![]() |
Davette Blalock |
The bill had a mixed reception from the various committee's considering it. The powerful Budget and Finance Committee voted 4 in favor, 10 opposed and 1 abstention. The Convention and Tourism committee failed to return a recommendation, voting 2 in favor and 2 opposed. The Public Safety Committee voted 1 in favor, 1 abstention and 4 opposed. The Transportation and Aviation Committee voted 4 in favor and 0 opposed.
![]() |
Charlie Tygert |
![]() |
Jacobia Dowell |
Mr. Brian McQuiston, Director of the Transportation Licensing Commission, argued that Metro needed to hire an outside consultant to evaluate and advise metro on transportation regulation policy.
![]() |
Bill Pridemore |
Councilman Tygert said the administration wished to have the issue studied by an outside consultant. It was explained that to hire an outside consultant to help study the issue and draft legislation, that Request for Proposals would have to be issued and proposals evaluated. It would be a time consuming process.
When it came to the floor of the Council for consideration, Council Member Blalock moved to defer the bill indefinitely. On second reading a bill must have the votes of a majority of those present in order for it to pass. Two council members were absent and one member had said he would have to abstain due to a conflict of interest so passage was in doubt. One of those who was absent was thought to have been a favorable vote had he been present. Also, one of the members who we had thought would be in favor of the bill was Jerry Maynard, but he voted against it in committee. The sponsor was not sure she had 19 votes which would have been required for passage. The vote was going to be so close that the sponsor did the prudent thing and deferred the bill.
An indefinite deferral does not mean the bill is dead. According to the rules of the Council, a council member who has indefinitely deferred a bill may at any time request that the bill be placed on the next agenda of the council and the clerk shall place it on the agenda for the next meeting. Hopefully, at least some of those members of the Council who said they wanted a more comprehensive look at limousine and taxi regulation were sincere and will now get to work drafting an improved bill. Hopefully they were not all simply trying to kill the bill by continuous delay.
It is my hope that the sponsor will not allow this bill to die a slow death. If there is a not a speedy drafting of a more comprehensive bill, then the sponsor should bring the bill back and force the council members to take a stand. Even if it does not pass, I want to know who believes in free markets and who supports crony capitalism. Those who believe it is the proper role of government to protect the well-connected from competition should be on record voting for the price-fixing status quo.
Top Stories
No comments:
Post a Comment