Aurora Sentinel: Hail, yes, we want more taxi companies
At least two state lawmakers are ready to help protect us from the state agency created to protect us.
State Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch, and state Rep. Daniel Kagan, D-Englewood, are chief sponsors of Senate Bill 65, which seeks to loosen the death grip the Colorado Public Utilities Commission has on the metro-area taxi industry.
The PUC has for three years worked to snuff an Aurora start-up company, Mile High Cab Company. It seeks to be a cooperative of sorts of 150 cab drivers.
In one of the most ludicrous rulings ever issued in regards to PUC action — and given the wild things the PUC does, that’s really saying something — an administrative law judge denied Mile High Cab’s request to go into business because it would create too much competition for the taxi industry.
“Wow” comes to mind as an initial response to such a curious statement. The illogic behind the statement runs along the lines of: having more taxi companies and more taxis would make it so competitive that the less-competitive taxi companies would fold and then the remaining taxi companies would unfairly control the market.
Kind of like they do now?
Given that this is the same PUC that never met an Xcel Energy rate increase proposal it didn’t like, it doesn’t take much of a leap to understand why they’re so disenchanted by Mile High Cab entering the taxi market. Had this agency had a say in the breakup of AT&T, we would all be paying huge monthly phone bills to one company for less service than what we get today.
Hence, the need for SB 65, which doesn’t seek to remove taxi regulation from the purview of the PUC (not a bad idea). It simply seeks to put taxi companies on an even playing field and prevent the commission from creating virtual anti-trust situations right here in Colorado.
The bill would require only that a new cab company have plenty of cabs (at least 50), have some kind of 24-hour dispatching system, and meet other public transportation requirements, such as meeting safety and insurance requirements. Should it pass, the measure would effectively keep the PUC from meddling in matters far beyond its intended powers.
Most likely, this bipartisan bill will get the bipartisan support it merits. If not, it would be time to move tax regulation to a state agency that is more committed to the public interest.