Comments about ‘Proposed taxi regulations may doom local cab companies’

I think the city needs to give this a little more thought because what they are saying and what is happening are opposites.

If there are too many cabs then why is there long wait times? Sounds more like a shortage of cabs.

The efficiency and getting around the city by GPS is less than efficient. Most of the times GPS is erroneous and are not kept up to date on road construction and it leads you in to dead ends. A drivers knowledge of the city streets excels in efficiency over any GPS network.

Is the city, and city owned UTA, trying to force its service for the handicapped on to the cab industry by saying their cabs can't haul heavy motorized wheel chairs on the back bumpers? It's senseless to force cab drivers to deal with this kind of equipment that they are not familiar with.

It's my understanding that cab drivers are owner operators who lease from the company's and this change would overburden the cab drivers. Should any out of state companies bid and win this contract the city should also regulate excessive fare rates that will follow.

It is good to have the government around to create monopolies.

Why can't J. T. Martin and his cronies on the City Council leave the Taxi Industry alone; Taxi companies CANNOT afford to provide special needs for the "disabled," if the "Disabled" need to go somewhere, let them take the Bus. I did not have to wait long for a Cab the last time I needed one.

So your issue is long wait times so your solution is to reduce number of available cabs? Leave it to City council to come up with that idea.

Why? This whole proposal doesn't make sense. Something else is going on here that has more to do with somebody making more money at the expense of the people of Salt Lake.

I've only called a cab once and after about 15 minutes we just started walking. The problem isn't that there are too many cabs it's that there are not enough.

This proposal will take cabs off the street and raise taxie prices. This is what is commonly refered to as a horrible idea.

The newspaper's article states that the feasibility study and proposal were made and accepted by Utah in 2005-BEFORE the great recession. It is now 2010--AFTER the great recession. Now what?

Government OVER-regulation gets in the way of the free enterprise system every time. Public safety is one thing but economic control is wrong.

We find that more of our leaders are showing their level of greed and self edification by telling how neat they are to the people to generate monoplolies every where. I wounder how much in kick backs the leaders are getting from these companies to do this and how long have they been receiving this "thank you" money?. I hope in November the voters will see how corrupt these leaders have become and vote them out of office. Their greed is good training for Russia and Venzuala and cuba.

Why does government regulate? People don't look for causation. When a cab over charges, rips someone off or drives poorly, the cell phone response starts. Remember; Utah had laws against inattentive driving and recklessness driving but, conservatives in Utah had to have another law just for cell phones and texting?

The reason we have all this big government is because of folks like you. Every time you faced a stupid drunk in a park, you wanted laws banning all alcohol. If a person drove fast through your neighborhood, you had to have a new stop sign, like all the other streets had. If the guy next door was too lax about cutting his lawn you wanted the government to force him to act.

i find it hilarious that a dual contract is the best idea---i think it should be about organizing the current crop of taxis for efficiency instead---something like leading negotiations for common and non-profit dispatch centers---or idendtifying locations of high use and low use and trying to match taxi service to them with higher numbers of cabs in high use areas and times and sending people elsewhere when the inevitable changes occur---

Why does the city think that MORE regulation is better? If people are waiting for cabs, one would think that an entrepreneur would step in if a profit could be made. If there's no profit, then how could the extra regulations be beneficial for anyone?

This looks like a bad law. The government needs to get its hands out of businesses.

"Fewer vehicles generate more trips per vehicle and more revenue," he said. "It's in the public's best interest to regulate."

More trips per vehicle means longer wait times. That's not in the public's best interest. Neither is less competition.

That's a flawed business model meant to make a few wealthy, and put the rest out of business.

Apparently the existing local taxi companies have not been giving enough to the city council election campaign funds and this is the punishment.

RE: Not_Scared | 12:14 p.m.


Id a taxis comany ACTS BAD,

they word will get out,

they lose business,


LET the free market work,

it will work every time.


When government gets involved they just shackle everyone rather than just punishing the bad actor.

Every City Council is People that have a need to screw everything up.
Most have no good tatent at all!