JIM GIBBONS

Governor

GORDON L. WALKER Administrator STACIE TRUESDELL MICHAELS, ESQ. Chairman

DIANNE CORNWALL
Director

STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY

SUSAN CARRASCO, ESQ. Vice chairman Members DR. EDWARD E. GOLDMAN CAROLYN M. SPARKS ROBERT FORBUSS

TAXICAB AUTHORITY
1785 E. Sahara Avenue, Suite 200 Las Vegas Nevada 89104 Telephone (702) 668-4000 • Fax (702) 668-4001 http://taxi.state.nv.us BEFORE THE STATE OF NEVADA TAXICAB AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES December 16, 2008

The Board Meeting and Public Hearing of the State of Nevada Taxicab Authority was held on Tuesday, December 16, 2008, scheduled to begin at 8:30 a.m. The meeting was held at the Taxicab Authority, 1785 E. Sahara Avenue, Suite 200, Las Vegas, Nevada 89104. The Board Meeting began at 9:33 a.m. Present were: Chairman Stacie Truesdell Michaels, Vice Chairman Susan Carrasco, Member Carolyn M. Sparks, Member Edward E. Goldman and Member Robert Forbuss. Others present: Administrator Gordon L. Walker, Legal Counsel, Deputy Attorney General Kimberly A. Arguello, and Legal Secretary, Barbara A. Webb. 1. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. The Pledge of Allegiance was lead by Member Sparks. 2. Compliance with Open Meeting Law. Administrator Gordon L. Walker advised the Board that the Notice of the Meeting was duly posted at the time and places as prescribed by law. 3. Approval of the October 28, 2008 Board Meeting Minutes. Chair Stacie Truesdell Michaels motioned to approve the October 28, 2008 Board Meeting Minutes; Member Forbuss seconded; passed unanimously. 4. Public Comment Steve Lanett a driver for Whittlesea Blue. He commented that the top floors of all the hotels are being closed; there is no room on cabstands for cabs to stage; the handicap vans that the companies have currently are servicing those that are in need of a handicap van no matter what is said; taking 10 cabs off the road for the next few days, he thought, was a good idea and thanked the companies for doing that; the next few days will be running rampart with rides due to the holidays and drivers will be able to make more money. He also commented that a driver was injured at In ‘n Out Burger and the PDA gave him $500 to help him out. Public Comment ended.

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008

At this point, Chair Truesdell Michaels commented that Agenda Item 10, Handicab, LLC, would be the last item taken as 2 board members have recused themselves from this issue. 5. Discussion with Stephen Patterson, Traffic Manager for LVCVA regarding the taxicab service during the months of October and November. Mr. Patterson reported that Cowboy Christmas was in town and taxicab service was excellent as it was for SEMA. He said that due to traffic on the last day, that was the only time it was difficult to get service. This weekend will be the Las Vegas Bowl with a projected 30,000 people in town. In January, he said that CES has a projected attendance of 140,000 which is lower than last year because there are fewer exhibitors. The people from CES were impressed as to how much better cab service was this year. He feels that is because the companies are sending their representatives to the convention center to make sure their cabs are available for better service. International Home Builders Show hasn’t been here in 4 years. The last time they were here they were not happy with the cab service. The traffic pattern has been revised since then and will remain the same as it always is for large conventions which make the flow of cabs much better and service was better. The Chair asked if there will be any special loading areas for these shows in January and he said no, but some time in 2009 they may start some construction to correct that. Member Sparks asked him about the 190,000 people that are projected over the next 6 months and he said that was the Bowling Congress that is at Cashman for 9 months. He said there are smaller shows during that time. Member Forbuss asked him if LVCVA coordinated with Public Works with regard to the construction situation when there are big conventions there and he said yes they work at night. He suggested that Mr. Patterson pursue the issue with Public Works and perhaps have them come to a meeting so they would know what is going on. Member Sparks asked we had the authority to ask Public Works to attend a meeting and Administrator Walker said he can ask them to come. The Chair questioned Metro’s presence during the conventions and Mr. Patterson explained that they are mandated by the county and do help them out during the big conventions. They direct traffic and if there’s an accident they are right there to take care of it. He said that there will be 15 officers there during CES and the Home Builders Show, for which LVCVA pays, depending on where they are. Member Sparks asked if there was any improvement with the pedestrian crossing and Mr. Patterson said that by the end of 2009, LVCVA will be installing an escalator. Administrator Walker asked Mr. Patterson to talk about when the Home Builders were here 4 years ago. Mr. Patterson said that they had major complaints about the long waits for a cab and he feels the cab industry has taken huge strides in improving that situation since they had been here. Mr. Patterson said that CES people have come to the M.A.G.I.C., NAB and other big shows to see how the service was and they were very impressed at how much better it has gotten. Member Forbuss asked him if the trade shows tell him the real numbers they are expecting because SEMA was off 20%. Mr. Patterson said they are different elements of people, different dynamics; CES protects their numbers until after the show. The Chair asked if the people that come for CES go out to shows and dinner or just come for the convention. Mr. Patterson said that the major companies wine and dine them. He commented that also during the CES show, Jeopardy will be here filming.

2

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008

6.

Discussion with Harry Waters, Assistant Director of Aviation for Landside Operations at McCarran Airport. Mr. Waters did not attend the meeting.

*7.

Discussion and Possible Decision regarding a temporary allocation of medallions for 2008 New Year’s Eve. Brock Croy, Management Analyst, made his presentation with staff’s recommendation as follows – Monday, December 29, 2008 – 8 medallions per company; 12:00 pm to 2:00 am, any 12 hours; Tuesday, December 30, 2008 – 8 medallions per company, 7:00 am to 7:00 pm and 8 medallions per company, 12:00 pm to 2:00 am, any 12 hours; Wednesday, December 31, 2008 – 8 medallions per company, 7:00 am to 7:00 pm and 20 medallions per company, 4:00 pm to 6:00 am, any 12 hours; Thursday, January 01, 2009 – 8 medallions per company – 7:00 am to 7:00 pm and 8 medallions per company, 12:00 pm to 2:00 am, any 12 hours. Staff requests that the Board allow the Administrator the discretion to remove any of these special event medallions if the demand for service is such that the medallions are no longer needed. Intervenors were Western Cab Company, Desert Cab Company, Frias Holding Company, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Nellis Cab Company, United Steelworkers Union, Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, ITPE Union, A Cab, LLC, and Lucky Cab Company. Desert, YCS, Nellis, Lucky, Frias, A Cab, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi all support staff’s recommendation. United Steelworkers Union and ITPE Union feel there is no need for additional cabs. There was much discussion about the specific hours and the any 12 hours for the special event medallions to be on the road. Member Forbuss asked if anyone tracks the 12 hours and which hours are the busiest. Mr. Croy stated that the companies run their shifts different and know when the medallions are most needed on the road. Member Forbuss asked if any determination can be made as to whether service is being provided or it there are any delays in service. Mr. Croy said only if complaints are lodged with the TA. Mr. Croy said if the trips per shift are at 35, then there is a need for more cabs. Staff sends their recommendation to the companies for feedback and that is why on New Year’s Eve the time was changed because the companies felt that the medallions would be better utilized from 4:00 PM to 6:00 AM and his recommendation was changed to reflect that. Member Forbuss asked with regard to complaints, what if no one complains and Mr. Croy said you can tell by the trip sheets. He said the companies will pull the cabs off the road if they see there is no need for them. He asked if TA officers monitor different locations and Mr. Croy said the companies have some of their staff out monitoring that, even though TA officers are out there also. George Balaban of Desert Cab feels that more people will be driving into Las Vegas now that gas prices are down and room rates are lower and feels that cab service will increase also. Mark James of Frias commented that even with hard times, cabs are needed or people will go to other modes of transportation and we will lose the market share. Member Sparks asked about the NTA and the problems with limos taking cab rides and the Administrator told her that he has a meeting Friday with them for that particular discussion and decision.

3

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008

Stephanie Edelman of United Steelworkers said that with New Year’s Eve on a Wednesday, a lot of people don’t have the rest of the week off and rooms are not sold out. She said that the Strip will be closed New Year’s Eve from Sahara to Russell and Valley View to Paradise. Also there is no front door service from 9:00 PM until 2:00 AM. The only route to take is Russell Road to 215 through the airport tunnel to Tropicana. A normal $13.00 ride becomes a $30.00 ride. Richard Segerbloom of ITPE Union opposes staff’s recommendation but feels if the need occurs, give the Administrator the authority to put cabs on the road. He said that last year there were too many cabs allocated. He commented that service is the most important issue, but the drivers need to make money also. Ruthie Jones of ITPEU asked Mr. Croy what his expectations were and he said that the productivity of the medallions that were allocated last year is what he based his recommendation on this year. Ms. Jones commented that last year the companies did not pull any of the medallions off the road and with the economy the way it is, she had hoped with less medallions on the road the drivers could make more money. She asked if the TA would do the reverse – no medallions allocated, but put them on the road if the need arises. The Chair asked her what does she want – no allocation and put out if needed Ms. Jones said that the Board gives the Administrator the authority to pull medallions off the road if he sees they are not needed, why can’t the Board give him the authority to put them on the road if they are needed. Bob Winner, attorney for Desert and Nellis, asked Ruthie to reiterate what she wanted and commented that he thought the Board made the decision, not the Administrator. Member Sparks commented that she would rather have too many on the road and be sure people are being serviced than having people waiting and complaining they cannot get a cab. Administrator Walker said that he feels the town will be very busy as opposed to Ms. Jones stating it would not. Jay Nady, A Cab, supports staff, but suggested the any 12 hours should be from 12:00 PM to 3:00AM and instead of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM should be 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM because the locals in his certificated area may need to get to the airport in the morning and they would get better service. He feels it would be better to remove the extra medallions than to add them. The Chair asked him what his justification for changing the hours from 2:00 AM to 3:00 AM and he said it would be more manageable to schedule drivers with staggered shifts. Member Forbuss stated that if the allocations were done on one-hour blocks then each company can decide when to put them out. Jay thought is was a great idea, as did Cheryl Knapp of Whittlesea Blue/ Henderson Taxi who commented that if the TA just allocated a number of medallions from Monday to Friday, the companies would then decide when to put them out. Mr. Croy said that the allocations are geared toward special events. Atty. Winner stated that the statute states 12-hour block. Member Forbuss feels that there is a better way to set the times for the allocations as the companies would know better when they are needed on the road. Desiree Dante of Lucky Cab supports staff and agrees with visiting the hours of the allocations. Member Sparks asked if these suggestions would impact the rules and regulations and DAG Arguello said no. The Chair asked how the intervenors felt about that suggestion. Ms. Knapp stated she appreciated Member Forbuss’ suggestion, but feels it should be discussed in the future. Member Sparks said that according to Mr. Croy’s chart, not all companies reported their trips per shift and the Administrator said that now it is part of the Order that they report that to the ASO. Jamie Pino of Nellis

4

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 Cab said it is important not to flood the streets with cabs and just put them out when they are most needed which is at peak times. The Chair said she thinks it’s a great idea and the possibility of a Workshop to discuss this may be an idea and Member Forbuss agreed. Vice Chair Carrasco motioned to accept staff’s recommendation; seconded by Member Sparks; passed unanimously. Chairman Michaels asked the Administrator to pursue a Workshop and he said he would target February. *8. Discussion and Possible Decision regarding a temporary allocation of medallions for the 2009 Consumer Electronics Services Convention (CES), Adult Entertainment Expo, and Home Entertainment Show – T.H.E. Show, all in Las Vegas from January 8th through January 11th, 2009. Kelly Kuzik, Administrative Services Officer, made his presentation stating that both these shows, as well as smaller shows, will be running concurrently from January 8th through January 11th. Total projected attendance is 190,000 with 150,000 at the LVCVA and 40,000 at the Sands Expo. Staff’s recommendation is – Wednesday, January 07 through Sunday, January 11 - 20 medallions per company 7:00 AM – 7:00 PM and 20 medallions per company12:00 PM – 2:00 AM, any 12 hours. As a contingent, Staff recommends that an additional 5 medallions be made available for distribution at the discretion of the Administrator if demand is such that additional medallions are required. Staff requests that the Board allow the Administrator the discretion to remove any of these special event medallions if the demand for service is such that the medallions are no longer needed. It is also requested that the Board direct the certificate holders to provide the TA with the number of trips, shifts and revenue for the special even medallions referenced above and that the information be provided to the TA within 2 weeks after the final day of the shows. Kelly commented that the Administrator, the Chief Investigator as well as himself, go to the venues to see if there is adequate service. Intervenors were Western Cab Company, Desert Cab Company, Frias Holding Company, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Nellis Cab Company, United Steelworkers Union, Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, ITPE Union, A Cab, LLC, and Lucky Cab Company. Western, Desert, Frias, Nellis, YCS, Lucky, A Cab, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi all supports staff’s recommendation of 20 medallions for any 12 hours from Wednesday, January 7th through Sunday, January 11th. George Balaban of Desert would rather have too many cabs plus it gives the drivers a chance to work on busy days. Member Sparks asked him if he okay with less cabs than last year and he said yes. Mark James and Neal Tomlinson both representing Frias stated that they supports Member Forbuss’ idea of letting the companies determine the time the cabs go on the road. They both have a problem with giving the Administrator the authority to add to pull medallions as the statue states that the Board has to allocate and feel the Administrator should not be given the authority. Member Sparks asked the DAG for her opinion. DAG Arguello stated that the Board, as part of the allocation, allocated the 5 additional medallions if needed or hold back if necessary. It has never been challenged in the past

5

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 when the Administrator was given the authority to remove medallions. Both the Chair and Member Sparks commented that it was never contingent to add additional medallions and removing the medallions was never challenged. Ms. Knapp stated that it never has been done before, but in the past a special meeting was held with the Administrator, Board Members and the Certificate Holders to put additional medallions out over and above what was allocated by the Board at the meeting. Mark James commented that Frias has an issue with the Administrator removing or adding additional medallions Administrator Walker commented that to move things along, as discussion was getting very cumbersome, that staff will withdraw the 5 additional medallions that they recommended. He also commented that Frias never mentioned the issue in their intervention. Mr. Tomlinson said he was not aware of it and the Administrator said it was part of staff’s recommendation that was sent out to the Certificate Holders. Mr. Tomlinson said he never received it. Staff was advised to add Mr. Tomlinson to their list in the future. Mr. Tomlinson stated that he wanted to make sure that how Frias Holding Company feels about the issue was on the record. Bob Winner, attorney for Nellis, stated he agrees with Mr. Tomlinson regarding the 5 medallions. He said the statute states that the Board decides and instructs the Administrator to pull the medallions; the Administrator does not make the decision. Stephanie Edelman of USW does not support staff’s recommendation. She said the 7 additional cabs for SEMA worked out just fine. She feels 13 medallions for CES is better than 20 medallions. She said because attendance is down by 25%, the cabstand at the Sands Expo only holds 10 cabs at a time, and shuttles are free are all factors for less medallions. The Chair asked her if 7 medallions for 103,000 people were workable and she said yes. The Chair said that the conventions at different venues is another factor to be considered. She also commented that each convention brings in a different type of person and that has to be taken into consideration when making a recommendation. Ms. Edelman stated that a trigger number should be set taking all conventions into consideration. Bill Shranko of YCS agrees with Frias’ position and feels it’s absolutely correct as far as the law goes. He commented that Bob and Cheryl were the ones that were a part of it when they started having the director give or be able to remove the medallions. Actually, it was not done that way originally. The Administrator requested…. what would happen after they requested, some of us took them off the road right away and other cab companies would keep them maybe to the end of the shift and then take them off when there was only an hour left. He doesn’t know that was ever changed and when you give your order stating he has the authority, the companies react that he should have that authority because, even the law is pretty strict on it, it might be too strict, so he agrees with Mr. Forbuss says that this should go to the State and give you more flexibility to react rapidly. He commented that at the meeting that Cheryl Knapp was talking about meeting in the Director’s office and it’s very difficult to get Board approval when you are up against it, so you should have the flexibility to let the Administrator react within reason. Member Sparks asked him if he felt in both directions. He said he felt a workshop with that subject at Mr. Forbuss’ suggestion was a good idea. The Chair asked him, as the law is currently written, you would agree with Frias’ issue and Mr. Shranko said yes. Richard Segerbloom of ITPEU stated they oppose staff’s recommendations. They think the staff should have the authority to add the cabs and they think the Board does have the authority to give the administrator the discretion as SEMA worked out very well. Jay Nady, A Cab, doesn’t feel it’s a good policy because it is unfair and unreasonable to call his drivers off the road when they had other choices. He doesn’t feel it’s a good idea when the Administrator calls in and tells them to pull their extra cabs off the road because it hurts the drivers most. He doesn’t feel

6

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 it’s a good policy. The Chair asked the Administrator if the cabs get pulled off mid shift and he replied no. The Administrator pointed out to the Chair that what Mr. Nady is referring to is the NAB convention when he pulled cabs off the road. They were notified by fax 17 hours prior to pulling them off the road. His general manager had not checked his fax machine and was not happy that they had to take the cabs off the road. The Chair asked Mr. Walker if he gives them until the end of their shift to take them off the road and Mr. Walker said absolutely. She stated that then no driver is called in 2 hours into their shift. Mr. Walker said no. Vice Chair Carrasco moves to accept staff’s recommendation with the revised recommendation; Member Goldman seconded; passed unanimously. *9. Discussion and Possible Decision regarding a temporary allocation of medallions for the 2009 Annual International Builders Show to be held at the LVCVA from January 20th through January 23rd, 2009. Kelly Kuzik, ASO, made his presentation, stating the projected attendance is 90,000. Mr. Kuzik stated that, in light of them not being happy with service 4 years ago, staff recommends the following – Monday, January 19 – 8 medallions per company from 12:00 PM to 2:00 AM, any 12 hours. Tuesday, January 20 through Friday, January 23 – 8 medallions per company from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM and 8 medallions per company from 12:00 PM to 2:00 AM, any 12 hours. Staff requests that the Board allow the Administrator the discretion to remove any of these special event medallions if the demand for service is such that the medallions are not longer needed. Intervenors were Western Cab Company, Desert Cab Company, Frias Holding Company, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Nellis Cab Company, United Steelworkers Union, Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, ITPE Union, A Cab, LLC, and Lucky Cab Company. Intervenors were Western Cab Company, Desert Cab Company, Frias Holding Company, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Nellis Cab Company, Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, A Cab, LLC, and Lucky Cab Company all support staff’s recommendation. George Balaban of Desert Cab said the object of putting more cabs on the road is better service not to make more money because it costs the company money in gas and maintenance when more cabs are on the road. Mark James of Frias agreed with George’s comment. Stephanie Edelman of USW opposes staff’s recommendation because she doesn’t know why staff would recommend 8 medallions for 90,000 and 7 medallions for 103,000. Another issue she brought up was that Home Builders always have a model home for people to visit and the cabdrivers are never given directions to it. The Chair asked Steve Patterson if he could get that information out to the companies. Mr. Kuzik said he has been in contact with them and it will be put on the TA’s website. ITPEU opposes staff’s recommendation for the same reasons they opposed the other recommendations. Member Goldman moves to support staff’s recommendation; seconded by Member Forbuss; passed unanimously.

7

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008

*11.

Discussion and Possible Decision regarding the Petition for Advisory Opinion of Nevada Taxicab Authority filed by Randell S. Hynes. Mr. Hynes gave a summary of his petition. Mr. Hynes is a former cabdriver who is currently president of an organization called United Taxicab Drivers Corporation, a chartered, non-profit organization to help cabdrivers. He has filed the aforementioned petition to help drivers earn more money. His petition is available at the Taxicab Authority office for the public to review if they wish. He claims that in 2003, Exhibit A of his Petition, a trigger of 24 trips per shift was established. His Exhibit B is a table showing TA data for 1984 that shows the average trips per shift was 24 up until 2003. He claims in his petition that by law the welfare of the drivers has not been considered by the TA. He says that it was followed for 20 years up until 2003 and has been ignored since then. Intervenors were ITPEU, Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, A Cab, LLC, Frias Holding Company and Nellis Cab Company. Ruthie Jones of ITPEU states she remembers when the trigger was put into effect and adopted by a previous Board. It was established to see if there was a need for extra medallions. She wants to listen to comments made before commenting further. Mark Trafton, attorney for Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, stated that all Mr. Hynes wants to do is appeal decisions that were made in 2003 which cannot be done. He said that when the Board renders a final decision, per the regulations, if you are an aggrieved party, your appeal can be filed within 15 days of that final decision. He puts emphasis on “aggrieved party” because before you can get before any state board with regard to an advisory opinion, it has to be determined if the petitioner has standing and in this case this was never brought forward. He clearly stated that his standing was as a petitioner, not a current taxicab driver because he is not. Mr. Trafton stated that in Mr. Hynes’ petition he asks for an advisory opinion and if it is granted, anyone can walk in off the street and ask for the same thing. He asks to deny Mr. Hynes’ request. Mr. Hynes stated that he did not say he was a petitioner he said he was an applicant. He quoted NAC 706.885 – Classification Party. Chair Michaels stated that he does not have standing to make that application to get to the procedural point that you are designated as an applicant for purposes of hearings and advisory (inaudible). Mr. Hynes’ disagreed with her and discussion followed between the Chair and Mr. Hynes. Member Sparks asked if the DAG had a comment on his standing. DAG Arguello stated that as an applicant for a declaratory order, he is an applicant and can apply for such. He cannot apply, if this is characterized as an appeal, then no he needs to be a party. The Chair stated a party to the decision if an appeal. The DAG stated that it means he would not have any. Member Sparks asked if this ends the discussion and the DAG said no that all the other intervenors could be heard from because it is his argument that it is not an appeal. Mr. Hynes commented that it is not an appeal that he is making an application for an advisory opinion. Vice Chair Carrasco asked him what he is actually asking for in his advisory opinion. Is it to look behind at the prior TA standards? He said that all he is asking for is if the Board wants the Administrator to address an opinion as to whether previous Boards have deviated from the standards which was the yearly trips per shift should be around 24. Chair Michaels stated that under the statute that Mr. Hynes has filed this request pursuant to what this Board would do as to whether they would grant or deny his request for this advisory opinion. No judgment to be made today on the merits or what the opinion should say just whether or not to grant this opinion. Mr. Hynes stated that he is just asking the Board if the adopted standard that was followed from 1949 until 2003 was

8

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 deviated from because that was the standard until then. The Chair asked him either what statute or administrative code regulation of this standard is needed or what action did this Board take at some point in time. She asked if he could provide her with some hearing minutes where a vote and an actual motion to approve this standard as a so-called adopted standard. He stated it is based on the language in the memo that attached as Exhibit A. The Chair stated that the memo does not state that is was an adopted standard was adopted on a particular date by the TA. He stated that because it is from 1949, he would have no records regarding that. Cheryl Knapp of Whittlesea, procedurally, would this be the point and time at which the Board would ask for a clarification as to the historical references Mr. Hynes is referring to with regard to the allocation formula or would you prefer that that information be briefed to the Authority after you’ve made the decision as to whether or not the Administrator is going to provide the advisory opinion. The Chair stated that it would be more helpful now. Cheryl Knapp went on to provide the historical information. “Rick Boxer was the former Administrative Analyst of the State of Nevada Taxicab Authority. And this was not back in 1949 because I was not in the industry then and I was not in the industry in 1949. It was mid 1980 and, at that point in time, in order to have allocations placed on the Agenda, the certificate holder would actually have to pay the $200.00 filing fee, file the application with all the appropriate information, the intervenors would have to intervene either in support of or opposition to and hearings were held on a monthly basis, long drawn out hearings for allocations because, those of you who lived in Las Vegas in the 1980s, you know the boom of growth that our city experienced and as such, we were always behind the 8 ball in trying to get cabs on the road, get drivers approved for TA permits, get them trained, get them in the cabs to serve the community because we were growing so expeditiously at just a rapid pace. Rick Boxer, who did fabulous work for this Authority and for the industry, came up with a brainstorm, an original idea, as it were, which was to have a trigger that would allow allocations to be placed on the agenda without benefit of an intervenor having to file an application, file the $200.00 filing fee, and then have it placed on the agenda. A way that staff could say, hey, here’s what’s going on in the industry before we get phone calls from Terry Bell, George Balaban, Ray Chenoweth and the other owners, let’s go ahead and have it on the agenda, they will be noticed properly, have sufficient time to present their evidence and we’ll hear the matter of allocation. Originally, the trips per shift was 26, then the industry changed and in order to meet that trigger to have allocations put on the agenda, it was reduced to 24 because over the years various types of medallions were introduced into the industry that were also unique – time-restricted medallions, day-of-week restricted medallions – which changed the make up of what then believed was something that would need to be put on the agenda. The trips per shift for the allocation formula was nothing more than means by which to have allocation placed on the agenda by staff, it reduced staff’s work when trying to prepare for an allocation hearing because during those days there was a lot of contention, there was not the harmonious work relationship that we have with the Taxicab Authority now. There was always bones of contention, there were political issues, there were personal issues involved that made allocation hearings something less than professional. This allowed staff an easy way out, as it were. If the trips per shift reached 24, that was staff’s presentation. It did not put staff in the position to either be friend or foe to any particular intervenor depending on what their position was and allocation. All evidence was still presented to this Board, graphs, statistical information, what was going on in the news, hotel occupancy, airport numbers, all of this information was still provided by the intervenors to support their particular case at the time because we are not always in agreement (inaudible) As such, the Board would then weigh all the evidence and make their decision. That is the historical history behind this allocation formula”. Vice Chair Carrasco asked her if there was ever anything binding it and Cheryl responded no. Cheryl also stated that there was never an agenda item that said an allocation would be on the agenda due to the trigger and that the Board made the decision of the allocation strictly on the formula would have

9

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 allowed because if that had been done, there would have owners’ attorneys that would have fought that at the PSC at the time. Member Sparks asked when the TA was formed and Administrator Walker answered 1969. She said that what she has in front of her all went into affect after the TA was in place referring to NRS 706.8824, did this come in after 1970 or was that part of the process. DAG Arguello said it was actually 1969. Ms. Knapp added 8824, subsection 2, references what would be considered a formula for allocation and talks about the 5 years preceding the Taxicab Authority if the Board would determine that a system of allocation (inaudible). The Chair commented that now they are required to annually review the medallions whether or not 24 is reached or not. Ms. Knapp said they actually had allocation hearings every month and it took an inordinate amount of time and that’s why the trigger was designed. Member Sparks asked what authority was used to do it more frequently than annually. Ms. Knapp said by filing a $200.00 application and it would be placed on the Agenda. DAG Arguello stated that according to the statute it has to be done once a year. The Chair asked if there were any other questions and the Board answered no. Yellow/Checker/Star – Cathy Olendorff, Esq. – the standard for the trigger is the same thing as the fuel surcharge trigger, it is something to tell you when it might be time for the Board to act. She said there is declaratory leave action – he needs to be (inaudible) any statutory provision, regulations or decision, he already agreed that he couldn’t be a party to appeal in any of the allocations and he definitely can’t be a party to appeal any allocations because they are for the traveling public and that’s who the allocations protect. The question is he wants this Board to explain a prior Board and to determine some arbitrary standard where you can’t have an arbitrary standard because things change. Asks to deny the application. The Chair asked if there were any questions for this intervenor. Mr. Hynes said that she said that he didn’t say that he was asking for consideration of authority regulation decision and its right in his petition. Ms. Olendorff stated that he is not appealing a decision, he is not party to appeal a decision, so therefore he’s not talking about a regulation because it isn’t one, he’s not talking about a statutory decision – it is in his terms an “adopted standard”. There is no rulemaking procedure within this authority to have an adopted standard where you can make your own rules (inaudible) under the Nevada Administrative Code, you can petition the legislature. If he’s not here questioning the particular decision, statute or administrative code provision, she doesn’t know why the Board would consider his application. The Chair said it goes back to what she asked him before – what date was this decision adopted or what date did the decision occur on - when the Board took action and voted. Mr. Hynes referred to the memo dated 2003. To this Ms. Olendorff commented that it is not a timely appeal and nor is he party to appeal. Bill Shranko of YCS stated that not only is there no standard, a memo does not constitute a standard. He reiterated what Cheryl Knapp had stated about the trigger point. He commented that after reading Frias intervention, he agreed that it might be opening the door to intervenors who don’t and should not have the status to appeal. He said that’s what the Unions are for. He advised Mr. Hynes if this is what he wants to do he should go through the legal procedure to make himself an intervenor. Esther Rodriguez, attorney for A Cab, stated that they agree with Mark Trafton’s commentary. She added that not only is Mr. Hynes asking for an advisory opinion, but he’s also asking for a way to correct the result of over allocation of 400 medallions. They see it as an appeal for former decisions. What Mr. Hynes is stating, is not the proper way to go about appealing.

10

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 The Chair asked if there were any other questions from the Board – there were none. Neal Tomlinson, attorney for Frias Holding Company – the biggest issue here is whether or not Mr. Hynes has legal standing which he has none. If Mr. Hynes feels he has a legal standing, he should have proof. Plus, per his website, he has not filed the proper papers to represent the drivers that he claims belong to his United Taxicab Drivers Corporation that he states is a non-profit entity. Mr. Tomlinson went on to explain what Mr. Hynes is lacking to be able to have legal standing, therefore, this should not be considered. He said it’s been established by previous intervenors that the time frame is long past for an appeal and he’s not citing the right regulations. Until he can prove to the Board that he has legal standing, this Board should not go any further. Mark James, CEO, for Frias Holding Company, because Mr. Hynes claims he speaks on behalf of cabdrivers, he cannot prove that legally because he is not a legal Union. Mr. Tomlinson commented that the important issue here is it will become a free for all in the future. Mr. Hynes disagreed with both Mr. Tomlinson and Mr. James stating that he is an applicant not asking for any more than that and wants the Board to direct the Administrator for an opinion. The Chair stated that he has to prove he has standing to take part in those proceedings. Mr. Hynes said he’s entitled as an applicant and there is no requirement….. The Chair commented that he keeps stating one administrative decision that defines how the parties to the procedures are to be titled – what constitutes applicant or what constitutes the parties to be respondents. It doesn’t say because you satisfied factual set of circumstances your deemed in that, it merely says for purposes (inaudible) you filed with the TA (inaudible) Mr. Hynes said he understands that but if he doesn’t file as an applicant (inaudible) he doesn’t see anything that requires him to prove why he’s before the Board other than that he’s applying to seek an opinion. The Chair stated that these are general principles of law that apply in all of these administrative and legal proceedings, it’s common law. There are certain things that need be established before you move forward with these proceedings. What you are asking us to partake is a very big deal, an advisory opinion. This has to done appropriately before these issues can be addressed and you have not done that so far. Bob Winner, attorney for Nellis and Desert Cab Companies, he challenged the issue of Mr. Hynes being an applicant; his request for an advisory opinion; another issue is “prompt” which he did not do. There is no legal authority for him to appeal 5 years later. Jamie Pino, Nellis Cab, stated that letters were sent to the Administrator and to the DAG regarding the legal rights of him being here. Too much time has been spent on this today and it would open a lot of doors for other people to do the same. Mr. Hynes asked when he brought up minimum wage in public comment and he went back to work that day at Nellis Cab, why was he fired. Vice Chair said that question was not relevant to the situation. Mr. Hynes said he could make public comment and when he did he got fired. The Chair said anyone can come and make public comment and at this time this issue is not relevant. Vice Chair Carrasco asked if he had anything else to add and he said he did not. The Chair said that at previous meetings, she and the Vice Chair had questioned him about the membership of his corporation and that was never really addressed by him. He said that when it was started it was confidential and the Vice Chair was questioned why when the other Unions are not confidential. Member Sparks agreed. Vice Chair Carrasco asked if he had anything else to add regarding the right to ask this Board to issue an advisory opinion. Mr. Hynes stated that he has nothing else to say, he’s just done with it. Chair Michaels stated that in the past they had asked him about his co-op – how many members, are dues charged, what are your rights of representation – an answer was never given to them. He reiterated

11

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 that earlier in the year when he had asked for membership, it was confidential with minimum amount of information (inaudible) there was a lot of enthusiasm until he asked for information and a donation. The Chair said if he is going to come before the Board and speak for a group of people, the Board has to know who that group of people are. When the Unions come before the Board, the Board knows who they represent and have the authority to represent their members. He stated his members’ information is confidential because they are in fear of being fired. The Vice Chair commented that without him providing the information they are looking for, she moves to deny. Robert Forbuss seconded, Passed unanimously. *10. Discussion and Possible Decision regarding the Handicab, LLC, Motion to Compel Discovery Responses; Intervenor Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi’s Counter Motion for Protective Order; and Handicab’s First Motion to Continue Hearing Date. Trevor Hayes, attorney for Handicab, stated that the Discovery Motions can be handled by the Administrator. Chair Michaels said no because the Board has been hearing these motions and other applications. Agenda Item 10 will continue after a 1-hour lunch break. 12. Staff Report Administrator’s Report – Administrator Walker stated that the tentative dates for the 2009 Board Meeting Minutes are in their packets and asked the Board to review them and get back to the Barbara to be sure that 2 or more members are not absent from the meeting. Complaints filed by Déjà vu and Little Darlings against certificate holders, their responses were due to the TA yesterday and they were received. The next step is for the TA staff to review the complaint and the responses. Two of the certificate holders filed their responses along with motions of dismissal. Another update with be given at the January meeting. Legislation – each of the Board Members should have received chart which are our pre-filed Bills that will be introduced when the second session starts. Kelly will go over them if the Board would like. Three other bills are also in the works that are important and the TA will probably go through a legislator to be introduced. They have to do with charging companies for meter changes, charging for special event Taxicab Authority services such as NASCAR, and a housekeeping bill regarding the Senior Rides Program. The language in the statute currently may allow them to go into our reserves and we are trying to prevent that. Member Forbuss asked about BDR 58-433 – are you saying absolutely no cell phones or the cabdriver needs to use the ear piece? The Administrator answered – no hand-held cell phones. Member Forbuss said it was clear and the DAG said it would be added. Compliance/Enforcement Report – Chief Investigator Joe Dahlia was not available. Kelly Kuzik presented Staff Report – Revenue numbers are starting to level out since the surcharge was removed; trips are down 4-1/2% for the first 11 months. It was not as drastic as expected as from November of ’07 vs November of ’08 it was down 9%. The year-to-date numbers are currently where expected and he is hoping they will pick up in 2009.

12

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 *10. Discussion and Possible Decision regarding the Handicab, LLC, Motion to Compel Discovery Responses; Intervenor Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi’s Counter Motion for Protective Order; and Handicab’s First Motion to Continue Hearing Date. Vice Chair Susan Carrasco stated that although her sister-in-law works for John Moran’s Law Firm that represents Western Cab Company, that will not affect her in making any decision regarding this item. Trevor Hayes, attorney for Handicab, LLC, asked about the Motions to Compel and Chair Michaels said they would be done by intervenor or party that is subject to their motion. The Chair stated they will start with Henderson Taxi, the Board will hear the related motions and then move on to the other intervenors. Intervenors were Mark Trafton, Esq., on behalf of Whittlesea Blue/Henderson Taxi, Neal Tomlinson, Esq., on behalf of Frias Holding Company, John Moran, Esq., on behalf of Western Cab Company, Cathie Olendorff, Esq., on behalf of Yellow/Checker/Star Cab Companies, Esther Rodriguez, Esq., on behalf of A Cab, LLC. Trevor Hayes, Esq., attorney for Handicab, LLC, presented his case as to what and why he was requesting Production #1 through Production # 8 and discussed Interrogatory #1 through Interrogatory #8. All attorneys presented their arguments, there was discussion between them and Attorney Hayes, and following are the results Production #1 – Produce all financial records showing profit/loss, operating expenses and income for 2003 through 2007 Motion - Chair Michaels motioned to deny all requests for production of financial records of intervenors; Vice Chair Carrasco seconded; passed unanimously. Production #2 – Produce all records establishing use by cab customers and/or for a handicapped cab in the years 2003 through 2007 – Mr. Tomlinson of Frias said he wants a timeframe for the requested documents and then they will furnish them. Mr. Hayes accepted that and withdrew his request. John Moran for Western said the request was too vague. After discussion, Western will provide handicapped records. Mr. Hayes requested an Order be done on Western. Motion – Chair Michaels stated that the companies will make the handicap reports that are sent to the Taxicab Authority available to Handicab. DAG Arguello stated that regarding the requested order, there will be no order done because it was withdrawn, but there will be an order or orders to stipulate parties make information available and an order requiring a meet and confer in person prior to any filing of any motion to compel from now on. This request was withdrawn. The DAG will make a separate order for filing motions. Production #3 – Produce all records of dispatch requesting a cab with Clark County, Nevada from 2003 through 2007 – Mr. Hayes withdrew the request. Production #4 – Produce all materials used in the training of cab drivers to assist customers who are elderly and/or disabled – Mr. Hayes withdrew the request. Production #5 – Produce all records which in any fashion track rides by the disabled in handicapped vans from 2003 through 2007 – Withdrawn

13

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 Production #6 – Produce all records which related to blown shifts from 2003 through 2007 – Withdrawn. Production #7 – Produce all records relating to length of time disabled customers can expect to wait before a handicapped cab could pick up the disabled customer. – Withdrawn. Production #8 – Produce all records relating to claims of cab passengers wherein the passenger claimed to be disabled or elderly and claimed that your driver’s conduct fell below the standard of care – Withdrawn. Interrogatory #1 – Identify all procedures that exist within your company to timely meet the needs of disabled passengers – Withdrawn. Interrogatory #2 – What percent of calls requesting handicapped cabs go directly to the driver without going through dispatch – Withdrawn. Interrogatory #3 – How many handicapped rides utilizing your handicapped cabs occur each month from January 1, 2003 through April 31, 2008. Please provide such information broken down by month – Withdrawn. Interrogatory #4 – What is the range of waiting time where a call comes in requesting a handicapped cab – Withdrawn Interrogatory #5 – Identify all personal injury claims or complaints where the passengers indicated that your driver had not properly cared for them – Withdrawn Interrogatory #6 – Describe in detail all training, whether initial or ongoing, for drivers of handicapped cabs to assist in the loading, transportation and unloading of disabled passengers – Withdrawn. Interrogatory #7 – Describe and quantify how forty (40) additional handicapped cabs within Clark County, Nevada will financially impact your company – Vice Chair Carrasco motioned for denial; seconded by Member Sparks, passed unanimously. DAG Arguello asked if was against all intervenors and Chair Michaels said only Henderson and Western. Interrogatory #8 – If answered no to any admission, explain – Per Chair Michaels, motion to compel has been fully determined; motion for protective order has been withdrawn from Whittlesea. At the suggestion of DAG Arguello, Chair Michaels asked to set a new hearing date. The following was agreed upon – January 9 - Pre-filed Testimony January 30 - Applicant Pre-filed Testimony February 13 - Intervenor Rebuttal Testimony February 25 - Applicant Rebuttal Testimony March 19 and March 20 – Hearing scheduled for 8:30 AM 13. Report of Legal Counsel Deputy Attorney General Kim Arguello said that there is nothing to report this month.

14

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Board Meeting Minutes December 16, 2008 14. Adjournment. Meeting was adjourned at 3:51 P.M.

Respectfully submitted by:

___________________________________________ Barbara A. Webb Date Recording Secretary

Approved by:

___________________________________________ Stacie Truesdell Michaels Date Chairman

___________________________________________ Gordon L. Walker Date Administrator

15

Nevada Department of Business & Industry
Financial Services Team Licensing & Regulatory Services Team Natural Resources Services Team Consumer & Labor Services Team

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful