A second meeting between cabbies and cops was distinctly friendlier and more productive than a confrontation that took place previously in the Santa Barbara City Administrator’s office. This meeting took place upstairs on Thursday, February 19, at Rusty’s Pizza Parlor, where Sgt. Riley Harwood and Lt. David Whitham showed up in street clothes to again listen to cabbies’ complaints about the stresses of trying to operate in the city, starting with all the tickets that cab drivers get when picking up fares on State Street when the bars let out.
Whitham drew his line in the sand a few minutes after the beginning of the hour-long meeting attended by eight cab drivers, some of them also cab company owners. Cabbies wanted to know why police are issuing them tickets at 1 a.m., when there is little traffic on State Street aside from the cabbies and partying pedestrians, the last of which rely on cabs to get home. “One thing I won’t do,” Whitham said, “is tell officers not to enforce or to enforce selectively.” Having taxis stop on lower State to take on passengers “is not something I want,” Whitham said. “Now I’ve got six people standing in the number two lane [to catch cabs or get into them]. I have absolutely no problem ticketing any cabbie who slows down when it’s not appropriate.”
By the end of the meeting, the officers had offered to work with the cabbies on any definite proposals they bring to the table, especially one for several additional taxi stands on downtown side streets. The officers were less enthusiastic about the idea of zones on State Street itself where cabs could pull up to the curb to pick up fares. In any case, they told the cabbies to meet with city councilmembers, who actually write the laws, as well as with the Downtown Organization, an excellent ally with considerable lobbying power within city government and a shared interest in regulating after hours traffic.
Also on the cabbies’ wish list were the right to stop in freight-loading zones and to double park for up to one minute. They noted that freight-hauling commercial trucks are allowed to double park. Whitham explained, however, that freight haulers never used to be able to until they exercised their lobbying power with state legislators. He recalled the day he was forced to cease and desist writing tickets for such behavior.
An even hotter issue is the increasing number of new cab companies. Larger, established companies groused about tactics that they said threaten not only their businesses but also the industry at large. For example, only a few of the newer companies are there for the public 24/7 year-round - they just swoop in for rush hour. In addition, owners said intruding companies have a habit of painting their cabs the same color as, say, Yellow Cab or Rose Cab, and then, allegedly, destroying the older cab companies’ reputations because customers don’t see the distinction.
Then too, the sheer number of cab companies makes it difficult for anybody to make a decent living, the cabbies said, suggesting that criteria to narrow the field could be implemented-such as a requirement that companies maintain an office and dispatcher rather than just the phones in the cabbies’ cars. After philosophizing briefly about free markets and competition, the officers seemed to warm to the idea, suggesting that stricter standards for drivers’ safety records might help separate the wheat from the chaff.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
A new City Ordinance would be an excellent action to allow cabs to pick up passengers in a much wider zone along lower State Street after midnight or so (exact hours and location to be determined).
No double car parking to block the lane, of course, but a much wider accommodation along the curb seems good to keep the drunks from driving and the cabs moving. A permit or similar system to favor local cabbies also would be good to explore.
Of course, the police LT. was not going to admit that they would do selective or discretionary enforcement; that is his job.
It's all good so far, and the next move is up to the City Council, either by the current Councilmembers or... AHEM, cough-cough... the new ones next year.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
February 21, 2009 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What a horribly written article. Does the author even proof read their work?
The officers "showed up in street clothes". Really the picture you attach makes it seem like they are in some type of uniform, were you even there?
"Cabbies wanted to know why police are issuing them tickets at 1 a.m., when the little there is little traffic on State Street at that hour of the morning aside from the cabbies..." HUH????
The Lt's name is "Lt. David Whitham " and then he is referred to as "Whitman drew his line" "Whitman explained" Whitman this Whitman that....
Not to mention all the other grammatical errors. Was the proof reader asleep?
InTheKnow (anonymous profile)
February 21, 2009 at 5:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The article has no grammatical errors.
Its writing could be a bit more polished, but this is a good report, published within 1.5 days after the event, for an important meeting that no other news outlet has reported.
Accordingly, SADLER ROCKS!!!
The Indy published a big cover story on Cabbie Wars last July:
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/...
The current photo above indeed shows the two cops in their "casual" uniforms of team polo shirts, often worn by police staff when they are doing public meetings and not necessarily street patrols Their handcuffs and Glocks still work just as well regardless of their shirts.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
February 21, 2009 at 6:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks for pointing out the corrections, InTheKnow. We have updated the article.
--WebAdmin
webadmin (webadmin)
February 21, 2009 at 7:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love the end where the "established" cabbies complain about "new companies" that "swoop in for rush hour".
There's a certain "established" cab company in SB that consistently has shockingly poor service through their unfriendly drivers and extremely rude dispatchers. Maybe another reason for the popularity of the "new companies" is their general friendliness towards clients and flexibility of service.
Meanwhile, certain "established" companies maintain a staff of drivers and dispatchers who regularly insult clients or refuse service due to bloated egos and idiotic company policies.
I don't think I'm alone in saying that I have no sympathy for certain "established" companies, and will certainly not delete the mobile number of a cabby who regularly delivers in a safe and professional manner.
dakine (anonymous profile)
February 22, 2009 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just my opinion... There is always two sides to the coin when negotiating with people.
Yes, the officers are obligated to enforce the law. Yes, at times they do look the other way or selectively enforce the law.
It is my hope that they are of good moral character and have good reasons for doing so.
Yes, if you give people an inch, they take take more. So the zoning would not be my first choice.
As for lower State Street. Why dont we close off the lower two blocks? Just after 11pm for the summer months or for special weekends like St Patty's Day.
The taxi can pick people up safely on
Cota Street, Haley Street and Gutierrez Street.
Let us not forget Fig Avenue, which is behind The Brewing company, The James Joyce, The Study Hall, Omalley's, and Madison's...
Now that I think on it, Fig could be "Cab Central". instead of sending the sedated out the front when the pub closes send them out the back door and into the caring and dedicated arms of a Santa Barbara cab driver.
Just my thoughts...JerrySB
Jhern (anonymous profile)
February 23, 2009 at 10:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It seems that a rather strange and dichotomous problem exists -- between letting taxicabs pickup customers along State St. by making brief stops curbside or in the street, and keeping drunks and drunkdrivers off our streets by encouraging taxi use when the bars and nightclubs close. Is there really that much traffic on the street at that time of morning that allowing cabbies to make brief stops would obstruct traffic? Big delivery trucks are apparently allowed to do this, and they certainly pose a bigger obstacle to traffic during the day than taxis do at night.
The police told the taxi operators that the truck companies and the downtown business association strongly lobbied the city council to ease the rules for them. The cabbies were told that a new ordinance might be needed to allow this and they were encouraged to obtain lobbying assistance.
Isn't there a police commission that oversees both the taxi licensing as well as the police department's procedures and advises city council on needed changes? It seems they would be the logical agency to help mediate some solutions. Why aren't they looking into this problem?
scoop9324 (anonymous profile)
February 23, 2009 at 11:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)