Cab drivers protest against a controversial taxi bill Monday
WASHINGTON — The heated debate between the city’s cab drivers and the District Council over credit card readers, navigation systems and uniform paint colors continued Monday, as dozens of drivers took their message to the street.
In front of the historic John A. Wilson Building that houses Mayor Vincent Gray and the council, drivers were loud and furious. They held signs that read “Support free enterprise and support D.C. cab owners” and “Where is the FBI when you need them?”
District cab drivers want to stop a bill that Councilwoman Mary Cheh, D-Ward 3, introduced in January from becoming law.
Under the bill, which received initial approval in June, cab drivers will have to update their vehicles to a uniform color, install payment systems that can take credit or debit card, purchase GPS devices and switch their vehicles to newer, more fuel-efficient models.
To help subsidize the plan, the District Council also included a 50-cent surcharge per flag drop in the bill.
While the council said the bill will help increase services that customers are demanding, drivers disagreed, arguing that it will only hurt the industry and more than 8,500 drivers in the area.
“We have been having a running argument since the city has been very disconnected from the drivers.” said Larry Frankel, chairman at Dominion of Cabdrivers – an advocacy association for drivers, “They don’t understand the issue from the street level. They think they are improving us while their actions do quite the opposite.”
Frankel, a taxi driver for more than 30 years, said if the bill becomes law, cab companies and independent operators, which make up the bulk of the fleet, will have to pay for equipment that could cost more than $3,500 per car plus an additional $500 installation fee.
To abide by the bill’s mandate to provide handicap accessibility, some cab drivers would need to purchase a new vehicle that could cost as much as $45,000, Frankel said.
Even among the council members, there are different opinions on how the plan should be implemented.
At-large Council member Vincent Orange Sr. said he supported drivers on the movement. But he also said that instead of working to overthrow the bill, the drivers should understand what the real issues are.
Orange said one major issue in D.C.’s taxi industry is that many outside drivers come to the area and take away customers from local drivers, many of them from Virginia and Maryland. In response, Orange said he is trying to strike a clause in the bill that makes it more fair to D.C. drivers.
“We don’t have the reciprocity,” said Orange, “we don’t have D.C. cab drivers coming there to pick up their customers. Their laws don’t allow us.”
Orange, however, said it is also unfair to completely negate what the bill brings in terms of customer services, amenities that would make the nation’s capital more tourist-friendly.
“There are some good aspects, but not enough and, therefore, need some amendments.” He said.
Some drivers agree with Orange’s suggestions on equipment updates. Still, they are worried about costs.
“We buy our own cabs, set our hours. We are great example of free enterprise in this country. The bill is destroying the foundation our small businesses.” Frankel said.
“This is completely a labor infringement,” said Nathan Price, another 40-year veteran cab driver. “You’d think it’s getting better, it’s actually getting worse. They are simply (trying) to make money. It’s all about kickbacks, nothing more, nothing less.”
The bill passed its first vote in the council 9-4 in June. The final vote will take place next week, on July 10, before going to the mayor for his signature.