The city will take proposed changes to the bylaws governing cabs and limousines to the public, but at least some cab drivers in Whitehorse aren't happy with the city's approach to the issue.

At Monday evening's city council meeting, cab driver Ron Pumphrey suggested rather than consulting the public on the draft bylaw, a working group should be established to look at the regulations around cabs and limousines.

If you start with a garbage document and then debate, you still end up with a final garbage document, he told reporters after council voted to take the issue to the public.

The city's bylaw department is proposing to break the current Vehicle For Hire Bylaw into two bylaws: one that would govern cabs, the other governing limos and charter vehicles.

New regulations would require cab companies to carry more insurance on their vehicles and would ban drivers' use of cell phones, among other changes.

Pumphrey pointed out that under the proposed bylaw, the company he works for – Quality Cabs – likely wouldn't exist.

The proposal would require cab drivers to be registered to work for a company listed in the phone book. At six months old, the company hasn't been able to get its number listed in the current book.

"Under this bylaw, we would not be operating,” he said, noting the word "strike” has made its way through the rumour mill of local cabbies.

Also arguing against the changes before council Monday night was Premier Cabs owner Ken Giam.

Both he and Pumphrey noted the difficulty they had getting a copy of the proposal, with Giam also stating there have been problems in dealing with the bylaw department in the past.

"We have no confidence in the bylaw department,” he said.

Throughout his presentation, Giam argued the city should involve a third party consultant or mediator in any discussions.

"I'm very worried,” he said.

The two cabbies weren't alone in bringing forward concerns.

Coun. Florence Roberts argued the city could be "biting off more than it could chew” with the proposal. Coun. Dave Stockdale came forward with a sampling from his long list of issues.

Among them was the cell phone ban, a lack of previous good consultation with the industry, questions over the cabs for passengers with disabilities, fines, regulations not dealing with shuttle buses, dark-tinted windows and the list of offences that fall under the proposed bylaw.

"It's a mess,” Stockdale said, as he went on to voice his support for the working group.

Coun. Doug Graham said he too has concerns, though many had been addressed when he read the bylaw and asked questions.

Stockdale had wondered what it would mean to have to return chattel, for example. Graham was quick to point out that that question had been asked, and it meant if anything was left in the vehicle, it would be returned to the owner.

"These are very simple answers,” he said.

Like Graham, Coun. Dave Austin said taking the bylaw to the public allows stakeholders to comment on the proposal.

Roberts and Coun. Ranj Pillai cited their own concerns, with Pillai suggesting the consultation could be a two-step process – first by meeting with stakeholders, then taking the matter to the general public.

"Let's take a look at what we're getting into here,” he suggested.

After Rob Fendrick, the city's director of administrative services, recalled previous meetings with cab industry officials over changes to regulations in years past that ended up dissolving, Graham suggested city staff involve a mediator.

With that direction, council appeared ready to vote on the recommendation to take it to the public with Mayor Bev Buckway calling the vote until Stockdale suddenly stated he had another concern he wanted addressed.

The mayor held to her call that ended debate. A visibly upset Stockdale continued to argue that administration could discuss the matter with groups, then bring a proposed process for input back to council for a vote.

Buckway said she is sure staff will keep members informed of the situation.

"I hope they will,” Stockdale stated before voting with the rest of council for public consultation on the issue.

Outside council chambers, Pumphrey continued to state his opposition ot the proposed bylaw and his lack of faith in the consultation process.

A report on the consultation and the bylaws will likely come back to council for a vote in the spring.