Columnist Jeff German: Ruling does little to bring issue into focus

Sunday, Oct. 9, 2005 | 10:50 a.m.

Ruling does little to bring issue into focus

The Nevada attorney general offered a legal opinion on cameras in cabs last week.

But I'm not sure the picture got any clearer.

Essentially, the 12-page opinion, written by Senior Deputy Attorney General Christine Guerci-Nyhus, concluded that the public has a "legitimate expectation of privacy" inside a taxicab and cannot be subjected to video surveillance that includes audio recording.

Guerci-Nyhus also concluded, however, that audio recording can be done on a limited basis when a passenger enters and leaves a cab and when a driver feels he's in danger and presses a panic button.

This has angered civil libertarians, who say it's a "weak decision" that fails to fully protect the public's right to privacy.

But it's bringing joy to the weak-kneed Nevada Taxicab Authority board, which sought the opinion. The five-member board is considering a proposed camera regulation that allows the use of sound in these limited instances.

For two years now, this public body of part-time political appointees has been kowtowing to rich megacompanies such as Whittlesea Blue Cab -- which already have installed cameras capable of audio recording without a regulation in place to protect the privacy of passengers.

Whittlesea has invested $500,000 in its spycams.

The original intent of putting cameras in cabs was to protect the drivers from growing acts of violence. It was thought that still digital cameras, which are used in cabs everywhere else in the world, would meet that goal with minimal intrusions on the public's privacy.

But politically connected Whittlesea Blue and other companies wanted to do more than just protect the drivers. They wanted to spy on them, too.

So they bullied the Taxicab Authority board into widening the debate to include video cameras that record sound.

Suddenly, cameras were being viewed as a management tool, which threw the entire debate off course.

The board wound up having to weigh concerns about protecting the privacy of the drivers and the riding public -- in this case the millions of tourists who visit Las Vegas each year.

With the regulation in limbo all these months, half the industry hasn't even lifted a finger to install the recommended still digital cameras, leaving the lives of the cabbies hanging in the balance.

That's what has been most disturbing about the protracted debate.

Lives are on the line, and the regulators of the industry have been powerless to do anything about it.

They don't even understand the value of maintaining the privacy of the passengers in a town that thrives on tourism.

No one has been following this issue more than Allen Lichtenstein, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada.

Lichtenstein doesn't believe the attorney general's opinion on audio recording would hold up in court if challenged.

The Taxicab Authority board, he says, is asking for trouble if it follows the attorney general's advice and enacts a regulation along those lines.

"If they pass this as it is, I can anticipate that there will be some lawsuits and that they're going to be hard-pressed to defend those lawsuits," he says.

This is what can happen to a public body that has lost its focus.