BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 650
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB
650 (Low)
As Enrolled September 9, 2016
2/3 vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 14, 2015) |SENATE: |27-7 |(August 31, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|COMMITTEE VOTE: |9-2 |(August 31, |RECOMMENDATION: |concur |
| | |2016) | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Trans.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |57-12 |(August 31, | | | |
AB 650
Page 2
| | |2016) | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: G.O.
SUMMARY: Prohibits cities and counties from creating additional
rules and regulations on taxicab transportation services, as
specified, and states the intent of the Legislature that the
regulation of taxicab transportation services and taxicab
drivers be consolidated with other modes of for-hire
transportation regulated by the state.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of the bill
and instead:
1)Sunset the existing authority of every city and county, except
for the city and county of San Francisco, to regulate taxicab
transportation services operated within the jurisdiction of
the city or county upon notification from the Directory of
Finance to the Speaker of the Assembly and the President Pro
Tem of the Senate of the completion of the state
reorganization of transportation duties from the Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) to other agencies, if taxicab
transportation services are included in that reorganization.
2)Provide that taxicab transportation services and taxicab
drivers shall be subject to rules and regulations adopted by a
city or a county as those rules and regulations existed on
July 1, 2016, except for in the city and county of San
Francisco, with the following exceptions:
AB 650
Page 3
a) Prohibit service charges, fees, or assessments levied on
a taxicab company from exceeding the amount annually
required per taxi vehicle as of July 1, 2016, and prohibits
new or additional service charges, fees, or assessments
from being created.
b) Prohibit fees for the issuance of taxi driver permits
from exceeding $75 annually.
c) Prohibit a city or county from limiting or prohibiting
prearranged trips, originated through dispatch, an Internet
Web site, or online application, by licensed taxicabs.
d) Authorize a city or county to limit the number of
taxicab companies or vehicles that use taxi stand areas,
pick up passengers at airports, or pick up street hails.
e) Authorize a city or county to set a maximum fare
structure for taxicab transportation services, with maximum
fares not lower than the fares existing on July 1, 2016,
and the ability for a taxicab transportation service to
offer fares lower than the maximum fare structure.
f) Prohibit a city or county from regulating the type of
device used by a taxicab company to calculate fares,
including the use of global positioning system metering,
require taxicab companies to disclose fares, fees, or rates
to the customer before the customer accepts the ride, and
authorize a taxicab company to disclose fares, fees, or
rates on its Internet Web site or cellular telephone
application.
g) Require local rules and regulations adopted prior to
AB 650
Page 4
July 1, 2016, ensuring adequate service levels to all areas
of a city or county's jurisdiction and promoting the use of
taxicab transportation services by individuals covered
under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 to remain
in effect.
3)State the intent of the Legislature as the following: that
the regulation of taxicab transportation services be
modernized in order for taxicabs to better compete with all
for-hire modes of transportation; that taxicab regulation be
moved from local authorities to one state agency coinciding
with the Governor's reorganization of transportation; that
duties and responsibilities for the regulation of taxicab
transportation services be established by state departments
that handle all other modes of for-hire transportation; that
the Governor propose the specific budget and statutory changes
needed to establish duties and responsibilities to the agency
that handles all other modes of for-hire transportation; that
conforming changes be made in existing law; and that a city or
county not impose any rule or regulation governing taxicab
transportation service that are inconsistent with or in
addition to the requirements established by state departments
within the agency that handles all other modes of for-hire
transportation.
4)Make findings and declarations relating to the relative levels
of regulation between taxicab transportation services and
other modes of for-hire transportation.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires every city or county to protect the public health,
safety, and welfare by adopting an ordinance or resolution in
regard to taxicab transportation services rendered in vehicles
designed for carrying not more than eight persons, excluding
AB 650
Page 5
the driver, which is operated within the jurisdiction of the
city or county.
2)States that each city or county is required to provide for,
but is not limited to providing for, all of the following:
a) A policy for entry into the business of providing
taxicab transportation service, as specified;
b) The establishment or registration of rates for the
provision of taxicab transportation service; and,
c) A mandatory controlled substance and alcohol testing
certification program.
3)Authorizes each city or county to levy service charges, fees,
or assessments in an amount sufficient to pay for the costs of
carrying out an ordinance or resolution adopted in regard to
taxicab transportation services.
4)Authorizes each city or county to adopt additional
requirements for a taxicab to operate in its jurisdiction.
5)Generally vests the CPUC with regulatory authority over
specified modes of for-hire transportation, including
passenger stage corporations, transportation network companies
(TNCs) and other charter-party carriers.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill added the "Blue Grass
Stakes" to the group of stake races in Horse Racing Law which
are exempt from the 50-race per day limit on imported races.
AB 650
Page 6
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Existing law requires local governments to regulate
taxicab transportation services. Under this requirement, cities
and counties can tailor their local rules and regulations to the
specific needs and conditions of their particular jurisdictions.
By contrast, other forms of for-hire transportation that
provide generally similar services, such as TNCs, are regulated
at the state level by the CPUC. This results in uniform
standards statewide for those carriers and irregular standards
for taxicabs that vary from local jurisdiction to local
jurisdiction.
In response to what the author characterizes as a "severe
competitive disadvantage" inflicted upon taxicabs by "patchwork"
local regulation, this bill would sunset the authority of cities
and counties to regulate taxicab transportation services and
freeze those regulations as they exist on taxicabs today. Under
this bill, fees for the issuance of taxi driver permits would be
capped, and local authorities would be prohibited from
regulating the pickup and drop off of prearranged taxicab trips,
consistent with the treatment of other forms of for-hire
transportation regulated at the state level. Cities and
counties would still be allowed to enforce existing local
requirements on ensuring adequate service levels to all areas in
their jurisdictions and to individuals covered under the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
This prohibition on local regulation would not apply to the city
and county of San Francisco, due to the infringement on the
property rights associated with their unique taxi medallion
system.
AB 650
Page 7
In June of 2016, the Governor announced his intention to
transfer functions relating to the regulation of for-hire
transportation from the CPUC to the California State
Transportation Agency (CalSTA) and its constituent departments,
including the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the
California Highway Patrol (CHP), through the Governor's
Reorganization Plan process (GRP). This bill would state the
intent of the Legislature that the regulation of taxicab
transportation services be included in the GRP and that taxicabs
be regulated by the same state agency that regulates all other
forms of for-hire transportation. Details relating to the GRP
have yet to be announced, although the process is expected to
begin in early 2017.
Due to the uncertainty relating to the timeline of the GRP
process, it is unclear when CalSTA will be vested with the
authority and requirement to regulate for-hire transportation
services. If the Governor chooses to include the transfer of
taxicab regulation to the state level in the GRP and its
subsequent policy changes, as stated in the declaration of the
Legislature's intent of this bill, CalSTA and its departments
would then have to evaluate the myriad existing local
regulations and requirements and adapt them into a statewide
regulatory scheme, while also adopting the necessary regulations
needed to transfer CPUC's regulatory framework to CHP and DMV,
as initially proposed by the Governor. This process could be a
lengthy one. Between awaiting the completion of the GRP process
and the implementation of all subsequent, conforming legislative
and regulatory changes, the time for which taxicabs would be
subject only to the local regulations that existed as of July 1,
2016, and the exceptions set forth in this bill - with no
possibility of further local regulation - could be months or
even years.
While the period in which taxicab regulations would be frozen
may be long, it may be worth it to level the playing field
between taxis and other modes of for-hire transportation.
AB 650
Page 8
The League of California Cities has expressed strong opposition
to limiting taxicab transportation service regulation by local
authorities, as such an action restricts the ability of cities
and counties to address local transportation needs and cover the
cost of enforcement. Additionally, while the Taxicab
Paratransit Association of California supports this bill, some
elements of the taxicab industry believe easing the geographic
requirements on the origin of trips will give certain taxicab
companies unfair advantages over others.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:
I am returning Assembly Bill 650 without my signature.
This bill removes significant regulation of taxicabs by cities
and counties and declares the intent of the Legislature to
transfer the regulation of taxicabs to the state.
This bill fundamentally alters the long-standing regulation of
taxicabs by cities and counties and makes the determination that
this responsibility should be shifted to the state. I do not
believe that such a massive change is justified.
Analysis Prepared by:
Justin Behrens / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN:
0005127
AB 650
Page 9