principals/Partners
Proposals were evaluated on submitted and other documentation accessed by the City of criminal
convictions, anti-competitive practices, violations of state/federal laws regarding false or misleading
advertising, revocation/suspension of business license, violation of operator licenses/franchises,
litigation against franchising authorities, and citations of operators/drivers for operating in
jurisdictions without required permits/licenses (bandit cab operations). Through criminal background
checks conducted by the California Department of Justice fingerprinting review, all proposers
demonstrated that their ownership and principal investors of record were of good character and
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
7 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
background, appropriate to the operation of a taxicab franchise. Of the recommended firms, most
demonstrated compliance with regulatory requirements jurisdictions in which they were authorized
to operate.
Proposed Discount Fares
All proposers specified some form of fare discount for senior citizens (persons age 65 or older who
present proof of age, such as a DMV ID card) and persons with disabilities (persons with a Los
Angeles County Transit Operators Association [LACTOA] Metro disabled ID card). While proposed
discounts ranged from 10% to 25%, some proposed discount schemes were determined to be
problematic. Several required advance purchase of a pre-paid “debit” card with no information as to
how the card was to be read or validated. One committed to accepting discount media for which
the City would be required to fund reimbursement. Others placed the full burden of the mandated
discount on the driver with no support or reimbursement from the franchise holder. These
approaches fail to guarantee a transparent fare discount that is easily understood by the target
customer groups and is easily monitored by the franchise holder and the City.
The evaluation committee recommends that a discount of 10% off of the metered fare for eligible
passengers, with a reimbursement to the driver by the franchise holder, should be required of all
franchise recipients. The committee determined that higher discounts are not financially viable
without funding by some entity other than the franchise holders and their independent contractor
drivers.
Dispatch/Communication System
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of the taxicab companies’
staffing/deployment plan, dispatch and communication systems, procedures for dispatching
vehicles and capturing records of services operations, dispatch facilities and locations, technology
for serving speech/hearing impaired customers and non-English speaking customers, and
procedures and formats for reporting service data to the City. Digital dispatching systems are a
required feature of the RFP and all proposers committed to acquiring this technology if it was not
already in place in the company’s operations. Additionally, digital systems utilize GPS to provide the
most efficient dispatching of available taxicabs and also improve the safety of passengers and
drivers by providing the vehicle’s location to the central dispatch. The recommended firms more
clearly demonstrated their understanding and use of this technology and its ability to both
communicate with drivers from a centralized computerized dispatch location and to provide a
backup communication system in case of emergencies or failure of the digital system.
Driver Training, Testing, Supervision and Benefit Plans
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of driver selection and training process,
proposers’ English language testing procedures, driver training and re-training programs, and driver
and employee benefit plans and costs. Taxicabs are either driven by the vehicle owner or leased to
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
8 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
an independent contractor taxi driver. Taxicab drivers are rarely, if ever, bona fide employees.
None of the proposals stated that they provide health insurance benefits to drivers. All but one of
the recommended proposers provide a level of accidental death/disability benefit with some medical
benefit at either the proposer’s cost or, in the case of those with the highest benefit, a nominal cost
(e.g. $20 per month) to the driver. The recommended firms all had specific procedures for soliciting,
selecting, hiring and training drivers and complying with City and state requirements for drug
screening.
Operator/Driver Financial Relationships
Proposals were evaluated on submitted documentation of leasing costs and other fees charged by
the operating entity to vehicle owners and taxi drivers, as well as any contribution required of drivers
towards the cost of discounted fares. Membership entities assess their member’s annual fees to
support the operation of the entity and share back any annual profit. Ownership entities, such as
LLC’s and partnerships, own the firm’s assets and derive income from the lease payments for use
of the vehicle and its equipment. Leasing fees charged by the Santa Monica-based firms were
consistently higher than those charged by firms based elsewhere, but were within the range of fees
generally charged in the industry.
Race, Ethnicity or Nationality of Taxicab Companies’ Ownership or Personnel
The race, ethnicity, or nationality of owners, officers, members, or other personnel of the taxicab
companies was not a factor in the evaluation process and played no role whatsoever in the
evaluation committee’s recommendations for taxicab franchises. The evaluation committee was
unaware of the specific race, ethnicity or nationality of individuals linked to specific taxicab
companies until such race, ethnicity or nationality was pointed out by outside individuals and
organizations subsequent to the evaluation process, and well after the publication of the taxicab
companies recommended for an award of a franchise in the City.
Taxicab Rules
Section 6.49.020 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code authorizes the Santa Monica Police
Department to adopt rules and regulations consistent with and necessary to implement Chapter
6.49 of the Code. In developing its taxicab franchise system, the City looked to the established
taxicab rules in nearby franchised cities, including Los Angeles and West Hollywood, as the basis
for developing the City’s rules. The rules were also reviewed against the adopted ordinance and the
Santa Monica Municipal Code and to ensure that the rules furthered the stated goals for
establishing the franchise system, including the goals of providing consistent, safe, high quality
taxicab service; decreasing the environmental impact of taxicabs; and providing the opportunity for
all franchised taxicab companies to have fair and equitable business practices.
Penalties for Violations of Taxicab Rules
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
9 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Consistent with Section 6.49.150 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, a progressive penalty
structure is established which:
·Sets a specific penalty for violation of each of the Taxicab Rules. Depending on the
seriousness of the rule violation, penalties range from monetary fines to revocation or
cancellation of the vehicle permit, driver permit, or franchise operations.
·Imposes progressively increased penalties for repeat violations of the same rule within a set
time period.
·Imposes penalties on both taxicab drivers and the franchisee for driver violations as a means
of ensuring that franchisees exert control over and take responsibility for their drivers’
actions.
A taxicab driver or franchisee that has been cited for a violation of a taxicab rule or regulation may
request an administrative hearing before a hearing officer, as set forth in Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 6.49.150.
Other Remedies
Franchisees are also subject to suspension of their taxicab operations or revocation of their
franchise, and taxicab drivers are also subject to suspension or revocation of their driver’s permit,
for violations of the terms and conditions of the franchise ordinance, and Santa Monica Municipal
Code Chapter 6.49, as set forth in Sections 6.49.050 and 6.49.070(h). Notice and a hearing in
accordance with the hearing procedures set forth in Chapters 6.16 and 6.49 will precede any action
of suspension or revocation. Violations of Chapter 6.49 may also be prosecuted as infractions or
misdemeanors in Los Angeles Superior Court, as set forth in Section 6.49.140.
Taxicab Franchise Fees
On June 30, 2009, staff recommended that the franchise fee and vehicle and driver permit fees be
established at rates both comparable to surrounding cities as well as at a level that fully recover the
costs of administering the franchise operations.
At that time, staff presented the following fees:
Annual franchise fee per taxicab firm: $10,000
Annual vehicle permit fee per taxicab: $ 875
Annual driver permit fee per driver: $ 150
After receiving input from Council and in order to better encourage the use of environmentally
superior vehicles, staff developed a new proposed annual franchise fee schedule that was
published in the RFP documents, as follows:
Annual franchise fee per taxicab firm: $5,000
Annual SULEV/ULEV/Wheelchair vehicle permit fee: $1,200
Annual non-SULEV/ULEV/Wheelchair vehicle permit fee $1,800
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
10 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Annual driver permit fee $ 150
The revised fee structure was developed to incentivize the use of low emission vehicles and is
expected to generate approximately the same revenue as that previously recommended and
encourages the use of SULEV, ULEV and accessible vehicles.
Taximeter Rates
The Nelson\Nygaard Taxicab study generally set forth two recommendations for setting taxicab
rates: (1) set a maximum rate; or (2) set a rate that is equal to LADOT which is widely used in the
sub region. Staff recommends that the most effective taxicab meter rate would be option 2, which
would minimize confusion for the public that often travels between jurisdictions and for enforcement
to ensure a consistent rate. Therefore staff recommends the following taximeter rates, which are
consistent with the current LADOT rates:
$2.85 flag drop (first 1/9th mile)
$0.30 for each additional 1/9th mile ($2.70 per mile)
$0.30 for each 37 seconds waiting/delay ($29.19 per hour)
The study further recommended that passengers be given the option of electing at the beginning of
a trip to either the Bob Hope Airport or Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) to pay the metered
rate or a flat rate, and with different flat rates for travel to LAX originating north or south of the I-10
Freeway. Staff recommends the following airport flat rates:
North of I-10 to Los Angeles International: $45
South of I-10 to Los Angeles International: $35
Santa Monica to Bob Hope Airport: $75
Response to Communications
Staff received a number of letters with questions pertaining to the RFP process as well as the
recommended allocation of taxicabs. These letters and all communications received are attached.
Alternatives
Council has several alternatives available for the award of taxicab franchises:
1) Adopt staff’s recommendation as presented in this report. No additional action would be required by Council
beyond adoption of the attached 5 franchise ordinances on second reading at the next Council meeting. Upon
each taxicab company’s consequent written acceptance of the awarded franchise, the five franchises could be
operational beginning January 3, 2011.
2) Modify the distribution of the 250 taxicabs among the five recommended taxicab companies. If Council modifies
the distribution, Council would need to modify the attached 5 franchise ordinances to reflect the desired
distribution of the 250 taxicabs for each taxicab company. Staff would confirm with the affected taxicab
companies their interest in securing a franchise under the revised number of taxicabs they would be authorized
to operate in the City. No additional action would be required beyond adoption of the attached five franchise
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
11 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
ordinances on second reading at the next Council meeting. Upon each taxicab company’s consequent written
acceptance of the awarded franchise, the five franchises could be operational beginning January 3, 2011.
3) Direct staff to return with a recommendation to award up to three additional franchises to additional taxicab
companies who submitted proposals in response to the RFP, for a total of up to eight taxicab franchises, and
redistribute the 250 taxicabs among the eight recommended taxicab companies. This option would require
Council to adopt another resolution declaring its intent to grant franchises, naming up to eight proposed
grantees, and notice a new public hearing to introduce for first reading and then adopt on second reading up to
eight franchise ordinances awarding franchises to eight taxicab companies.
4) Increase or decrease the maximum number of taxicabs in the City, which number is currently 250 taxicabs, by
amending the law. This option would require Council to notice and hold a public hearing to introduce for first
reading and then adopt on second reading an ordinance modifying Ordinance No. 2292 (CCS), which created
the taxicab franchise system, and Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.040(d), which states that the
“maximum number of taxicabs permitted to operate under the terms of all franchises granted by the City shall
not exceed two hundred and fifty taxicabs, which number may be adjusted by City Council from time to time.”
Council then has two options:
(i) Modify the distribution of the new total number of taxicabs among the five recommended taxicab
companies. This option would require Council to adopt another resolution declaring its intent to grant
franchises to the five taxicab companies, and notice and hold a public hearing to introduce for first
reading and then adopt on second reading the five attached franchise ordinances with the modified
distribution of the new total number of taxicabs for each taxicab company.
(ii) Direct staff to return with a recommendation to award up to three additional franchises to additional
taxicab companies who submitted proposals in response to the RFP, for a total of up to eight taxicab
franchises. This option would require Council to adopt another resolution declaring its intent to grant
additional franchises and notice and hold a new public hearing to introduce for first reading and then
adopt on second reading up to eight franchise ordinances awarding franchises to eight taxicab
companies.
5) Increase or decrease the maximum number of taxicabs in the City in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 6.49.040(f) or 6.49.040(e), respectively. This option would require Council to notice and hold a
public hearing to make certain findings that more or less taxicabs are required in the City. Council then has the
two options as set forth in number four above.
6) Decline staff’s recommendation; provide further direction to staff in relation to additional evaluation criteria and
direct staff to complete a new RFP process for taxicab franchises, which would allow for submission of
proposals by taxicab companies that did not submit a proposal in the first RFP process.
7) Decline staff’s recommendation and maintain the current open-entry taxicab system. This option would require
Council to notice and hold a public hearing to introduce for first reading and adopt on second reading an
ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2292 (CCS), which created the taxicab franchise system.
Next Steps
If the attached ordinances are adopted on second reading, the recommended franchisees have 10
days following adoption to file with the City Clerk a written acceptance of the terms of the franchise.
(See Article XVI, Section 1603, of the Charter.) If one or more companies decline to accept the
franchise, staff will return to Council with a reallocation of remaining taxicabs to those awarded firms
which have accepted the franchise to bring the number of authorized taxicabs to 250.
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
12 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
On January 3, 2011, only franchised companies will be allowed to operate within Santa Monica.
Staff is currently developing the details of the six month implementation period and will engage the
awarded firms, if any, in finalizing the transition plan. Staff will provide quarterly updates on the
implementation of the taxicab franchise program during the first year. After one year, staff will return
to Council with an assessment and review of the first year of the taxicab franchise system and will
be prepared to propose changes to the regulations, administration or number of cabs, if warranted.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
Administration of the proposed franchise system will consist of annual review of the franchise-
holder’s performance, on-going processing of vehicle and driver permits, and supervision of the
vehicle inspection/certification process by a City-designated facility. The full cost of these functions
will be supported by the franchise fees and vehicle and driver permit fees paid by the franchise
holders.
Prepared by: Pamela McGarvey, Revenue Collection Administrator
Approved:Forwarded to Council:
Carol Swindell
Director of Finance
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachments:
A.Request for Proposals for Taxicab Franchises
B.Request for Proposals Questions and Answers
C.Sample Score Sheet
D.Composite Score
E. Previous Council Items
a.February 10, 2009 – Study Session on Regulation of Taxicab Operations
b.March 3, 2009 – Proposed moratorium on new taxicab permits (not approved)
c.June 30, 2009 – Ordinance to Establish Franchise System for Regulation of Taxicab
Operations and Modifying Existing Provisions Applicable to Taxis and Vehicles for
Hire
d.July 28, 2009 – Second Reading on Ordinance to Establish Franchise System for
Regulation of Taxicab Operations and Modifying Existing Provisions Applicable to
Taxis and Vehicles for Hire
e.November 10, 2009 - Taxicab Franchising RFP Evaluation Factors
f.October 12, 2010 - Resolution of Intention to Grant Taxicab Franchises
g.July 5, 2010 – Information Item - Additional Information on Taxi Franchise Selection
Process
h.October 21, 2010 – Information Item - Additional Information on Taxi Franchises –
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
13 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Taxicab Rules
F.Letters Received
G.Ordinances Granting Taxicab Franchises
H.Resolution setting the annual taxicab franchise fees and rates
I.Resolution setting the penalty structure and penalties for violation of the taxicab rules and
regulations
Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises - City of Santa Monica https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101109/s2...
14 of 14 7/7/2019, 11:38 AM
10.E.b
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment B. Nov 9, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council Meeting: December 14, 2010
Agenda Item: 7-E
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Carol Swindell, Director of Finance
Subject: Ordinances Increasing the Maximum Number of Taxicabs
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council introduce for first reading ordinances amending the taxicab
franchises with Bell Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association, Metro Cab Company,
Taxi Taxi, and Yellow Cab Company to increase the maximum number of taxicabs per company to
up to sixty.
Executive Summary
At its November 23, 2010 meeting, Council adopted ordinances granting taxicab franchises to Bell
Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association, Metro Cab Company, Taxi Taxi, and Yellow
Cab Company. During its November 9, 2010 meeting, Council also directed staff to return to Council
with necessary actions to increase the maximum number of permitted taxicabs to 300. On
November 23, Council introduced the necessary ordinance increasing the total number of taxicabs
from 250 to 300. This report modifies each franchise ordinance to increase the maximum number of
taxicabs to sixty for each company. The recommended ordinance change would increase projected
revenue by approximately $25,000 annually.
Background
The 2008 Nelson\Nygaard Santa Monica Taxi Study concluded, among other findings, that Santa
Monica has too many taxicabs. The study included an extensive discussion of methodologies to
determine the right number of taxicabs for Santa Monica. The study looked at numerous factors,
including an economic analysis, on-street data collection, and comparisons to comparable cities.
The study concluded that the optimal number of taxicabs in Santa Monica was between 200 and
300. At its July 28, 2009 meeting, Council approved an ordinance that set the maximum number of
taxicabs at 250, the midpoint of the recommended range.
At its November 9, 2010 meeting, Council introduced for first reading ordinances granting taxicab
franchises to Bell Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association, Metro Cab Company, Taxi
Taxi, and Yellow Cab Company. During discussions related to the proposed franchise system,
Council expressed concern about the total number of taxicabs, including:
·The number of taxicabs permitted in Santa Monica that could also be permitted to serve Los
Angeles and other surrounding cities.
·Ensuring that 250 taxicabs are available for passengers in Santa Monica at all times, given
that some taxicabs would be transporting passengers to destinations outside the city, such
as Los Angeles International Airport.
·That 250 taxicabs may not be sufficient, given the range in the Nelson\Nygaard
City Council Meeting: Date https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101214/s2...
1 of 2 7/7/2019, 11:39 AM
10.E.c
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment C. Dec 14, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
recommendation and the number of large events that take place in the city, such as GLOW,
L. A. Marathon and American Film Market.
Council then directed staff to prepare necessary ordinances to increase the maximum number of
permitted taxicabs to 300, which is the maximum number recommended in the Nelson\Nygaard
study. On November 23, 2010, Council introduced for first reading an ordinance modifying Santa
Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.040 (d), increasing the total number of permitted taxicabs to
300. This ordinance’s second reading is on tonight’s agenda.
Discussion
As part of its action establishing taxicab franchises on November 9, 2010, Council directed staff to
increase each franchise taxicab company’s allocation to sixty vehicles. The attached ordinances
modify the franchise ordinances with Bell Cab Company, Independent Taxi Owners Association,
Metro Cab Company, Taxi Taxi, and Yellow Cab Company to allow up to sixty taxicabs per
company.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The proposed ordinances would increase revenue by approximately $25,000 annually due to the
additional number of taxicabs. Revenue generated from the taxicab franchises offsets the City’s
cost to administer the franchises.
Prepared by: Donald P. Patterson, Business & Revenue Operations Manager
Approved:Forwarded to Council:
Carol Swindell
Director of Finance
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachments: Ordinances modifying Taxicab franchises
A.Taxicab franchise to Bell Cab Company, Inc.
B.Taxicab franchise to Independent Taxi Owners’ Association
C.Taxicab franchise to Metro Cab Company, LLC
D.Taxicab franchise to TMAT Corp., Doing Business as Taxi! Taxi!
E.Taxicab franchise to L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., Doing Business as Yellow Cab
Company
City Council Meeting: Date https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20101214/s2...
2 of 2 7/7/2019, 11:39 AM
10.E.c
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment C. Dec 14, 2010 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council Report
1
City Council Meeting: September 27, 2011
Agenda Item: 7-B
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Carol Swindell, Director of Finance
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of Six Ordinances Modifying the Taxicab
Franchise and Permit Annual Renewal Dates and Make Other
Clarifications and Changes to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.49.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:
1. Introduce for first reading an ordinance amending Sections 6.49.040, 6.49.060,
6.49.070, and 6.49.080 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, changing the franchise
and permit annual expiration date from June 30th to December 31st, amending
Section 6.49.060 adding a subdivision (d) to address non-franchise vehicle for hire
operations that advertise or otherwise hold themselves out as providing taxicab
services within the City, amending Section 6.49.080(d)(5) adding “authorized
enforcement officer” to provide clarification that taxicab inspections may be
performed by other officers in the City with enforcement authority and duties, and
deleting certain references to administrative functions by the Police Department.
(Attachment A1)
2. Introduce for first reading five ordinances amending Sections 7(a) and 8(b) in the
ordinances granting a taxicab franchise to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association; Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., dba Taxi! Taxi!;
and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., dba Yellow Cab Company, respectively, changing
the franchise and permit annual expiration date from June 30th to December 31st
(Attachments A2, A3, A4, A5, A6).
Executive Summary
Due to a court ordered delay of the implementation of the franchise system, franchisees
requested that fees be prorated to account for the shortened permit/franchise year. In
response, staff recommended a prorated formula based on the initial six month permit
period and permit expiration date established by the Santa Monica Municipal Code
(SMMC) and the Terms & Conditions for each franchisee. The franchisees objected to
the use of the proration formula using a six month period that was established by
multiple ordinances, and requested that the permit fees paid be for a full 12 month
period. In order to achieve a compromise, staff submitted a supplemental report as part
of the June 28, 2011 City Council meeting, which was supported by all five franchisees,
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
recommending that the permit year be changed from a fiscal year to a calendar year,
with no prorated credit for the two month delay.
On June 28, 2011, Council accepted the recommendation outlined in the supplemental
staff report and directed staff to retroactively establish a taxicab franchise/permit year
from July 1st to June 30th, to January 1st to December 31st of each year, and changing
the expiration date for taxicab vehicle and driver permits from June 30th of each year to
December 31st of each year. This modification, which is supported by staff and the five
franchises, requires ordinances to modify the permit/franchise year to January 1st to
December 31st, and thereby delay the collection of renewal fees by six months.
The Ordinance amending Sections 6.49.040, 6.49.060, 6.49.070, and 6.49.080 of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code include minor clarifications and changes to address gaps
in the Code with respect to enforcement and to more accurately reflect the roles played
in the administration of the program.
Background
On July 28, 2009, Council adopted an ordinance establishing the franchise based
system for regulating taxicabs, which added Chapter 6.49 to the Santa Monica
Municipal Code (SMMC). The amendments to the Code included establishing the
taxicab vehicle and driver’s permit years. The code established June 30, 2011 as the
expiration date for permits issued prior to this date and June 30th of each year thereafter
as the expiration date for permits for each subsequent year.
On November 23, 2010, Council awarded the franchises by ordinance to five
companies. The ordinances established the terms and conditions of the franchise for
each company, which set the effective date for the franchise for January 1, 2011. The
terms and conditions were subsequently agreed to by each company and require
payment of the annual taxicab driver’s permit fee and the annual vehicle permit fee, and
further require that the permits expire each June 30th thereafter. The June 30th
expiration date is consistent with Sections 6.49.040 (i)(2) and 6.49.070(e) of the SMMC.
On June 28, 2011, Council provided direction to staff to implement the
recommendations of the supplemental staff report which was provided as a third
alternative to the original staff recommendation and two alternative recommendations
proposed by the franchisees. The alternative recommended retroactively establishing a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
taxicab franchise/permit year of January 1st to December 31st, and changing the
expiration date for vehicle and driver permits to December 31st of each year. This
alternative, which is supported by staff and the five franchises, required Council to direct
staff to prepare necessary ordinances to modify the permit/franchise year to January 1st
to December 31st, and thereby delay the collection of renewal fees by six months.
Council provided such direction.
Discussion
Based on the recommendations of a 2008 study by Nelson\Nygaard Consulting
Associates of taxicab operations in Santa Monica, on July 28, 2009, Council adopted an
ordinance establishing a franchise-based system for the regulation of taxicabs, which
required the program to be self-supporting through franchise, vehicle permit and driver
permit fees. In compliance with the ordinance requirements, a Request for Proposals
(RFP) for citywide taxicab franchises was issued on January 14, 2010. On November
23, 2010, the Council awarded franchises by ordinance to Bell Cab Company, Inc.;
Independent Taxi Owners’ Association; Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., dba
Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., dba Yellow Cab Company.
The program was scheduled for implementation in January 2011 giving each taxicab
franchisee access to the Santa Monica taxicab market with an established number of
vehicles and all five companies paid their 2011 franchise fee of $5,000. On December
23, 2010, following a lawsuit, a temporary restraining order was granted, blocking
implementation of the franchise system. Although the motion for a preliminary
injunction was denied at the January 19, 2011 hearing, the lawsuit caused
implementation of the franchise to be delayed until March 1, 2011.
Due to the delay in the program launch, the City received requests from all five
franchise companies to prorate the FY10-11 fees based on the shortened
permit/franchise year including the annual franchise fee of $5,000. Franchisees argued
that these fees were annual fees and the permit/franchise year for FY10-11 had been
for four months instead of a full twelve. The program originally approved by Council
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
included fees for a permit/franchise year of January 2011 to June 2011, with a permit
expiration date of June 30, 2011.
The original staff report submitted for the June 28, 2011 City Council Meeting Agenda
Item 11-A included a recommendation by staff to provide a pro-rated credit of two
months, for all fees paid, due to the delay of the start of the franchise until March 1,
2011. The staff report also included two alternative proposals that were based on the
requests of the five taxicab franchise companies.
The supplemental report for item 11-A provided a third alternative to the staff
recommendation and the two alternatives proposed by the franchisees. The third
alternative was a compromise with the franchises, by retroactively establishing a taxicab
franchise/permit year of January 1st to December 31st, and changing the expiration
date for vehicle and driver permits to December 31st.
Based on the third alternative that was presented to Council in the supplemental report,
supported by staff and the five franchises, Council directed staff to return with
ordinances amending the following:
• SMMC Section 6.49.040(i)(2), changing the taxicab vehicle permit annual
expiration date from June 30th of each year to December 31st of each year,
• SMMC Sections 6.49.070(e), changing the taxicab driver’s permit annual
expiration date from June 30th of each year to December 31st of each year, and
• Sections 7(a) and 8(b) of the ordinances granting a franchise to the five taxicab
franchise companies, changing the expiration date of taxicab vehicle and driver
permits from June 30th of each year to December 31st of each year.
Clarifications and Corrections
The Ordinance includes minor clarifications to more accurately reflect how the taxicab
franchise program is administered and to strengthen enforcement measures, including
the following:
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
• Deletion of certain references to administrative functions by the Police
Department, since the Finance Department is primarily responsible for overall
administration of the taxicab franchise program.
• SMMC Section 6.49.060, addition of a subdivision (d), which states “No person
shall advertise or otherwise hold itself out as providing taxicab services within the
City, unless such person is operating pursuant to a taxicab franchise awarded by
the City,” to address non-franchise vehicle for hire operations that advertise or
otherwise hold themselves out as providing taxicab services within the City.
• SMMC Section 6.49.080(d)(5), addition of “other authorized enforcement officer”
to provide clarification that taxicab inspections may be performed by not only
police officers, but also other officers in the City with enforcement authority and
duties.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no significant immediate budget/financial impact associated with this
recommended action. The cost of reprinting permits is approximately $5,000, which is
available in account 01224.544110.
Prepared by: Salvador M. Valles, Taxi Franchise Program Coordinator
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
Carol Swindell
Director of Finance
Rod Gould
City Manager
Attachments:
A1. Ordinance for Permit Year Change in SMMC
A2. Ordinance for Permit Year Change for Bell Cab
A3. Ordinance for Permit Year Change for ITOA
A4. Ordinance for Permit Year Change for Metro Cab
A5. Ordinance for Permit Year Change for Taxi! Taxi!
A6. Ordinance for Permit Year Change for Yellow Cab
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
CHAPTER 6.49 OF ARTICLE VI OF THE
SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
REGARDING TAXICABS
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system in order to assure reliable, safe, quality
taxicab services in the City and to eliminate undue congestion and air pollution,
disorganization, and hazards associated with the City’s previous open-entry regulated
taxicab environment; and
W HEREAS, Sections 6.49.040 and 6.49.070 of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code sets the annual taxicab vehicle permit and taxicab driver's permit expiration date
at June 30th of each year; and
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st; and
WHEREAS, the City strives to establish a clear, fair, effective, and
administratively efficient system for regulating taxicabs;
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 6.49.040 of Chapter 6.49 of Article VI of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
(a) The City may in its discretion award one or more, but no more than eight,
nonexclusive franchises for the operation of taxicab services within the City. Upon issuance
of one or more franchises, the City shall not accept new or renewal applications for an
existing business license, decal or police permit to operate a taxicab service and it shall be
unlawful for any person other than a taxicab franchisee and its employees or authorized
agents to operate, engage in the business of operating, or cause to be operated any
taxicab service within the City.
(b) Franchises shall be awarded through a competitive process initiated through
a request for proposals issued by the City. A franchise applicant shall propose to operate
no less than twenty-five vehicles in the franchise fleet. Franchise proposals will be
evaluated based upon criteria including, but not limited to, the following: the emissions
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
standards and fuel economy of taxicabs; the age and condition of taxicabs; provision of a
centralized dispatch system; past experience, including demonstrated quality of service
and safety; driver training and qualifications; financial stability; insurance; record of
violations by the bidder or bidder’s drivers of Federal, State or local law, and rules and
regulations relating to taxicab operations, particularly safety operations; extra services
available to the public, including discounts for seniors and those with disabilities; and
benefits available to drivers and employees. Additionally, there shall be a local preference.
Taxicab franchise proposals shall be examined and evaluated by a committee established
by the City Manager, which shall make recommendations to the City Council. Upon the
award of a franchise, the franchisee shall enter into a franchise agreement with the City.
The franchise agreement may impose obligations on the franchisee that are additional to
but not inconsistent with those imposed pursuant to this Chapter. Each franchisee,
including its members, drivers, and authorized agents, shall comply with the franchise
agreement.
(c) The City may at any time initiate a competitive bidding process for the
issuance of new franchises. Nothing shall prohibit a taxicab franchisee from competing for
a new franchise; however, any taxicab franchisee whose franchise has been revoked shall
thereafter be prohibited from competing for award of a franchise for a period of three years
following the scheduled expiration of its franchise agreement.
(d) The maximum number of taxicabs permitted to operate under the terms of all
franchises granted by the City shall not exceed three hundred taxicabs, which number may
be adjusted by City Council from time to time.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
(e) After notice and a hearing, the City Council may at any time reduce the total
maximum number of taxicabs operating within the City, upon finding that the number of
taxicabs is detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. If the City Council reduces
the number of permitted taxicabs, the reduction shall be reasonably allocated amongst
existing franchisees.
(f) The City Council may schedule a public hearing to determine, by resolution,
whether the public convenience and necessity require the operation of additional taxicabs
in the City. Any such resolution shall specify the number of additional taxicabs permitted.
Any determination that the public convenience and necessity require the operation of
additional taxicabs in the City shall include, but are not limited to, findings that:
(1) The additional taxicabs will not substantially impair the ability of existing
franchisees, under efficient management, to earn a fair and reasonable return on their
capital investments in their franchises;
(2) Existing franchisees, under normal conditions, are not fulfilling the need for
taxicab services in the City; and
(3) The additional taxicabs, together with the taxicabs then currently operating in
the City, will not unduly congest, overburden, or interfere with any traffic circulation, public
street access, public or private parking, or stands, or otherwise create any danger or
hazard to the public health, safety, or welfare.
(g) No franchisee shall operate a taxicab within the City unless the Police
Department City has issued and the franchisee possesses a current taxicab vehicle permit
for that specific vehicle.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
(h) No taxicab franchisee shall permit any driver in its employ to operate, and no
driver shall operate, a taxicab in the City into which passengers are accepted for
transportation without having first obtained a valid driver’s permit from the Police
Department City and paid to the City the required taxicab driver’s permit fee.
(i) Fees.
(1) Annual Franchise Fee. Each taxicab franchisee shall pay to the City an
annual fee, established by resolution of the City Council, for the privilege of operating a
taxicab service in the City. Such payment shall be in addition to any other prescribed fees,
including but not limited to, business license and permit fees. The franchise fee shall be
due, without set off or deduction, upon execution of the franchise agreement and payable
on each anniversary date thereafter, unless otherwise specified in the franchise
agreement. Failure to pay the full franchise fee when due shall be cause for revocation of
the franchise.
(2) Annual Taxicab Vehicle Permit Fee. Each taxicab franchisee shall be
required annually to obtain a taxicab vehicle permit and to pay to the City an annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee, established by resolution of the City Council, for each taxicab operating
under its franchise. Any taxicab vehicle permit issued pursuant to a franchise prior to June
30 December 31, 2011, shall expire on June 30 December 31, 2011, unless revoked or
suspended prior to that date pursuant to this Chapter. Taxicab vehicle permits issued after
June 30 December 31, 2011, shall expire at midnight on the June 30th December 31st
next succeeding its issuance, unless revoked or suspended prior to that date pursuant to
this Chapter.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
SECTION 2. Section 6.49.050 of Chapter 6.49 of Article VI of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Suspension. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard,
suspend a taxicab franchisee’s operations for one or more days if, in the judgment of the
Chief of Police City, a lapse in required insurance or any other violation of the terms and
conditions of the franchise agreement or the provisions of this Chapter; or a violation of any
rules, and regulations, orders, or directives established by the Police Department, orders or
directives established by the City, or the California Vehicle Code, creates an immediate
safety hazard. Cause for suspension also exists where the holder of a majority interest in
the taxicab franchise or the taxicab franchisee illegally conducts any type of vehicle for hire
or public transportation operation licensed by the City or any other governmental agency.
(b) Revocation. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard,
revoke a franchise and terminate the franchise agreement in the event that the franchisee:
violates any terms and conditions of the franchise agreement; fails to cure any default
within the time required as provided in the franchise agreement; violates any provision of
this Chapter or other applicable law or violates any rules, regulations, orders or filings of
any regulatory body having jurisdiction over the franchisee relative to its operations under
the franchise agreement; or practices, or attempts to practice, any fraud or deceit upon the
City.
The franchisee may respond in writing to a notice of intent to terminate from the City
Manager. The matter will then be referred to a Hearing Examiner for consideration
pursuant to this Section. The matter will be set for a hearing and the City shall give the
franchisee at least thirty days’ written notice of the time and place of the hearing. At the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall consider all relevant evidence and testimony and if the
Hearing Examiner determines that the franchisee is in breach of the agreement as above
described, the Hearing Examiner may, in his or her discretion, order the franchisee to take
remedial actions to cure the breach or impose any other remedy in accordance with the
franchise agreement, including but not limited to suspension for a designated period of
time; temporary or permanent reduction of taxicab vehicle permits; or revocation of the
franchise and termination of the franchise agreement. The decision or order of the Hearing
Examiner shall be final and binding and subject only to judicial review.
(c) Effect of Suspension or Revocation. Upon suspension or revocation of a
franchise, all the franchisee’s taxicab operations in the City shall cease until such time as
the suspension or revocation is lifted.
(1) No fee refunds shall be issued to any franchisee upon revocation of a
franchise.
(2) Upon revocation of any taxicab franchise, no franchise to operate the same
business activity shall be granted to the franchisee within the remainder of the term or
extension term of the franchise agreement and for a period of three years thereafter.
(3) In the event of revocation of a franchise, the franchisee’s taxicab vehicle
permits may in the City’s discretion be reallocated to other franchisees on a pro rata basis
or assigned to a new taxicab franchisee following a competitive bidding process for the
award of new franchises.
SECTION 3. Section 6.49.060 of Chapter 6.49 of Article VI of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
(a) No person shall knowingly dispatch a vehicle or respond to a request for a
“taxi,” “cab” or “taxicab” for pick-up within the City, or pick-up passengers within the City for
taxicab services, unless the responding vehicle has a valid taxicab vehicle permit, the
driver of such vehicle has a valid taxicab driver’s permit, and the taxicab is operated
pursuant to a franchise awarded by the City.
(b) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall publish, advertise
or broadcast in any manner, written or oral, a telephone number either by itself or
connected to a rotary or call forwarding system for taxicab service, which is the same
telephone number as that for other taxicabs or vehicles for hire.
(c) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall use a name that
imitates a name used by another person who drives or operates a taxicab in such a
manner as to be misleading or tend to confuse or defraud the public.
(d) No person shall advertise or otherwise hold itself out as providing taxicab
services within the City, unless such person is operating pursuant to a taxicab franchise
awarded by the City.
SECTION 4. Section 6.49.070 of Chapter 6.49 of Article VI of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Application. In order to obtain a taxicab driver’s permit, each person shall file
with the Police Department City, upon forms supplied by the City, a completed verified
application including the following information and documentation:
(1) Name, address, and age of applicant;
(2) Convictions, if any, in any court of law;
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
9
(3) Name, address, and certification of the taxicab franchisee by whom the
applicant is to be employed as a taxicab driver in the City;
(4) Proof of a valid California Driver’s License;
(5) A signed agreement to submit to a background investigation and
fingerprinting via live-scan capture by the Police Department;
(6) Original test results from a certified laboratory or testing agency, submitted
simultaneously with the applicant’s verified application, proving that the applicant has
tested negative for drugs and alcohol as provided by Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the
California Government Code; and
(7) Such further information as the City may require.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Applicant Investigation. The Police Department
shall investigate each applicant for a taxicab driver’s permit and shall approve the
application or state its reason for disapproval. The Police Department may disapprove any
applicant who has a record of criminal conduct or other behavior involving any of the
following:
(1) Moral turpitude;
(2) Violence toward persons or property;
(3) Physical or mental disease which could make the applicant a danger to the
safety of others;
(4) Illegal sexual conduct involving another nonconsenting person;
(5) Negligent or reckless driving;
(6) Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
10
(7) Three or more moving violations under the California Vehicle Code within the
twelve month period preceding the date of the application;
(8) Existing suspension or revocation of a taxicab driver’s permit in any other
jurisdiction as of the date of the application;
(9) Conviction of operating a taxicab without a valid taxicab driver’s permit or
taxicab vehicle license within the three year period preceding the date of the application; or
(10) Acts showing the applicant to be otherwise incompetent or not fit to drive a
taxicab.
(c) Examination. Every applicant for a taxicab driver’s permit shall take an
examination, prepared and administered by the Police Department City, which tests the
applicant’s qualifications to operate a taxicab. The examination shall test the applicant’s:
ability to communicate in English; knowledge of and ability to locate, with the aid of a street
atlas, street addresses and intersections in Santa Monica and surrounding cities in the
County of Los Angeles; and knowledge of the laws of the road. Failure to obtain a passing
score on the examination shall be cause for disapproval of an application.
(d) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Issuance. Based on the application, investigation
and examination, the Police Department shall approve or deny the taxicab driver’s permit.
No permit shall be issued if the applicant is under the age of eighteen years, if any false
statement appears in the application, or if the application is otherwise incomplete. Upon
approval of an application and receipt by the City of the taxicab driver’s permit fee, the
Police Department City shall issue a taxicab driver’s permit to the applicant. The taxicab
driver’s permit fee shall be established by resolution of the City Council. The permit shall
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
11
bear the name and photograph of the applicant, date of expiration of the permit, and name
of the taxicab franchisee for which the driver is authorized to drive a taxicab.
(e) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Expiration and Renewal. Any taxicab driver’s
permit issued pursuant to a franchise prior to June 30 December 31, 2011, shall expire on
June 30 December 31, 2011, unless revoked, suspended or terminated prior to that date.
Taxicab driver’s permits issued after June 30 December 31, 2011, shall expire at midnight
on the June 30th December 31st next succeeding its issuance, unless revoked, suspended
or terminated prior to that date. A taxicab driver’s permit which has not been revoked,
suspended, or terminated may be renewed annually by paying the annual taxicab driver’s
permit fee and by filing with the City a verification that the driver is in compliance with the
provisions of this Section and test results from a certified laboratory or testing agency
proving that the driver has tested negative for drugs and alcohol as provided by Section
53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government Code.
(f) Effect of Termination of Employment. The taxicab driver’s permit shall
become void upon termination of employment, at which time the taxicab franchisee-
employer shall immediately give the City written notice of the termination and the
terminated driver shall immediately return his or her taxicab driver’s permit to the City.
(g) Prohibition on Transfers. Taxicab driver’s permits are personal in nature
and shall not be transferred. Any purported transfer shall be null and void.
(h) Grounds for Suspension and Revocation. Any taxicab driver’s permit and
any taxicab vehicle permit may be suspended or revoked, after due notice and an
opportunity to be heard, for any of the following reasons:
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
12
(1) Arrest or citation for the commission of any crime while driving a taxicab or
any crime involving moral turpitude;
(2) Violation of any applicable rule or regulation, or Federal, State or local law
relating to the operation of taxicabs by a driver, or by an employer in the case of a taxicab
vehicle permit;
(3) Use of the taxicab driver’s permit for a purpose different from that for which it
was issued;
(4) Suspension or revocation of the driver or franchisee’s taxicab driver’s permit
or taxicab vehicle permit in another jurisdiction; and
(5) The existence of any facts, including conviction of a crime that is substantially
related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a taxicab driver, which would have been
good cause to deny such taxicab driver’s permit application, regardless of when such facts
arose.
SECTION 5. Section 6.49.080 of Chapter 6.49 of Article VI of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
(a) No person shall operate any taxicab without a distinctive and uniform color
scheme or identification which designates the taxicab franchisee under which said vehicle
is operated, and which has been approved by the Police Department City.
(b) No color scheme, insignia, name, monogram, logo, or identification shall
conflict with or imitate any color scheme, insignia, name, monogram, logo, or identification
used by another taxicab franchisee in such a manner as to be misleading or to tend to
confuse or defraud the public.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
13
(c) Each taxicab operated pursuant to a franchise shall be identified as a City of
Santa Monica authorized taxicab by a taxicab identification decal issued by the Police
Department City. No person shall identify any vehicle by means of such taxicab
identification decal, or any facsimile thereof, unless authorized to do so by the Police
Department City.
(d) Every taxicab franchisee and taxicab driver shall comply with the following
operating requirements at all times:
(1) Maintain and keep an accurate and legible record of all passengers carried,
including the pickup and drop off points, the date and time carried, the starting and ending
mileage of the taxicab for each trip, the charges authorized and made for each trip, and
any other information as may be required by the Police Department City. Such record shall
be retained for at least three years at the business office of the taxicab franchisee and shall
be available for inspection by the Police Department City at all reasonable times. Failure to
comply with any reasonable request by the Police Department City for inspection of such
record shall be cause for revocation of the franchise;
(2) Display inside the taxicab and in full view of passengers, a valid taxicab
driver’s permit bearing the name and photograph of the taxicab driver and identifying the
name of the taxicab franchisee under which such taxicab is operated;
(3) Maintain in each taxicab a working two-way communication system with a
dispatcher;
(4) Obtain an annual vehicle inspection of each taxicab by a certified mechanic
or automotive repair dealer authorized by the City. Inspection records must be maintained
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
14
in the business office of the franchisee and shall be available for inspection by the Police
Department City at all reasonable times; and
(5) Permit any Police Officer of the City or other authorized enforcement officer
enforcing this Chapter to inspect any taxicab upon request.
(e) No person shall drive or operate a taxicab in the City into which passengers
are accepted unless the person is an owner or member of, employed by, or is an
authorized agent of a taxicab franchisee.
(f) Taxicabs may be driven pursuant to a contract, agreement, or understanding
between the franchisee and the driver. Such contract, agreement, or understanding shall
not relieve the franchisee from full and complete compliance with the applicable provisions
of the Code, rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this Chapter, and the franchise
agreement.
SECTION 6. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices
thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such
inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to
effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
15
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 8. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2329 (CCS) GRANTING A
TAXICAB FRANCHISE TO BELL CAB COMPANY, INC.
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system authorizing a maximum of 250 taxicabs
in the City, in order to assure reliable, safe, quality taxicab services in the City and to
eliminate undue congestion and air pollution, disorganization and hazards associated
with the City’s previous open-entry regulated taxicab environment; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Council adopted Resolution No. 10533 (CCS),
declaring its intent to grant taxicab franchises to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., doing
business as Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company, and setting a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, Council held a public hearing in accordance with
City Charter Section 1601, at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be
heard on all matters relative to the proposed granting of taxicab franchises; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2329 (CCS)
granting a taxicab franchise to Bell Cab Company, Inc. (“Bell Cab”); and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 7 of Ordinance No. 2329 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - TAXICABS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Taxicab Vehicle Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee for all taxicabs in its fleet, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab vehicle permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter, and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab vehicle permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab vehicle permits for all
taxicabs in its fleet in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
6.49.040(i)(2).
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
(b) Taxicab Operations. All taxicabs used by Grantee within the City must be
operated in accordance with, and Grantee shall not permit any taxicab to be driven which is
in violation of, this Franchise, the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Taxicab Rules.
(c) Registration and Acquisition of Vehicles. All taxicabs operated under this
Franchise must be registered to either Grantee or a Member of Grantee. Taxicabs must
either be owned by Grantee, a Member, a commercial lending agency, or leased from a
licensed leasing agency whose primary business is the sale or leasing of vehicles. Any
taxicab utilized by Grantee which is owned by it or one of its Members shall have been
acquired by way of bona fide purchase, lease, or other transaction approved by the City.
Grantee or Member shall submit to City, upon request, the method utilized for vehicle
acquisition. Members may sell or transfer a share or taxicab under these same provisions.
(d) General Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs. Grantee shall, at its sole
expense, monitor and be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and replacement of
Grantee’s and any driver/manager Member’s managed taxicabs. Preventive maintenance
must be performed at least in accordance with manufacture recommendations for each
taxicab. A copy of maintenance inspection reports, including any repair documentation,
shall be filed with City.
(e) Age of Vehicles. No taxicab fleet vehicle authorized by this Franchise shall be
in excess of the years of age set forth in the Taxicab Rules unless otherwise authorized in
writing by City in its sole and absolute discretion.
(f) Off-Street Parking Facilities. Grantee shall provide garaging or other off-street
parking facilities within one-half mile of its main operating location(s), or as specified by the
City, where Grantee’s taxicabs are to be parked when not in service or when not being
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
repaired or when not in the possession of a taxicab driver. Grantee shall have sufficient
vehicle parking capacity within the main operating location(s) or the garaging or off-street
parking facilities to meet the requirements for Grantee’s operations, including but not
limited to vehicle inspection and maintenance, administrative functions, and training.
SECTION 2. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 2329 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - DRIVERS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Authorized Drivers. Grantee shall not issue or dispatch any taxicab operated
on behalf of this Franchise to any driver who is in violation of any terms of this Franchise,
the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Taxicab Rules, or any other applicable law, rule or
regulation.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee for all its taxicab drivers, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab driver’s permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab driver’s permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab driver’s permits for all its
taxicab drivers in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e).
(c) Work Shifts. Drivers must check in with Grantee at the beginning and end of
each shift, and such activity shall be recorded by Grantee. Grantee must maintain daily
logs to indicate the vehicle and driver assignments for each shift at all times. Grantee or a
driver/manager Member shall make all such assignments. Grantee shall issue and collect
waybills in the manner and within the time limits established by the Taxicab Rules.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
Grantee shall review waybills upon collection to ascertain that the required information is
fully and accurately provided.
(d) Independent Contractor Drivers. Grantee and its driver/manager Members
are authorized to provide taxicab services through a contracting or leasing type of
operation with an independent contractor driver. No independent contractor driver may
subcontract or sublease the vehicle, or the right to operate the vehicle, to another person.
All contracting or leasing arrangements shall be evidenced in writing and subject to City
approval. Such lease contract shall provide for the collection and documentation of lease
fees by Grantee and driver/manager Members. The lease contract shall not be instituted or
changed without City approval. The independent contractor driver shall not use a taxicab
as the driver’s personal vehicle within the City except when driving to or from the beginning
or ending of a work shift. Grantee shall maintain current files of all lease contracts in a
central location, filed by driver, to verify compliance with these requirements.
(e) Training Program. Grantee shall provide a comprehensive screening, testing
and training program for all its drivers, including independent contractor drivers. The
training program, including curriculum and delivery, must be approved by City and must
include City and state rules and regulations; geography, including map reading, major
points of interest in the City, and familiarity with the City and surrounding areas; driver
safety and defensive driving; vehicle safety and maintenance/inspection checks; customer
service and relations; sensitivity guidelines for disabled, frail and elderly passengers;
behind the wheel driver training; and accessible vehicle operation training and CPR
certification or equivalent for accessible vehicle drivers. City may authorize or require
additional training program components, a change in delivery of program components, or a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
training facilitator or program outside of Grantee’s program at Grantee’s or driver’s cost if
City deems such change will best serve the public interest.
(f) Drug and Alcohol Testing. Grantee is responsible for scheduling pre-
employment and pre-permitting driver drug and alcohol testing and for enrolling all current
drivers in a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program as
mandated by California Government Code Section 53075.5, and which follows program
components and testing requirements of the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, Part 40
and Part 382, as amended. Testing shall be conducted as a condition for initial driver
permit authorization. Annual testing shall be conducted as a condition for permit renewal.
Random testing may be conducted and additional tests may be required, including post
accident testing, rehabilitation and return-to-service testing, and reasonable suspicion
testing. Drivers must show a valid California driver’s license at the time and place of
testing.
Grantee shall contract with a consultant (program administrator) and authorized lab
approved under the Federal Register to facilitate the program and shall provide a copy of
the contracts to City. Test results shall be provided to Grantee as the employing entity.
Information shall be supplied to City pertaining to any positive test results and shall include
driver name, identifying information, and driver permit status, including any entry into a
rehabilitation program. Specific driver test results shall remain confidential, on file by driver
with Grantee, but testing information, including date of annual test and random test, and
positive or negative results, shall be available for City’s review. Cost of testing shall be the
driver’s responsibility, if the driver is an independent contractor of Grantee, or Grantee’s
responsibility, if the driver is an employee.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
In accordance with the Federal Code of Regulations, Grantee’s certification program
must include information regarding the controlled substance and alcohol use policy and
procedures as well as educational materials made available to all drivers and other
pertinent staff. Grantee or its authorized agency must advise drivers of the resources
available to them to resolve problems associated with misuse of alcohol and controlled
substances. Materials for education and company policies must be made available to all
current and potential drivers and a signed statement of their receipt shall be in every
permitted driver’s file and retained by Grantee.
Grantee shall train supervisory personnel in accordance with federal guidelines in
order to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require a driver to undergo
additional testing. Grantee shall use custody and control forms similar to that used under
the federal testing guidelines. Any changes in the federal program guidelines or other state
mandates will be considered by City for modification to Grantee’s program.
(g) Social Benefits Programs. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state
and federal rules, regulations and statutes concerning mandated social benefits programs
for employees. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to determine whether legislation
concerning these social benefits applies to Grantee's operations.
SECTION 3. Except as expressly modified by this Ordinance, all other terms and
conditions of the taxicab franchise granted to Bell Cab pursuant to Ordinance No. 2329
(CCS) shall be and remain in full force and effect.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2330 (CCS) GRANTING A TAXICAB FRANCHISE
TO INDEPENDENT TAXI OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system authorizing a maximum of 250 taxicabs
in the City, in order to assure reliable, safe, quality taxicab services in the City and to
eliminate undue congestion and air pollution, disorganization, and hazards associated
with the City’s previous open-entry regulated taxicab environment; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Council adopted Resolution No. 10533 (CCS),
declaring its intent to grant taxicab franchises to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., doing
business as Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company, and setting a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, Council held a public hearing in accordance with
City Charter Section 1601, at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be
heard on all matters relative to the proposed granting of taxicab franchises; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2330 (CCS)
granting a taxicab franchise to Independent Taxi Owners’ Association; and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 7 of Ordinance No. 2330 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - TAXICABS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Taxicab Vehicle Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee for all taxicabs in its fleet, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab vehicle permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter, and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab vehicle permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab vehicle permits for all
taxicabs in its fleet in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
6.49.040(i)(2).
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
(b) Taxicab Operations. All taxicabs used by Grantee within the City must be
operated in accordance with, and Grantee shall not permit any taxicab to be driven which is
in violation of, this Franchise, the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Taxicab Rules.
(c) Registration and Acquisition of Vehicles. All taxicabs operated under this
Franchise must be registered to either Grantee or a Member of Grantee. Taxicabs must
either be owned by Grantee, a Member, a commercial lending agency, or leased from a
licensed leasing agency whose primary business is the sale or leasing of vehicles. Any
taxicab utilized by Grantee which is owned by it or one of its Members shall have been
acquired by way of bona fide purchase, lease, or other transaction approved by the City.
Grantee or Member shall submit to City, upon request, the method utilized for vehicle
acquisition. Members may sell or transfer a share or taxicab under these same provisions.
(d) General Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs. Grantee shall, at its sole
expense, monitor and be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and replacement of
Grantee’s and any driver/manager Member’s managed taxicabs. Preventive maintenance
must be performed at least in accordance with manufacture recommendations for each
taxicab. A copy of maintenance inspection reports, including any repair documentation,
shall be filed with City.
(e) Age of Vehicles. No taxicab fleet vehicle authorized by this Franchise shall be
in excess of the years of age set forth in the Taxicab Rules unless otherwise authorized in
writing by City in its sole and absolute discretion.
(f) Off-Street Parking Facilities. Grantee shall provide garaging or other off-street
parking facilities within one-half mile of its main operating location(s), or as specified by the
City, where Grantee’s taxicabs are to be parked when not in service or when not being
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
repaired or when not in the possession of a taxicab driver. Grantee shall have sufficient
vehicle parking capacity within the main operating location(s) or the garaging or off-street
parking facilities to meet the requirements for Grantee’s operations, including but not
limited to vehicle inspection and maintenance, administrative functions, and training.
SECTION 2. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 2330 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - DRIVERS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Authorized Drivers. Grantee shall not issue or dispatch any taxicab operated
on behalf of this Franchise to any driver who is in violation of any terms of this Franchise,
the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Taxicab Rules, or any other applicable law, rule or
regulation.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee for all its taxicab drivers, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab driver’s permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab driver’s permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab driver’s permits for all its
taxicab drivers in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e).
(c) Work Shifts. Drivers must check in with Grantee at the beginning and end of
each shift, and such activity shall be recorded by Grantee. Grantee must maintain daily
logs to indicate the vehicle and driver assignments for each shift at all times. Grantee or a
driver/manager Member shall make all such assignments. Grantee shall issue and collect
waybills in the manner and within the time limits established by the Taxicab Rules.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
Grantee shall review waybills upon collection to ascertain that the required information is
fully and accurately provided.
(d) Independent Contractor Drivers. Grantee and its driver/manager Members
are authorized to provide taxicab services through a contracting or leasing type of
operation with an independent contractor driver. No independent contractor driver may
subcontract or sublease the vehicle, or the right to operate the vehicle, to another person.
All contracting or leasing arrangements shall be evidenced in writing and subject to City
approval. Such lease contract shall provide for the collection and documentation of lease
fees by Grantee and driver/manager Members. The lease contract shall not be instituted or
changed without City approval. The independent contractor driver shall not use a taxicab
as the driver’s personal vehicle within the City except when driving to or from the beginning
or ending of a work shift. Grantee shall maintain current files of all lease contracts in a
central location, filed by driver, to verify compliance with these requirements.
(e) Training Program. Grantee shall provide a comprehensive screening, testing
and training program for all its drivers, including independent contractor drivers. The
training program, including curriculum and delivery, must be approved by City and must
include City and state rules and regulations; geography, including map reading, major
points of interest in the City, and familiarity with the City and surrounding areas; driver
safety and defensive driving; vehicle safety and maintenance/inspection checks; customer
service and relations; sensitivity guidelines for disabled, frail and elderly passengers;
behind the wheel driver training; and accessible vehicle operation training and CPR
certification or equivalent for accessible vehicle drivers. City may authorize or require
additional training program components, a change in delivery of program components, or a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
training facilitator or program outside of Grantee’s program at Grantee’s or driver’s cost if
City deems such change will best serve the public interest.
(f) Drug and Alcohol Testing. Grantee is responsible for scheduling pre-
employment and pre-permitting driver drug and alcohol testing and for enrolling all current
drivers in a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program as
mandated by California Government Code Section 53075.5, and which follows program
components and testing requirements of the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, Part 40
and Part 382, as amended. Testing shall be conducted as a condition for initial driver
permit authorization. Annual testing shall be conducted as a condition for permit renewal.
Random testing may be conducted and additional tests may be required, including post
accident testing, rehabilitation and return-to-service testing, and reasonable suspicion
testing. Drivers must show a valid California driver’s license at the time and place of
testing.
Grantee shall contract with a consultant (program administrator) and authorized lab
approved under the Federal Register to facilitate the program and shall provide a copy of
the contracts to City. Test results shall be provided to Grantee as the employing entity.
Information shall be supplied to City pertaining to any positive test results and shall include
driver name, identifying information, and driver permit status, including any entry into a
rehabilitation program. Specific driver test results shall remain confidential, on file by driver
with Grantee, but testing information, including date of annual test and random test, and
positive or negative results, shall be available for City’s review. Cost of testing shall be the
driver’s responsibility, if the driver is an independent contractor of Grantee, or Grantee’s
responsibility, if the driver is an employee.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
In accordance with the Federal Code of Regulations, Grantee’s certification program
must include information regarding the controlled substance and alcohol use policy and
procedures as well as educational materials made available to all drivers and other
pertinent staff. Grantee or its authorized agency must advise drivers of the resources
available to them to resolve problems associated with misuse of alcohol and controlled
substances. Materials for education and company policies must be made available to all
current and potential drivers and a signed statement of their receipt shall be in every
permitted driver’s file and retained by Grantee.
Grantee shall train supervisory personnel in accordance with federal guidelines in
order to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require a driver to undergo
additional testing. Grantee shall use custody and control forms similar to that used under
the federal testing guidelines. Any changes in the federal program guidelines or other state
mandates will be considered by City for modification to Grantee’s program.
(g) Social Benefits Programs. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state
and federal rules, regulations and statutes concerning mandated social benefits programs
for employees. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to determine whether legislation
concerning these social benefits applies to Grantee's operations.
SECTION 3. Except as expressly modified by this Ordinance, all other terms and
conditions of the taxicab franchise granted to Independent Taxi Owners’ Association
pursuant to Ordinance No. 2330 (CCS) shall be and remain in full force and effect.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2331 (CCS) GRANTING A
TAXICAB FRANCHISE TO METRO CAB COMPANY, LLC
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system authorizing a maximum of 250 taxicabs
in the City, in order to assure reliable, safe, quality taxicab services in the City and to
eliminate undue congestion and air pollution, disorganization and hazards associated
with the City’s previous open-entry regulated taxicab environment; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Council adopted Resolution No. 10533 (CCS),
declaring its intent to grant taxicab franchises to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., doing
business as Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company, and setting a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, Council held a public hearing in accordance with
City Charter Section 1601, at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be
heard on all matters relative to the proposed granting of taxicab franchises; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2331 (CCS)
granting a taxicab franchise to Metro Cab Company, LLC (“Metro Cab”); and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 7 of Ordinance No. 2331 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - TAXICABS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Taxicab Vehicle Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee for all taxicabs in its fleet, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab vehicle permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter, and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab vehicle permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab vehicle permits for all
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
taxicabs in its fleet in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
6.49.040(i)(2).
(b) Taxicab Operations. All taxicabs used by Grantee within the City must be
operated in accordance with, and Grantee shall not permit any taxicab to be driven which is
in violation of, this Franchise, the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Taxicab Rules.
(c) Registration and Acquisition of Vehicles. All taxicabs operated under this
Franchise must be registered to either Grantee or a Member of Grantee. Taxicabs must
either be owned by Grantee, a Member, a commercial lending agency, or leased from a
licensed leasing agency whose primary business is the sale or leasing of vehicles. Any
taxicab utilized by Grantee which is owned by it or one of its Members shall have been
acquired by way of bona fide purchase, lease, or other transaction approved by the City.
Grantee or Member shall submit to City, upon request, the method utilized for vehicle
acquisition. Members may sell or transfer a share or taxicab under these same provisions.
(d) General Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs. Grantee shall, at its sole
expense, monitor and be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and replacement of
Grantee’s and any driver/manager Member’s managed taxicabs. Preventive maintenance
must be performed at least in accordance with manufacture recommendations for each
taxicab. A copy of maintenance inspection reports, including any repair documentation,
shall be filed with City.
(e) Age of Vehicles. No taxicab fleet vehicle authorized by this Franchise shall be
in excess of the years of age set forth in the Taxicab Rules unless otherwise authorized in
writing by City in its sole and absolute discretion.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
(f) Off-Street Parking Facilities. Grantee shall provide garaging or other off-street
parking facilities within one-half mile of its main operating location(s), or as specified by the
City, where Grantee’s taxicabs are to be parked when not in service or when not being
repaired or when not in the possession of a taxicab driver. Grantee shall have sufficient
vehicle parking capacity within the main operating location(s) or the garaging or off-street
parking facilities to meet the requirements for Grantee’s operations, including but not
limited to vehicle inspection and maintenance, administrative functions, and training.
SECTION 2. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 2331 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - DRIVERS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Authorized Drivers. Grantee shall not issue or dispatch any taxicab operated
on behalf of this Franchise to any driver who is in violation of any terms of this Franchise,
the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Taxicab Rules, or any other applicable law, rule or
regulation.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee for all its taxicab drivers, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab driver’s permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab driver’s permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab driver’s permits for all its
taxicab drivers in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e).
(c) Work Shifts. Drivers must check in with Grantee at the beginning and end of
each shift, and such activity shall be recorded by Grantee. Grantee must maintain daily
logs to indicate the vehicle and driver assignments for each shift at all times. Grantee or a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
driver/manager Member shall make all such assignments. Grantee shall issue and collect
waybills in the manner and within the time limits established by the Taxicab Rules.
Grantee shall review waybills upon collection to ascertain that the required information is
fully and accurately provided.
(d) Independent Contractor Drivers. Grantee and its driver/manager Members
are authorized to provide taxicab services through a contracting or leasing type of
operation with an independent contractor driver. No independent contractor driver may
subcontract or sublease the vehicle, or the right to operate the vehicle, to another person.
All contracting or leasing arrangements shall be evidenced in writing and subject to City
approval. Such lease contract shall provide for the collection and documentation of lease
fees by Grantee and driver/manager Members. The lease contract shall not be instituted or
changed without City approval. The independent contractor driver shall not use a taxicab
as the driver’s personal vehicle within the City except when driving to or from the beginning
or ending of a work shift. Grantee shall maintain current files of all lease contracts in a
central location, filed by driver, to verify compliance with these requirements.
(e) Training Program. Grantee shall provide a comprehensive screening, testing
and training program for all its drivers, including independent contractor drivers. The
training program, including curriculum and delivery, must be approved by City and must
include City and state rules and regulations; geography, including map reading, major
points of interest in the City, and familiarity with the City and surrounding areas; driver
safety and defensive driving; vehicle safety and maintenance/inspection checks; customer
service and relations; sensitivity guidelines for disabled, frail and elderly passengers;
behind the wheel driver training; and accessible vehicle operation training and CPR
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
certification or equivalent for accessible vehicle drivers. City may authorize or require
additional training program components, a change in delivery of program components, or a
training facilitator or program outside of Grantee’s program at Grantee’s or driver’s cost if
City deems such change will best serve the public interest.
(f) Drug and Alcohol Testing. Grantee is responsible for scheduling pre-
employment and pre-permitting driver drug and alcohol testing and for enrolling all current
drivers in a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program as
mandated by California Government Code Section 53075.5, and which follows program
components and testing requirements of the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, Part 40
and Part 382, as amended. Testing shall be conducted as a condition for initial driver
permit authorization. Annual testing shall be conducted as a condition for permit renewal.
Random testing may be conducted and additional tests may be required, including post
accident testing, rehabilitation and return-to-service testing, and reasonable suspicion
testing. Drivers must show a valid California driver’s license at the time and place of
testing.
Grantee shall contract with a consultant (program administrator) and authorized lab
approved under the Federal Register to facilitate the program and shall provide a copy of
the contracts to City. Test results shall be provided to Grantee as the employing entity.
Information shall be supplied to City pertaining to any positive test results and shall include
driver name, identifying information, and driver permit status, including any entry into a
rehabilitation program. Specific driver test results shall remain confidential, on file by driver
with Grantee, but testing information, including date of annual test and random test, and
positive or negative results, shall be available for City’s review. Cost of testing shall be the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
driver’s responsibility, if the driver is an independent contractor of Grantee, or Grantee’s
responsibility, if the driver is an employee.
In accordance with the Federal Code of Regulations, Grantee’s certification program
must include information regarding the controlled substance and alcohol use policy and
procedures as well as educational materials made available to all drivers and other
pertinent staff. Grantee or its authorized agency must advise drivers of the resources
available to them to resolve problems associated with misuse of alcohol and controlled
substances. Materials for education and company policies must be made available to all
current and potential drivers and a signed statement of their receipt shall be in every
permitted driver’s file and retained by Grantee.
Grantee shall train supervisory personnel in accordance with federal guidelines in
order to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require a driver to undergo
additional testing. Grantee shall use custody and control forms similar to that used under
the federal testing guidelines. Any changes in the federal program guidelines or other state
mandates will be considered by City for modification to Grantee’s program.
(g) Social Benefits Programs. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state
and federal rules, regulations and statutes concerning mandated social benefits programs
for employees. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to determine whether legislation
concerning these social benefits applies to Grantee's operations.
SECTION 3. Except as expressly modified by this Ordinance, all other terms and
conditions of the taxicab franchise granted to Metro Cab pursuant to Ordinance No. 2331
(CCS) shall be and remain in full force and effect.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2332 (CCS) GRANTING A TAXICAB FRANCHISE
TO TMAT CORP., DOING BUSINESS AS TAXI! TAXI!
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system authorizing a maximum of 250 taxicabs
in the City, in order to assure reliable, safe, quality taxicab services in the City and to
eliminate undue congestion and air pollution, disorganization and hazards associated
with the City’s previous open-entry regulated taxicab environment; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Council adopted Resolution No. 10533 (CCS),
declaring its intent to grant taxicab franchises to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., doing
business as Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company, and setting a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, Council held a public hearing in accordance with
City Charter Section 1601, at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be
heard on all matters relative to the proposed granting of taxicab franchises; and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2332 (CCS)
granting a taxicab franchise to TMAT Corp., doing business as Taxi! Taxi! (“Taxi! Taxi!”);
and
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 7 of Ordinance No. 2332 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - TAXICABS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Taxicab Vehicle Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee for all taxicabs in its fleet, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab vehicle permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter, and Grantee is responsible for paying the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
annual taxicab vehicle permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab vehicle permits for all
taxicabs in its fleet in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
6.49.040(i)(2).
(b) Taxicab Operations. All taxicabs used by Grantee within the City must be
operated in accordance with, and Grantee shall not permit any taxicab to be driven which is
in violation of, this Franchise, the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Taxicab Rules.
(c) Registration and Acquisition of Vehicles. All taxicabs operated under this
Franchise must be registered to either Grantee or a Member of Grantee. Taxicabs must
either be owned by Grantee, a Member, a commercial lending agency, or leased from a
licensed leasing agency whose primary business is the sale or leasing of vehicles. Any
taxicab utilized by Grantee which is owned by it or one of its Members shall have been
acquired by way of bona fide purchase, lease, or other transaction approved by the City.
Grantee or Member shall submit to City, upon request, the method utilized for vehicle
acquisition. Members may sell or transfer a share or taxicab under these same provisions.
(d) General Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs. Grantee shall, at its sole
expense, monitor and be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and replacement of
Grantee’s and any driver/manager Member’s managed taxicabs. Preventive maintenance
must be performed at least in accordance with manufacture recommendations for each
taxicab. A copy of maintenance inspection reports, including any repair documentation,
shall be filed with City.
(e) Age of Vehicles. No taxicab fleet vehicle authorized by this Franchise shall be
in excess of the years of age set forth in the Taxicab Rules unless otherwise authorized in
writing by City in its sole and absolute discretion.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
(f) Off-Street Parking Facilities. Grantee shall provide garaging or other off-street
parking facilities within one-half mile of its main operating location(s), or as specified by the
City, where Grantee’s taxicabs are to be parked when not in service or when not being
repaired or when not in the possession of a taxicab driver. Grantee shall have sufficient
vehicle parking capacity within the main operating location(s) or the garaging or off-street
parking facilities to meet the requirements for Grantee’s operations, including but not
limited to vehicle inspection and maintenance, administrative functions, and training.
SECTION 2. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 2332 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - DRIVERS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Authorized Drivers. Grantee shall not issue or dispatch any taxicab operated
on behalf of this Franchise to any driver who is in violation of any terms of this Franchise,
the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Taxicab Rules, or any other applicable law, rule or
regulation.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee for all its taxicab drivers, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab driver’s permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab driver’s permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab driver’s permits for all its
taxicab drivers in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e).
(c) Work Shifts. Drivers must check in with Grantee at the beginning and end of
each shift, and such activity shall be recorded by Grantee. Grantee must maintain daily
logs to indicate the vehicle and driver assignments for each shift at all times. Grantee or a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
driver/manager Member shall make all such assignments. Grantee shall issue and collect
waybills in the manner and within the time limits established by the Taxicab Rules.
Grantee shall review waybills upon collection to ascertain that the required information is
fully and accurately provided.
(d) Independent Contractor Drivers. Grantee and its driver/manager Members
are authorized to provide taxicab services through a contracting or leasing type of
operation with an independent contractor driver. No independent contractor driver may
subcontract or sublease the vehicle, or the right to operate the vehicle, to another person.
All contracting or leasing arrangements shall be evidenced in writing and subject to City
approval. Such lease contract shall provide for the collection and documentation of lease
fees by Grantee and driver/manager Members. The lease contract shall not be instituted or
changed without City approval. The independent contractor driver shall not use a taxicab
as the driver’s personal vehicle within the City except when driving to or from the beginning
or ending of a work shift. Grantee shall maintain current files of all lease contracts in a
central location, filed by driver, to verify compliance with these requirements.
(e) Training Program. Grantee shall provide a comprehensive screening, testing
and training program for all its drivers, including independent contractor drivers. The
training program, including curriculum and delivery, must be approved by City and must
include City and state rules and regulations; geography, including map reading, major
points of interest in the City, and familiarity with the City and surrounding areas; driver
safety and defensive driving; vehicle safety and maintenance/inspection checks; customer
service and relations; sensitivity guidelines for disabled, frail and elderly passengers;
behind the wheel driver training; and accessible vehicle operation training and CPR
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
certification or equivalent for accessible vehicle drivers. City may authorize or require
additional training program components, a change in delivery of program components, or a
training facilitator or program outside of Grantee’s program at Grantee’s or driver’s cost if
City deems such change will best serve the public interest.
(f) Drug and Alcohol Testing. Grantee is responsible for scheduling pre-
employment and pre-permitting driver drug and alcohol testing and for enrolling all current
drivers in a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program as
mandated by California Government Code Section 53075.5, and which follows program
components and testing requirements of the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, Part 40
and Part 382, as amended. Testing shall be conducted as a condition for initial driver
permit authorization. Annual testing shall be conducted as a condition for permit renewal.
Random testing may be conducted and additional tests may be required, including post
accident testing, rehabilitation and return-to-service testing, and reasonable suspicion
testing. Drivers must show a valid California driver’s license at the time and place of
testing.
Grantee shall contract with a consultant (program administrator) and authorized lab
approved under the Federal Register to facilitate the program and shall provide a copy of
the contracts to City. Test results shall be provided to Grantee as the employing entity.
Information shall be supplied to City pertaining to any positive test results and shall include
driver name, identifying information, and driver permit status, including any entry into a
rehabilitation program. Specific driver test results shall remain confidential, on file by driver
with Grantee, but testing information, including date of annual test and random test, and
positive or negative results, shall be available for City’s review. Cost of testing shall be the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
driver’s responsibility, if the driver is an independent contractor of Grantee, or Grantee’s
responsibility, if the driver is an employee.
In accordance with the Federal Code of Regulations, Grantee’s certification program
must include information regarding the controlled substance and alcohol use policy and
procedures as well as educational materials made available to all drivers and other
pertinent staff. Grantee or its authorized agency must advise drivers of the resources
available to them to resolve problems associated with misuse of alcohol and controlled
substances. Materials for education and company policies must be made available to all
current and potential drivers and a signed statement of their receipt shall be in every
permitted driver’s file and retained by Grantee.
Grantee shall train supervisory personnel in accordance with federal guidelines in
order to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require a driver to undergo
additional testing. Grantee shall use custody and control forms similar to that used under
the federal testing guidelines. Any changes in the federal program guidelines or other state
mandates will be considered by City for modification to Grantee’s program.
(g) Social Benefits Programs. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state
and federal rules, regulations and statutes concerning mandated social benefits programs
for employees. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to determine whether legislation
concerning these social benefits applies to Grantee's operations.
SECTION 3. Except as expressly modified by this Ordinance, all other terms and
conditions of the taxicab franchise granted to Taxi! Taxi! pursuant to Ordinance No. 2332
(CCS) shall be and remain in full force and effect.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting 09-27-2011 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 2333 (CCS) GRANTING A TAXICAB FRANCHISE
TO L.A. TAXI COOPERATIVE, INC.,
DOING BUSINESS AS YELLOW CAB COMPANY
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2009, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2292
(CCS), establishing a taxicab franchise system authorizing a maximum of 250 taxicabs
in the City, in order to assure reliable, safe, quality taxicab services in the City and to
eliminate undue congestion and air pollution, disorganization and hazards associated
with the City’s previous open-entry regulated taxicab environment; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2010, Council adopted Resolution No. 10533 (CCS),
declaring its intent to grant taxicab franchises to Bell Cab Company, Inc.; Independent
Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab Company, LLC; TMAT Corp., doing
business as Taxi! Taxi!; and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company, and setting a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, Council held a public hearing in accordance with
City Charter Section 1601, at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be
heard on all matters relative to the proposed granting of taxicab franchises; and
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2010, Council adopted Ordinance No. 2333 (CCS)
granting a taxicab franchise to L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., doing business as Yellow Cab
Company (“Yellow Cab”); and
WHEREAS, the implementation date for the taxicab franchise program was
scheduled for January 1, 2011, but was delayed until March 1, 2011, through no fault of
the taxicab franchisees; and
WHEREAS, despite the implementation delay, all franchisees paid the full
franchise and permit fees for the fiscal year, even though they were unable to operate
pursuant to their franchises for part of the year; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that for purposes of administrative efficiency and in
fairness to the taxicab franchisees, since the taxicab franchisees did not cause the
implementation delay and paid all franchise and permit fees for a full year, the City
wishes to adjust the permit year from the fiscal year to the calendar year, and thereby
extend the expiration date of vehicle and taxicab driver's permits from June 30th to
December 31st;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 7 of Ordinance No. 2333 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - TAXICABS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Taxicab Vehicle Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual taxicab
vehicle permit fee for all taxicabs in its fleet, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab vehicle permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter, and Grantee is responsible for paying the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
annual taxicab vehicle permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab vehicle permits for all
taxicabs in its fleet in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
6.49.040(i)(2).
(b) Taxicab Operations. All taxicabs used by Grantee within the City must be
operated in accordance with, and Grantee shall not permit any taxicab to be driven which is
in violation of, this Franchise, the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and Taxicab Rules.
(c) Registration and Acquisition of Vehicles. All taxicabs operated under this
Franchise must be registered to either Grantee or a Member of Grantee. Taxicabs must
either be owned by Grantee, a Member, a commercial lending agency, or leased from a
licensed leasing agency whose primary business is the sale or leasing of vehicles. Any
taxicab utilized by Grantee which is owned by it or one of its Members shall have been
acquired by way of bona fide purchase, lease, or other transaction approved by the City.
Grantee or Member shall submit to City, upon request, the method utilized for vehicle
acquisition. Members may sell or transfer a share or taxicab under these same provisions.
(d) General Vehicle Maintenance and Repairs. Grantee shall, at its sole
expense, monitor and be responsible for all maintenance, repair, and replacement of
Grantee’s and any driver/manager Member’s managed taxicabs. Preventive maintenance
must be performed at least in accordance with manufacture recommendations for each
taxicab. A copy of maintenance inspection reports, including any repair documentation,
shall be filed with City.
(e) Age of Vehicles. No taxicab fleet vehicle authorized by this Franchise shall be
in excess of the years of age set forth in the Taxicab Rules unless otherwise authorized in
writing by City in its sole and absolute discretion.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
(f) Off-Street Parking Facilities. Grantee shall provide garaging or other off-street
parking facilities within one-half mile of its main operating location(s), or as specified by the
City, where Grantee’s taxicabs are to be parked when not in service or when not being
repaired or when not in the possession of a taxicab driver. Grantee shall have sufficient
vehicle parking capacity within the main operating location(s) or the garaging or off-street
parking facilities to meet the requirements for Grantee’s operations, including but not
limited to vehicle inspection and maintenance, administrative functions, and training.
SECTION 2. Section 8 of Ordinance No. 2333 (CCS) entitled “OPERATIONS AND
SERVICE - DRIVERS”, is hereby amended as follows:
(a) Authorized Drivers. Grantee shall not issue or dispatch any taxicab operated
on behalf of this Franchise to any driver who is in violation of any terms of this Franchise,
the Santa Monica Municipal Code, Taxicab Rules, or any other applicable law, rule or
regulation.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permits. Grantee is responsible for paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee for all its taxicab drivers, in accordance with the fee specified by
resolution of Council, as of the effective date of this Franchise. Taxicab driver’s permits
expire each June 30th December 31st thereafter and Grantee is responsible for paying the
annual taxicab driver’s permit fees and obtaining annual taxicab driver’s permits for all its
taxicab drivers in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e).
(c) Work Shifts. Drivers must check in with Grantee at the beginning and end of
each shift, and such activity shall be recorded by Grantee. Grantee must maintain daily
logs to indicate the vehicle and driver assignments for each shift at all times. Grantee or a
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
driver/manager Member shall make all such assignments. Grantee shall issue and collect
waybills in the manner and within the time limits established by the Taxicab Rules.
Grantee shall review waybills upon collection to ascertain that the required information is
fully and accurately provided.
(d) Independent Contractor Drivers. Grantee and its driver/manager Members
are authorized to provide taxicab services through a contracting or leasing type of
operation with an independent contractor driver. No independent contractor driver may
subcontract or sublease the vehicle, or the right to operate the vehicle, to another person.
All contracting or leasing arrangements shall be evidenced in writing and subject to City
approval. Such lease contract shall provide for the collection and documentation of lease
fees by Grantee and driver/manager Members. The lease contract shall not be instituted or
changed without City approval. The independent contractor driver shall not use a taxicab
as the driver’s personal vehicle within the City except when driving to or from the beginning
or ending of a work shift. Grantee shall maintain current files of all lease contracts in a
central location, filed by driver, to verify compliance with these requirements.
(e) Training Program. Grantee shall provide a comprehensive screening, testing
and training program for all its drivers, including independent contractor drivers. The
training program, including curriculum and delivery, must be approved by City and must
include City and state rules and regulations; geography, including map reading, major
points of interest in the City, and familiarity with the City and surrounding areas; driver
safety and defensive driving; vehicle safety and maintenance/inspection checks; customer
service and relations; sensitivity guidelines for disabled, frail and elderly passengers;
behind the wheel driver training; and accessible vehicle operation training and CPR
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
certification or equivalent for accessible vehicle drivers. City may authorize or require
additional training program components, a change in delivery of program components, or a
training facilitator or program outside of Grantee’s program at Grantee’s or driver’s cost if
City deems such change will best serve the public interest.
(f) Drug and Alcohol Testing. Grantee is responsible for scheduling pre-
employment and pre-permitting driver drug and alcohol testing and for enrolling all current
drivers in a mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing certification program as
mandated by California Government Code Section 53075.5, and which follows program
components and testing requirements of the Federal Code of Regulations, Title 49, Part 40
and Part 382, as amended. Testing shall be conducted as a condition for initial driver
permit authorization. Annual testing shall be conducted as a condition for permit renewal.
Random testing may be conducted and additional tests may be required, including post
accident testing, rehabilitation and return-to-service testing, and reasonable suspicion
testing. Drivers must show a valid California driver’s license at the time and place of
testing.
Grantee shall contract with a consultant (program administrator) and authorized lab
approved under the Federal Register to facilitate the program and shall provide a copy of
the contracts to City. Test results shall be provided to Grantee as the employing entity.
Information shall be supplied to City pertaining to any positive test results and shall include
driver name, identifying information, and driver permit status, including any entry into a
rehabilitation program. Specific driver test results shall remain confidential, on file by driver
with Grantee, but testing information, including date of annual test and random test, and
positive or negative results, shall be available for City’s review. Cost of testing shall be the
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
driver’s responsibility, if the driver is an independent contractor of Grantee, or Grantee’s
responsibility, if the driver is an employee.
In accordance with the Federal Code of Regulations, Grantee’s certification program
must include information regarding the controlled substance and alcohol use policy and
procedures as well as educational materials made available to all drivers and other
pertinent staff. Grantee or its authorized agency must advise drivers of the resources
available to them to resolve problems associated with misuse of alcohol and controlled
substances. Materials for education and company policies must be made available to all
current and potential drivers and a signed statement of their receipt shall be in every
permitted driver’s file and retained by Grantee.
Grantee shall train supervisory personnel in accordance with federal guidelines in
order to determine whether reasonable suspicion exists to require a driver to undergo
additional testing. Grantee shall use custody and control forms similar to that used under
the federal testing guidelines. Any changes in the federal program guidelines or other state
mandates will be considered by City for modification to Grantee’s program.
(g) Social Benefits Programs. Grantee shall comply with all applicable local, state
and federal rules, regulations and statutes concerning mandated social benefits programs
for employees. It shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee to determine whether legislation
concerning these social benefits applies to Grantee's operations.
SECTION 3. Except as expressly modified by this Ordinance, all other terms and
conditions of the taxicab franchise granted to Yellow Cab pursuant to Ordinance No. 2333
(CCS) shall be and remain in full force and effect.
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this
Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of
this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30
days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
10.E.d
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Attachment D. Sept 27, 2011 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council Report
City Council Meeting: March 17, 2015
Agenda Item: 4-A
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Taxicab Franchise Program Regulations, Non-Taxi Vehicles for Hire
Regulations, and Curb Space Allocation to Non-Taxi Vehicles for Hire
(e.g. Uber, Lyft)
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council review and comment on vehicles for hire and
direct staff to:
1) Include both taxi and non-taxi vehicles for hire when allocating curb space.
2) Research and consider amendments to the taxicab franchise program.
3) Draft an ordinance to amend the taxicab franchise program rules and regulations.
4) Draft an ordinance to amend the vehicle for hire regulations to establish minimal
regulations on in-city vehicles for hire.
5) Return to Council with recommendations on franchise renewals and vehicle
allocations.
Executive Summary
The transportation system in Santa Monica is in a rapidly evolving environment with
immediate and ongoing transportation initiatives, such as light rail, car sharing, and new
vehicles for hire and valet smartphone technologies. An integrated and coordinated
circulation system is critical to the successful management of parking, circulation, and
public resources in Santa Monica; particularly in downtown and other areas that serve
as visitor destinations. Staff is seeking comment and feedback concerning the
proposed allocation of public assets such as curb space for vehicles for hire.
Staff is also seeking direction on establishing minimum regulations on vehicle for hire
operations that operate solely within Santa Monica, such as minimum insurance
requirements, and amendments to the taxicab franchise program in light of the
introduction of Transportation Network Companies, such as Uber and Lyft, as well as
other changes such as the arrival of Expo Light Rail Service.
Background
Council adopted the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) at its July 6, 2010
meeting. The LUCE set the framework for the Draft Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) to
1
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
engage the community in a dialogue about the future of the City’s shared downtown.
The LUCE specifies that the DSP should address community concerns related to traffic,
congestion and pedestrian safety. Priority was specified for public improvements that
would enhance the pedestrian experience and for standards and programs to foster
vehicle trip reduction goals by encouraging transit, walking, and biking as well as
transportation demand management strategies.
Circulation and connectivity, the ability to move around the Downtown freely and
conveniently between destinations, is cited as the top issue that residents want the DSP
to address. The Plan enhances movement for cars, bikes, pedestrians and public transit
services and all the supporting services. Allocation of curb space is critical to achieving
goals set out by the DSP. Particularly because multiple competing demands for curb
space exists with new demands on the horizon.
Examples of the existing demands for curb space include:
• Public On-Street Parking
• Bus Stops and Layover Zones
• Commercial Loading/Unloading Zones
• Passenger Loading
• Taxis Zones
• Tour Buses Loading/Unloading
• Valet Parking Zones
• Bike Valets and Corrals
• Pedicabs
• Travel Lanes for Automobiles
• Bus Only Lanes
Examples of scheduled or potential demands for curb space include:
• Car Sharing
• Bike Sharing
2
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
• Private Corporate Shuttles Not Available to the Public
• In City Shuttles Available to the Public
• Bike Parking
• Downtown Circulator
• Parklets
• Consolidated Valet
• Kiss-and-Ride for dropping off and picking up light rail passengers
Discussion
The transportation system in Santa Monica is in a rapidly evolving environment with
immediate and ongoing transportation initiatives, such as light rail, car sharing, and new
vehicles for hire and valet smartphone technologies. An integrated and coordinated
circulation system is critical to the successful management of parking, circulation, and
public resources in Santa Monica; particularly in downtown and other areas that serve
as visitor destinations. In support of sustainable transportation and a multi-modal
system, the City accommodates and encourages new modes of alternative
transportation options. These immediate, ongoing and longer term transportation
initiatives will increase competition for access to curb space. Examples of new
transportation modes include the Light Rail, Transportation Network Companies (e.g.
Lyft, Uber1,2), Bike Share, Shuttles, and Carshare.
The items discussed in this staff report should be considered taking into account the
following policies and plans:
1 Uber signed a 10-year lease in December 2014 for about 40,000 square feet at 1733 Ocean Avenue in
Santa Monica
2 For purposes of this report, Uber refers to both the Uber and UberX services. UberX is distinct in that it
provides what is most commonly knows as “ridesharing” services. UberX vehicles are personal vehicles
and are categorized by the State of California as Transportation Network Companies (TNC). Uber
provides what is commonly known as “town car” services. Uber vehicles are commercial vehicles are
categorized by the State of California as Transportation Charter Party (TCP) carriers.
3
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
• Land Use and Circulation Element
• Draft Downtown Specific Plan
• Big Blue Bus Expo Integration Plan
• 4th and Colorado Interim Use Study Session
• February 2016 Downtown Expo Terminus Station Opening
This report is presented in two parts. Part 1 discusses the allocation of curb space to
non-taxi vehicles for hire, such as Transportation Network Companies (TNC) and in-city
shuttles. TNCs are defined more below and in Attachment A. Part 2 discusses in more
detail specifics related to the regulation of vehicles for hire.
PART 1 - Allocation of Curb Space to Non-Taxi Vehicles for Hire
Curb space is limited and valuable, and is required for buses, bikes, passenger drop-off
and pick up, valet, shared cars and bikes, bike parking, and loading and unloading of
goods and services. Curb space must be allocated thoughtfully and designed to ensure
visibility and discourage people from using the space in unintended ways that impact
adjacent traffic flow and pedestrian activity. The most common use of curb space is for
on-street parking and bus stops. Currently Downtown has significant areas of on-street
parking and bus stops and layover space for both Metro and BBB (Big Blue Bus). The
draft DSP specifically notes that as mobility diversifies with the arrival of Light Rail, the
curb space will be used less as a transition for people from individual cars, and more for
people coming from buses, shuttles, taxis, and bikes, and in some cases Parklets,
which are mini-landscaped pockets or extensions of outdoor space that provide places
for pedestrians to rest and gather.
The draft DSP states that priority in the allocation of curb space will be given to activities
such as consolidated valet, car share, bike share, public bike parking, taxis, and
shuttles. However, even with this suggested guidance, staff seeks input from Council to
ensure that curb space is allocated in a manner that best serves the interests of the
community, particularly as it relates to alternative forms of for hire vehicles.
4
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Decisions related to curb space allocation are determined by Transportation Planning
staff and the Traffic Engineer as part of both the land use planning process and to
effectuate City goals. When considering the allocation of curb space in lieu of off-street
parking spaces, staff has considered whether the space:
• Contributes towards Sustainable City Plan Transportation Goals;
• Reduces Vehicle Trips in Support of LUCE Goals;
• Is a Green Low Impact Transportation Mode in Support of DSP Goals;
• Serves a Bona Fide Transportation Need (non-recreational); or
• Provides another benefit and/or meets a need, such as commercial loading
zones.
When considering these guidelines, other forms of vehicles for hire, which provide
similar services as taxicab companies, would meet the City’s goals, as well as other
types of “ridesharing” services. For example, carpooling services that dynamically link
passengers together to share a ride when they are traveling in the same direction. This
is similar to when two people who are traveling in the same direction (e.g. from Santa
Monica to Downtown Los Angeles) agree to travel in the same taxicab and split the cost
of the trip. UberPool and Lyft Line, through their smartphone apps build routes and
search for users going in the same direction to share a ride and split the cost. The
theory being that these carpooling services will reduce the need to own a vehicle by
making it cheaper to carpool. As these types of new technology driven services
continue to emerge and evolve, it is essential that the City of Santa Monica maintain
flexibility to incorporate these new services into its system when they contribute to the
City’s goals.
Following is a summary of vehicles for hire and the shuttle program that could
potentially be granted additional curb space primarily in the downtown and Main Street
areas.
5
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Vehicles for Hire
In most cases individuals and businesses providing the transportation of passengers for
compensation (aka Vehicles for Hire) require operating authority from the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) such as:
• Passenger Stage Corporations (PSC) - A PSC provides transportation service to
the general public on an individual-fare basis. Most PSCs operate a fixed route,
scheduled service, or an on-call, door-to-door airport shuttle-type service.
• Transportation Charter Permit (TCP) vehicles - A TCP charters a vehicle, on a
prearranged basis, for the private exclusive use of an individual or group.
Charges are based on mileage or time of use, or a combination of both. Also
falling under the TCP category are round-trip sightseeing services, and certain
specialized private services not offered to the general public. TCPs are officially
known as Charter-Party Carriers and are commonly known as “town cars” or
“limousines”. Although these vehicles are referred to as town cars or limousines,
a variety of vehicle models are used as TCPs, including hybrid vehicles such as
Toyota Priuses
• Transportation Network Companies (TNC) - A TNC provides prearranged
transportation services for compensation using an online-enabled application
(App) or platform to connect passengers with drivers using their personal
vehicles. Well known providers include Lyft and Uber.
Vehicles for hire (including TNCs, TCPs and PSCs) are generally regulated by state law
and by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). State law substantially
preempts the City’s ability to regulate vehicles for hire. There are some specific
exceptions set forth in Public Utilities Code Sections 226 and 5353. One is taxicab
service, which is subject to local regulation by cities and counties.
6
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
While in the recent past there had been some ambiguity regarding local governments’
ability to substantially regulate TNCs (e.g. Uber, Lyft) because of their similarity to
taxicabs, recent state action, judicial decisions and PUC regulations have made
increasingly clear the State’s virtually exclusive authority to regulate such carriers.
These recent state regulatory pronouncements have also produced certain positive
outcomes, such as addressing certain local governments’ concerns about the lack of
insurance requirements for TNCs. More information regarding vehicle for hire
regulations is provided in Part 2 of this report.
Currently the City provides 35 taxicab zones, and only 5 zones for other type of vehicles
for hire via a 15 minute parking zone. TCPs and TNCs are not authorized to pick up
passengers unless the trip is prearranged, meaning that these for hire vehicles cannot
legally accept a passenger who simply approaches the vehicle or hails the cab from the
sidewalk or street. Therefore, zones that might be created for these types of vehicles
would likely need to be set up as loading and unloading or for a short time limited
parking depending on the location of the zone. Electronic hailing apps make providing
such a zone more plausible, since the CPUC defines an electronic hail through an app
as “prearranged”. This would in theory allow a person departing a train station or a
restaurant to electronically call a vehicle through their smartphone app, and be picked
up at a designated passenger loading zone.
Uber claims that this is already happening in San Diego. In a recent analysis by Uber of
its ridership patterns in San Diego, Uber claims that “Gaps in public transportation
become hubs for Uber”. The company also claims that their service “complement[s]
public transit”, essentially filling in what is commonly referred to when discussing light
rail in Santa Monica as the first and last mile. In a recent survey3 conducted by the
University of California Transportation Center that was published in August 2014 on
3 App-Based, On-Demand Ride Services: Comparing Taxi and Ridesourcing Trips and User
characteristics in San Francisco; University of California Transportation Center UCTC-FR-2014-08; Lisa
Rayle, Susan Shahee, Nelson Chan, Danielle Dai, and Robert Cervero, University of California, Berkeley,
August 2014
7
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
TNC trip purpose in San Francisco, trips were mainly social and leisure in nature. The
survey notes, “Of all responses, 67% were social/leisure (bar, restaurant, concert, visit
friends/family). Only 16% were work, 4% were to or from the airport, and 10% were
other (doctor’s appointment, volunteer). A large percentage (47%) of trips began
somewhere other than home or work, a restaurant, bar, gym, etc., and 40% were home-
based. Although the survey did not ask about connections with public transit, 4% named
a specific transit station as their origin or destination, suggesting that many respondents
used [TNCs] to access transit. Almost half (48%) occurred on Friday or Saturday. While
evening hours are heavily represented, the survey did capture trips at times throughout
the day and night.” The dense urban nature of San Francisco in comparison to the
suburban layout of San Diego may account for the differences and the report authors
also noted that interviews with drivers seemed to reflect that more passengers were
beginning their trips from public transit than the surveys represented.
Theoretically taxicabs should be able to fill any of the demands that a TNC can fill;
however, the smartphone app enables TNCs to operate more effectively in this space.
Without a uniform App and a commitment to more predictability, taxicabs appear to be
at a competitive disadvantage. In the same University of California Transportation
Center survey, 25% of respondents who said that taking a taxicab would have been
their choice had TNCs not existed indicated that their top choices were about
convenience – 25% said ease of payment, 17% said short wait time, and 11% said easy
to call a car.
In-City Shuttles
As of June 2013 new low speed electric vehicles, similar to a golf cart, began operating
in Santa Monica. This alternative passenger vehicle transportation service meets a
need for short distance trips in the central business district of the City more effectively
than taxicabs. They also address other environmental concerns, since the vehicles are
small and zero-emission and are free to the general public. There are currently eight
shuttles operated by Free Ride Santa Monica with three of the vehicles serving as part
8
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
of a Santa Monica Convention and Visitors Bureau (SMCVB) program described more
in the following paragraphs.
Santa Monica Convention and Visitors Bureau Hotel Shuttle Program
Certain hotels in the Downtown and coastal areas are required through Development
Agreements (DA) to provide an alternative shuttle service to certain Santa Monica
destinations or pay an in lieu fee to cover this service. The City had been exercising its
rights under the agreements to require hotels to pay the in lieu fee, which funded the
Tide Shuttle. The Tide Shuttle was eliminated as of September 2010 due to low
ridership and high cost. Since the elimination of the Tide Shuttle, staff set aside the in
lieu fees while an alternative service delivery method was established.
In April 2014, staff conducted a Request for Applications (RFA) process to grant funds
to administer a shuttle program on behalf of the hotels. The SMCVB was awarded a
grant. The SMCVB program was launched May 2014. SMCVB contracts with Free
Ride Santa Monica to provide the service. The hotels work directly with the SMCVB as
the shuttle program administrator.
The free hotel-sponsored service transports riders to destinations, including Downtown
Santa Monica, the Santa Monica Pier, Main Street, and Montana Avenue. The shuttle
consists of electric vehicles wrapped in Santa Monica destination branding that are
regularly available at Shutters on the Beach Hotel, Double Tree Santa Monica Suites
and Loews Santa Monica Beach Hotel. The service runs seven days a week from 11:30
a.m. until at least 8 p.m., later on weekends and for special events. The program has
proven to be very successful with approximately 50,000 rides from May 2014 through
December 2014. Although the SMCVB program sponsors three shuttles, Free Ride
Santa Monica has an additional five for a total of eight vehicles that operate in Santa
Monica, the company anticipates adding two additional vehicles by June 2015 that
would not be part of the SMCVB program. The company is also testing a consumer app
that could be used to request a pick up.
9
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Currently one space is allocated for loading and unloading outside of Shutters Hotel that
the SMCVB hotel sponsored shuttle is able to utilize through a permitting process. All
other staging is provided by the hotels on private property.
PART 2 – Vehicle for Hire Regulations
In-City Vehicles for Hire
Currently, local law requires that a vehicle for hire company that operates solely within
Santa Monica secure a business license; however, no other operational regulations
exist (e.g. vehicle standards, driver permits, minimum insurance standards). Therefore,
in-city vehicle for hire operations, such as Free Ride Santa Monica, and other potential
in-city vehicle for hire operations that would seek to operate within the City have no
regulatory requirements4. Establishing regulations proactively on vehicles for hire that
operate solely within Santa Monica will help to ensure that as Santa Monica continues
to be a popular destination for new and novel types of business models, regulations will
assist with mitigating a “wild west” environment, similar to what the City experienced
prior to the launch of Taxicab franchise program.
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to draft an ordinance to eliminate the gap in
vehicle for hire regulations that currently exist for in-city only vehicles for hire with
guidance to establish minimal regulations to address public safety and circulation, such
as an operating permit, minimal insurance requirements, and driver permits.
Taxicabs
On July 28, 2009, Council adopted an ordinance establishing the franchise-based
system for regulating taxicabs, which added Chapter 6.49 to the Santa Monica
Municipal Code (SMMC). On November 23, 2010, Council awarded the franchises by
4 Pedicabs in Santa Monica are currently subject to regulations, including driver permits and insurance
requirements; however, Pedicabs are not technically vehicles for hire as defined by state law or local law
because they are not motor propelled.
10
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
ordinance to Bell Cab, Independent Taxicab Owners Association (ITOA), Metro Cab,
Taxi! Taxi!, and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc. (dba Yellow Cab Company). On December
14, 2010, Council adopted an ordinance increasing the maximum number of taxicabs
permitted to operate from 250 to 300.
Staff recommends amendments to the taxicab franchise rules and regulations to
address changes in the vehicle for hire market. Due to the disruptive nature of TNCs on
the vehicle for hire market, it is necessary to examine adjustments to the franchise
system before it is renewed. To determine what amendments should be brought
forward in an ordinance, staff would:
1. Evaluate the total number of taxicabs authorized to operate in Santa Monica, taking
into consideration the following:
a. The percentage of full time vs. part time taxicab leases
b. The effects of Duel Licensing with Los Angeles
c. The effects of Transportation Network Companies (e.g. Uber, Lyft)
d. The effects of Shuttle services
e. The effects of the Metro Light Rail opening in 2016
f. The ability of drivers to earn a livable wage
2. Identify taxicab company and driver rules and regulations for repeal that do not
specifically address the following:
a. Public Safety
b. Consumer Protection
3. Evaluate options to require taxicab companies to utilize a smartphone app to “hail” a
taxicab.
4. Evaluate options to allow taxicab franchisees to dynamically adjust the number of
taxicabs to address cyclical demands for service.
5. Evaluate options to provide more flexibility in pricing for special events and flat rates.
6. Evaluate establishing a two-year driver permit instead of a one-year permit.
11
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7. Evaluate establishing either a driver permit fee that is pro-rated depending on the
number of months into the permit year the application is filed or an rolling one year
permit that is renewed annually on the original application date or other date such as
the drivers birthday.
Outreach
Staff conducted outreach to Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. Access and Circulation
Committee and to the Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. Board of Directors. The committee
did not take official action on a recommendation. However, members of the committee
expressed support for providing curb space to non-taxi vehicles for hire, particularly
TNCs and for as much coordination with the Los Angeles Department of Transportation
taxicab program. At its February 26, 2015 meeting the DTSM Board of Directions voted
to submit a letter to Council with specific positions on Curb Space allocation in the
downtown.
Outreach was also conducted with the five taxicab franchisees. The franchisees have
provided written comments regarding taxicab regulations. Staff recommendations
include some of the same requests being made by the taxicab companies. Letters from
the taxicab companies are provided as attachments to this report.
Through the SMCVB, an email survey was sent to the General Managers of local
hotels. Four hotels provided feedback, including Shutters on the Beach, Wyndham – At
the Pier, Shore Hotel, and the Georgian Hotel. Two hotels indicated support for the
allocation of curb space to non-taxi vehicles for hire and two did not support providing
curb space. The primary reasons given by the two hotels opposed were congestion and
too many loading/unloading zones already.
12
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Conclusion
In both the allocation of public curb space and the modification of taxicab regulations, a
key element needed is flexibility to adjust and react to the rapidly emerging mobility
market place that includes various forms of new shared transportation. Based on the
information provided in this report, staff recommends that the Council direct staff to:
1. Include all forms of transportation modes when allocating curb space, with
additional priority given to vehicles for hire that are subject to greater local control
and/or directly support the guidelines outlined earlier in this report.
2. Research and consider amendments to the taxicab franchise program that allow
for flexibility in the system and taking into consideration the impacts of the
following: a) adjusting the total number of taxicabs authorized to operate in
Santa Monica, b) modifying company and driver rules that do not specifically
address public safety, consumer protection, and customer service, c) requiring a
smartphone app to “hail” a taxicab, d) implementing more dynamic adjustments
to the number of taxicabs in service, e) more flexible pricing options; f) modifying
the length of driver permit periods; and g) a method that provides for a pro-rated
driver permit fee or the equivalent,
3. Draft an ordinance to amend the taxicab franchise program rules and regulations
that provide flexibility and adjust to the changing vehicle for hire market as
outlined earlier in this report no later than July 2015.
4. Draft an ordinance to amend the vehicle for hire regulations to establish minimal
regulations on in-city vehicles for hire, consistent with State law no later than July
2015.
5. Return to Council with recommendations on franchise renewals and vehicle
allocations no later than September 2015.
13
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared by: Salvador M. Valles, Acting Chief Administrative Officer
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
David Martin
Director of Planning and Community
Development
Elaine Polachek
Interim City Manager
Attachments:
A. Transportation Network Companies
B. Taxicab Factors
C. Letter from LA Taxi Cooperative Inc (dba Yellow Cab Company), Bell Cab,
Independent Taxi Owners Association (ITOA), and All Yellow Cab (dba Metro Cab)
D. Letter from TMAT (dba Taxi! Taxi!)
14
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Attachment A - Transportation Network Companies
What are commonly called “Ridesharing” companies such as UberX and Lyft are
changing the vehicle-for-hire landscape and compete directly with taxicab companies.
These new companies, deemed Transportation Network Companies (TNC) by the
CPUC, utilize smartphone apps that allow customers to order a vehicle, get a quote of
the cost for the requested trip, and pay using a credit card. The strong support of
venture capitalists 1 and comments in 2013 by the Federal Trade Commission that
“these are innovative forms of competition that may enable consumers to more easily
arrange and pay for… transportation,” suggest that the vehicle-for-hire market is
undergoing a fundamental transition that has accelerated and is likely to continue on
this trajectory. It is important to stress, however, that the market continues to evolve.
The City has received complaints from taxicab drivers and companies about the
prevalence of TNCs and what they consider to be an unfair competitive landscape due
to the level of regulations that TNCs must comply with. Over the past year, taxicab
drivers have held protest demonstrations in major cities across the world, including Los
Angeles, Cincinnati, San Francisco, Washington DC, London, and Paris, against TNC
companies for what they claim to be unfair competition.
The CPUC claimed jurisdiction over TNCs in 2013. Local governments do not have
jurisdiction to impose any regulations on TNCs, as they do currently with taxicabs, with
the exception of requiring a business license if the TNC has a business location in the
city, as Uber does 2.
On September 23, 2013, the CPUC implemented rules on these TNC services,
including background checks, insurance, and annual reporting; however, the bar to
1 Uber has received $3.3 Billion in 8 Rounds of funding from 38 Investors. The most recent funding was $600
Million on December 12, 2014. Lyft has received $332.5 Million in 6 rounds of funding from 15 investors.
2 Uber signed a 10-year lease in December 2014 for about 40,000 square feet at 1733 Ocean Avenue in Santa
Monica.
1
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
entry for drivers is still much lower for the TNC drivers than for taxicab drivers. Also,
TNCs are not restricted on how much they can charge as taxicab companies are. TNCs
routinely use demand-based pricing, increasing prices during peak demand periods like
New Year’s Eve. A taxicab driver may not change the rates established by the City.
However, TNCs typically charge lower rates than taxicabs on routine days. The taxicab
industry argues that TNCs are able to charge less due to fewer regulatory burdens,
particularly with regards to insurance requirements.
As a result of the death of a six year old girl in San Francisco who was struck by a
vehicle being operated by an UberX driver, the CPUC received feedback from the
insurance industry to clarify the insurance rules for these types of vehicles for hire. The
incident also prompted the California State legislature to seek to increase insurance and
background regulations on TNCs.
As a result, Assembly Bill 2293 was signed by the Governor on September 17, 2014.
The bill requires TNCs to buy insurance to cover drivers when they are transporting
passengers and when drivers are logged on to their computer dispatching program and
ready to accept riders. The requirements go into effect July 1, 2015. The coverage will
raise insurance requirements to the same levels required of Taxicab companies in
Santa Monica.
In the San Francisco case, UberX’s insurance denied the claim because the child and
her family were struck by the driver during a period of time when there was no
passenger in the vehicle even though the driver was on-duty and available to accept a
customer through the Uber app. The driver’s personal vehicle insurance denied
the claim because the driver was conducting a commercial activity and his insurance is
only for personal use of the vehicle. AB 2293 seeks to address this issue.
2
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
A second bill, Assembly Bill 612, which would have increased the background checking
requirements, did not pass in the Assembly. The bill would have required a LiveScan
background, which requires fingerprinting and is administered by the California Justice
Department. Companies would have been barred from hiring a driver with a felony
conviction less than 7 years old from the date of hire for felony convictions for such
crimes as fraud, forgery, or larceny. The bill would have also required a DMV driving
record review and participation in a drug screening program. These requirements
would have brought background requirements more in line with what taxicab driver are
subject to. To address concerns of safety, Uber recently announced that it is adding a
a "panic button" as part of the Uber app that would be available in Chicago. The
feasture is expected to be available in the Chicago market only before the end of 2015.
The addition of this feature is in direct respond to an accusation against two Uber
drivers in Chicago of sexually assaulting passengers in recent months. A similar feature
was implemented in India by Uber for similar reasons after a driver was charged with
raping a female passenger.
Additionally, TNC vehicle metering devices (i.e. the Smartphone apps) are not required
to be inspected and approved by the local Commissioner of Weights & Measures,
although these apps charge based on a per mile rate, just as taxicabs do.
As of December 23, 2014, the following companies were issued TNC permits to operate
in California:
• Lyft
• Raiser-CA, LLC (dba UberX)
• Sidecare
• Tickengo dba Wingz
• RideLabs, LLC
• Shuddle
3
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Attachment B – Taxicab Factors
The following factors contribute to the availability of taxicabs and are directly relevant
when determining the total number of taxicabs that should be authorized to operate.
Trend in the Number of Taxicab Trips
Santa Monica taxicabs have experienced a 27% reduction in trips in 2014 when
compared to 2013. The chart below represents the change by company. Although it is
not possible to know specifically the cause of the decline, it clearly coincides with the
arrival of Transportation Network Companies (TNC), such as Uber and Lyft.
2013 Trips 2014 Trips
Percent Change in
2013 Compared to
2014
Bell Cab 69,806 48,987 -30%
ITOA 156,279 115,127 -26%
Metro 179,289 129,139 -28%
Taxi! Taxi! 277,293 197,835 -29%
Yellow Cab 93,196 76,325 -18%
All Taxicab Companies 775,863 567,413 -27%
Percentage of full time vs. part time taxicab leases
A factor that contributes to service levels is whether a driver has contracted with the
taxicab company for a 24 hour lease or a 12 hour lease. The length of leases offered
has an impact on availability because the vehicle with a 24 hour lease is not in service
full time. The 24 hour lease gives one driver full control of the vehicle 24 hours per day.
The driver does not turn the vehicle over to another driver at the end of a 12 hour
period, as drivers with 12 hour leases must. A single driver is not able to keep a vehicle
in service 24 hours a day due to legal and practical reasons. When a taxicab has a Los
Angeles permit and a 24 hour lease, the impact on availability is compounded. The
following breakdown of leases offered to drivers by company in 2012 provides a
breakdown of 24 hour leases vs. 12 hour leases. On any given day, the 300 taxicabs
1
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
permitted in Santa Monica are available approximately 1,340 hours less than if all
vehicles were on 12 hour leases. The chart below provides data collected in 2012 that
demonstrates the effects of the full time vs. part time lease arrangements.
Franchisee
Total
Taxicabs
Awarded
24 Hour
Lease
Daily
Hours
Available 1
12
Hour
Lease
Daily
Hours
Available
Total Daily
Hours
Available
Bell 58 55 550 3 60 610
ITOA 58 12 120 46 920 1,040
Metro 63 37 370 26 520 890
Taxi! Taxi! 63 10 100 53 1060 1,160
Yellow 58 20 200 38 760 960
Actual Totals 300 134 1,340 166 3,320 4,660
Potential Daily Hours That Would be Available if All Vehicles had 12 hour leases: 6,000
Difference between Actual and Potential Daily Hours Available Due to 24 Hour Leases: 1,340
The Effect of Los Angeles Licensed Taxicabs
The 2008 Nelson/Nygaard study recommended between 210 and 310 taxis for Santa
Monica. The lower fleet size assumed all taxis operated exclusively in Santa Monica,
while the higher fleet size assumed that the number of jointly-permitted cabs (with Los
Angeles) would spend one third of their time in Santa Monica. However, when the
terms and conditions were written, no specific requirements were included to address
how much time a specific taxicab that was also licensed in Los Angeles would have to
devote to the Santa Monica market, nor how many taxicabs must be jointly-permitted
vs. Santa Monica-permitted only.
Los Angeles’ 469 square mile area, as opposed to Santa Monica’s 8.3 square mile
area, provides more opportunities for drivers to find fares, including popular areas such
as Hollywood, City Walk, the Grove, downtown Los Angeles, and Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX), where drivers are able to charge a $4.00 surcharge. The
1 By both rules taxicab drivers may not drive more than 10 hours in any given 24 hour period.
2
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
following table provides the breakdown of Santa Monica taxicabs that were also
licensed in Los Angeles from 2012 (which is used to help illustrate the effects of the
dual leases).
Franchisee
SM Taxicabs
Awarded
Number That Also
Hold LA Permits
Percent That Also
Hold LA Permits
Bell 58 40 69%
ITOA 58 0 0%
Metro 63 0 0%
Taxi! Taxi! 63 0 0%
Yellow 58 58 100%
Total 300 98 33%
Reporting from 2012 shows that Yellow Cab, which at the time had 100% of its vehicles
licensed in Los Angeles, responded to orders for taxicab service within 15 minutes
54.6% of the time and has a high no-load 2 rate of 34%. By comparison, this same
company responded to calls within 15 minutes for its three Los Angeles service areas
between 81.35% to 94.83% of the time3. Due to the response times, Yellow Cab has
been incrementally converting dual licensed taxicabs to Santa Monica dedicated
taxicabs. However, Yellow Cab has faced challenges in getting these vehicles
deployed.
The 2008 Nelson/\Nygaard study noted that drivers who held Santa Monica permits but
did not hold Los Angeles permits believed it was unfair that Los Angeles companies and
drivers were able to both pick up and drop off passengers in Santa Monica while they
were within the City limits, allowing them to earn additional revenue; while drivers that
were licensed in Santa Monica, but not in Los Angeles could not do the same after
dropping a passenger off at a Los Angeles location, since the driver is required to drive
2 No load/No show is reported as trips that are requested and dispatched but not completed. Some taxicab
companies include cancellations as no load/no show. There are instances that may cause a trip to be designated as
no load/no show; for example, cancellation by passenger, taxicab driver unable to arrive to pick up passenger at
designated time, taxicab driver declined to pick up passenger, or taxicab driver arrived at designated location and
passenger could not be located. 3 Source: Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) 2010 Taxicab Performance Report
3
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
back to Santa Monica to continue working. In addition to the feedback that staff has
received from drivers who only operate in Santa Monica, a recent petition that was sent
to the City by 19 drivers that do not have Los Angeles permits, made essentially the
same complaint.
4
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
VIA EMAIL
Mr. Salvador Valles
Chief Administrative Officer
Planning and Committee Development
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Taxicab Industry Recommendations for Franchise Updates
Dear Mr. Valles,
Thank you for meeting with the taxicab industry on January 8 to discuss the upcoming review of the
City’s taxicab franchises.
Thank you also for the opportunity to comment on the franchises and to propose changes to you, in
light of the current state of the industry and as housekeeping items in the franchise system.
The signatories to this letter are four out of the five franchised taxicab companies. We have met and
discussed the franchises and have put our heads together to come up with a list of changes that we
think are fair, sensible, and reflect the realities of the market, while still protecting the taxi-riding public.
Before we explain our recommendations, however, we want to remind the City of the considerable
investment our companies have made in the City and in our franchises since they went into effect four
years ago. Three of our companies are membership organizations, where individual, hard-working
families have had to invest many thousands of dollars of their savings in this business. The other
company, Metro Cab, stepped in to bail out a franchise winner who had misrepresented its financial
strength in the bidding process, and the City has benefited greatly from its investment. In all, our
companies have invested millions of dollars, and in the short time since the franchises began, we have
not yet had an opportunity to recoup our investment.
Franchise extension
For this reason, in spite of the market changes brought about by the TNCs, we would respectfully submit
to you that the proper decision would be for the City to extend the franchises. Furthermore, in addition
to the huge investment our companies have made in the City, extending the franchises would preserve
Attachment C
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Mr. Salvatore Valles
January 27, 2015
Page 2
the competitive environment, and allow our industry the necessary time to regroup and confront the
competitive challenge posed by the TNCs.
The truth is, the TNCs have had a large, negative, impact on the taxicab industry in urban centers across
the country. While some of this impact may be attributed to the shortcomings of the taxicab industry,
the vast bulk of this impact is due to the uneven playing field that has been created by the California
Public Utilities Commission’s allowance of this almost entirely deregulated industry to compete directly
against the heavily regulated taxicab industry. Controls on pricing, insurance, fleet size, vehicle type,
vehicle inspections, driver background checks, and other franchise requirements have created an
environment where it has been difficult for the taxi industry to compete. The TNCs simply can operate
without much of our cost structure. Add to these issues the fact that the TNCs have been funded with
incomprehensible amounts of money, and the situation may seem to some to be insurmountable.
We, however, are not that pessimistic. We believe that our industry can be retooled and can
successfully compete against the TNCs. However, it is up to the City to be our partner and to work with
us on changes that maintain the public safety and service while reducing the regulatory inequality
between us and the TNCs.
This process requires time, including the dialogue that we are beginning with you now, and time to
implement any changes that we all can agree to. It is our hope that you agree with us that a franchise
extension of a minimum of three years is warranted at this time.
Parking vehicles
As referenced above, the taxicab industry has suffered a loss in business. The data we all provide to the
City supports this conclusion. One problem presented by the current franchise structure is that the
taxicab franchises have been forced to keep all authorized vehicles in service, and pay to insure them,
even when we do not have drivers for them. Each of the five franchisees has had vehicles that have
remained out of service for extended periods of time.
The laws of supply-and-demand economics come into play here. When our business is down, drivers will
earn less, and we will lose drivers until we achieve equilibrium. When we grow our business, the drivers
who we recruit can earn a decent living, and the vehicle stays on the road.
We propose to the City to allow each of the taxi franchises to park up to 25% of their fleets without
losing operating authorities. By parking, we mean to say that the City would be formally notified that the
vehicle is out of service, and we would not be required to maintain expensive auto insurance on the
vehicle. Of course, we would stipulate that no vehicle may ever be driven as long as it is parked.
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Mr. Salvatore Valles
January 27, 2015
Page 3
This proposal would allow the City’s taxi fleet to ebb and flow with the overall state of the taxi industry’s
business, and we would respectfully submit to you that it is a much more logical way for the City to
manage its taxi fleet than to force vehicles in service regardless of the state of the market.
The concept of parking vehicles is not without precedent. In the economic slowdown for our industry
that occurred after the September 11 attacks, the City of Los Angeles maintained a vehicle parking
program for the taxicab industry for a period of two years. This allowed the industry to get back on its
feet and place the vehicles in service as the business increased to support them.
Pricing Flexibility
As we have discussed together with you, one of the major ways that the TNCs have been able to take
business from the taxi industry is by giving away promotional codes to be used on their apps, sometimes
in large amounts. The TNCs are essentially buying our business.
We must have the right to fight back. We need to have the ability to discount fares and give away
promo codes just like the TNCs do. This will only benefit the consumers in the City of Santa Monica, and
we hope you agree. In any event, we look forward to discussing this with you further.
Housekeeping items
1. Business License Fee
When the franchises were originally bid, it was the understanding of all bidders that the
franchise fees paid would be in lieu of business license taxes. This assumption was based on the
fact that every other city with taxicab franchises in greater Los Angeles treats business license
fees in this way. We believe that it was treated differently in Santa Monica merely as a matter of
mistake or oversight. In any event, one item that we would like to include in our discussions is
for the Council to take up the waiver of the $250.00 per cab business license fees for companies
who pay franchise fees.
More generally, the City needs to address the issue of the value of the franchises themselves.
The value of the franchises is based on the amount of business the franchise brings to the
franchisee. The steep decline in business should reduce the value of the franchises, but
moreover, the per vehicle franchise fees are now so high that they interfere with a driver’s
ability to earn a living thus hampering our ability to deliver needed transportation.
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Mr. Salvatore Valles
January 27, 2015
Page 4
2. Driver permit issues
Two-Year Renewals. We recommend that the City adopt the same policy that Los Angeles and
other cities in the region have adopted by allowing driver permit renewals for two years. This
would cut considerably on staff time and would increase efficiency without sacrificing safety.
Prorated Driver Fees. We also recommend that driver permits be prorated as of the date the
permit is granted. Each driver is an individual business person and the license fees are not trivial.
As the year goes on, the current policy of charging drivers for a full year when the permit is only
good for a few months strikes drivers as unfair and hinders our ability to recruit drivers and keep
our cabs in service. Thus it gets in the way of us being able to transport people who need our
services. In the alternative, we would propose allowing drivers to renew their permits on their
anniversary dates.
Reduced Licensing Time. We request that the city revise the driver application and permitting
process to enable us to put drivers in cabs faster. The TNCs have advertised that they can put a
driver in a vehicle in two hours. We think that two hours is transparently unsafe, but it’s
important to understand what our competition is doing. By contrast, the process for a new
Santa Monica driver can take several weeks, sometimes as long as six or eight weeks. We would
like to sit down and discuss with you revisions to the application process, testing process, and
LiveScan process that would allow drivers to start working sooner without compromising public
safety. For instance, most cities have a process where drivers can receive a temporary driving
permit almost immediately after fingerprinting. If we are to compete, the time that it takes to
put a driver to work must be reduced.
Drivers Who Take Leaves. As you know, ours is an industry with large immigrant populations
from, literally, all over the world. Many of these drivers, when they return occasionally to their
home countries, take extended leaves away from taxi driving in Santa Monica. However, if too
much time passes, or if any of their supporting documentation expires while they are away
(such as their drivers’ license or work permit), the permit is revoked and they have to go
through the process of qualifying to become a taxi driver as if they were new. We recommend
a rule change that would allow these drivers to provide the missing updated documentation and
allow the drivers to retain their right to pick up their permit while their permits are still within
their validity dates (keeping in mind our recommendation for two-year renewals, above). In
other words, what we are requesting here is the ability to temporarily inactivate them while
they take a vacation.
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Mr. Salvatore Valles
January 27, 2015
Page 5
3. Camera System, Recording and Storage Requirements / Other Revisions to the Taxicab
Rulebook
We are attaching a list of proposed modifications to the Taxicab Rules of the City of Santa
Monica. We look forward to discussing these topics with you further.
4. Taxicab Performance Index Revisions
We have some issues that we would like to discuss with you, along with our recommendations
for some revisions.
As mentioned above, we remain confident that by working together, the City and the industry can arrive
at a regulatory framework that will allow our industry the opportunity to succeed in the post-TNC world,
thus preserving the many benefits of the taxicab industry for the local community.
We look forward to working with you further and invite you to contact us to set up a meeting to discuss
these topics in more detail.
Sincerely,
William J. Rouse
General Manager
L.A. Taxi Cooperative,
Inc.
Shirley Pe
General Manager
All Yellow Taxi, Inc. dba
Metro Cab
Simon Momennasab
Director of Operations
Bell Cab Company, Inc.
Nettabai Ahmed
President
Independent Taxi
Owners Association
cc: Ms. Cheryl Shavers
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
January 27, 2015
City of Santa Monica
City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: 2015 Taxicab Franchise Renewal in the City of Santa Monica
Dear Sir or Madam:
We write in response to the City’s request for feedback regarding the upcoming taxicab franchise renewal.
Taxi! Taxi! has held a franchise with the City since the inception of the franchise system on November 23, 2010.
Since this time, Taxi! Taxi! has consistently serviced the majority of customers in the City as compared to all of the
other franchisees, while still maintaining the highest level of service. In 2012, Taxi! Taxi! serviced 212,845 out of
371,887 trips in the City, which equates to 57.2 % of the overall total trips. See 2013 TCPI. Similarly, in 2013,
Taxi Taxi! serviced 193,357 out of 376,408 trips, which equals 51.3% of the overall total trips. However, the ever
increasing presence of Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber, Sidecar and Lyft have led to a
severe drop in the number of calls received by drivers. In 2014, Taxi! Taxi!’s total dispatched trips dropped to
134,230, which is 30% lower than in 2013 and 37% lower than in 2012. Based on these numbers, it is likely the
total number of taxicab calls in the City also decreased by approximately 30% in 2014, which equates to only
260,000 calls. This has affected the ability of all Santa Monica taxi drivers to earn sufficient income to support
their families and continue driving in the City. The influx of TNC drivers in the City has also led to overcapacity,
congestion, and pollution. As outlined below, the only way to bring taxicab driver incomes back to a living wage,
reduce emissions, adequately fulfill the City’s needs, reduce the amount of traffic, and decrease the amount of
dedicated taxicab curbside spaces is to reduce the number of taxicabs and franchises. Taxi! Taxi! urges the City to
reduce the number of taxicabs to a maximum of 125 and award franchises to only the two most qualified
companies.
The Impact of Transportation Network Companies
“Companies such as Uber and Lyft are changing the vehicle-for-hire landscape and increasing competition felt by
taxicab companies.” See Taxicab Franchise Program Update dated 6/6/13, pg. 10. All franchisees can attest to the
fact that the demand for taxicab service has been rapidly decreasing in Santa Monica since the Nelson/Nygaard
study was conducted in March of 2008. This drop in the number of service calls is directly attributable to the ever
increasing use of rideshare companies like Uber, Lyft and Sidecar.
The original Nelson/Nygaard study estimated that the City needs between 210 and 310 taxicabs in order to fulfill
its service demands. These estimates did not take into account the enormous number of rideshare drivers that
freely pick up passengers throughout both Santa Monica and Los Angeles. Based on Uber’s administrative data,
the number of Uber drivers has increased from zero in July 2012 to well over 160,000 in 2014.
Attachment D
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Historically, the number of Uber drivers has doubled every six months for the last two years. See Hall, et al., “An
Analysis of the Labor Market for Uber’s Driver-Partners in the United States” (Jan. 22, 2015) (“Hall Article”). As
shown in the chart below, the Los Angeles area has experienced the highest amount of growth in Uber drivers,
with over 20,000 on the road at the end of 2014.
See Hall Article, pg. 15.
In an effort to determine the average number of Uber, Lyft and Sidecar drivers in the City of Santa Monica, Taxi!
Taxi! monitored the mobile applications for each of the companies on a typical Saturday night. During this
period, Taxi! Taxi! estimates that there were between 200 and 250 available drivers for hire between the Uber and
Lyft platform at any given time. This does not include Sidecar drivers (or those working with other TNC
companies), nor does it take into account the number TNC drivers that were already carrying customers
throughout the City at the monitoring time. Uber alone offers six different services with various pricing tiers. A
sampling of the photographs captured from the Uber and Lyft mobile applications on Saturday, January, 24 2014
is attached to this letter.
The influx of TNCs has severely impacted the ability of taxicab drivers to earn an income sufficient to support
their families. As noted in the Nelson/Nygaard study, “the excessive number of cabs makes it hard for drivers to
earn a living, results in them working more hours than is safe, and reduces service quality for the public.”
See Nelson/Nygaard Taxi Study, Technical Memo., pg. 2-10.
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
The decrease in the number of calls received by drivers has made it impossible for most drivers to earn even a
minimum living wage, much less support their families. See, e.g., Blasi, Gary, et al., “Driving Poor: Taxi Drivers
and the Regulation of the Taxi Industry in Los Angeles” (2006). A study commissioned by Uber estimates that
Uber drivers in the Los Angeles area earn over 30% more income per hour than taxicab drivers and chauffeurs.
See Hall Article, pg. 23. In 2014, taxicab drivers wrote several letters to the City of Santa Monica complaining
about their inability to earn a living wage, and protested for two hours by circling the City while honking their
horns.
The Solution – Reduce the Number of Taxicabs and Franchises
The City has the authority to set the both number of franchises awarded and the number of taxicabs allotted to
each franchise. See City of Santa Monica Franchise Ordinance. Taxi! Taxi! urges the City to exercise its discretion
and reduce the number of franchises to two based on the Taxicab Company Performance Index. “The
performance index is designed as a measurement to be used when considering the extension of franchises at
the end of the five-year term of the franchise agreement, which is scheduled for December 31, 2015.” See 2013
TCPI, pg. 2. We further recommend that the number of taxicabs be reduced to 125 total.
The Nelson/Nygaard study was conducted under the assumption that only 45 non-local drivers (i.e., those jointly
permitted with the City of Los Angeles) would be in service in the City of Santa Monica on any given day, and that
they would account for 450 of the 1,595 trips per day (28%). See Nelson/Nygaard Study, pg. 4-4. As outlined
above, this number has been rendered meaningless by the voluminous amount of TNC drivers that are not
regulated by the City. Based on the reduction in calls experienced by Taxi! Taxi! (who has historically serviced
the largest portion of the City’s passengers), these TNC drivers are likely servicing approximately 40% if not more
of the passengers picked up daily in the City. See also, Hall Article, pg. 15 (estimating that there are over 20,000
Uber drivers in the Los Angeles area alone). The increase in TNC drivers has reduced the market for taxicabs in
the City, and warrants a reduction in the number of franchises and taxicab permits. Reducing the number of
taxicabs to 125 would increase driver income, reduce emissions and traffic, and alleviate congestion in taxicab
zones.
The number of franchises granted by the City should be reduced to the two that have historically performed the
best in the TCPI. See 2013 TCPI, pg. 2. Taxi! Taxi has consistently invested in making sure its performance meets
and exceeds the City’s expectations, and has worked hard to maintain its franchise privilege for another term.
Taxi!Taxi! has new and well-kept fleet of taxicabs, courteous drivers, and efficient dispatchers, all while
maintaining its headquarters in the City of Santa Monica (despite the higher cost of operation). This equates to
benefits for the City, its residents and its visitors. In addition to ease of service and prompt response times, Taxi!
Taxi! also provides specialized amenities, including a lost & found procedure and child/infant seats when needed
for a traveling family. As demonstrated by its volume of calls in 2012, Taxi! Taxi! is capable of servicing all of the
City’s taxicab needs on its own. Reducing the number of franchises to a maximum of two will allow the City’s
needs to be met, account for the presence of TNC drivers, and ensure that taxicab drivers are able to earn
sufficient wages to provide for their families.
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
If the City does not reduce the number of franchises and taxicabs in the City, the drivers cannot financially survive
or meaningfully compete with Uber, Lyft and Sidecar. Taxi! Taxi! is a small local company that has remained
dedicated to serving only the City of Santa Monica, and its operational costs will easily exceed its revenues if the
City reduces the number of taxicabs in its fleet. It is simply not economically feasible to reduce the number of
taxicabs across the existing five franchises. This is also unnecessary since Taxi! Taxi! alone has been able to fulfill
well over 50% of the taxicab demand in the City, and is still capable of servicing many more passengers every day.
“Supply and Demand” is NOT a Solution
It has been suggested that the current number of taxicabs should be maintained, leaving it to “supply and demand”
to regulate the City’s taxicab needs. This is not a viable option. As the City is aware, the co-op structure of most
taxicab franchisees is such that the majority of drivers own their own vehicles. The companies with this co-op
business model charge their drivers a fixed lease regardless of whether there is a “demand” or not. This require the
owner-operators to either sublease his/her taxicab or to continue working longer and longer hours, while still
earning less than a reasonable living wage. These companies have no control over whether the taxicab is off-duty
when there is no “demand;” instead, this decision is left entirely to the owner-operator. Taxi! Taxi! owns all of its
own vehicles, which alleviates this problem. Additionally, the City already knows that leaving the number of
taxicabs to “supply and demand” does not work. This was precisely the situation prior to the institution of the
taxicab franchise system, and caused low wages, higher emissions, overcrowding in taxicab zones, and an influx of
taxicabs in the City. See Nelson/Nygaard Study.
Conclusion
The only way to account for the number of TNCs currently servicing the City, ensure that drivers can support their
families, reduce emissions, and meet the City’s taxicab needs is to (1) reduce the number of taxicab franchises to
two (using the TCPI “as a measurement”), and (2) reduce the number of taxicabs to a maximum of 125. The City’s
residents and visitors deserve taxicab companies, like Taxi! Taxi!, that operate with the utmost safety and provide
the best service. Taxi! Taxi! thanks the City for its consideration, and remains willing to provide additional
information if needed.
Sincerely yours,
Taxi! Taxi!
Ayman Radwan, CEO
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Uber X (Saturday 01/24/2015 at 7:38 PM)
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Uber Plus (Saturday 01/24/2015 at 7:38 PM)
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Uber Black (Saturday 01/24/2015 at 7:40 PM)
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Uber SUV (Saturday 01/24/2015 at 7:41 PM)
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
Lyft at (Saturday 01/24/2015 at 9:05 PM)
10.E.e
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Attachment E. March 17, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council
Report
City Council Regular Meeting: November 10, 2015
Agenda Item: 7.E
1 of 23
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Planning and Community Development , Planning and
Community Development
Subject: Introduction for First Reading of Ordinances Amending Chapters 6.48, 6.49,
and 6.50 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code Modifying Provisions of the
Vehicle for Hire Regulations, Taxicab Franchise Regulations, and Definition of
Pedicab; Ordinances Extending the Taxicab Franchises of Bell Cab,
Independent Taxicab Owners Association, Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi!, and Yellow
Cab; Adopt a Resolution Establishing Taxicab Franchise Fees, Permit fees,
and Taximeter Rates; and, Direct Staff to Research Options that Would
Consider Changes to the Taxicab Franchise Program that Would Make
Companies More Accountable to Market Forces Rather than City
Regulations.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance amending Chapters 6.48, 6.49,
and 6.50 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code modifying provisions of the
vehicle for hire regulations, taxicab franchise regulations, and definition of
pedicab (Attachment K);
2) Introduce for first reading the attached ordinances modifying and extending the
taxicab franchises of Bell Cab, Independent Taxicab Owners Association, Metro
Cab, Taxi! Taxi!, and Yellow Cab (Attachments L, M, N, O, P);
3) Adopt the attached resolution modifying taxicab franchise fees, permit fees, and
taximeter rates (Attachment S); and
4) Direct staff to research options for changes to the taxicab franchise program that
would make companies more accountable to market forces rather than City
regulations.
Executive Summary
On March 1, 2011, the City implemented a new taxicab franchise system in response to
concerns with the open licensing system. The current franchises expire on December
31, 2015. Due to the disruptive nature of Transportations Network Companies (TNCs)
on the vehicle for hire market, staff is recommending changes to regulations to assist
with competing with TNCs, a reallocation of taxicab vehicles to more accurately
represent the needs, impacts, and service delivery, and extension of the five existing
franchise agreements for two years. Staff is also recommending clarifying the definition
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2 of 23
of vehicle for hire operations that operate solely in Santa Monica and adding minimum
insurance requirements on all non-taxi vehicle for hire operations; and clarification of the
definition of pedicabs to include motorized pedicabs.
Background
Based on the recommendations of a 2008 study by Nelson \Nygaard Consulting
Associates (see Attachment A) of taxicab operations in Santa Monica, on July 28, 2009,
Council adopted an ordinance establishing a franchise-based system for the regulation
of taxicabs (see Attachment B), which required the program to be self-supporting
through franchise, vehicle permit, and driver permit fees. In compliance with the
ordinance requirements, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for citywide taxicab franchises
was issued on January 14, 2010.
On November 23, 2010, the Council awarded franchises by ordinance to Bell Cab
Company, Inc. (Bell Cab); Independent Taxi Owners’ Association (ITOA); Metro Cab
Company, LLC (Metro Cab); TMAT Corp., dba Taxi! Taxi! (Taxi! Taxi!); and L.A. Taxi
Cooperative, Inc., dba Yellow Cab Company (Yellow Cab) (see Attachment C). The
ordinances established the terms and conditions of the franchise for each company,
which set the effective date for the franchise for January 1, 2011. The terms and
conditions were subsequently agreed to by each company. On January 11, 2011, an d
October 11, 2011, Council adopted amendments to the terms and conditions to
increase the fleet size for each franchisee and to adjust the permit year from a fiscal
year to a calendar year (see Attachments D and E respectively). On May 22, 2012,
Council transferred the taxicab franchise of Metro Cab Company, LLC to All Yellow Taxi
dba Metro Cab (Metro Cab) (see Attachment F).
In preparation for the expiration of the Taxicab Franchise agreements on December 31,
2015, staff held a study session with Council at its March 17, 2015 meeting on the
taxicab franchise and the impact of Transportations Network Companies (TNCs), such
as Uber and Lyft, on the transportation market (see Attachment G). Council directed
staff to review changes to the regulatory program to assist taxicab companies in light of
the arrival of TNCs.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3 of 23
Discussion
Due to the disruptive nature of TNCs on the vehicle for hire market, staff is
recommending changes, as outlined in this report, to the taxicab franchise program.
Staff is also recommending that the franchises for all five companies be extended for
two years with some modifications. The two year agreement will allow for an
incremental approach to changes to a highly volatile market and will allow more time to
evaluate the impacts of the arrival of Expo in 2016.
Staff is also recommending that:
1. Minimum insurance requirements be established for vehicles for hire that operate
solely within Santa Monica and that are not regulated by the State of California,
and
2. A minor clarification be made to the pedicab definition to include pedicabs with
small motors, similar to a motorized bicycle.
Taxicabs - Outreach
In preparation for the March 17, 2015 study session, staff met jointly with all five taxicab
franchisees on January 8, 2015. All five companies where encouraged to provide their
recommendations to regulatory changes to assist with competing with TNCs. Four of
the existing franchisees, Bell Cab Company, Inc., Independent Taxi Owners’
Association, Metro Cab Company, LLC, and L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc., dba Yellow
Cab Company (“Taxicab Coalition”)1 submitted a joint letter with detailed
recommendations on both regulations and vehicles for staff and Council to consider
(see Attachment C of Attachment G of this report). Taxi! Taxi! submitted its own letter
with its recommendations on vehicles (see Attachment D of Attachment G of this
report). During the study session, Council directed staff to consider options for reducing
taxicab regulations to assist companies with competing with TNCs and to consider if
regulations were necessary for in-city vehicles for hire.
1 . For simplicity, these four companies will be jointly referred to as the “Taxicab Coalition” in this report.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4 of 23
On August 17, 2015 staff sent letters to each franchisee outlining a draft summary of the
proposed changes to the current taxicab regulatory scheme (see Attachment H ).
Franchisees were encouraged to schedule individual meetings with staff to discuss the
proposals. The primary area of concern with the draft proposal expressed by each
taxicab company in these meetings was the proposed reduction of taxicabs from 300 to
182, and the subsequent allocation of those vehicles between the five companies. The
Taxicab Coalition argued for more taxicabs and Taxi! Taxi! recommended fewer taxicab
vehicles and fewer franchisees. The taxicab companies were asked to submit written
responses to the draft recommendations. As before, the Taxicab Coalition submitted a
letter for its four members (see Attachment I) and Taxi! Taxi! submitted a letter on its
own to staff and to Mayor Kevin McKeown with a petition from drivers (see Attachm ent
J). The companies outlined their positions on the total number of vehicles that should
be authorized and why. With the outline of staff’s recommendations below, alternatives
are presented based on the recommendations offered by the Taxicab Coalition and
Taxi! Taxi! for Council’s consideration.
Taxicabs - Long Beach Taxicab Regulatory Changes
The Long Beach City Council recently adopted new regulations in response to a request
from Yellow Cab Long Beach (now Yellow Long Beach) to address the compe titive
pressures of TNCs. Long Beach is also currently served by only one taxicab company
(i.e. Yellow Cab). According to a May 13, 2015 Los Angeles Times article, Long Beach
Mayor Robert Garcia said that the new regulations to help taxis stay competitive was
not a knock on TNCs, but a way to protect a "community partner" that provides a
service for tourists, the elderly and the disabled.
The city removed price floors on rates (which allows Yellow Cab to offer lower rates and
coupons) and approved the addition of 24 new taxis to the fleet, bringing the total to
199, even though there was a reported decline of approximately 15% in business with
the 175 taxis already licensed. Long Beach also approved new rebranding for Yellow
Cab with a new name Yellow Long Beach, a new logo, and a mobile app called Ride
Yellow, which appears to be a rebranded version of their app called Curb, which was
formerly called TaxiMagic.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5 of 23
The company claims that the lower rates would increase the demand, however this
would not directly assist drivers, unless the company absorbed the cost of the discount.
The addition of more taxicabs provides for an opportunity for the company to lease
more vehicles regardless of whether or not taxicab drivers have access to more
customers.
Taxicabs - Proposed Amendments
The staff recommendations for taxicabs are outlined later in two sections of this report:
Regulations - Rules and procedures for how the program is implemented.
Vehicles - The total number of vehicles authorized to operate and the allocation
of those vehicles
Franchise and Permit Fees
Taximeter Rates
The recommended changes to the regulations are based mostly on the specific
recommendations made in a January 27, 2015 letter jointly signed by the “Taxicab
Coalition”.
In addition to minor administrative changes to the taxicab programs rules and
regulations, such as minor changes to address technological changes in the
marketplace, staff proposes the following material changes to the program. These
changes are governed by Chapter 6.49 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC),
the Taxicab Franchise Agreement, and the Taxicab Rules.
The draft ordinance amending Chapter 6.49 of the SMMC is included as Attachment K
and the draft ordinances extending the franchises are attached as follows:
Bell Cab Company, Inc. - Attachment L
Independent Taxi Owners’ Association - Attachment M
All Yellow Taxi (dba Metro Cab) - Attachment N
TMAT Corp., dba Taxi! Taxi! - Attachment O
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6 of 23
L.A. Taxi Cooperative, Inc (dba Yellow Cab) - Attachment P
Because of the rapidly changing vehicle for hire market in California, staff is proposing
an incremental approach, instead of a full revamping of the program, to assist taxicab
companies in competing with TNCs while still advancing the City’s priorities.
Staff is recommending that the franchises of all five taxicab companies be extended for
two years to allow for consideration of further changes in the near future to the program
as the market adapts, as well as to allow time for impacts to the local Santa Monica
vehicle for hire market from the arrival of Expo. This recommendation is not based on
the performance of the companies. Instead staff is recommending that this decision be
delayed for two years. The expiration date of the two year franchise agreements would
be midnight December 31, 2017. This date is also consistent with when the City of Los
Angeles franchise agreements expire.
Regulations
Following are regulatory changes to the program proposed by staff. The taxicab
companies have not expressed any significant disagreement with these proposals
which are in in most cases based on the recommendations from the taxicab companies.
Later in this report, under the section of vehicles, staff outlines recommendations for the
total number of vehicles to be awarded and how these vehicles should be allocated
among the five franchisees.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7 of 23
Proposed Regulatory Change Governed By
SMMC Franchise
Agreement
Rules
1 Establish two types of vehicle permits: Full Time
Permit and a Part Time Permit. A full time vehicle
permit allows a company to dedicate the vehicle to
Santa Monica. The full time vehicle may not be
permitted to also operate in the City of Los Angeles;
however, full time vehicles may be permitted in other
jurisdictions with approval. A part time vehicle
permit requires the vehicle to also be permitted by
the City of Los Angeles. A Part Time vehicle counts
as 50% of a vehicle when calculating Full Time
Equivalency (this is discussed further in the Vehicle
section below).
x X
2 Vehicle Flexibility - Allow each of the franchises to
remove from service vehicles based on demand.
This would allow companies to suspend auto
insurance on the vehicle while it is out of service.
This would allow them to reduce costs by not having
to pay for insurance during slower demand periods,
allowing the fleet to “ebb and flow”. The Taxicab
Coalition requested that they be allowed to remove
25% of their fleets from service. Staffs proposal
does not include a limit.
X X
3 Pricing Flexibility - Remove pricing floors. Maximum
rates would still apply. The change would allow
companies to establish promotional pricing including
flat rates, package deals with groups, employers, etc.
This proposal does not change the existing ban on
companies establishing exclusive deals with hotels.
The Taxicab Coalition requested this change. An
additional provision has been added to make it illegal
for a company to charge discounted or flat rates
other than that which has been advertised or agreed
to in advance with the passenger.
X X X
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8 of 23
Proposed Regulatory Change Governed By
SMMC Franchise
Agreement
Rules
4 Driver Permits - Change the permit period from one
year to a prorated permit that would expire at
midnight on December 31, 2017. The proposed
permit would be prorated so that a driver paid an
amount equal to the number of months remaining in
the franchise agreements. The Taxicab Coalition
requested a two year driver permit. Staff has no
objections to a two year permit, which is consistent
with Los Angeles, however, since the proposal is for
a two year franchise, all driver permits must expire at
the end of the franchise period, so providing a
prorated permit fee would accomplish the same goal.
Permit fees are based solely on cost recovery, so the
permit fees would be the same, with standard CPI
increases or changes based on fee studies. Drivers
pay the driver permit fees. If Council should extend
the franchises beyond two years, driver permit
expiration dates would be adjusted accordingly.
x X
5 Transfer rule making authority from the Police
Department to Planning and Community
Development (PCD). All other aspects of the
Taxicab program have been transferred to PCD,
such as permitting and enforcement. Transfer of the
rule making authority would complete this transition.
x
6 LADOT Smartphone App - Allow participation in any
Los Angeles Department of Transportation electronic
hailing Smartphone app and reciprocity program that
may be launched.
x
7 Carpooling - Clarification of “full use of taxicab” to
allow for carpooling or ride sharing types of services
by taxicabs.
x
8 Delivery of Goods – Ban taxicab companies and
drivers from providing non-passenger delivery
services (e.g. food, gods, marijuana).
x
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
9 of 23
Other Requests
The Taxicab Coalition requested that the City waive the business license tax fees,
claiming that no other city requires a payment of franchise fees and business license tax
and that the City’s franchise fees are the highest in the region. The Taxicab Coalition
claims that the franchise fee is based on the value that the franchise brings to the
franchisee. In their letter dated September 23, 2015, the coalition states “[W]here our
business is drastically down due to the encroachment of unregulated businesses who
pay no fees to the City, the value of our franchises have dropped considerably.”
Because of the incremental approach to the changes that staff is proposing, staff does
not recommend a waiver to the business license fee of $250 per vehicle at this time. A
waiver could be considered in a future modification to the program with any franchise
fee changes.
All five companies have requested that the processing time for permits be reduced.
Most of the processing time is for background checks and driver testing. Staff will
review options for driver testing to reduce the amount of time it takes to obtain a permit
however, staff is not recommending the elimination of testing at this time. Background
checks are dependent on both the California Department of Justice to process
fingerprints and the Police Department to complete a thorough background check. It
has been requested by the taxicab industry to provide provisional permits until the
background check has been completed. Staff does not recommend any changes to the
background check requirements or the implementation of provisional driver permits at
this time.
Rules
Attached is a redline version of the rules with changes that staff expects to make
pending adoption of the attached amendments to Chapters 6.48, 4.49, and 6.50 of the
SMMC and the Taxicab Franchise Agreements (see Attachment Q).
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
10 of 23
Vehicles
Taxicab Trips Originating in Santa Monica
Santa Monica taxicabs have experienced a 27% reduction in trips in 2014 when
compared to 2013. See Chart A below.
Chart A
2013 Trips 2014 Trips
Percent Change
Trips
2013 to 2014
Market Share
2015
Bell Cab 69,806 48,987 -30% 9%
ITOA 156,279 115,127 -26% 20%
Metro 179,289 129,139 -28% 23%
Taxi! Taxi! 277,293 197,835 -29% 35%
Yellow Cab 93,196 76,325 -18% 13%
All Taxicab Companies 775,863 567,413 -27% 100%
The industry continues to report declines in overall trips in 2015 with a 51% reduction in
the first seven months of calendar year 2015 over the first seven months of calendar
year 2013. See Chart B below.
Chart B
2013 Trips
Jan-Aug
2015 Trips
Jan-Aug
Percent Change
Trips
2013 to 2015
Jan-Aug
Market Share
2015
Jan-Aug
Bell Cab 46,381 18,315 -61% 7%
ITOA 107,030 52,910 -51% 20%
Metro 118,794 54,947 -54% 21%
Taxi! Taxi! 193,195 93,391 -52% 35%
Yellow Cab 83,203 47,542 -43% 18%
All Taxicab Companies 548,603 267,105 -51% 100%
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
11 of 23
Since flag downs are considered by some companies to be an unreliable reflection of
the number of trips a company completes, even when excluding flag down trips, and
instead only considering dispatched trips through the companies dispa tching systems
reported by the companies, there has been a decrease in requests for service calls of
57% from January to August for 2013 to 2015. Chart C below shows a breakdown by
company of the decrease in reported dispatched trip, which also demonstrates a clear
decline in trips.
Chart C
2013
Dispatched
Trips
Jan-Aug
2015
Dispatched
Trips
Jan-Aug
Percent Change
2013 to 2015
Dispatched Trips
Jan-Aug
Market Share
2015
Jan-Aug
Bell Cab 13,813 6,832 51% 6%
ITOA 15,833 7,058 55% 6%
Metro 53,220 28,292 47% 24%
Taxi! Taxi! 135,210 65,248 52% 55%
Yellow Cab 60,432 11,274 81% 9%
All Taxicab
Companies
278,508 118,704 57% 100%
Although it is not possible to know specifically the cause of the decline, it clearly
coincides with the arrival of Transportation Network Companies (TNC); Uber officially
launched in Los Angeles on March 8, 2012. It is also unclear if other factors may be
contributing to the decline.
Determining the Number of Vehicles
The current number of vehicles authorized to operate is 300. However, the allocation of
vehicles did not take into account whether or not a vehicle serves Santa Monica on a
full time basis or on a part time basis. The 2008 Nelson/Nygaard Taxicab study
recommended 210 Full Time Equivalent vehicles, meaning that a fa ctor should be taken
into consideration in establishing the authorized number of vehicles based on whether
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
12 of 23
or not vehicles are operating in Santa Monica on a full time basis or part time basis.
Therefore taxicab companies have full discretion to determine if a vehicle is operating in
Santa Monica on a full time or part time basis. The Taxicab Coalition has requested
that they maintain this discretion. Staff is recommending that vehicle allocations be
awarded specifically for full time or part time vehicles to ensure greater control over the
total number of vehicles that impacting local streets.
Staff is recommending that Council authorize no more than 182 full time equivalent
taxicabs based on factors outlined in Attachment R which has taken in to account the
number of full time leases, dedicated vehicles, and market share of the company. The
analysis is based on 2014 trip data, the most recent full year of data available.
Vehicle Allocation by Company
For the purpose of this discussion, Full Time Equivalency (FTE) is the amount of time a
vehicle operates in Santa Monica as compared to a full time bas is. FTE distinguishes
between vehicles that are spending 100% of their time serving Santa Monica and those
that are license in both Santa Monica as well as Los Angeles, thereby serving a much
broader market. These vehicles are present in Santa Monica far less than vehicles that
are only permitted by Santa Monica but would be authorized to operate in Santa Monica
during peak periods. For example if a taxicab company is authorized to operate 100
FTE vehicles, the taxicab company could be issued 50 full time vehicle permits and 100
part time vehicle permits for a total of 100 FTE Vehicles. The formula would be:
50 F/T vehicles + (100 P/T vehicles x 50%) = 100 Full Time Equivalent Vehicles
The use of 50% as the part time factor is used for convenience since it is difficult to
determine how much time a vehicle that is permitted in both Santa Monica and Los
Angeles actually operates in Santa Monica. Additionally, many Los Angeles permitted
vehicles are also permitted in other jurisdictions, such as Beverly Hills, West Hollywood,
Culver City, and Los Angeles County. Staff is recommending that companies continue
to have the discretion to offer 12-hour or 24-hour leases in any mix it chooses.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
13 of 23
The following chart outlines the proposed Full Time Equivalent vehicles and breakdown
by Full Time and Part Time permits. Column E represents the actual number of
vehicles that would be permitted to operate.
Company
(A)
Proposed
Full Time
Equivalent
Vehicles
(B)
Proposed
Full Time
Vehicle
Permits
(C)
Proposed
Part Time
Vehicle
Permits*
(D)
Actual
Proposed
Total
Vehicles
Permitted
(E)
Bell Cab 16 2 28 30
ITOA 38 32 12 44
Metro Cab 42 32 20 52
Taxi! Taxi! 62 62 0 62
Yellow Cab 24 2 44 46
Totals 182 130 104 234
*Vehicles in this category are also permitted to operate in the City of Los Angeles for
Bell Cab, ITOA, and Yellow Cab. For Metro Cab these vehicles are permitted to
operate as Access vehicles outside of Santa Monica.
Based on this proposal, the total change in the number of vehicles would be reduced by
66 or 22%. The actual change to the current allocation is minimal considering the
significant drop in vehicle trips and when compared to the original number of FTEs
recommended by Nelson/Nygaard in its 2008 study. The key change is that by
adjusting the permitting to include specific full time and part time vehicle permits, the
allocation will provide more control than the current system over how many vehicles are
dedicated to operating only in Santa Monica and is more consistent with the original
recommendations by the 2008 Nelson/Nygaard study recommendations.
The following chart provides a comparison of the change in vehicle allocation to the
current allocation:
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
14 of 23
Company
Current
Authorized
Vehicles
Current
Full
Time
Proposed
Full Time
Current
Part
Time
Proposed
Part Time
Proposed
Total
Authorized
Vehicles
Change in
Total
Vehicles
from
Current
Allocation
to
Proposed
Allocation
Percent
Change
in Total
Vehicles
Bell Cab 58 12 2 46 28 30 -28 -48%
ITOA 58 47 32 11 12 44 -14 -24%
Metro Cab 63 43 32 20 20 52 -11 -17%
Taxi! Taxi! 63 63 62 0 0 62 -1 -2%
Yellow Cab 58 43 2 15 44 46 -12 -21%
Totals 300 208 130 92 104 234 -66 -22%
Taxicab Coalition - Vehicle Allocation Alternative Proposal
As noted earlier in this report, the taxicab companies were encouraged to provide
written responses to the proposals outlined by staff in the August 17, 2015 letter sent to
each company. The recommended allocation by the Taxicab Coalition was originally to
maintain the current level of vehicles with no changes to allocation. In response to the
August 17, 2015 letter and subsequent individual meetings with each company, the
Taxicab Coalition of four companies have proposed reducing the total number of
vehicles to 266 (32 more than staff’s proposal) with a total of 213 FTE vehicles (31 more
than staffs proposal). The recommendation also proposes a distribution of vehicles that
does not take into account market share, but instead proposes essentially a numerically
an equal division of vehicles between companies.
The chart on the next page shows the breakdown recommended by the Taxicab
Coalition.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
15 of 23
Taxicab Coalition Recommendation
Company
Proposed
Full Time
Equivalent
Vehicles
Proposed
Full Time
Vehicle
Permits*
Proposed
Part Time
Vehicle
Permits*
Actual
Proposed
Total
Vehicles
Permitted
Bell Cab 33 15 35 50
ITOA 41 32.5 17.5 50
Metro Cab 48 38 20 58
Taxi! Taxi! 58 58 0 58
Yellow Cab 33 15 35 50
Totals 213 158.5 107.5 266
*Fraction resulted due to the proposal containing percentages instead of actual
numbers. The final numbers would need to be rounded to reflect a whole number.
Taxi! Taxi! - Vehicle Allocation Alternative Proposal
Taxi! Taxi! made several recommendations in its response to the August 17, 2015 letter
and subsequent individual meeting with the company. Taxi! Taxi!’s original request was
to reduce the number of franchisees to two and to reduce the total number of vehicles t o
125 with no distinction between full time and part time vehicles, which is 57 fewer
taxicabs than recommended by staff. The two charts below provide a breakdown of
Taxi! Taxi!’s proposals. The first is based on market share and proposes a total of 125
vehicles; the second is based on performance and proposes a total of 121 vehicles.
Both of Taxi! Taxi!’s proposals assume that the companies would determine how many
vehicles would be full time or part time; however, only Bell would have the ability to
make a vehicle part time. If Council were to choose to adopt Taxi! Taxi!’s proposal to
reduce the number of vehicles to 121 and only grant franchises to Bell Cab and Taxi!
Taxi, since the total number of vehicles would be very low, staff would have no
objections to allowing Bell Cab the flexibility to determine how many vehicles in its fleet
were full time vs. part time. For example, even if Bell Cab opted to make all of its
vehicles full time, the total number of full time vehicles would still be less then staffs
current proposal of 182 full time equivalent vehicles.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
16 of 23
Taxi! Taxi! Proposal – Based on Market Share
Company
Proposed
Full Time
Equivalent
Vehicles
Proposed
Full Time
Vehicle
Permits
Proposed
Part Time
Vehicle
Permits
Actual
Proposed
Total
Vehicles
Permitted
Bell Cab n/a n/a n/a 8
ITOA n/a n/a n/a 8
Metro Cab n/a n/a n/a 26
Taxi! Taxi! n/a n/a n/a 63
Yellow Cab n/a n/a n/a 20
Totals n/a n/a n/a 125
Taxi! Taxi! Proposal – Based on Performance
Company
Proposed
Full Time
Equivalent
Vehicles
Proposed
Full Time
Vehicle
Permits
Proposed
Part Time
Vehicle
Permits
Actual
Proposed
Total
Vehicles
Permitted
Bell Cab n/a n/a n/a 58
ITOA n/a n/a n/a 0
Metro Cab n/a n/a n/a 0
Taxi! Taxi! n/a n/a n/a 63
Yellow Cab n/a n/a n/a 0
Totals n/a n/a n/a 121
Franchise and Permit Fees
Staff is recommending that there be no changes to fees at this time except for vehicle
franchise fees for part time vehicles. Staff recommends that full time vehicle franchise
fees be consistent with the current franchise vehicle fee and that part time vehicles be
reduced to 50% of current vehicle franchise fees. Driver and vehicle permits are based
on cost recovery so these fees are not impacted by the two-year driver permit or part
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
17 of 23
time vehicle permit. Any increase in permitting fees would be adjusted in accordance
with standard CPI increases.
The fee structure is outlined below and the proposed Resolution is provided as
Attachment S.
Franchise Fees:
Annual base franchise fee per taxicab company $5,000
Annual franchise fee per Full Time vehicle in taxicab fleet $1,100
Annual franchise fee per Part Time vehicle in taxicab fleet $ 550 (new)
Vehicle Permit Fees:
New vehicle permit fee $119.86
Transfer vehicle permit fee $119.86
Renewal vehicle permit fee $ 54.58
Replacement vehicle permit fee $ 38.53
Vehicle re-inspection fee $ 29.97
Taxicab Driver’s Permit Fees:
New and renewal taxicab driver’s permit application fee $208.69
Taxicab driver’s permit re-examination fee $ 66.35
Taxicab driver’s permit transfer fee $ 66.35
Taxicab driver’s permit replacement fee $ 29.97
Santa Monica Police Department Live Scan fee* $ 67.00
*Live Scan fee established by the Police Department. Additional fees may be required by the Police
Department if FBI search is required.
Rates
Staff is recommending that no significant changes be made to the existing rate
structure. If Council approves removal of the rate floors by allowing companies to
provide discounts beyond just airport flat rates, no changes are needed at this time
since the companies will have the flexibility to lower rates as needed. By maintaining
the existing maximum rates taxicab companies would not be able to implement price
surging, as TNCs such as Uber has. This provides more predictability for passengers.
A passenger may pay less than the existing rates, however, it would be illegal to charge
more than the base rates. Additionally, the proposed rate schedule would allow the taxi
companies to negotiate different rate s (higher or lower than the set rates) with another
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
18 of 23
entity to provide specialty prearranged transportation services for events, such as
weddings, employee shuttles or carpooling services.
The current rates are outlined in the chart below and the proposed Resolution is
provided as Attachment S.
Mileage Rates
$2.85 flag drop (first 1/9th mile)
$0.30 for each additional 1/9th mile ($2.70 per mile)
$0.30 for each 37 seconds waiting/delay ($29.19 per hour)
Airport Flat Rates
North of I-10 to Los Angeles International Airport $35 maximum
South of I-10 to Los Angeles International Airport $30 maximum
Santa Monica to Bob Hope Airport $75 maximum
Senior and Disabled Discount
Senior citizens (persons age 65 and older) and persons with disabilities (including
persons with a Los Angeles County Transit Operators Association Metro Disabled
Identity Card) receive a ten percent (10%) discount.
Custom Rates
A taxicab company would be able to establish flat rates to any destination;
however, the flat rate may not exceed the maximum that would otherwise be paid
at the mileage rate established by this resolution. A taxicab company would also
be able to set mileage rates, flat rates or other negotiated rates pursuant to an
exclusive arrangement with any business establishment that is for the specific
purpose of providing prearranged transportation services for events with multiple
participants, employee shuttle services, carpooling services, or other
arrangements. These rates must be filed with the City five business days prior to
their implementation.
Driver Working Conditions and Income
The current business model used by the taxicab industry in Los Angeles is based on a
franchise system with the local jurisdiction where companies lease vehicles to individual
drivers. The taxicab company’s revenues are from vehicle leases and other services
provided to the drivers, and in some cases advertising on the vehicles. The taxicab
companies classify the relationship of the driver with the taxicab company as
independent contractor. Lease agreements include language that the driver agrees they
are self-employed and that the companies only provide vehicles and other services to
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
19 of 23
them. Taxicab companies also claim that they are not able to exercise “control” over
drivers because of the independent contractor status, such as directing drivers where
and when to work.
Under the existing system drivers do not have access to statutory benefits including,
unemployment insurance, short-term disability insurance, workers compensation, or
legal protections against discrimination and a minimum wage.
Staff proposes to evaluate potential changes to the taxicab program that would create a
more direct connection between the taxicab companies and fare paying customers, as
well as evaluate structures that could potentially allow companies to be more directly
responsible to market forces instead of City regulations. By being more directly
responsible to the market, it is possible that the City could eliminate the need to set
vehicle limits, since companies would be incentivized by market forces to deploy only
the number of vehicles that the market would support. This approach has the potential
to make taxicab companies more directly responsible for customer service, safety, and
working conditions.
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to research options that would consider
changes to the taxicab franchise program that would make companies more
accountable to market forces rather than City regulations.
In-City Vehicle for Hire Regulations
Staff recommends only minor amendments to address in -city vehicles for hire, including
clarifying the definition of in-city vehicles for hire, prohibiting in-city vehicles for hire from
providing non-passenger delivery services (e.g. food, goods, etc…), and establishing
application approval/denial conditions for in-city vehicles for hire. In-City vehicles for
hire operate only within the City of Santa Monica city limits and are not regulated by the
CPUC. The draft ordinance amending Chapter 6.48 of the SMMC is included as
Attachment K.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
20 of 23
Pedicabs
California Vehicle Code (CVC) 312.5 defines "electric bicycle" as a bicycle equipped
with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts . It establishes
the following three classes of electric bicycles:
1. “Class 1 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a
bicycle equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is
pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the
speed of 20 miles per hour.
2. “Class 2 electric bicycle,” or “low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,” is a
bicycle equipped with a motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle,
and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the
speed of 20 miles per hour.
3. A “class 3 electric bicycle,” or “speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle,” is a bicycle
equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling,
and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28
miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer.
Class 3 electric bicycles are prohibited by the CVC from operating on bicycles paths or
trails. The City has the authority to prohibit, by ordinance, the operation of a class 1 or
class 2 electric bicycle on a bicycle path or trail, equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational
trail within its jurisdiction.
Staff recommends including CVC 312.5 defined electric bicycles as pedicabs to ensure
that any pedicab operator that utilizes a motor to assist the pedicab driver is subject to
all pedicab regulations. Pedicabs are currently prohibited on the beach bike path when
operating for hire due to due to the safety issues related to the size of the pedicab in
relation to the beach bike path.
The draft ordinance amending Chapter 6.50 of the SMMC is included as Attachment K .
Next Steps for Taxicab Program
1. Implement the administrative changes to the taxicab program.
2. Issue administrative rules no later than December 31, 2015.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
21 of 23
3. Monitor changes to the vehicle for hire market, particularly TNCs.
4. Prepare an analysis of driver working conditions and income as it relates to the
current taxicab business model, which relies on lease revenue, as opposed to
fares.
5. Return to Council by March 2017 with a status of the program and recommended
changes to the taxicab franchise program that would make companies more
accountable to market forces rather than City regulations, including the potential
of barring Taxicab companies from using independent contractors as drivers.
Alternatives
1. Extend the franchises, maintaining the existing franchise system as it exists with
no changes to the regulatory scheme or the number of vehicles authorized. This
option would not address concerns related to competition with TNCs or the total
number of vehicles authorized.
2. Extend the franchises, maintaining the existing franchise system with minor
changes to the regulatory scheme, including allowing companies to remove
vehicles from operation at their discretion to allow for flexibility and to remove
price floors, with no changes to the number of vehicles. This option would be
closer to the approach that Long Beach took addressing in a small way concerns
related to competition with TNCs, but would not address the total number of
vehicles authorized.
3. Extend the franchises of only two companies, maintaining the existing franchise
system with minor changes to the regulatory scheme, including allowing
companies to remove vehicles from operation at their discretion to allow for
flexibility and to remove price floors, with no changes to the number of vehicles.
This option addresses in a small way concerns related to competition with TNCS
and would reduce the total number of vehicles authorized.
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
22 of 23
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action as a result of the recommended
action. Staff will return to Council if specific actions are required in the future. Staff
anticipates an ongoing revenue reduction in the amount of $144,389 beginning in FY
2015-16 due to the reduction in the number of authorized vehicles and the reduced
vehicle franchise fees for part time vehicles, and an additional reduction in the amount
of $68,659 in revenue in FY 2016-17 due to the implementation of a two year driver
permit. Revenue changes are included in the FY 2015-16 Adopted Budget and the FY
2016-17 Budget Plan.
Prepared By: Salvador Valles, Assistant Director of PCD
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 2008 Taxicab Study (weblink)
B. Taxicab Franchise Adopted (weblink)
C. Public Hearing & Award of Taxicab Franchises (weblink)
D. Increase of Vehicles to 300 (weblink)
E. Amendments and Clarifications (weblink)
F. Assignment of Taxicab Franchise to All Yello Taxi, Inc., dba Metro Cab (weblink)
G. March 2015 Study Session (weblink)
H. August 2015 Letter to Taxicab Franchises
I. September 2015 Letter from Taxicab Coalition
J. September 2015 Letters from Taxi Taxi with Addendum and Petition
K. Chapters 6 48 6 49 6 50 AMENDMENTS
L. Taxicab Franchise Terms and Conditions BELL CAB AMENDMENTS
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
23 of 23
M. Taxicab Franchise Terms and Conditions ITOA AMENDMENTS
N. Taxicab Franchise Terms and Conditions METRO CAB AMENDMENTS
O. Taxicab Franchise Terms and Conditions TAXI TAXI AMENDMENTS
P. Taxicab Franchise Terms and Conditions YELLOW CAB AMENDMENTS
Q. Taxicab Rules Eff 1-1-2016 DRAFT AMENDMENTS
R. Vehicle Allocation Criteria
S. Taxicabs Fee Resolution final
T. Taxi Presentation - Council November 10, 2015
10.E.f
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Attachment F. Nov 10, 2015 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: November 14, 2017
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 9
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Transportation Planning
Subject: Introduction for First Reading of Ordinances Extending the Taxicab
Franchises of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi Owners’ Association, Metro Cab,
Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab for one year; Extending City Taxi Cab Driver
permit expiration dates to December 31, 2018; and adopting a resolution
setting reduced taxicab driver permit fees
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading the a ttached
ordinances 1) extending the franchises of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi Owners’
Association, Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi!, and Yellow Cab for one year; 2) extending City Taxi
Cab Driver permit expiration dates to December 31, 2018; and 3) adopting a resolution
setting reduced taxicab driver permit fees.
Executive Summary
The City’s taxicab franchise system, established in March 2011 and renewed from time
to time, is currently set to expire on December 31, 2017. The taxi industry has been in
decline in recent years concurrent with the rise of Transportation Network Companies
(TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft across the country. California State Assembly Members
have been proposing revised taxicab regulations during recent sessions in response to
these challenges. The most recent iteration, AB 1069, was signed by the Governor on
October 13, 2017. While some AB 1069 regulations will take effect on January 1, 2018,
the most impactful changes will not take effect until January 1, 2019. Most notably, by
January 1, 2019, taxicab permitting will move from the current patchwork of various
local requirements to a countywide system that only requires taxicab drivers and
companies to obtain a permit in the jurisdictions that they are “substantially located.” A
number of implementation questions remain to be resolved with the new regulations,
including the interpretation of the “substantially located” requirement and which
agencies will assume the role of countywide taxicab regulation. Staff will work with
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2 of 9
surrounding jurisdictions and agencies and provide Council with an update on AB 1069
implementation by July 2018.
In the meantime, staff is recommending 1) a one-year extension of the original five-year
franchise, which expires on December 31, 2017; and 2) extension of all e xisting City
Taxi Cab Driver Permits until the end of 2018. The extensions, through December 31,
2018, will coincide with the implementation of AB1069. Since approval of AB1069 was
unknown at the time of the staff report preparation, staff went through th e process of
seeking input from the taxicab companies regarding the franchise regulations. Staff
received requests from all five taxicab companies to reduce the annual vehicle franchise
fee and eliminate the per vehicle business license fee as well as othe r changes. Given
the pending change to the whole regulatory system, Staff recommends the continuation
of all regulations for the remaining one-year franchise period but requests a reduction in
taxicab driver’s permit application and renewal fees.
Background
On July 28, 2009, the City Council established the taxicab franchise to regulate taxicab
transportation services operated within the City, including practices for licensing the
taxicab businesses, rates, and mandatory controlled substance and alcohol te sting. On
October 12, 2010, the Council granted franchises to five taxicab companies. The
original franchise was granted for five years through December 31, 2015.
On November 24, 2015, Council modified and extended the existing franchise
agreements for two years to December 31, 2017 for all five taxicab companies, and
maintained the number of authorized vehicles at 300. Council granted taxicab
companies the ability to “park” a taxicab, which allows the taxicab company to remove
the vehicle from its insurance plan, saving the company money during slower periods.
On October 10, 2016, Taxi! Taxi! submitted a request to reduce the number of taxicab
vehicles authorized to operate. Section 5(f) of the taxicab franchise agreement allows a
franchisee to request a reduction in the size of their fleet if the “public convenience and
necessity no longer requires Grantee to furnish taxicab services with the number of
vehicles authorized under this franchise”. On October 31, 2016, the four remaining
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3 of 9
taxicab companies, Bell Cab, ITOA, Metro Cab, and Yellow Cab (i.e., the “Taxicab
Coalition”) submitted requests to reduce the number of vehicles. At its December 6,
2016 meeting, the Council approved the taxicab companies’ request and reduced the
number of authorized vehicles from 300 to 199.
Discussion
The taxicab industry has been in a steady decline since the arrival of TNCs, including
Uber and Lyft, in 2012. From 2013 through 2016, taxicab trips in Santa Monica have
declined 68% and the gross revenue of the franchises has declined 54%. It is
estimated by the end of 2017 gross revenue will decline by 64% and total trips by 79%
since 2013. The following chart shows the decline in gross revenue and trips for each
year compared to 2013:
YEAR GROSS REVENUE DOWN SINCE
2013 YEAR TRIPS DOWN SINCE
2013
2013 $14,875,472 2013 750,555
2014 $11,355,224 24% 2014 571,037 24%
2015 $7,897,532 47% 2015 352,614 54%
2016 $6,858,816 54% 2016 238,648 68%
2017* $5,309,870* 64% 2017* 159,130 79%
A total of 199 vehicles have been authorized by Council, and currently 128 vehicles are
dedicated (providing taxicab services only in Santa Monica), of those 9 are ‘parked’ and
removed from service, and 41 provide Access Services. When taxicab vehicles provide
trips through the County’s Access program, they are not available to respond to calls in
the Santa Monica area. In August 2017, 108 (54%) of the 199 authorized vehicles
provided trips in Santa Monica.
STATUS OF AUTHORIZED VEHICLES
Company Authorized
Vehicles
Dedicated
Vehicles
Parked
Vehicles
Access
Vehicles
Vehicles
Providing
Service In
August
Bell Cab 43 3 2 0 25
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4 of 9
ITOA 30 18 0 0 18
Metro Cab 43 43 7 21 10
Taxi Taxi 40 40 0 0 39
Yellow Cab 43 24 0 20 16
TOTAL 199 128 9 41 108
Since 2015, the number of calls for service responded to within 15 minutes for each
taxicab company has not changed significantly even with the reduction of authorized
vehicles and vehicles removed from service by “parking”. Taxicab franchises with
licenses in surrounding cities (Bell, ITOA, and Yellow) continue to have lower response
times than Metro Cab and Taxi! Taxi!. The following chart provides a comparison
between 2015, 2016, and 2017 year to date through August.
AVERAGE PERCENT OF CALLS
REPONDED TO WITHIN 15
MINUTES
JANUARY – AUGUST 2015,
2016 AND 2017
Company 2015 2016 2017
Bell Cab
89% 87% 87%
ITOA
90% 87% 85%
Metro Cab
94% 91% 90%
Taxi! Taxi!
93% 94% 94%
Yellow Cab
83% 80% 74%
Taxi Regulation
The taxicab industry has been hit hard by the emergence of TNCs (Uber and Lyft) as an
alternative in the vehicle for hire transportation market. For the past two years,
California Assembly Member Low has introduced bills to attempt to level the playing
field between taxicabs and TNCs. In 2015, Low introduced Assembly Bill 650 which
attempted to modernize the regulation of taxicab transportation services in order for
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5 of 9
taxicabs to better compete with all for-hire modes of transportation. Governor Brown
vetoed this bill in September 2016.
In February of this year, Low introduced Assembly Bill 1069 to again modernize the
regulation of taxicab transportation services and it was signed by Governor Brown in
October. AB 1069 is effective January 1, 2018, though the bulk of its impactful changes
will not become effective until January 1, 2019. Senate Floor analysis of AB 1069 is
provided. (Attachment A)
Beginning January 1, 2018, taxicab companies and taxicab drivers are required to
collect and report trip data for 12 months in order to determine where taxicab
companies and taxicab drivers are substantially located.
Beginning January 1, 2019, AB 1069 removes the existing broad and relatively
unrestricted taxicab permitting authorities from local jurisdiction. It further requires all
local jurisdictions to permit and regulate taxicab drivers and companies that are
“substantially located” within their jurisdiction. Substantially located is defined as the
jurisdiction “where the primary business address of the company or driver is located” or
“in which trips originating in that jurisdiction account for the largest share of that
company or driver’s total number of trips within [the] county over the past year.”
AB1069 further grants permitting authority to certain joint powers authorities and transit
agencies. These grants of authorities will need further review by staff.
Even after 2019, AB 1069 still allows local jurisdictions to adopt operating requirements
unrelated to permitting or business licensing for taxicab companies and drivers,
regardless of whether such companies and drivers are substantially located within their
jurisdictions. Such authorized operating requirements include limits on the use of taxi
stands or street hails.
Approval of AB1069 was not anticipated given local agency opposition. Staff has begun
to look at what the bill means for Santa Monica’s franchise based on current trip making
patterns. Preliminarily, it appears that Metro Cab and Taxi! Taxi! would be considered
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6 of 9
substantially located within Santa Monica. Other taxicab companies, given their regional
reach, may not be substantially located in Santa Monica.
Staff will continue to analyze the bill, meet with other jurisdictions over the next several
months to determine how this bill will be implemented and its affect on our City’s taxicab
service. Staff will provide an update to Council on AB 1069 by July 2018 and return to
Council with any necessary changes to the taxicab franchise by November 2018.
Taxicab Franchisees – Requests
Since approval of AB1069 was unknown at the time of the staff report preparation, staff
solicited input from the five taxicab companies as part of developing the franchise
extension recommendations. The existing franchisees provided two letters, one
individual letter from TMAT Corp. (dba Taxi! Taxi!) and one joint letter from Bell Cab
Company, Inc., Independent Taxi Owners’ Association, All Yellow Taxi (dba Metro Cab),
and LA Taxi Cooperative (dba Yellow Cab Company) (Attachment B). Below is a
summary of the primary requests and responses. Given the impending substantial
change to taxicab regulation, staff is recommending continuation of current regulations
and practices until the new regulations take effect.
Taxi! Taxi! requests to increase number of authorized vehicles to 63
o Data does not support increasing the number of Taxi! Taxi! authorized
vehicles as trips are continuing to decline.
Cancel Weights and Measures Certificate
o The County of Los Angeles Department of Agricultural
Commissioner/Weights and Measures Bureau is responsible for the
regulation of taximeters. We require that taxicab vehicles have meters
and that the meter be inspected.
Reduce the annual franchise fee per vehicle and cancel the business
license fee;
o Staff recommends maintaining the current regulations and only change
the taxicab driver’s permit application fee in addition to the permit
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7 of 9
renewal fee for the remaining year of the current franchise, until the
impact of the new State legislation is fully evaluated. The cost of the
taxicab driver’s permit (new or renewal) would be reduced from
$112.86 to $48 for 2018.
Cancel printed waybills and use the digital record
o In November 2015, the Taxicab Rules and Regulations were updated.
Each franchisee shall maintain waybills and make them available for
inspection for up to 1 year from the date of the trip.
No monthly reports, only on demand
o Staff recommends that the franchises continue to submit monthly
reports. Timely monthly reports allow staff to analyze data, report
findings, make recommendations and ensure administrative efficiency.
Driver Permits
In November 2015, Council approved a two-year pro-rated taxicab driver permit as
requested by the taxicab companies. Pro-rating the driver permit fees enables drivers to
pay for only the proportion of months remaining in the year at the time of application. All
two year permits expire at the end of the current franchise period on December 2017.
Consistent with the proposed one-year Franchise extensions, Staff recommends
extending the driver permit expiration date to the end of 2018. Staff also recommends
that taxicab driver’s new and renewal permit application fees be reduced to $48 and
prorated monthly based on the number of calendar months remaining until the permit
expires in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.49.070(e). Staff
believes that this reduction is necessary in light of the heavy competition that City
permitted taxi drivers face from Transportation Network Company drivers.
Next Steps for Taxicab Program
1. Work with county jurisdictions on the implementation strategy for AB1069
2. Provide Council with an update regarding implementation of AB1069 before July
2018, and return to Council with any necessary changes to the taxicab franchise
program by or before to November 2018.
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8 of 9
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff anticipates revenues to decrease by approximately $16,410 in Taxi Driver Permit
Fees due to the proposed reduction in permit fees. Staff will include consideration of
budget impact with updates on the implementation of AB1069 during the FY 2018 -19
Exception Based Budget.
Attachments:
A. Senate Floor Analysis of AB 1069
B. Franchisee Requests
C. Bell Cab Ordinance
D. Independent Taxi Ordinance
E. Metro Cab Ordinance
F. Taxi! Taxi! Ordinance
G. Yellow Cab Ordinance
H. Ordinance Modifying SMMC Chapter 6.49
I. Fee Resolution
Prepared By: Cheryl Shavers, Senior Administrative Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Senate Floor Analysis AB 1069
B. Franchisee Requests
C. Bell Cab Ordinance
D. ITOA Ordinance
E. Metro Cab Ordinance
F. Taxi Taxi Ordinance
G. Yellow Cab Ordinance
H. Taxi Permit Ordinance
I. Taxi Fee Resolution
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
9 of 9
J. Powerpoint Presentation
10.E.g
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Attachment G. Nov 14, 2017 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: November 13, 2018
Agenda Item: 7.E
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Transportation Planning
Subject: Introduction for First Reading of Ordinance amending and extending a taxicab
franchise granted to TMAT Corp., dba Taxi! Taxi!
Recommended Action
Introduce for First Reading an Ordinance amending and extending the taxicab franchise
of TMAT Corp., dba Taxi! Taxi!
Executive Summary
Traditional taxi service and the regulations that govern the industry have been
dramatically challenged by the emergence of multiple competitors and changing
consumer choices. Now, as a result of recent changes in State law related to taxi
transportation services, the City updated its local taxicab franchise ordinance. State law
allows a jurisdiction to regulate taxicab companies that meet the state definition of being
“substantially located” in that jurisdiction. Taxi! Taxi! is currently the only taxicab
company that meets this requirement. Staff is recommending that Council modify and
extend Taxi! Taxi!’s current franchise for five years to December 31, 2023. This does
not preclude other companies from seeking a local franchise if they meet the new
standards.
Background
Since the taxicab franchise was established by City Council in June 2009, several
actions regarding the taxicab franchise have been taken given the dramatic changes
affecting the taxi industry. In November 2010, Council granted taxicab franchises to
Bell Cab, Independent Taxi, Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab for five years.
Subsequently, Council granted a 2-year extension in 2015 and a 1-year extension in
2017 to all five taxicab companies. Currently, there are only four companies providing
taxicab transportation services in Santa Monica due to Metro Cab forfeiting their
10.E.h
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2 of 5
franchise in January of this year.
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
June 30, 2009 Introduction and first reading adding Chapter 6.49 to establish
taxicab franchises
November 10, 2010 Introduction and first reading of five ordinances of the City of
Santa Monica granting a taxicab franchise to Bell Cab, Metro
Cab, Independent Taxi, Taxi! Taxi! and Yellow Cab
November 10, 2015 Introduction and first reading of Ordinances extending the taxicab
franchise of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi, Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi!
and Yellow Cab
November 14, 2017 Introduction for first reading of Ordinances extending taxicab
franchises of Bell Cab, Independent Taxi, Metro Cab, Taxi! Taxi!
and Yellow Cab
At its last meeting, the City Council authorized an ordinance amending Chapter 6.49 of
the Santa Monica Municipal Code modifying provisions of the taxicab franchise
regulations in response to State law.
Discussion
The Municipal Code allows the City to grant nonexclusive franchises for the operation of
taxicab services within the City. Newly updated State law substantially limits a city’s
regulatory and permitting authority in order to reduce the regulatory burden on
companies operating in multiple local jurisdictions. Most local regulatory and permitting
requirements now may only apply to those taxicab companies that are substantially
located in the jurisdiction. Substantially located is defined by State law as: a taxicab
company that has a primary business address within the jurisdiction or the total number
of prearranged and non-prearranged trips that originate within that jurisdiction account
for the largest share of the taxicab company’s total number of trips within the county
within the past year. State law continues to allow companies permitted in Los Angeles
10.E.h
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3 of 5
County to service prearranged trips.
Currently, City Franchisees Bell Cab Company, Independent Cab Company, and Yellow
Cab Company are not substantially located within Santa Monica and as such, their
franchises agreements will terminate effective January 1, 2019. These companies are
not substantially located due to their primary business locations and the largest share of
their trips are in other jurisdictions. Bell Cab Company’s offices are located in the city of
Hawthorne. With a fleet of 320 taxicabs, Bell Cab provides trips in the cities of El
Segundo, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Lawndale, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach,
Torrance, Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, West Hollywood and Los Angeles. Independent
Cab Company’s offices are located in Los Angeles. With their fleet of over 400
vehicles, their service area encompasses cities from San Pedro to Granada Hills and
Los Feliz to Malibu, including Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, and West Hollywood. Yellow
Cab Company’s offices are located in Gardena. Their service area includes Bel-Air,
Brentwood, Calabasas, Century City, Hollywood, Inglewood, Pacific Palisades, Century
City, San Fernando, and Los Angeles.
Taxi! Taxi! is currently substantially located in Santa Monica and as such, they are the
only franchisee that continues to qualify for a franchise with the City. In order to
maintain its Taxicab Franchise with the City, Taxi! Taxi! must also provide
documentation, which must be maintained throughout the term of the franchise, of the
following as outlined in the Municipal Code:
1. Taxicab company is substantially located in the City;
2. Established fares, fees, or rates to be charged to customer;
3. Participation in the pull-notice program (regularly check the driving records of all
taxicab drivers);
4. Financial responsibility;
5. A safety and disabled access education and training program;
6. Motor vehicles to be used for taxicab transportation services are in safe
operating condition and have passed inspection by the City;
7. Address of an office or terminal where all documents pertaining to taxicab
transportation services may be inspected by the City; and
10.E.h
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4 of 5
8. Provision of a taxicab driver fingerprint-based criminal history check and
mandatory drug and alcohol testing program.
All of these requirements, with the exception of being substantially located, are part of
the current terms and conditions of Taxi! Taxi!’s franchise ordinance and are monitored
regularly by staff. The major modification to Taxi! Taxi!’s franchise ordinance relates to
the number of vehicles in their taxicab fleet. In the past, City Council authorized the
number of vehicles required in a taxicab company’s fleet. Now, Taxi! Taxi! will be
responsible for determining the number of vehicles in their fleet giving them the flexibility
to modify the number of taxicabs with demand for service.
Taxicab Franchise Fees
Table 1 summarizes the current fees that would be paid by Taxi! Taxi! based on the
current number of permitted vehicles and drivers. As the only franchise holder that will
be able to continue operating in the City on both a non-prearranged basis (i.e., taxi
stands and street hails) and prearranged basis, it is projected that Taxi! Taxi! may need
additional vehicles to meet demand. Table 1 includes a projection of potential fees with
the capacity of drivers and vehicles anticipated to be needed to provide efficient taxicab
service.
Table 1. Taxicab Franchise Fees
Fee Quantity
(current)
Total
(current)
Quantity
(projected)
Total
(projected)
Franchise Fee $5,000 1 $5,000 1 $5,000
Vehicle Fee $452 39 $17,628 50 $22,600
Renew Vehicle Fee $61.62 39 $2,403 50 $3,081
Driver Permit
Renewal Fee
$48 49 $2,352 70 $3,360
TOTAL REVENUE $27,383 $34,041
The current and projected revenue would not recover the full cost of administering the
taxi program. Just one taxicab company will be subject to the fees, resulting in
substantially reduced revenues. While program administration will be reduced,
reductions are not strictly proportional to the number of companies or vehicles because
there is a baseline administration for the program overall. However, increasing fees to
fully recover costs is not recommended at this time. Taxicab services continue to meet
10.E.h
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5 of 5
the needs of specific users, taxicab revenue has been on the decline for the past six
years and the future of the taxicab industry is still uncertain even with new state
regulations.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff anticipates revenues to decrease by approximately $79,860 due to the reduction in
the number of permitted taxicab companies allowed to operate in Santa Monica.
Revenues will be adjusted during FY 2018-19 Mid - Year Review.
Prepared By: Cheryl Shavers, Senior Administrative Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Ordinance - PCD - Taxicab - Taxi Taxi Franchise - First Reading - 11132018
B. Ordinance to Establish Franchise System of Taxicab Operations June 30, 2009
(Web Link)
C. Award of Taxicab Franchises November 2010 (Web Link)
D. First Reading Extending Taxicab Franchises November 10, 2015
E. First Reading Extending Taxicab Franchises November 14, 2017
F. Modification to Taxicab Franchise October 23, 2018
G. Powerpoint Presentation
10.E.h
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Attachment H. Nov 13, 2018 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: July 28, 2020
Agenda Item: 7.B
1 of 9
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Administration
Subject: Introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending Transportation
Demand Management, Preferential Parking, Pedicabs and Bikeshare
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that, to reflect recent operational changes effectuated by the budget
and staffing impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, the City Council:
(1) introduce for first reading the attached ordinance amending Chapter 3.08
Preferential Parking Zones, Chapter 3.20 Bikeshare, Chapter 6.50 Pedicabs, and
Chapter 9.53 Transportation Demand Management; and,
(2) give direction to transition the Taxicab Franchise-based system to a permit-
based system.
Summary
Changes to the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) and transportation procedures
are necessary to align with restructuring of City services adopted by the Council to
respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and its long-term economic impacts. Staff
recommends adoption of the proposed ordinance to implement the most time-sensitive
changes in the areas of Employer Trip Reduction, Preferential Parking, Pedicabs and
Bikeshare programs, as follows:
• SMMC Chapter 9.53—Transportation Demand Management: suspend
requirements, including the Emissions Reduction and Worksite Transportation
plans, for employers of 49 people or fewer; suspend City rideshare program; and
reduce Transportation Management Organization services;
• SMMC Chapter 6.50—Pedicabs: eliminate the requirement for a local pedicab
driver permit and operator permit; retain existing requirements for a business
license, insurance, inspection decal, and pedicab driver and carriage
requirements, and update SMMC to remain in compliance with State law;
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2 of 9
• SMMC Chapter 3.08—Preferential Parking Zones: suspend designation of new
or amended preferential parking zones for a period of 4 years; continue to
implement pre-approved zones and issue and renew permits in existing zones ;
• SMMC Chapter 3.20—Bikeshare: enable a commercial operator to run the City’s
public bike share system in the public-right-of-way.
Staff also seeks direction on pursuing changes to SMMC Chapter 6.49—Taxicabs to
transition the current franchise-based system to a permit-based system and pursue
regional permitting options.
Background
On May 5, 2020, Council considered citywide restructuring necessitated by the
economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. This included reconsideration of
staffing, program funding, and contractual obligations in order to address the projected
budget shortfall. On June 9, 2020, Council considered a draft budget proposal that
identified budget impacts on staff activities and services. On June 23, 2020, Council
approved a citywide budget that established FY20/21 departmental budgets and
finalized staffing and resource changes. The Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC)
includes several transportation-related provisions that require changes to align with the
adopted restructuring.
Discussion
On June 9, 2020, Council received details of how City services and programs are being
restructured to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and its long-term economic impact.
Citywide changes included operational, maintenance and permitting functions that
eliminated internal functional capacity for street striping and signs, engineering,
rideshare, neighborhood traffic calming and grant reporting due to the loss of 16 staff
dedicated to these efforts. Some changes identified in the transportation services and
programs require updates to relevant SMMC sections as identified in this report.
Redline changes to the code sections are provided in Attachment A, the proposed
ordinance.
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3 of 9
1. Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Changes to SMMC Chapter 9.53—Transportation Demand Management, internal
rideshare program, and Transportation Management Organization services.
Santa Monica established its Transportation Demand Management Ordinance (TDM) in
1993, with the goals of proactively reducing congestion, reducing automobile
dependence, improving air quality and enhancing transportation choices. It is modeled
closely after Rule 2202 administered by the South Coast Air Quality Management
District. The TDM Ordinance requires employers of a certain size to submit either a
Worksite Transportation Plan or an Emission Reduction Plan. Contents of a Worksite
Transportation Plan include estimations of transportation mode choices for staff, on-site
information requirements, and a signed letter from management demonstrating
commitment to reducing drive alone trips to and from the worksite. The Emission
Reduction Plan, more robust in nature, requires an employer to survey employees
about how they arrived and departed work over a 5-day period, calculate Average
Vehicle Ridership (AVR), and reach a designated target AVR based on worksite
location. Employers completing an Emission Reduction Plan who do not reach their
AVR target either create a plan describing how over the course of the next year they will
reduce the number of drive alone trips to the worksite or purchase mobile source
emission reduction credits from a verified vendor. In past years, staff supported
businesses through this program with annual commuter resources and non -auto
commuting guidance, facilitating collaboration among businesses for carpool, vanpool
and parking, and more recently some problem-solving for commuter and customer
access needs following COVID-19.
City restructuring has impacted the ability to continue regulating this many employers
and providing these additional support resources. In 2016, Santa Monica amended the
TDM Ordinance by increasing AVR targets citywide and increasing the applicability of
the greater requirements of the Emission Reduction Plan to business of 30 employees
or more (instead of 50+). Staff is proposing to update SMMC Chapter 9.53 to return to
pre-2016 thresholds that apply the ERP requirements only to employers with 50 or more
employees. Additionally, staff is proposing to suspend Worksite Transportation
Requirements entirely. The proposed updates would suspend these requirements until
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4 of 9
September 2024 or until restoration of program resources. The changes do not affect
procedures for employers with 50 or more employees or developers.
As an employer, the City is subject to employee trip reduction requirements from
AQMD, and as a facilities builder (such as City Hall East) is subject to lo cal TDM
requirements for developers. Restructuring reduces the capacity of our internal
programs and includes the suspension of the City’s internal employee trip reduction
program (in compliance with any requirements imposed by labor group MOUs) including
incentives for transit, vanpool, carpool, etc. until resources are available. Additionally,
restructuring resulted in a reduction of the Transportation Management Organization
(TMO) contract from $250,000 to $195,000 for FY20/21, with half of the remaining
contract funded by development agreement contributions. The TMO supports medium
and large employers through the provision of transportation solutions, encouraging
green commuting and teleworking, and improving worksite access.
2. Pedicabs
Changes to SMMC Chapter 6.50—Pedicabs, which eliminate the requirement for a local
pedicab driver permit and operator permit. The changes retain requirements for a
business license, insurance, inspection decal, and pedicab driver and carriage
requirements in compliance with State law.
Santa Monica adopted pedicab regulations in 2013 which were informed by a year-long
pilot program in 1998. Current SMMC regulations require a pedicab driver permit,
operator permit, pedicab inspection decal, business license, and outline operating
requirements such as minimum driver age, driver’s license, pedicab cleanliness and
safe operations. Detailed Administrative Regulations were issued in 2013 to accompany
Section 6.50. Local rules also require each driver to successfully complete a pedicab
driver class. In 2015, the State established California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section
21215 regulating the safe operation of pedicabs and establishing insurance, annual
incident reporting, routing and loading/unloading requirements.
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5 of 9
City restructuring has impacted the ability to continue the local permitting of drivers and
operators. CVC 21215 has filled the prior gap in safety provisions and operating
expectations, but still requires local agencies to inspect pedicabs annually. Staff is
proposing to update the SMMC to retain language regarding pedicab vehicle equipment
standards and driver qualifications, update to align with State regulations, and to
continue requiring annual inspections for a fee. The proposed update would eliminate
the requirement for local permitting and classes until there is a restoration of resources
for this program.
The Business License Unit would continue business license processing and insurance
verification, pedicab rules would be enforced by Code Enforcement staff, and “rules of
the road” would be enforced by the Police Department as they do today.
3. Taxicabs
Direction to pursue changes to SMMC Chapter 6.49—Taxicabs to transition the current
Franchise program to a permit program and seek regional permitting options.
Santa Monica has the authority to regulate for-hire vehicles within the city. In June
2009, Council adopted an ordinance establishing a franchise-based system for the
regulation of taxicabs. The franchise was initially established to address an oversupply
of taxis in the market and operating standards. In November 2010, Council approved
franchise agreements with five companies, which operated with extensions for
approximately eight years. In 2018, Council approved simplified taxicab permitting in
compliance with California State law (AB1069) and approved a franchise with one
company that is substantially located in Santa Monica: TMAT Corp., dba. Taxi! Taxi!.
AB1069 was passed in response to the market challenges created by Transportation
Network Companies (TNCs, such as Uber and Lyft), and reduced local regulation to
those taxicab companies which are “substantially located” in the jurisdiction. AB1069
also enables a regional or other agency to perform the permitting function on behalf of
local agencies. Staff has been in regular communication with cities throughout the
region to explore regional permitting function and best practices for local regulation.
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6 of 9
Some cities are transitioning their franchise systems to permit systems including the
City of Los Angeles. Franchise systems are time consuming to create, and once created
are closed to new providers and are difficult to update. The permit system would allow
for more flexibility and openness to new customer services, while still enabling
requirements for accessibility, fare maximums and other core benefits of the franchise
system. A permit system does eliminate a franchise holder’s right to a market area, but
this exclusivity was already undone by recent state law that allowed any company to
serve a “pre-arranged” trip in the city. Once Los Angeles’ permitting system is
operational, they may be able to facilitate permitting on our behalf through a
Memorandum of Understanding or other agreement.
In light of Santa Monica’s restructuring that resulted in the elimination of staff resources
for this program, and the changing market dynamics of taxicab services which has
eliminated the concern regarding oversupply, staff recommends that Santa Monica
move toward a regional permitting solution, and initiate those steps in coordination with
the local franchise company. The current franchise agreement with Taxi! Taxi! has a
termination date of December 31, 2023 or earlier at the discretion of the City. A regional
permit system does not yet exist, and as one become s available staff would pursue it in
coordination with Taxi! Taxi! This does not preclude the City from establishing a local
permitting solution for taxicabs and similar transportation providers with a future
restoration.
4. Residential Preferential Parking Program
Changes to SMMC Chapter 3.08—Preferential Parking Zones to suspend designation
of new or amended preferential parking zones for a period of four years, or until
restoration of staff resources. These changes do not affect the ability to obtain and
renew permits in existing zones or the implementation of pre-approved zones.
Currently, the City’s residential streets are largely blanketed by residential preferential
parking zones that are already implemented or pre-approved. City staff answer
hundreds of calls and emails each year regarding changes to preferential parking,
collect parking occupancy data, assist with resident notifications, host community
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7 of 9
meetings, and prepare analyses to support amendments to the preferential parking
program. Restructuring has eliminated staff resources to process changes to the
preferential parking program, requiring the suspension of new or amended residential
preferential parking zones for an estimated period of four years (until September 2024)
or until restoration of the program. Zones that have been pre-approved by Council and
in which residents are able to independently collect the required signatures will continue
to be implemented during this period. Suspend interdepartmental coordination toward
implementation of the unbundled parking Section 9.28.110 .A.1 which will result in the
continued ability of residents of new mixed-use projects in commercial zones to have
access to preferential parking district permits.
This change would be incorporated into SMMC 3.08.080:
3.08.080 – Suspension on the designation of new or amendment of existing
zones. No new zones will be designated, nor any existing zones amended, during the
period of September 24, 2020 through September 24, 2024. Zones that have been pre-
approved will continue to be implemented during this period, and qualified petitions
received by September 24, 2020 will be processed.
Applications received before the effective date of the ordinance amendment would also
continue to be processed including:
• Petitions to reduce existing restrictions on Hill Street between 21st and 23rd
streets and 25th Street between Idaho and Washington avenues
• Petitions to amend existing regulations from blocks in the vicinity of Harvard
Street and Wilshire Boulevard, including but not limited to: Harvard Street
between Washington and Arizona avenues and Princeton Street between
Wilshire Boulevard and Arizona Avenue
• Application for California Coastal Commission approval of the expansion of Zone
F, which Council approved on February 25, 2020
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8 of 9
5. Bikeshare
Changes to SMMC Chapter 3.20 which enables public bike share other than the City’s
designated operator.
SMMC Chapter 3.20 was adopted just prior to the introduction of the City’s Breeze bike
share system in 2015. This section created enabling language for a public bike share
system operated by the City to function in the public right-of-way. As part of direction to
continue piloting shared mobility services, Council directed staff to investigate options
for public bike share that could deliver the affordability, reliability, equity and outreach
elements of the Breeze program but be operated by a private commercial entity. Staff
recently released a request for information regarding the potential for a private operator
to achieve these public outcomes. This minor update to Chap ter 3.20 would enable a
private commercial entity to operate a public bike share system in the public right-of-
way, that meets the aforementioned criteria, should an operator be identified in the
future.
Next Steps
Upon first reading, the amended ordinance will return to Council for a second
reading/adoption and take effect 30 days after adoption. Affected businesses will be
notified of the reduced or adjusted regulations as their permits and approvals come up
for renewal. If directed to pursue a taxicab permit-based system, staff will work with the
City Attorney’s office and regional agencies to define process, procedures, and timeline.
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
9 of 9
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended actions. The financial impacts were previously discussed during the May
5, May 26, and June 23, 2020 Council budget sessions and included in the FY 2020-21
Adopted Budget.
Prepared by: Francie Stefan, Assistant Director/Chief Mobility Officer
Attachments
A. Ordinance amending SMMC Chapters 3.08 Preferential Parking, 3.20 Bikeshare,
6.50 Pedicabs, and 9.53 Transportation Demand Management
Prepared By: Francie Stefan, Assistant Director/Chief Mobility Officer
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Proposed Ordinance
10.E.i
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Attachment I. July 28, 2020 Staff Report (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
1
City Council Meeting: September 12, 2023 Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CHAPTER 6.49 TO TRANSITION TAXICAB
REGULATIONS FROM A FRANCHISE-BASED SYSTEM TO A PERMIT-BASED
SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica’s (“City”) taxicab franchise was established
by Council in June 2009 due to the influx of the number of taxicabs within the City and
complaints pertaining to poor customer service from drivers; confusing and high fees; lack
of discounted services for seniors and residents with disabilities; and “bandit” taxis; and
WHEREAS, the City’s one existing franchise with a taxicab company expires on
December 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, with the changing nature of the taxicab industry due in part to the rise
in the use of Transportation Network Companies (“TNCs”) for ride -hailing services, staff
recommends that the City shift from a franchise program for regulating taxicabs to a
system that is permit-based.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 6.49 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby
amended as follows:
6.49.010 Definitions.
For the purposes of this Chapter certain words and phrases are defined and certain
provisions shall be construed as herein set forth, unless it is apparent from the context
that a different meaning is intended.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
2
(a) Stand. “Stand” means a place designated by the City Engineer for use by any
taxicab permitted hereunder by the City while awaiting employment .
(ba) Taxicab. “Taxicab” means every automobile and motor-propelled vehicle
which is not otherwise licensed by the California Public Utilities Commission, is designed
to carry not more than eight persons, excluding the driver, is not otherwise required by
State Law to have all trips prearranged, and is used for the transportation of passengers
for hire within and without the boundaries of the City, at rates for distance traveled, or for
waiting, standby or traffic delay time, or for any combination of such rates, and not
operating over a defined route.
(cb) Taxicab Franchisee Company Permittee or Franchisee Permittee. “Taxicab
Franchisee company permittee” or “franchisee company permittee” means any person,
firm, corporation, or other entity, however organized, including the management and
officers thereunder, that is substantially located in and has been granted a franchise
permit by the City to provide taxicab transportation services.
(dc) Taxicab Driver. “Taxicab driver” means a driver who works for a taxicab
franchisee company permittee or is a self-employed, independent taxicab franchisee
company permittee, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(d) Taximeter. “Taximeter” means any d evice or technology that automatically
calculates a predetermined rate or rates for taxicab services and indicates the charge for
the hire of a taxicab, including Internet, web, or other network -based applications.
Taximeters may use global position system metering and also facilitate flat rates or
promotional rates.
6.49.020 Authority of designated employees of the Police Department to have
access to summary criminal history information.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
3
Police Department employees assigned to or having responsibility for permitting
and licensing pursuant to this Chapter shall have the authority to obtain State and local
summary criminal history information pursuant to Sections 11105(b)(11) and
13300(b)(11) of the California Penal Code.
6.49.030 Taxicab franchise company permit—Grant application for of franchise
permit.
(a) Prior to commencing the operation of taxicab services within the City, a taxicab
company shall apply for and obtain a permit in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter. may grant nonexclusive franchises in accordance with Article XVI of the Charter
of the City for the operation of taxicab services within the City. In order for a taxicab
company to be eligible for a franchise grant permit, the taxicab company must provide
documentation of the following consistent with applicable State law, this Chapter, and the
City’s requirements: (1) the taxicab company is substantially located in the City; (2)
established fares, fees, or rates to be charged to the customer; (3) participation in the
pull-notice program; (4) financial responsibility; (5) a safety and disabled access
education and training program; (6) the motor vehicles to be used for taxicab
transportation services are in safe operating condition and have passed inspection by the
City; (7) the address of an office or terminal where all documents pertaining to taxicab
transportation services may be inspected by the City; and (8) provision of a taxicab driver
fingerprint-based criminal history check and a mandatory drug and alcohol testing
program.
(b) Taxicabs may be driven pursuant to a contract, agreement, or understanding
between the franchisee taxicab company permittee and the driver. Such contract,
agreement, or understanding shall not relieve the franchisee taxi company permittee from
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
4
full and complete compliance with the applicable provisions of the Code, rules and
regulations adopted pursuant to this Chapter, and the franchise ordinance.
6.49.040 Taxicab franchise company permit —Suspension or revocation.
(a) Suspension. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard,
suspend a taxicab franchisee’s company’s operations for one or more days if, in the
judgment of the City, a lapse in required insurance or any other violation of the terms and
conditions of the franchise ordinance or the provisions of this Chapter; or a violation of
any administrative rules and regulations established by the City, orders or directives
established by the City, or applicable State law, creates an immediate safety hazard.
Cause for suspension also exists where the holder of a majority interest in the taxicab
franchise company or the taxicab franchisee company permittee illegally conducts any
type of vehicle for hire or public transportation operation licensed by the City or any other
governmental agency, or the franchisee permittee fails to pay any monetary penalties in
accordance with this Chapter, the terms and conditions of the franchise, or any
resolutions or schedules adopted thereto.
(b) Revocation. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard,
revoke a franchise permit in the event that the franchisee permittee, including its
employees, officers, agents and drivers: violates any terms and conditions of the
franchise ordinance this Chapter; fails to cure any default within the time required as
provided in the franchise ordinance; violates subsection (d) of this Section; violates or
commits multiple violations of any provision of this Chapter or any other law, rule,
regulation, order or filings of any regulatory body having jurisdiction over the franchisee
permittee; or practices, or attempts to practice, any fraud or deceit upon any
governmental agency or regulatory body.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
5
(c) The franchisee permittee may appeal any decision from the City to suspend or
revoke to a Hearing Examiner for consideration pursuant to this Section. The matter will
be set for a hearing and the City shall give the franchisee permittee at least thirty days’
written notice of the time and place of the hearing. At the hearing, the Hearing Examiner
shall consider all relevant evidence and testimony and if supported by a preponderance
of the evidence, the Hearing Examiner may, in his or her discretion, order the franchisee
permittee to take remedial actions or impose any other remedy as authorized by law,
including, but not limited to, suspension for a designated period of time; or revocation of
the franchise permit. The decision or order of the Hearing Examiner shall be final and
binding and subject only to judicial review.
(d) Effect of Suspension or Revocation. Upon suspension or revocation of a
franchise permit, all the franchisee’s company permittee’s taxicab operations in the City
shall cease until such time as the suspension or revocation is lifted. Upon revocation of
any taxicab franchise permit, no franchise permit to operate the same business activity
shall be granted to the franchisee permit within the remainder of the term or extension
term of the franchise ordinance and for a period of three years thereafter.
6.49.050 Taxicab franchise company permit —Driver’s permit.
(a) Application. In order to obtain a taxicab driver’s permit, each person shall file
with the City, upon forms supplied by the City, a completed verified application including
the following information and documentation:
(1) Name, address, and age of applicant;
(2) Convictions, if any, in any court of law;
(3) Name, address, and certification of the taxicab franchisee company permittee
by whom the applicant is to be employed as a taxicab driver in the City;
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
6
(4) Proof of a valid California driver’s license;
(5) A signed agreement to submit to a background investigation and fingerprinting
via LiveScan capture by the Police Department;
(6) Original test results from a certified laboratory or testing agency, submitted
simultaneously with the applicant’s verified application, proving that the applicant has
tested negative for drugs and alcohol as provided by Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the
California Government Code; and
(7) Such further information as the City may require, as established by the rules
and regulations.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Applicant Investigation. The Police Department shall
investigate each applicant for a taxicab driver’s permit and shall approve the application
or state its reason for disapproval. The City may disapprove any applicant who has a
record of criminal conduct or other behavior involving any of the following:
(1) Moral turpitude;
(2) Violence toward persons or property;
(3) Physical or mental disease which could make the applicant a danger to the
safety of others;
(4) Illegal sexual conduct involving another nonconsenting person;
(5) Negligent or reckless driving;
(6) Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
(7) Three or more moving violations under the California Vehicle C ode within the
12-month period preceding the date of the application;
(8) Existing suspension or revocation of a taxicab driver’s permit in any other
jurisdiction as of the date of the application;
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
7
(9) Conviction of operating a taxicab without a valid ta xicab driver’s permit or
taxicab vehicle permit within the three -year period preceding the date of the application;
or
(10) Acts showing the applicant to be otherwise incompetent or not fit to drive a
taxicab.
(c) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Issuance. Based on the application, investigation and
compliance with all requirements of Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government
Code, the City shall approve or deny the taxicab driver’s permit. No taxicab driver’s permit
shall be issued if the applicant is und er the age of eighteen years, if any false statement
appears in the application, or if the application is otherwise incomplete. Upon approval of
an application and receipt by the City of the taxicab driver’s permit fee, the City shall issue
a taxicab driver’s permit to the applicant. The taxicab driver’s permit shall bear the name
and photograph of the applicant, date of expiration of the taxicab driver’s permit, and
name of the taxicab franchisee company permittee for which the driver is authorized to
drive a taxicab.
(d) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Renewal. A taxicab driver’s permit which has not been
revoked, suspended, or terminated may be renewed annually by paying the annual
taxicab driver’s permit fee and by filing with the City a verification that the d river is in
compliance with the provisions of this Section and test results from a certified laboratory
or testing agency proving that the driver has tested negative for drugs and alcohol as
provided by Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government Co de and U.S.
Department of Transportation program guidelines set forth in 49 CFR Parts 40, 653, and
654, and any other applicable regulations.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
8
(e) Effect of Termination of Employment. The taxicab driver’s permit shall become
void upon termination of employment, at which time the taxicab franchisee company
permittee shall immediately give the City written notice of the termination and the
terminated driver shall immediately return his or her their taxicab driver’s permit to the
City.
(f) Prohibition on Transfers. A taxicab driver’s permit is personal in nature and
shall not be transferred to another person. Any purported transfer shall be null and void.
(g) Grounds for Suspension and Revocation. Any taxicab driver’s permit and any
taxicab vehicle permit may be suspended or revoked, after due notice and an opportunity
to be heard, for any of the following reasons:
(1) Arrest or citation for the commission of any crime while driving a taxicab or any
crime involving moral turpitude;
(2) Violation of any applicable rule or regulation, or Federal, State or local law
relating to the operation of taxicabs by a driver, or by an employer in the case of a taxicab
vehicle permit;
(3) Use of the taxicab driver’s permit for a purpose different from that for which it
was issued;
(4) Suspension or revocation of the driver or franchisee’s taxicab company
permittee’s taxicab driver’s permit or taxicab vehicle permit in another jurisdiction; and
(5) The existence of any facts, including conviction of a crime that is substa ntially
related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a taxicab driver, which would have been
good cause to deny such taxicab driver’s permit application, regardless of when such
facts arose.
6.49.060 Taxicab franchise permit —Fees.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
9
(a) Annual Franchise Taxicab Company Permit Fee. Each taxicab franchisee
company permittee shall pay to the City an annual fee, established by resolution of the
City Council, to cover the City’s costs of administering taxicab transportation services in
the City. Such payment shall be in addition to any other prescribed fees, including but not
limited to, business license and permit fees. The franchise taxicab company permit fee
shall be due, without set off or deduction, upon grant issuance of the franchise taxicab
company permit and payable on each anniversary date thereafter, unless otherwise as
specified in the franchise ordinance. Failure to pay the full franchise taxicab company fee
when due shall be cause for revocation of the franchise taxicab company permit.
(b) Annual Taxicab Vehicle Permit Fee. Each taxicab franchisee company
permittee shall be required annually to obtain a taxicab vehicle permit and to pay to the
City an annual taxicab vehicle permit fee, established by resolution of the City Council,
for each taxicab operating under its franchise taxicab company permit.
(c) Annual Taxicab Driver’s Permit Fee. Each taxicab driver shall be required
annually to renew his or her taxicab driver’s permit and the franchisee taxicab permittee
or driver shall pay to the City an annual taxicab driver’s permit fee, established by
resolution of the City Council.
(d) No fee refunds shall be issued to any franchisee taxicab company permittee
upon revocation of a franchise, or to any driver upon revocation of a taxicab driver’s
permit.
6.49.070 Taxicab franchise company permittee —Signage.
Taxicab franchisees company permittees and taxicab drivers shall ensure that
taxicabs display the following signage:
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
10
(a) Two cards not less than two inches by four inches nor more than two and one -
half inches by five inches, in both the front seat and the rear seat in full view of
passengers, which state the following in letters and numbers which are clearly legible and
in the following format:
(1) On the first card: the name, address and telephone number of the taxicab
franchisee which operates the taxicab and all rates to be charged; and
(2) On the second card: “COMPLAINTS? Call the City of Santa Monica’s Hotline,”
followed by the City’s hotline telephone number.
(b) Every taxicab shall have printed upon it, in lettering and numbering not less
than two and one-fourth inches in height and five-sixteenths of an inch wide, the cab
number and the name and telephone number of the taxicab franchisee company
permittee which operates the taxicab. The telephone number and the cab number shall
also be printed in a plainly visible manner upon the rear of such vehicle.
(c) Every taxicab may have an electrically lighted identification or vacant sign, or
a combination of both, attached to the top of such taxicab, which shall be not more than
two and one-half inches high by nine inches in length.
(d) No taxicab shall display any sign other than those authorized in this Chapter.
6.49.080 Taxicab franchise company permit —Identification decal required.
(a) Each taxicab operated pursuant to a franchise permit shall be identified as a
City of Santa Monica authorized taxicab by a taxicab identification decal issued by the
City. No person shall identify any vehicle by means of such taxicab identification decal,
or any facsimile thereof, unless authorized to do so by the City in writing.
(b) Every taxicab driver and franchisee permittee shall ensure that a taxicab
identification decal is displayed in each taxicab at all times. Such decal shall be issued
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
11
and affixed by the City to a specific area on the assigned ta xicab as designated by the
City.
(c) No taxicab driver or franchisee taxicab company permittee shall operate a
taxicab without a current taxicab identification decal for that specific vehicle.
(d) No taxicab identification decal issued shall be in any ma nner transferred or
assigned. Any decal that is transferred, assigned, or otherwise conveyed or stolen shall
be automatically revoked.
(e) No applicant may be issued a taxicab identification decal until that applicant
has paid all applicable fees and all of his, her or its outstanding parking citations, including
all civil penalties and related fees.
6.49.090 Taximeters and rates.
(a) No taxicab shall be operated within the City unless it is equipped with a
taximeter that is approved by the California Division of Measurement Standards and
complies with Section 12500.5 of the California Business and Professions Code and with
all regulations established pursuant to Section 12107 of the California Business and
Professions Code.
(b) Taximeters are subject to inspection at any time by any police officer of the
City or any other authorized inspector, including the California Department of Agriculture
Commissioner/Weights and Measures. Any vehicle equipped with an inaccurate
taximeter is subject to impound until said taximeter shall have been correctly adjusted,
inspected, and certified by the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner/Weights
and Measures.
(c) Taximeters shall be placed so that the reading dial displaying the amount to
be charged is readily discernible by passengers.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
12
(d) All rates to be charged for transportation by taxicabs pursuant to a franchise
permit, including both flat and mileage rates, may not exceed the maximum rates
established by resolution of City Council. No franchisee permittee shall charge, collect,
demand, receive, or arrange for any compensation for taxicab service in an amount that
exceeds said maximum rates.
(e) Each taxicab company and taxicab driver shall disclose all rates to the
customer before providing taxicab services.
(f) Except where a flat rate is applicable, it is unlawful for a taxicab driver to do
any of the following:
(1) Set the taximeter in operation when such vehicle is not actually hired;
(2) Fail to set the taximeter to a nonrecording po sition at the termination of each
and every service or call the attention of the passenger to the amount registered;
(3) Fail to activate the taximeter while carrying passengers or under hire; or
(4) Activate or operate the taximeter so as to denote a ra te of fare exceeding that
authorized pursuant to this Chapter or by the permitting governmental agency.
(g) No driver of any taxicab upon receiving payment of a fare thereon shall refuse
to give a receipt upon the request of any passenger making said payment.
(h) It shall be unlawful to charge a discounted or flat rate other than that which has
been advertised or agreed to in advance with the passenger. (Added by Ord. No.
2590CCS, adopted 11/13/18)
6.49.100 Intentionally Left Blank Parking of vehicles—Stands.
(a) No franchisee or driver shall permit any taxicab to stand while awaiting
employment at any place other than a stand designated by the City Traffic Engineer.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
13
(b) No taxicab driver shall leave a vehicle unattended in a stand for a period of
time longer than three minutes.
(c) Stands may be occupied at any time, except when standing, stopping or
parking at a particular stand is otherwise prohibited by law.
(d) Taxicab drivers may not stop in bus zones for purposes of loading or unloading
passengers unless there is no other practicable location to safely and expediently load or
unload such passengers.
(e) No person shall occupy a stand without a valid taxicab driver’s permit and
vehicle permit issued by the City pursuant to a franchise.
6.49.110 Taxicab identification and vehicle operating requirements.
(a) No taxicab company shall operate any taxicab without a distinctive and uniform
color scheme or identification which designates the taxicab company under which said
vehicle is operated.
(b) No taxicab company shall use any color scheme, insignia, name, monogram,
logo, or identification that conflicts with or imitates any color scheme, insignia, name,
monogram, logo, or identification used by another taxicab company in such a manner as
to be misleading or to tend to confuse or defraud the public.
(c) Every taxicab company and taxicab driver shall comply with the following
operating requirements at all times:
(1) Maintain and keep an accurate and legible record of all passengers carried,
including the pickup and drop off points, the date and time carried, the starting and ending
mileage of the taxicab for each trip, and the charges authorized and made for each trip;
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
14
(2) Display inside the taxicab and in full view of passengers, a valid ta xicab driver’s
permit bearing the name and photograph of the taxicab driver and identifying the name
of the taxicab company under which such taxicab is operated;
(3) Maintain in each taxicab a working two-way communication system with a
dispatcher;
(4) Obtain an annual vehicle inspection of each taxicab at a facility certified by the
National Institute for Automotive Service or a facility registered with the Bureau of
Automotive Repair; and
(5) Permit any police officer of the City or other authorized en forcement officer
enforcing this Chapter to inspect any taxicab upon request.
6.49.120 Full use of taxicab.
When a taxicab is engaged the occupant or occupants shall have the exclusive
right to the full and free use of the passenger compartment and no own er or driver of said
taxicab shall solicit or carry additional passengers therein without soliciting and receiving
the consent of the occupant or occupants. Nothing in this provision is intended to restrict
any taxicab company from offering carpooling or ride sharing services.
6.49.130 Access to passengers on business establishment premises; exclusive
arrangements limited.
(a) No owner, operator, employee or agent of any hotel or any other business
establishment shall exclude any permitted taxicab driver operating pursuant to a franchise
granted by the City from standing or picking up passengers at any taxicab stand, hack
stand, or other location where taxicabs or other vehicles for hire are regularly allowed to
stand and pick up passengers on the premises of the hotel or other business
establishment.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
15
(b) Each taxicab franchisee company permittee is prohibited from entering into
any taxicab service arrangements or agreements for compensation with any hotel, motel,
or other business establishments, or any public or private agency or organization in the
City for the purpose of obtaining exclusive access to the business’ patrons seeking on
demand taxicab services. Each franchisee taxicab company permittee shall ensure that
none of its members or taxicab drivers enters into any such taxicab service arrangements
or agreements for compensation with any hotel, motel or other business establishments,
or any public or private agency or organization in the City. Nothing in this Section prohibits
exclusive arrangements with any business establishment for the purpose of providing pre -
arranged transportation services for events with multiple participants, employee shuttle
services, carpooling services, or other arrangement approved in advance by the City to
the extent consistent with the requirements of this Chapter.
6.49.140 Unauthorized taxicab services prohibited; exception .
(a) No person shall knowingly dispatch a vehicle or respond to a request for a
“taxi,” “cab” or “taxicab” for pick-up within the City, or pick up passengers within the City
for taxicab services, unless the vehicle has a valid taxicab vehicle permit, the driver of
such vehicle has a valid taxicab driver’s permit, and the taxicab is operated pursuant to a
franchise granted by the City this Chapter.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) above, a taxicab company or taxicab driver that
is lawfully permitted by a governmental agency to operate in Los Angeles County may
provide prearranged trips anywhere within the City.
(c) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall publish, advertise
or broadcast in any manner, written or oral, a telephone number, website address, or
other identifier, either by itself or connected to a rotary, redirect, or call forwarding system
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
16
for taxicab service, which is the same telephone number, website address, or other
identifier, as that for other taxicabs or vehicles for hire.
(d) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall use a name that
imitates a name used by another person who drives or ope rates a taxicab in such a
manner as to be misleading or tend to confuse or defraud the public.
(e) No person shall advertise or otherwise hold itself out as providing taxicab
services within the City, unless such person is operating pursuant to a taxicab franchise
company permit granted by the City or is lawfully permitted by a governmental agency to
provide prearranged trips in the City.
6.49.150 Rules and regulations.
The Director of Planning and Community Development Transportation or designee
is authorized to adopt administrative rules and regulations consistent with this Code and
applicable State law necessary to implement this Chapter. and the franchise ordinances.
Such rules and regulations may include, but are not limited to, p rovisions: governing
taxicab service and safety; prescribing limitations, conditions and qualifications of
applicants for vehicle permits and driver permits; stipulating the responsibilities of taxicab
franchisees company permittees and their drivers; and pertaining to public health, safety,
and welfare. Violations of the administrative rules and regulations adopted pursuant to
this section shall constitute violations of this Chapter, and shall subject the violator to the
penalties set forth in this Chapter.
6.49.160 Penalty for violation.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, any person violating any
provision of this Chapter shall be guilty of either: (1) an infraction, which shall be
punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars for the first violation, two hundred dollars for
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
17
a second violation within one year, and five hundred dollars for a third and subsequent
violations within one year; or (2) a misdemeanor, which shall be punishable by a fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars per violation, or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a
period not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Where the
violation is of a continuing nature, each day that the violation continues constitutes a
separate and distinct violation.
(b) Any police officer and other persons authorized by the City to enforce this
Chapter are authorized under Sections 53075.6 and 53075.61 of the California
Government Code, Section 5411.5 of the California Public Utilities Code, Section 21100.4
of the California Vehicle Code and any other applicable State law, to impound and retain
any vehicle operating within the City as a taxicab without having any valid permits , and/or
a franchise granted issued by the City to operate a taxicab service, in violation of this
Chapter.
(c) Every person who operates a taxicab and who knowingly and willfully issues,
publishes or affixes, or causes or permits to be issued, published or affixed, any oral or
written advertisement, broadcast or holding out to the public or any porti on thereof, in any
manner whatsoever, that the person operates a taxicab company or an individual taxicab
without having any valid permits is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(d) Any person who, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard in accordance
with the provisions of Chapter 6.16, is found to have been operating a taxicab service
within the City without any valid permits may in the City’s discretion be required to pay a
fine of not less than five thousand dollars for each violation, plus any assessment s and
interest as authorized by law, as set forth by resolution of the City Council.
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
18
(e) The remedies specified in this Section are cumulative and their specification
shall not preclude the use of any other remedy provided by law.
6.49.170 Penalties for violations of rules and regulations .
Any person who violates a rule or regulation adopted pursuant to Section
6.49.020 this Chapter may be subject to an administrative citation pursuant to Chapter
1.09 of this Code. A taxicab company shall be responsible for the violation of a rule or
regulation by a taxicab driver operating under that company, and shall be deemed a
responsible party within the meaning of Section 1.09.020 of this Code.
SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices
thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such
inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to
effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed
this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance
would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty
days after adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code
19
_________________________
DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney
10.E.j
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: 6.49 Taxicab Permit Ordinance 09.12.2023 (5822 : First Reading of proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code