Taxicab Authority rejects plan for cameras in cabs

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2004 | 8:33 a.m.

The Taxicab Authority of Nevada on Tuesday rejected a proposal to require cameras in Southern Nevada's 2,500 taxis, instead ordering a one-year test run to study the effectiveness of cameras deterring crime.

Following six hours of testimony from cabdrivers, taxi company owners, union officials, community activists and representatives of companies that have placed cameras in cabs in other cities, the five-member board that oversees Clark County's 16 cab companies voted to reject a proposed regulation that would have required the installation of digital camera systems in cabs.

Cameras in cabs were first considered by the Taxicab Authority in 1992. Various proposals have been raised and rejected since then. The latest push for cameras gathered momentum from of a series of assaults, murders and robberies of cabdrivers that began in May.

Star Cab driver Mark Chavez was shot in the head on May 9 and has been undergoing rehabilitation ever since. Former Star Cab driver Wagnaw Gatahun is serving a life sentence in prison after pleading guilty to two counts of robbery in connection with a string of cab heists in August. Western Cab driver Aberga Asmamaw was strangled to death in his taxi in August. His murder remains unsolved.

The regulation, defeated in a 4-1 vote, was rejected primarily because authority members were convinced by cab company owners that a testing period for a camera system was needed before companies footed the expense of investing in equipment for each of their vehicles.

Industry officials say they have received estimates ranging from $400 to $1,100 per vehicle to equip a cab with a camera capable of capturing and storing digital images of a driver and all of the passenger positions in a vehicle.

The regulation also spelled out how a camera system would have to be capable of snapping a photo every six seconds after a taxi door is opened, an image every 200 seconds for 20 minutes and the capability of storing at least 4,800 images. The regulation also called for installation of a panic switch that could be activated by a driver in an emergency and record one image per second for five minutes.

George Balaban, owner of Desert Cab, said when he reviewed the proposed regulation, he priced camera systems and found there were none on the market capable of doing everything the regulation was ordering. Suppliers, however, said they could custom design systems capable of achieving the minimum standard.

Balaban also said he was concerned about upkeep expenses, the cab company management's ability to access removable memory devices and whether the Southern Nevada heat would affect the performance of the system.

Those arguments weighed heavily on authority members Lia Roberts, Richard Land, Horacio Lopez and Jo Anna Wesley Winn, who voted against the regulation.

Roberts, who chairs the board, said the issue required further study, particularly because the Las Vegas cab industry, reliant primarily on tourists, is different from most cities, and additional information is needed on whether cameras in cabs would deter crime or possibly scare off customers who could see cameras as an invasion of their privacy.

Winn suggested that other crime-prevention measures be studied along with the cameras, and Land said the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, should be contacted about performing the study so that industry biases could be avoided. Jason Awad, owner of Lucky Cab, offered to finance the study.

Proponents of the camera regulation were bitter about the vote.

"What does the vote mean? It means more drivers get killed and more murderers go free," said Arthur McClenaghan, a Lucky Cab driver who organized a petition drive in support of cameras in cabs.

"This proposal had the support of law enforcement, the district attorney and most of the drivers," McClenaghan said.

He applauded the lone authority board member who voted in favor of the regulation, Katheryn Werner, calling her "a woman of courage."

Supporters of the camera measure said taxi companies in other cities have had success with cameras in cabs deterring crime. Because those companies already have cameras in their cabs, they said, systems already have been effectively field tested.

Doug Anderson, executive vice president of Raywood Communications Inc., Bellevue, Wash., a supplier of camera systems in other cities, also was disappointed with the outcome of the vote.

"I'm not sure what they're going to study," Anderson said about what happens next. "There's already plenty of evidence that these cameras work in deterring crime."