BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1885
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 6, 2010
Counsel: Nicole J. Hanson
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Tom Ammiano, Chair
AB 1885 (Hill) - As Introduced: February 16, 2010
SUMMARY : Removes the exemption currently given to
charter-party carrier limousines licensed by the Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) to enter or remain on airport
property owned by a city, county, or city and county but located
in another county, to offer transportation services, on or from
the airport property, without the express written consent of the
governing board of the airport property, or its duly authorized
representative.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that every person who enters or remains on airport
property owned by a city, county, or city and county but
located in another county, and sells, peddles, or offers for
sale any goods, merchandise, property, or services of any kind
whatsoever, to members of the public, including transportation
services, other than charter limousines licensed by the PUC,
on or from the airport property, without the express written
consent of the governing board of the airport property, or its
duly authorized representative, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
This provision does not limit the power of a county, city, or
city and county to regulate the sale, peddling or offering for
sale of goods, merchandise, property, or services. (Penal
Code Section 602.4.)
2)States that except in cases where a different punishment is
prescribed by any law of this state, every offense declared to
be a misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding six months, or by fine not exceeding
$1,000, or by both. (Penal Code Section 19.)
3)Prohibits the governing body of any airport from imposing
vehicle safety, vehicle licensing, or insurance requirements
on charter-party carriers operating limousines that are more
burdensome than those imposed by the PUC. However, the
AB 1885
Page 2
governing board of any airport may require a charter-party
carrier operating limousines to obtain an airport permit for
operating authority at the airport. A city, county, or city
and county may impose reasonable rules for the inspection of
waybills of charter-party carriers of passengers operating
within the jurisdiction of the city, county, or city and
county, for purposes of verifying valid prearranged travel.
[Public Utilities Code Section 5371.4(b) and (h).]
4)Defines "limousine" as any sedan or sport utility vehicle, of
either standard or extended length, with a seating capacity of
not more than 10 passengers including the driver, used in the
transportation of passengers for hire on a prearranged basis
within California. [Public Utilities Code Section 5371.4(i).]
5)Provides that every charter-party carrier of passengers and
every officer, director, agent, or employee of any
charter-party carrier of passengers who violates or who fails
to comply with, or who procures, aids, or abets any violation
by any charter-party carrier of passengers who fails to obey,
observe, or comply with any order, decision, rule, regulation,
direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC, or of any
operating permit or certificate issued to any charter-party
carrier of passengers, or who procures, aids, or abets any
charter-party carrier of passengers in its failure to obey,
observe, or comply with any such order, decision, rule,
regulation, direction, demand, requirement, or operating
permit or certificate, is guilty of a misdemeanor and is
punishable by fine of not less than $1,000 and not more than
$5,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than
three months, or both. Persons arrested for operating a
charter-party carrier of passengers without a valid
certificate or permit at a public airport or within 100 feet
of a public airport may have their vehicle impounded and
possession retained. (Public Utilities Code Sections 5411 and
5411.5.)
6)Prescribes persons convicted of operating a charter-party
carrier of passengers without a valid certificate or permit,
in addition to any other penalties provided by law, if the
court determines the operator has the ability to pay, the
court shall impose a mandatory fine not exceeding $10,000 for
a first conviction, or $25,000 for a subsequent conviction.
[Public Utilities Code Section 5412.2(b).]
AB 1885
Page 3
7)Provides that whenever the PUC, after hearing, finds that any
person or corporation is operating as a charter-party carrier
of passengers, including a charter-party carrier operating a
limousine, without a valid certificate or permit, or fails to
include in any public advertisement the number or permit or
required identifying symbol, the PUC may impose a fine of not
more than $7,500 for each violation. The PUC may assess the
person or the corporation in an amount sufficient to cover the
reasonable expense of investigation incurred by the PUC. The
PUC may assess interest on any fine or assessment imposed, to
commence on the day the payment of the fine or assessment
becomes delinquent. All fines, assessments, and interest
collected shall be deposited a least once a month in the
General Fund. (Public Utilities Code Section 5413.5.)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Author's Statement : According to the author of this bill, "I
was recently offered a ride by an unauthorized limo driver at
San Francisco International (SFO) Airport. I have experience
with this and know this type of illegal soliciting is
happening and can be dangerous to those passengers that get
roped in by these rogue limo drivers.
"AB 1885, provides law enforcement the necessary tools to
reduce the prevalence of unauthorized limousine drivers that
are illegally soliciting business at San Francisco
International Airport. Due to a 1973 exemption, SFO police
officers do not have adequate enforcement authority to monitor
unauthorized limousine drivers. AB 1885 would change the
Penal Code to give them this much needed authority.
Unauthorized limousine drivers not only take away business
from legitimate drivers, they endanger passengers because they
do not have to undergo criminal background checks and their
vehicles are not inspected by the appropriate authorities."
2)Background : According to information provided by the author,
"The PUC licenses and regulates passenger carries (limousines,
airport shuttles, charter and scheduled bus operators).
Passenger carriers must provide financial responsibility and
safety information to the Commission, including evidence of
liability insurance and California Highway Patrol (CHP) safety
inspection and approval. Companies must display their PUC
AB 1885
Page 4
file number on their vehicles and in advertisements; for
example, ' passenger stage corporations 1234' or
'charter-party carrier] 1234.'
"Limousine drivers that conduct airport pickups at SFO must have
valid PUC licenses and have a 'way bill', which is a
prearranged reservation with the airport for a specific
passenger. They cannot solicit anyone looking for
transportation at the airport. This is illegal. The 'way
bill' also allows the airport to verify that the limousine
driver is operating legally.
"Two situations currently occurring at SFO are putting
consumers' safety in jeopardy. The first is when a limousine
driver has a valid PUC license, but is illegally soliciting
business at the airport. However, because of the existing
exemptions on limousines, San Francisco Police Officers (SFPD)
cannot cite the driver for illegal solicitation.
"The second scenario is when a limousine driver is soliciting
business at the airport without having a legal PUC license or
using a fake charter-party carrier number. This is the worst
scenario because there is no way of verifying the safety of
the driver or the vehicle."
3)Limousines are Charter-Party Carriers of Passengers :
Limousine services are classified in statute as "charter-party
carriers of passengers." Charter-party carriers are allowed
to transport passengers for hire only to the extent that
transport was prearranged with the service by the passengers.
[Public Utilities Code Section 5371.4(i).] Prearrangement
generally involves a reservation of limousine services by
phone or in person by a written contract. Limousine services
are precluded from picking up passengers on a spontaneous
basis as taxicab operators are allowed to do. Thus,
charter-party limousines are not permitted to respond to hails
or on-demand requests for transportation.
Further, a limousine service or other charter-party carrier is
forbidden from "advertis[ing] its services, or in any manner
represent its services, as being a taxicab or taxi service . .
. 'advertise' includes any business card, stationary,
brochure, flyer circular, newsletter, fax for, printed or
published paid advertisement in any media form, or telephone
book listing." (Public Utilities Code Section 5386.5.)
AB 1885
Page 5
Charter-party limousines are also required by the PUC to possess
a "waybill" that must include, among other things, the name
and address of the person requesting service, the time and
date the service was requested, and the points of origin and
destination. (PUC General Order 157-D, effective February 24,
2005, Section 3.01.)
4)Is this Bill Necessary ? The author of this bill indicates this
bill "provides law enforcement the necessary tools to reduce
the prevalence of unauthorized limousine drivers that are
illegally soliciting business at San Francisco International
Airport."
Current law provides that every charter-party carrier and every
officer, director, agent, or employee of any charter-party
carrier of passengers who violates or who fails to comply
with, or who procures, aids, or abets any violation by any
charter-party carrier of passengers who fails to obey,
observe, or comply with any order, decision, rule, regulation,
direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC, or of any
operating permit or certificate issued to any charter-party
carrier of passengers, or who procures, aids, or abets any
charter-party carrier of passengers in its failure to obey,
observe, or comply with any such order, decision, rule,
regulation, direction, demand, requirement, or operating
permit or certificate, is guilty of a misdemeanor and is
punishable by fine of not less than $1,000 and not more than
$5,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than
three months, or both. [Public Utilities Code Sections 5411
and 5411.5 (emphasis added).] Persons arrested for operating
his or her charter-party carrier of passengers without a valid
certificate or permit at a public airport or within 100 feet
of a public airport may have their vehicle impounded and
retained. [Public Utilities Code Section 5412.2(b).]
In addition thereto, current law prescribes persons found
operating a charter-party carrier of passengers without a
valid certificate or permit, in addition to any other
penalties provided by law, if the court determines the
operator has the ability to pay, the court shall impose a
mandatory fine not exceeding $10,000 for a first conviction or
$25,000 for a subsequent conviction. [Public Utilities Code
Section 5412.2(b).]
AB 1885
Page 6
The aforementioned misdemeanors punish charter-party limousines
operating in violation of their PUC issued permit or
Commercial Ground Transportation Operating Permit issued by
the Airport Director. The Public Utilities Code is applicable
and enforceable throughout California. Thus, California has
rules and regulations to protect passengers from unauthorized
limousines; however, there seems to be a problem with
enforcement. This bill does not create new prohibitions upon
limousines. Operating in violation of a charter-party carrier
permit or any operating permit is behavior that has already
been deemed illegal under the Public Utilities Code. Does the
lack of enforcement of current law justify an adjustment to
the Penal Code?
It has also been alleged by the sponsor that limousines with
charter-party carrier licensing are entering SFO and
"soliciting business illegally." Under existing law, an
airport may require charter-party carrier limousines to obtain
an airport permit. [Public Utilities Code Section 5371.4(b).]
In addition thereto, the governing body of any airport may
adopt and enforce reasonable and nondiscriminatory local
airport rules, regulations, and ordinances pertaining to
access, use of streets and roads, parking, traffic control,
passenger transfers, trip fees, and occupancy, and the use of
buildings and facilities, which are applicable to
charter-party carriers operating limousines on airport
property. [Public Utilities Code Section 5371.4(c).]
Further, as discussed above, as a provision of a charter-party
permit, it is understood that limousines may only serve
prearranged customer and are required by the PUC to provide
within their "waybill" the name of the person requesting
service, the time and date the service was requested, and the
points of origin and destination.
Moreover, SFO has adopted nondiscriminatory airport rules for
charter-party carrier limousines:
a) No limousine shall be operated at SFO Airport unless the
operation of such limousine is currently authorized by:
(i) a valid certificate or Airport Commission's Rules and
Regulations permit issued by the PUC of the State of
California, (ii) a Commercial Ground Transportation
Operating Permit issued by the Airport Director, and (iii)
a valid California livery or commercial license plate on
the front and rear of the vehicle that is registered with
AB 1885
Page 7
SFO unless it is temporarily waived in writing by SFO.
b) Drivers of limousines entering SFO with passengers shall
load and unload the passengers only at such locations
designated by the Airport Director.
c) All limousines picking up passengers for hire at SFO
shall be by prior appointment or pre-arrangement with the
passenger.
d) All limousine permittees not adhering to SFO's limousine
procedures shall be subject to both administrative
sanctions and administrative fines as set forth in the
Permit by the Airport Director, as well as fines as set
forth in Section 14 of the Rules and Regulations.
e) All limousine companies with pre-arranged customers are
permitted to pick up and drop-off at SFO. Limousine
drivers and company representatives are required to have a
legible waybill with them at all times indicating the
driver and representative's name, the name and phone number
of the limousine company including PUC Commercial Ground
Transportation Operating Permit (TOP) certificate numbers,
the vehicle license plate, the name and address of the
person requesting the charter, the date and the time the
charter was arranged, the driver's name, the number of
persons in the party and names of every passenger to be met
or dropped off, the airline name, the flight number, and
scheduled flight arrival time of the passenger(s) to be
picked up or dropped off at SFO, and the points of origin
and destination.
f) All limousine drivers and company representatives, whose
company holds a TOP, and who have arrived at SFO to pick up
pre-arranged passengers, may proceed to SFO garage and park
in the area designated for limousine parking. Limousine
drivers are prohibited from circling or looping the
terminal roadways excessively to pick up passengers.
g) All limousine drivers and company representatives who
have arrived at SFO to pick up passengers shall, upon
request, present a valid waybill to any police officer or
representative of the City and County of San Francisco.
All limousine drivers and any company representatives in
the terminal buildings must wear a visible identification
AB 1885
Page 8
card issued by the company that includes the company's
Passenger Stage Corporation and TOP certificate numbers, a
color photograph of the employee, and the employee's name.
After the driver or representative makes contact with
passenger(s) listed on the waybill, the driver may board
the passenger(s) into the limousine either in the
designated limo parking area of the garage or at an area
designated by the Director.
h) Solicitation: Limousine drivers are prohibited from
soliciting customers anywhere on Airport property. [The
Airport Commission City and County of San Francisco, Rules
and Regulations SFO (November 2009) p. 27-28.]
It is questionable whether a statewide change should be made
for the benefit of a single airport due to lack of enforcement
of current laws. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether a lack
of adherence to airport rules and regulations regarding the
practice of soliciting business rises to the level of
misdemeanant conduct within the Penal Code.
5)Argument in Support : According to San Francisco International
Airport (SFO) (the sponsor of this bill), "This bill is
necessary because SFO has a long-standing and onerous problem
with 'pirate' limousine drivers who solicit customers at SFO
in violation of SFO's rules and regulations. AB 1885 will
benefit public safety at SFO by enabling the San Francisco
Police Department (SFPD) to exercise its police powers at SFO
in order to protect customers who are illegally solicited by
pirate limousine operators and who are unwittingly exposed to
risks associated with pirate limousines.
"Solicitation by pirate limousines poses a significant risk to
members of the public because these limousines can have unsafe
mechanical conditions and their operators my have criminal
histories or poor DMV records, which are unknown to the
illegally solicited patron. AB 1885 addresses this problem by
simply eliminating a limousine exemption in Penal Code Section
602.4. Penal Code Section 602.4 addresses a unique law
enforcement jurisdictional issues that arises with a public
airport owned and operated by one local government is located
within the boundaries of another local government. Under
these circumstances, the municipal code and the police powers
of the local government that owns and operates the airport do
not extend to the airport because the airport is located
AB 1885
Page 9
outside its boundaries.
"This is the situation with SFO. SFO is owned and operated by
the City and County of San Francisco, but is located in San
Mateo County. While SFPD is responsible for law enforcement
at SFO, SFPD is hampered because the San Francisco Municipal
Code does not extend SFPD's police powers to SFO.
"Fortunately, in Penal Code Section 602.4, the state provides
SFPD with legal authority to arrest any person who comes onto
airport property and sells or offers to sell goods and
services to members of the public in violation of the rules
and regulations or the airport governing board.
Unfortunately, however, while Section 602.4 applies generally
to transportation services, charter limousines are exempt from
this code section. Therefore, SFPD cannot protect the public
at SFO from pirate limousine owners and drivers by arresting
such drivers and impounding their vehicles.
"By removing the limousine exemption in the Penal Code, AB 1885
simply grants SFPD the same police powers toward pirate
limousines that law enforcement is able to exercise in other
public airports in California."
6)Argument in Opposition : According to the Greater California
Livery Association , "PUC-licensed limousine companies serving
individual and corporate clients have no reason to
inappropriately solicit customers on airport property. The
presence of a limousine or luxury sedan driver on airport
property is restricted to those individuals providing
pre-arranged travel service and have been licensed with the
PUC and the airport. The Greater California Livery
Association agrees that solicitation on airport property is
inappropriate.
"The sponsor of your legislation, SFO, has reported the improper
travel services solicitation if airline passengers in the
baggage claim area. In fact, SFO staff has stated publicly
that the presence of unlicensed limousine operators soliciting
customers is frequent and ongoing. Current law prohibits that
practice; SFO need only enforce that law. Licensed limousine
providers have no reason to be, nor should they be allowed to
solicit customers on airport property; their presence is
limited to pre-arranged travel. California Law, Public
Utilities code 5360.5 states, 'charter-party carriers shall
AB 1885
Page 10
operate in a prearranged basis at airports in this state.'
The evidence of pre-arranged travel is defined in Public
Utilities Code section 5381.5,
'The commission shall, by rule or other appropriate
procedure, ensure that every charter-party carrier of
passengers operates on a prearranged basis within the
state, consistent with Section 5360.5. The commission
shall require every charter-party carrier of passengers to
include on a waybill or trip report at least all of the
following: (a) The name of at least one passenger in the
traveling party, or identifying information of the
traveling party's affiliation, along with the point of
origin and destination of the passenger or traveling party.
(b) Information as to whether the transportation was
arranged by telephone or written contract.'
"SFO enforcement staff need only request the limousine
operator's waybill and check their own licensing documentation
to determine whether or not his/her presence on airport
property is appropriate. Current law allows for airport
enforcement personnel to impound the vehicle of any limousine
operator operating illegally or in violation of airport rules
and regulations. The airport may request that the PUC
investigate, suspend, or revoke the permit of any limousine
operator violating airport and/or commission rules and
regulations. The airport can deny access to airport property
to offending limousine operators.
"The Greater California Livery Association opposes your
legislation because 'sells, peddles, or offers for sale any
goods, merchandise, property, or services of any kind
whatsoever, to members of the public, including transportation
services' is not defined. Each of our operators welcomes
customers at unrestricted areas of the airport such as baggage
claim and outside the terminals with signage that identifies
the operator and the customer being served. Our industry
traditionally uses a 'meet-and-greet card.' We are concerned
that without a definition of what constitutes, 'sells,
peddles, or offers for sale,; a meet-and-greet card with a
company name, logo and contact information could be construed
to be a violation and could subject a legitimate operator or
driver to a criminal misdemeanor.
"The concern is amplified by the current practice at SFO. SFO
AB 1885
Page 11
strictly regulates limousine and luxury sedan signage on
vehicles: 'The company name or logo shall be legible in a
contrasting, yet complementary color.' Passage of AB 1885, in
its present form, may result in, and is capable of,
encouraging the regulation of; or refusal of the use of
meet-and-greet cards.
"It is not uncommon for our limousine drivers to be asked for
information, while awaiting the arrival of a client on airport
property, regarding arranging transportation service at a
later time. We are concerned that responding to a request for
information, such as providing a business card when requested,
may be deemed to be in violation of AB 1885 (selling,
peddling, or offering for sale) by airport enforcement
personnel; subjecting a driver to a criminal misdemeanor for
handing out a business card when requested."
7)Prior Legislation :
a) AB 1310 (Leno), Chapter 701, Statutes of 2007, requires
the PUC upon receipt of a complaint containing sufficient
information to warrant conducting an investigation, the
commission shall investigate any business that advertises
limousine-for-hire or passenger charter transportation
service for compensation in motor vehicles. The PUC shall,
in a rulemaking or other appropriate procedure, adopt
criteria that establishes the type of information, if
contained in a complaint, that is sufficient to warrant an
investigation.
b) AB 2591 (Leno), Chapter 603, Statutes of 2004, specifies
the required contents of a waybill, which acts as proof
that passenger rides are prearranged, enhances the fines
for illegal operators, and provides for local authority to
inspect charter-party carrier waybills tand to impound the
vehicles of illegal operators.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Airports Council
San Francisco International Airport
Opposition
AB 1885
Page 12
Greater California Livery Association
Analysis Prepared by : Nicole J. Hanson / PUB. S. / (916)
319-3744