The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-12-14
MAYOR GIVES
HIS ATTITUDE
ON TAXI ISSUE
Proposed Ordinance Mainly
Old Laws Codified, He
Tells Council.
SECTION ON FEES NEW
Urges Them to Adopt 1t If
They Believe Revision
in Public Interest.

Mayor Kern'S sole interest in the
controversial taXiCab ordinance now
pending is in the property damage
insurance, license fee and monthly
inspection provisions, ne told City
Council members today.
Otherwise the proposed ordinance
merely is a codfication of old ordi-
nanceS already in force and not ini-
tiated by this administration, the
Mayors letter to the Council men,
bers said
Council members were urged to
revise the proposed ordinance if
they consider such revision IN the
public interest.
Critics Attack Limit
Critics Of the pending legislation
have charged that it would favor
the street car company. They ask
for public convenience and ne
cesSity" clause instead of a limit of
one cab for each 1900 of population.
They point to the active opposition
OF the street car company when the
taxicab companies last spring intro
duced their own ordinance without
success.
The proposed codifcation ordi-
nance, sponsored by Walter Boetch-
er, city controller, was introduced
Nov. 4. In its original form it would
prohibit cab drivers cruising or So
Letting business on streets used by
street cars, traCkless trolleyS or mo-
tor buses; increase license fees to
$50 a cab provide monthly inspec-
ton; reduce the number of cabs and
add compulsory property damage
insurance to the present libality in
surance.
Higher Rates Threatened
AT a public hearing Dec. 2, three
OF four taxi companies represented
said adoption of the ordinance
would mean higher rates if indeed
1t did not put them out of business.
They particularly aSSailed a pro-
vision necesstating ownership in
every cab by the operating company.
This would destroy their corporate
identity inasmuch as the cabs now
were owned entirely by drivers, they
argued.
Text of Mayors Letter
Text of the Mayors letter follows:
In view of the widespread discus
sion concerning the proposed ordi-
nance affecting the regulation of
taxicabS in Indianapolis, l feel it is
proper for me to communicate to
you what 1 know concerning this
ordinance and my attitude with re-
gard to it.
Some months ago Mr.. Walter
Boetcher, the city controller while
talking with me in regard 10 finan-
cial problems of the city, explained
to me the necessity of collecting
next year all the miscellaneous fees
and receipts possible in order to
balance next years budget, and in
Dictated that the license fees to be
paid by taXicabs pursuant to exist
ing ordinances would be, in his
opinion and in the opinion of the
corporation counsel, difficult to COL
lect unless the city furnished some
AAAnlNNVAOli dS a lNS dl JllollllOdlIOIl 1OI
the charging of fees. He also eX-
planned to me that there were other
loopholeS in the ordinances i'm
posing license fees upon taXicabS
which might be done away with by
modifying to slight extent the pro-
visions of existing ordinances ap-
plying to the imposition of license
fees upon taXicabS.
In view of the facts stated by
him, and my understanding of the
legal problems involved, 1 agreed
with him that it would be advisable
to amend the existing regulatory
ordinances covering taXicabS by in
creasing to small extent the license
fees, by providing for certain in
Spections as to meters and the cabs
themselves, and otherwise taking
steps to guarantee to the city the
collection in full of the taxicab IL
cense fees for the ensuing year.
Qualification Is Decided On
NO mention was made during
this conversation of any general Or
dinances regulating taXicabS with
in the city or of any changes in the
existing ordinances other than those
specifically dealing with the license
problem. The next information
coming to me concerning this mat
ter was when I read in the press
that a general ordinance had been
introduced regulating the taxicab
industry in its entirety.
Upon checking Immediately with
Mr.. Boetcher and with Judge James
E. Deery, corporation counsel. I
found that the following develop
ments had taken place; When Mr..
Boetcher talked with the corpora
ton counsel with regard to the pro-
posed amendment which he had in
mind. Judge Deery informed Mr..
Boetchcr that there had been a