Miami–Dade Aviation DepartmentMiami–Dade Aviation Department

Ground Transportation Fees

Monica Beltran

BackgroundBackground

The Miami-Dade Aviation Department director may The Miami-Dade Aviation Department director may issue operational directives (OD) issue operational directives (OD)

Establishment of fees in an Operational Directive Establishment of fees in an Operational Directive require action from Board of County require action from Board of County CommissionersCommissioners

In November of 1980 the Aviation Department In November of 1980 the Aviation Department issued OD 24 regulating and classifying ground issued OD 24 regulating and classifying ground transportation service at the Miami International transportation service at the Miami International AirportAirport

Operational Directive 24Operational Directive 24

OD 24 divided ground transportation OD 24 divided ground transportation services into 4 classes:services into 4 classes:– Class A: Prearranged Interstate ServiceClass A: Prearranged Interstate Service– Class B: Intrastate ServiceClass B: Intrastate Service– Class C: Airline Crew ServiceClass C: Airline Crew Service– Class D: Expedite ServiceClass D: Expedite Service

Operational Directive 24Operational Directive 24

OD 24 also established service zones for pick-up OD 24 also established service zones for pick-up points, fees and insurance requirements for all points, fees and insurance requirements for all classes of serviceclasses of service

Fees included:Fees included:- $2,500 minimum security deposit- $2,500 minimum security deposit- $10 pick-up fee for smaller vehicles (38 or fewer - $10 pick-up fee for smaller vehicles (38 or fewer passengers ), including limousinespassengers ), including limousines- $20 pick-up fee for large vehicles ( 38 or more - $20 pick-up fee for large vehicles ( 38 or more passengerspassengers

American V.I.P Limousines, Inc.American V.I.P Limousines, Inc.

In 1989 American V.I.P. Limousines, Inc., In 1989 American V.I.P. Limousines, Inc., comprised of various limousine companies comprised of various limousine companies brought action against the Dade County brought action against the Dade County Board of County Commissioners, acting as Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Dade County Aviation Authority, the Dade County Aviation Authority, challenging regulations governing service at challenging regulations governing service at airport terminal.airport terminal.

RulingRuling

The District Court held that:The District Court held that:

1- “Classifications adopted by the 1- “Classifications adopted by the department for limousine services, bus department for limousine services, bus services, taxi services, shuttle services and services, taxi services, shuttle services and other pickup services did not violate equal other pickup services did not violate equal protection rights of the limousine services”protection rights of the limousine services”

RulingRuling

2- “Regulations did not violate commerce 2- “Regulations did not violate commerce clause”clause”

3- “Fees which had been charged by the 3- “Fees which had been charged by the Aviation Department were discriminatory “Aviation Department were discriminatory “

FeesFees

Limousine operators who showed that they Limousine operators who showed that they had been charged discriminatory fees by had been charged discriminatory fees by county aviation department for pickups at county aviation department for pickups at airport were entitled to the losses airport were entitled to the losses represented by the difference between what represented by the difference between what they had been charged and what they would they had been charged and what they would be charged under new fee schedule.be charged under new fee schedule.

Equal ProtectionEqual Protection

““Regulation limiting access of limousines to Regulation limiting access of limousines to airport terminal did not deny limousine airport terminal did not deny limousine operators equal protection of the law in view operators equal protection of the law in view of the fact, unlike the situation with taxicabs, of the fact, unlike the situation with taxicabs, their passengers would not be immediately their passengers would not be immediately ready to board, they did not take ready to board, they did not take passengers on demand, and their greater passengers on demand, and their greater size presented congestion problems.”size presented congestion problems.”

CommerceCommerce

““Regulations limiting access to airport terminal for Regulations limiting access to airport terminal for limousine services were not an unreasonable limousine services were not an unreasonable burden on interstate commerce in view of fact that burden on interstate commerce in view of fact that airport was more than 300 miles by land from the airport was more than 300 miles by land from the nearest state border, regulation was necessary to nearest state border, regulation was necessary to relieve severe vehicle traffic congestion, and there relieve severe vehicle traffic congestion, and there was little burden on interstate travelers, even was little burden on interstate travelers, even though the service had filed applications with though the service had filed applications with county aviation department for the right to operate county aviation department for the right to operate as interstate limousine companies.”as interstate limousine companies.”

Reduced FeesReduced Fees

In 1990 under a revised OD 24,the security In 1990 under a revised OD 24,the security deposit and pickup fees were reduceddeposit and pickup fees were reduced

Minimum deposit dropped from $2,500 to Minimum deposit dropped from $2,500 to $500$500

Limousine fee was modified from a pickup Limousine fee was modified from a pickup fee to a per-trip fee and was reduced from fee to a per-trip fee and was reduced from $10.00 to $2.50 $10.00 to $2.50

Teri Davis, d/b/a Dependable LimosTeri Davis, d/b/a Dependable Limosvs. the Aviation Departmentvs. the Aviation Department

In 2006, Dependable Limo filed a federal In 2006, Dependable Limo filed a federal lawsuit against the Aviation Departmentlawsuit against the Aviation Department

Claimed OD 24 to be unconstitutional Claimed OD 24 to be unconstitutional because of imposition of fees and other because of imposition of fees and other requirements on limousines dropping off requirements on limousines dropping off passengers at airportpassengers at airport

Claimed abuse of process and malicious Claimed abuse of process and malicious prosecution for enforcing the terms of OD 24prosecution for enforcing the terms of OD 24

Commerce ClauseCommerce Clause

“ “ County aviation department regulation per trip County aviation department regulation per trip fee and minimum insurance requirements on fee and minimum insurance requirements on limousine service operators that dropped off limousine service operators that dropped off passengers at airport did not impose passengers at airport did not impose unreasonable burden on interstate commerce, in unreasonable burden on interstate commerce, in violation of Commerce Clause, where violation of Commerce Clause, where approximately one-half of comparable airports, approximately one-half of comparable airports, imposed similar fees, …. And there was no imposed similar fees, …. And there was no evidence that fee and cost of additional insurance evidence that fee and cost of additional insurance could not be absorbed by operator’s customers.” could not be absorbed by operator’s customers.”

OD 24 requirementsOD 24 requirements

““The court in American V.I.P. determined The court in American V.I.P. determined that the requirements of OD-24 were not that the requirements of OD-24 were not clearly excessive at the time of that clearly excessive at the time of that challenge in 1990-91, and this Court finds challenge in 1990-91, and this Court finds nothing to suggest that the passage of the nothing to suggest that the passage of the intervening fifteen years changes the results intervening fifteen years changes the results of that analysis.”of that analysis.”

Equal RightsEqual Rights

“ “County aviation department had rational basis County aviation department had rational basis for regulation imposing per trip fee and minimum for regulation imposing per trip fee and minimum insurance requirements on limousines dropping off insurance requirements on limousines dropping off passengers at airport, and thus regulation did not passengers at airport, and thus regulation did not violate limousine service operator’s equal violate limousine service operator’s equal protection rights, even though taxicabs were not protection rights, even though taxicabs were not subject to same requirements;…”subject to same requirements;…”

Reference was made to the American V.I.P. Reference was made to the American V.I.P. Limousine case, which supported the differences Limousine case, which supported the differences between taxicab and limousine service between taxicab and limousine service

Abuse of Process and Malicious Abuse of Process and Malicious ProsecutionProsecution

““Having found no constitutional infirmity in Having found no constitutional infirmity in OD-24, the court now turns to Plaintiff’s OD-24, the court now turns to Plaintiff’s state law claims alleging malicious state law claims alleging malicious prosecution and abuse of process. The prosecution and abuse of process. The Court declines to exercise supplemental Court declines to exercise supplemental *1201 jurisdiction…over these two claims in *1201 jurisdiction…over these two claims in light of the Court’s conclusion that OD-24 is light of the Court’s conclusion that OD-24 is rationally related to a legitimate government rationally related to a legitimate government purpose.” purpose.”

Supporting OD 24Supporting OD 24

““The Court has found that there are several The Court has found that there are several purposes which could support OD-24, purposes which could support OD-24, including the regulation and control of airport including the regulation and control of airport roadway traffic, the protection of the public roadway traffic, the protection of the public safety, and the need to generate revenue safety, and the need to generate revenue from commercial users of the airport to from commercial users of the airport to support the provision of the airport facilities support the provision of the airport facilities to the public.”to the public.”

AVI systemAVI system

From a process that required issuance of a From a process that required issuance of a permit for each pickup and drop offpermit for each pickup and drop off

To an honor reporting system To an honor reporting system To an AVI system deployed in June of 2001To an AVI system deployed in June of 2001 Ground transportation revenues significantly Ground transportation revenues significantly

increased through enforcement and use of increased through enforcement and use of AVI technologyAVI technology

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

3Q2000

4Q2000

1Q2001

2Q2001

3Q2001

4Q2001

1Q2002

2Q2002

AVI OD 24 Revenue

AVI Deployed June 2001

Revenue Comparison

$43,903

$116,949

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

Apr 2001 Apr 2002

AVI OD24 Revenue

AVI Revenue Comparison April 01 vs. April 02 $43,903 vs. $116,949

REVENUE!!!!! In the 12 months following the implementation of AVI, despite the effects of 9/11, billing more than doubled as compared to the 12 months prior to implementation.

$472,069 versus $1,022,391

$0

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

6/00-5/01 6/01-5/02

AVI 12 Month Revenue Comparison

OD 24 Per-Trip RevenueOD 24 Per-Trip Revenue2008 Calendar Year2008 Calendar Year

Prearranged- Prearranged- A-1 Bus- A-1 Bus- $6.00 per-trip$6.00 per-trip $183,588$183,588

A-2 Van- A-2 Van- $2.50 per-trip $2.50 per-trip $280,285$280,285A-3 Limo- A-3 Limo- $2.50 per-trip $2.50 per-trip $601,953$601,953

Hotel CourtesyHotel CourtesyB-1- Small B-1- Small $1.00 per-trip$1.00 per-trip $291,829$291,829B-2- Large B-2- Large $2.00 per-trip $2.00 per-trip $205,194$205,194

Crew ServiceCrew Service C-1 SmallC-1 Small $1.00 per-trip$1.00 per-trip $42,978$42,978

C-2 LargeC-2 Large $2.00 per-trip$2.00 per-trip $10,628$10,628 TOTALTOTAL $1,616,454$1,616,454