by Jack Mayne

The fight over which taxicab company will get an exclusive contract to provide cab service for people leaving the airport continued Tuesday (July 6) when the Washington State Supreme Court was asked to review the legal case.

The Seattle-Tacoma International Taxi Association (STITA) is asking the State Supreme Court to review and overturn a recent decision by the State Appeals Court that denied STITA’s objections of a proposed new Port contract with Yellow Cab.

Filing of the appeal to the state high court means a stay prohibiting the Port from signing the new contract with Yellow remains in effect until the court either rejects reviewing the case or rules against STITA and in favor of Yellow.

The current STITA contract is due to end on August 31 and the Port is pressing to be allowed to sign the new agreement so Yellow Cab can prepare to provide service to the thousands to passengers who arrive at Sea-Tac and who seek taxi service. Any cab company can take people to the airport, but only a primary contractor may pick up passengers leaving the airport.

STITA’s original case says the Port’s new proposed concession fees violate the state’s Airports Act because it lets the Port “auction off” its monopoly taxi concession to the highest bidder rather than basing fees on “uniform and reasonable” charges, as the law provides. The agreement also fails to give “due regard” to setting charges based on the property used and cost of operations.

“We hope the state Supreme Court will hear our case,” said Jesse Buttar, a spokesman for STITA. “We believe there are significant questions the court will be interested in addressing.”

The Port faces two lawsuits stemming from the December 2009 awarding of the on-demand taxi contract at Sea-Tac to Yellow Taxi, which would end a 20-year relationship with STITA cab drivers.

In a second lawsuit, filed by Farwest Taxi, STITA alleged last week that the Port of Seattle violated the state’s Open Public Meetings Act by substantially altering a proposed contract behind closed doors and without further review by the Port Commissioners.

The Port released a statement noting the Port Commission, “as it routinely does, authorized staff to proceed with the award to Puget Sound Dispatch (Yellow Cab) and has delegated staff sufficient authority to achieve that end. The authorization and delegation properly occurred in an open public meeting. There has been no violation of the Open Public Meetings Act.”

Perry Cooper, the Sea-Tac media officer, said the Port never comments on pending legal matters, so would have no comment on the Supreme Court filing.

by Jack Mayne

The Port of Seattle has been accused by a taxicab company of violating the state open meeting act and seeks to have the Port restrained from signing a contract with Yellow Cab for exclusive cab service from the airport.

The legal dispute over the taxi contract for travelers arriving at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport could make finding a taxicab impossible after the August 31 end of the current contract. The Port of Seattle and the Seattle Tacoma International Taxi Association, better known as STITA, say some sort of service will be found but no discussions have been held with any cab provider, say spokesmen for both sides.

Court orders sought by STITA and other cab companies have prevented the Port from signing a new contract with Yellow Cab as recommended by the Port staff. For 20 years, STITA has held the contract to provide all taxi service leaving the airport, but the Port was stung last year by a state auditor’s report dinging the Port for not making enough money on the contract.

The Port and STITA say there were no discussions about increasing income to the Port. Instead, for the first time last year, the Port issued requests for proposals, which resulted in Port staff recommending the contract be awarded to Yellow Cab.

STITA and other area cab companies have gone to court to stop Yellow from getting the contract, claiming various problems with the way the bid were evaluated.

In the latest filing, STITA is asking for the court to issue an injunction restraining the Port from signing a new contract with Yellow Cab because it violated the open meetings act by adopting changes in the provisions of the contract in a closed door meeting and without giving bidders notice of those changes. The changes should have been discussed in a public and open meeting, says attorney Michael A. Goldfarb on behalf of client STITA.

“Everything points to the Port of Seattle to go back to the drawing board, and clean up this mess,” says Jesse Buttar, a STITA spokesman. “We’re not asking for them to give us the contract, but to give us a level playing field. This has been stacked against STITA from the beginning.”

STITA says it also plans to appeal another case to the State Supreme Court to continue an injunction preventing the port from signing the Yellow Taxi contract. If the Court starts its summer recess before acting on the appeal, the injunction against a new contract could result in no contract for cab service being in place after the current one expires.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE:

• STITA Cab Challenges Yellow Taxi Lobbyist Over Role In Taxi Contract
• Court Ruling Prevents Port Of Seattle From Signing Taxi Contract. For Now.
• Taxicab Companies Request State Investigation Into Port Of Seattle
• Port Of Seattle Being Sued By Second Taxi Company
• UPDATE: After Brief Denial, STITA Cab Wins Stay Against Port Of Seattle
• STITA Taxi Files Lawsuit Against Port Of Seattle For Breaking Contract

On Thursday (April 15) STITA Cab announced that it is challenging Chris Van Dyk, lobbyist for Yellow Taxi, to provide documents and answer questions about his role in drafting two rival taxi contract proposals.

Yet, according to documents (download PDF here), Van Dyk has failed to respond to subpoenas in the case and on Wednesday (April 14) filed a motion to plead the Fifth Amendment. The motion will be noted for decision in King County Court this Friday (April 16).

As we’ve previously reported, STITA has filed two lawsuits against the Port for its alleged mishandling of switching cab vendors over from STITA to Yellow Taxi. They have also accused Van Dyk of collusion in the RFP process.

Prior to this, the most recent news was Feb. 22nd, when the Washington state Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the cab company by granting a temporary injunction against the Port of Seattle’s planned contract with Yellow Cab/Puget Sound Dispatch.

According to STITA:

“If Chris Van Dyk has nothing to hide and didn’t do anything wrong, then why is he pleading the Fifth?” said Jesse Buttar, STITA spokesperson. “Clearly, it’s time for the Port of Seattle to do the right thing and re-write the proposal request and re-bid the contract.”

The Port of Seattle faces two lawsuits stemming from its handling of a competitive contract process for the exclusive rights to offer cab service for passengers leaving Sea-Tac Airport. The Seattle-Tacoma International Taxi Association (STITA) filed a lawsuit in January against the Port of Seattle to stop the Port from awarding its airport taxi contract to Yellow Cab.

On Feb. 12, Farwest Taxi (Rainier Dispatch), which was part of a joint venture that submitted a bid to the Port last year, filed a separate lawsuit alleging that Van Dyk had misappropriated the joint venture’s confidential information and had improperly passed it on to the winning bidder, Yellow Taxi. Farwest’s suit requests the court to disqualify Yellow Taxi’s bid, require the Port to start over and reinitiate a new Request for Proposal (RFP) process, and bar Yellow Taxi from bidding on the new RFP.

Van Dyk’s assertion of the Fifth is important because the Port’s RFP states: “One or all responses will be rejected if there is reason for believing that collusion exists among Proposers, and no participant in such collusion will be considered in future proposals for concessions at the Airport.” [RFP, 13.4.1, p. 6]

Last year, the Port opened the contract for on-demand taxi cabs at Sea-Tac and issued a Request for Proposals. In December, the Port awarded a five-year contract to Yellow Cab, to start in September. However, the Port currently is blocked from signing the contract with Yellow while the lawsuits make their way through the legal system.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE:

• Court Ruling Prevents Port Of Seattle From Signing Taxi Contract. For Now.
• Taxicab Companies Request State Investigation Into Port Of Seattle
• Port Of Seattle Being Sued By Second Taxi Company
• UPDATE: After Brief Denial, STITA Cab Wins Stay Against Port Of Seattle
• STITA Taxi Files Lawsuit Against Port Of Seattle For Breaking Contract

In the continuing saga of STITA vs the Port of Seattle, on Monday (Feb. 22nd), the Washington state Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the cab company by granting a temporary injunction against the Port of Seattle’s planned contract with Yellow Cab/Puget Sound Dispatch.

This means the Port cannot sign the planned contract “until further order of the Court” (click here to download/read the order as a PDF file), which could happen in April.

STITA’s request to expedite the appeal was granted by Commissioner Mary Neel. The Commissioner’s order states that this case will be heard by a three-judge panel “toward the end of the April 2010 term,” meaning that this ongoing SeaTac soap opera is far from over.

Members of STITA, who filed the original lawsuit against the Port of Seattle on Jan. 29, were obviously pleased with the decision.

“We are thrilled that the court stopped the Port from proceeding with an illegal contract,” said Jesse Buttar, a STITA member and spokesperson. “We’ve only ever asked for a fair process and a legal contract and now we hope the Port has finally listened and will re-do its flawed bidding process.”

Here’s more info from STITA’s press release, issued late Monday afternoon:

STITA, a non-profit co-op with one of the greenest cab fleet in the country, was created in 1989 by the Port of Seattle to exclusively serve the airport and provide reliable service to airport users. Now, after an unfair proposal process, STITA and its approximately 450 members and drivers will essentially be put out of business. They have the airport contract through August 2010.

STITA’s lawsuit claims that the Port’s bidding process violated state law by requiring bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues to the Port. This revenue system violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform. Previously, the Port had charged a per-trip fee to taxis based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies.

Additionally, the lawsuit contends that the Port’s new concession fees violate the King County Code and takes away from the King County Council’s authority to set “just and reasonable” taxi meter rates.

Despite protests from STITA to the Port about these glaring problems with the process and the proposed contract, the Port has so far declined to re-do its flawed contract bid.

A second lawsuit against the Port and Yellow Cab by Farwest Taxi was filed on Feb. 12.

Read our previous coverage of this ongoing legal battle here.

On Wednesday (Feb. 27th), STITA and Farwest taxi companies sent letters to Washington State Auditor Brian Sonntag and Attorney General Rob McKenna, urging an investigation into the Port of Seattle.

This follows a recent, fast-paced rash of two lawsuits filed against the Port for its alleged mishandling of switching cab vendors over from STITA to Yellow Cab (read our previous coverage here).

The letter to the State Auditor asks him to investigate the Port’s handing of the entire on-demand taxicab RFP (Request For Proposal) process, which resulted in the two recent lawsuits.

The letter to Attorney General McKenna requests not only for an investigation of the Port, but also of lobbyist Chris Van Dyk, who is accused of collusion in the RFP process.

“It’s time for the auditor and the attorney general to step in,” said STITA spokesperson Jesse Buttar in a statement. “We hope they will take a careful look at the allegations against the Port.”

We got in touch with Perry Cooper, Media Officer for the Port, who said:

“Understand we have just received this and will review our records again…but we are still emphasizing that we are confident the RFP and bidding process was fair, open and transparent.

We have reviewed our approach continually throughout a thoughtful and thorough RFP and bidding process.

We are aware of no facts that would support allegations of collusion.

At no time during the process did anyone file an official complaint.

We were not aware of these allegations until the suit was filed.”

Both letters are enclosed below, and are available also for download here (both as PDF files):

• Letter to State Auditor Sonntag (PDF File)
• Letter to Attorney General McKenna (PDF File)

The Port of Seattle is apparently being sued by a second taxi company – this time by Rainier Dispatch (aka Farwest Taxi) for ignoring collusion.

This is the latest twist in an ongoing legal war against the embattled Port of Seattle, and Rainier/Farwest is now the second taxi company to claim the Port’s process for selecting a new on-demand airport taxi contract is illegal (as we’ve covered previously, the first was STITA).

According to a press release we received Tuesday, Feb. 16th:

Farwest Taxi filed a lawsuit last Friday (Feb. 12th) in King County Superior Court against the Port of Seattle and Yellow Cab, its former partner in a joint bid for the airport contract. The lawsuit claims the Port’s proposal process was illegal. The lawsuit says lobbyist Chris Van Dyk drafted the bid for Yellow Cab, the winning bidder for the on-demand airport contract. Then he turned around and used that insider information to draft a less competitive proposal by the No. 2 bidder, a joint venture between Yellow, Farwest and Orange Cab.

“The Port of Seattle and Yellow Cab should be ashamed of this whole process,” said Gurcharan Dhaliwal, president of Rainier Dispatch. “Yellow Cab and Chris Van Dyk took our bid information and used it to make sure they came out on top, and the Port looked the other way.”

According to the lawsuit, Van Dyk knew trade secrets of the two other bidders in the joint venture, and used that proprietary intellectual property to ensure Yellow Cab submitted the top bid. In addition, in its legal filing, Farwest says it explicitly told Yellow representatives that it did not want anyone who drafted the joint venture proposal to also draft a proposal for any of the three individual members. They said they were assured that would be the case.

The Port’s own RFP states: “One or all responses will be rejected if there is reason for believing that collusion exists among Proposers, and no participant in such collusion will be considered in future proposals for concessions at the Airport.” [RFP, 13.4.1, p. 6]

This latest lawsuit follows on the heels of a well-publicized lawsuit filed by the Seattle-Tacoma International Taxi Association (STITA) on Jan. 29. STITA, which has the exclusive taxicab contract at Sea-Tac Airport through August 2010.

Like STITA’s lawsuit, Farwest Taxi’s lawsuit requests a court order barring the Port of Seattle from officially signing a contract with Yellow Cab. It also seeks an order disqualifying Yellow Cab from future re-bids of the airport contract.

STITA members were encouraged that another taxi company – even one of their competitors – saw the same foul play and are now suing the Port and Yellow Cab.

“Here is yet another reason for the Port to hold off on signing the illegal contract with Yellow Cab,” said Jesse Buttar, a spokesperson for STITA. “We hope the Port takes the opportunity to go back and review this whole process. This illegal process directly affects the 450 families who make up STITA. We just want a fair shot at the airport contract.”

A copy of this lawsuit can be downloaded here (as a PDF file).

In a fast-paced legal tennis match, after briefly having its restraining order denied, a State Court of Appeals Commissioner issued a stay late Monday in STITA Cab’s lawsuit against the Port of Seattle.

This means that, pending any other legal maneuvering, the Port will not be able to sign a contract with Yellow Cab.

Earlier Monday, King County Superior Court Judge Steven Gonzalez denied a restraining order filed by STITA to block the Port from signing the contract with Yellow Cab.

The contract for on-demand taxi service at Sea-Tac airport won’t be awarded until the court determines if the Port acted illegally. Judge Gonzalez heard STITA’s case Feb. 4th, and issued his decision Monday afternoon.

STITA vowed to continue fighting. They immediately took the case to the State Court of Appeals, which agreed to issue a stay – meaning the Port cannot sign with Yellow Cab until the legal issues are resolved.

The commissioner is expected to consider the merits of the case this week.

“We’re thrilled with this late-breaking win,” said Jesse Buttar, STITA cab owner. “We know we have a case. We just want a fair shot at the airport contract.”

On Jan. 29, STITA filed a complaint asking the court to halt the Port from signing a contract that violates state law. STITA seeks a fair and legal proposal process in which all bidders can compete on a level playing field.

In 1989, STITA – a non-profit co-op with the greenest cab fleet in the country – was created by the Port of Seattle to exclusively serve the airport and provide reliable service to airport users. Now, after an unfair proposal process, STITA and its approximately 450 members and drivers will essentially be put out of business.

In its lawsuit, STITA contends the Port’s bidding process violated the state Airports Act because the Port discontinued its prior practice of charging fees to taxicabs based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies. Instead, it required bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues. This violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the Airport’s actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform.

STITA contends the Port’s bidding process caused a predatory bidding war among taxi companies which not only was illegal but will be financially devastating to the King County taxi industry.

STITA’s lawsuit also contends that the Port’s new concession fee violates the King County Code, which requires the King County Council to set the taxi meter rate at a level that is “just and reasonable.” The Port’s new concession fee cuts directly into the county’s taxi meter rate and prevents cab operators from receiving the gross receipts that they legally are entitled to receive.

Despite notice from STITA protesting these glaring problems with the process and proposed contract, the Port of Seattle declined to re-do its flawed proposal and said it would sign an agreement with Yellow Cab. STITA had no recourse but legal action.

PREVIOUSLY:

On Monday (Feb. 8th), King County Superior Court Judge Steven Gonzales put up the first roadblock in a lawsuit filed by longtime Sea-Tac Airport vendor STITA Cab by denying its attempts to stop the Port of Seattle from signing a contract with Yellow Cab.

The exclusive taxicab contract was held by STITA for 20 years in a no-bid deal. After a harsh rebuke from the State Auditor over its contracting processes, the Port of Seattle issued a “Request for Proposal,” or RFP, for the first time last fall.

Yellow Cab won the award with a bid of $18.3 million, which is $8 million greater than the bid STITA submitted. Yellow Cab was named a defendant in the lawsuit, along with the Port of Seattle and other taxi associations.

In issuing the ruling, Judge Gonzales noted that the RFP allowed for prospective bidders to file complaints, or injunctions, to any portion of the RFP document; Gonzales said, “The Plaintiff had the opportunity to file a complaint during the process, and they did not. They only complained when they did not win the bid.”

Yellow Cab will have to expand to meet its new agreement and may add up to 150 taxis, which could mean transferring over some STITA drivers, according to company representatives.

Without ruling on the lawsuit’s merits, Gonzalez said that STITA’s request for an injunction was damaged by the fact that it waited until after the bidding process to object. Had STITA won the contract, it’s “inconceivable” they would’ve sought an injunction, he said.

As we reported Feb. 1st:

In its lawsuit, STITA claimed that the Port’s bidding process violated the state Airports Act, because the Port discontinued its prior practice of charging fees to taxicabs based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies. Instead, it required bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues. This violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the Airport’s actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform.

STITA contends the Port’s bidding process caused a “predatory bidding war among taxi companies which not only was illegal but will be financially devastating to the King County taxi industry.”

STITA has 216 cabs, 450 drivers, and claims to have brought in $10.58 million to the Port between 2004 and 2008.

On Monday (Feb. 1st), the Seattle-Tacoma International Taxi Association (STITA) announced a lawsuit against the Port of Seattle to stop the Port from “unfairly awarding” its airport taxi contract to Yellow Cab (Puget Sound Dispatch).

In the lawsuit, STITA contends that the Port’s bidding process violated the state Airports Act, because the Port discontinued its prior practice of charging fees to taxicabs based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies. Instead, it required bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues. This violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the Airport’s actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform.

STITA has 216 cabs, 450 drivers, and claims to have brought in $10.58 million to the Port between 2004 and 2008.

According to a press release sent to us by STITA:

On Friday, STITA filed a complaint asking the court to halt the Port from signing a contract that violates state law. STITA seeks a fair and legal proposal process in which all bidders can compete on a level playing field.

“If you think it’s difficult to hail a cab in Seattle now, wait to see what will happen if STITA cabs are put out of business,” said Jesse Buttar, STITA cab owner. “We’re trying to make sure that doesn’t happen. We’re asking the Port to reconsider and allow us to fairly compete for the airport contract. We’re sorry this has come to legal action, but we STITA members are ready to fight against what we feel was an unfair process by the Port of Seattle.”

In 1989, STITA – a non-profit co-op with the greenest cab fleet in the country – was created by the Port of Seattle to exclusively serve the airport and provide reliable service to airport users. Now, after an unfair proposal process, STITA and its approximately 450 members and drivers will essentially be put out of business.

“People tell us to go work for Yellow, but we can’t,” said Kanwarjit Bassi, who followed in his father’s footsteps and drives a STITA cab. “We don’t have Seattle for-hire licenses and it’s nearly impossible to get one. We were prevented from expanding service outside of the airport by the Port and now it’s telling us to go away. But, there’s nowhere to go.”

In its lawsuit, STITA contends the Port’s bidding process violated the state Airports Act because the Port discontinued its prior practice of charging fees to taxicabs based on the airport’s actual cost of services provided to the cabbies. Instead, it required bidders to commit to pay an unfair concession fee of at least 10 percent of their airport-based revenues. This violates the Airports Act, which says airport concession fees must be based upon the Airport’s actual cost of operations and be reasonable and uniform.

STITA contends the Port’s bidding process caused a predatory bidding war among taxi companies which not only was illegal but will be financially devastating to the King County taxi industry.

STITA’s lawsuit also contends that the Port’s new concession fee violates the King County Code, which requires the King County Council to set the taxi meter rate at a level that is “just and reasonable.” The Port’s new concession fee cuts directly into the county’s taxi meter rate and prevents cab operators from receiving the gross receipts that they legally are entitled to receive.

“I’ve driven a cab for 35 years – mostly seven days a week,” said Patty Stephens. “It wasn’t an easy living, but at the end of the day I barely made enough to feed my family. And I could take care of sick children or go to their soccer games without getting fired. It’s the only life we know; my daughter and son both drive a cab too. We’re all out of jobs if STITA loses this contract.”

Despite notice from STITA protesting these glaring problems with the process and proposed contract, the Port of Seattle declined to re-do its flawed proposal and said it would sign an agreement with Yellow Cab. STITA had no recourse but legal action.

STITA’s complaint will go before a King County judge on Thursday.

STITA BY THE NUMBERS:

• Cabs: 216
• Owner-Operators: 283
• Total number of drivers, including owner-operators: approximately 450
• Founded: 1989 as non-profit association

Declining trips in 2009 do not reflect new light rail service to the airport and how it will likely decrease future cab demand.

Current per-trip fee paid to Port for airport pickup:

• $3.05 in 2009;
• $1.80 in 2010.

Current STITA contract ends August 31, 2010.

Revenues to Port:

• STITA, 2004 – 2008: $10.58 million

Number of on-demand taxi trips at Sea-Tac Airport

• 2004: 578,259
• 2005: 639,751
• 2006: 648,275
• 2007: 732,694
• 2008: 740,867
• 2009: 676,010 (estimate)