City council has passed first and second readings of its new taxi bylaw, though not without continuing concerns expressed from taxi owners.

Ken Giam of Premiers Cabs told council at its meeting Wednesday night there still remain a couple of flaws in the revised bylaw scheduled for third and final reading Oct. 24.

In particular, said Giam, the city's desire to impose a five-year life on taxi cabs for safety reasons, or at least demonstrate the vehicle is just like almost new, is not affordable nor practical.

He also noted his suspicion the five-year rule is not a safety issue, but a backdoor, cosmetic issue to beautify the city's cab fleets.

"I have heard bylaw (officers) say before they would like to have nicer vehicles,” Giam told council.

The vast majority of taxis in the city are older than five years old, said Giam, whose fleet consists of 12 vehicles.

Ron Pumphrey told council that phasing out one or two car operations which aren't supported by a central taxi stand and dispatcher would put him and others like him out of business.

The single-car service is important to customers who like to know the driver they're getting when they call for a lift, he said.

Pumphrey said eliminating the smaller taxi businesses will reduce competition and could open the door for larger fleets, and what he described as the seedy activity which sometimes comes with the bigger companies.

Operating a boutique service from his car with his hands-free, wireless bluetooth is safe. It also provides the personal touch his clients want while allowing him to go about his business without being tied to the radio in the car, he told council.

"The bylaw will affectively shut down my business in a year, or I will have to grow,” Pumphrey said. "And I do not want to grow.”

Surely, he suggested, there's still time for representatives of the city and the industry to sit down and come to some other arrangement.

But Coun. Florence Roberts reminded the company owner the city has been rewriting the bylaw for coming up on two years, complete with extensive public and industry consultation.

It was also noted the one-year period was provided to allow taxi drivers like Pumphrey to make alternate arrangements, and perhaps form some alliance with companies which have central stands or form partnerships with others in his situation.

Bylaw manager Dave Pruden reminded council last night the public itself expressed concerns about the use of taxi cabs unsupported by a dispatchers.

Not only is it a concern for driver safety, he said, but also for passengers if there's an issue arises and there's nobody at the stand wondering where the cab is.

Giam, on the other hand, said the requirement to have cabs fewer than five years old, or professional confirmation the condition of vehicles which are older than five years and are just as safe as cars fewer than five years, isn't supported by any policy.

Mechanics licensed to provide fitness certificates will confirm whether a vehicle is safe, as required by the laws which guide the industry, he pointed out.

Giam said they'll tell you if a vehicle is safe, or a part is worn and needs replacing.

But they won't tell you if a particular vehicle is just as good as any vehicle on the road that's five years old or younger, he said.

The bylaw reads a vehicle older than five years must have passed all mechanical – and general inspections – to be considered in the same condition as a vehicle of fewer than five years in age.

Giam said the city does not have any policy nor guidelines to set out the criteria for general inspections, nor how exactly a vehicle would pass or fail a general inspection.

One bylaw officer, for instance, may determine that a small rock chip or crack on the windshield is not acceptable, while another officer might not have any problem with it.

Giam recalled for council how he'd purchased a brand new car, and was instructed by a bylaw officer to trim the factory-installed mud flap, as it was sticking out too much.

But he notified the officer cutting the mud flap would nullify his warranty, he told council.

"I suspect this is a cosmetic issue,” he said.

He said he hopes the city does not pass the bylaw until it establishes exactly what criteria are required to rule a vehicle older than five years is just as good vehicle five years old or fewer.