Wednesday, May 19, 2004 | 10:55 a.m.
The Nevada Taxicab Authority, bruised by criticism that it hasn't done enough to help keep taxi drivers safe, jump-started a study to determine which crime deterrents would do the most good.
Board members on Tuesday set study parameters for Keith Schwer, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, to investigate what technology would be the best crime deterrent.
Schwer -- an economist and researcher who was selected to do the study because of his independence from the taxi industry -- also will have to sort through opinions from the cab driver community and cab company owners about what's in their best interests.
The Taxicab Authority in February considered a proposal to install cameras in taxis after publicity on a series of robberies, assaults and murders of drivers snowballed. The board, influenced by cab company owners concerned about the cost of camera systems and whether the types of cameras being recommended would be a crime deterrent, voted instead to commission a study.
Lucky Cab Co. owner Jason Awad offered to pay for the study. But Senior Deputy Attorney General Ann Elworth, the Taxicab Authority's legal counsel, said Tuesday that the process for the state to accept Awad's offer would have delayed the study for months.
Instead, Awad will donate the unspecified amount directly to the university to enable Schwer to begin his work. Schwer said the report would be completed within three to four months.
Schwer will be looking at more than just cameras. In addition to reporting on the effectiveness of digital still cameras and videotape systems that record video and sound, the report will investigate other deterrent solutions, including driver shielding systems, satellite-guided global positioning systems to monitor cab movement, and reinforced lock boxes.
Representatives of the Industrial Technical and Professional Employees union, which represents hundreds of taxi drivers, conducted their own survey and determined that most drivers prefer a digital still camera system.
Law enforcement officials say videotape systems usually offer the clearest photographic evidence for apprehending criminals, but drivers prefer digital still cameras, which include some models that drivers can activate when trouble occurs. Other systems record periodic images.
Disharmony between the drivers and the owners has resulted in an exchange of accusations. Owners say drivers don't want the videotape systems because they could record driver misconduct, such as longhauling -- the illegal practice of taking a customer on a trip longer than the customary route.
Owners say they fear drivers would vandalize or sabotage their own cameras to avoid getting caught doing something wrong.
Drivers say owners are just trying to dodge having to pay for a camera system and that revenue is more important to them than the safety of their employees. They also say the videotape systems invade the privacy of their customers.
Schwer asked the authority board for guidelines to determine what questions they want answered in his study.
Board member Kathryn Werner, the lone supporter of the proposal to put cameras in cabs, said she wanted to get an unbiased perspective of what features would best deter crime and an idea of how many vehicles should be used as an effective test for results.
She also asked for a public perception gauge to determine whether customer privacy really is an issue.
Board member Horacio Lopez also asked for an evaluation of other cities' deterrent systems and new member Edward Goldman asked how other cities have dealt with the vandalism issue.
The Southern Nevada taxi industry is among the tourism industries that is growing as a result of the rebounding economy.
Cab drivers provided 2.1 million rides to customers in April, a 15.7 percent increase over the same period a year earlier.
archive
