Thursday, July 14, 2005 | 8:56 a.m.
On Monday the state Taxicab Authority held a public hearing on regulations it is proposing that would spell out how security cameras are to be used in cabs. It is pathetic that the Taxicab Authority, by its previous bungling of this issue, was again dealing with something that should have been settled a long time ago. Instead of simply passing regulations last year that would have permitted digital cameras only, in October 2004 the Taxicab Authority wrote regulations to the liking of the cab company owners. The regulations permitted cameras that also pick up sound, which allows a company's management to check up on a driver. Permitting audio, however, is controversial because it invades the privacy of passengers, whose words also would be picked up by the company. The 2005 Nevada Legislature wisely rejected the Taxicab Authority's regulations and ordered t he board to start over.
The latest Taxicab Authority proposal isn't much of an improvement, however. The proposed regulation would allow cameras with sound, although they would have to "comply with all applicable state and federal laws." The taxicab industry pretty much runs the Taxicab Authority, but it still is mind-boggling, after the Legislature's rebuke, that the authority would insist on allowing cameras with audio. Then again, prohibiting sound from cameras would mean that the Taxicab Authority would have to stand up to many in the industry, because nearly 60 percent of the cabs in Southern Nevada already have cameras with sound in them, having been installed after the Taxicab Authority passed its first regulation in October 2004.
When is the Taxicab Authority, which has really been more of a tool for the cab companies over the years, going to realize that cameras aren't supposed to be a tool for management? In acting as a deterrent to robberies and murders, the cameras are supposed to protect drivers. And, if a crime occurs, the cameras can help identify and catch a criminal. For that matter, when is the Taxicab Authority going to stand up to protect the privacy rights of passengers?
archive
