2177 Petition of Executive Transportation Company, Inc., t/b/d/a Luxury Sedan Service; doc. no. 10-09-37?

PHILADELPHIA
PARKING AUTHORITY

Petition of Executive Transportation Company, Inc., t/d/b/a Luxury Sedan Service; Doc. No. 10-09-37

[40 Pa.B. 6623]
[Saturday, November 13, 2010]

Notice of Evidentiary Hearings and Applicable Procedures Regarding Various Petitions for Relief Following the Commonwealth Court's Decision
in Germantown Cab Company v. Philadelphia Parking Authority

 On April 28, 2010, the Commonwealth Court concluded that the taxicab regulations of the Philadelphia Parking Authority (PPA) are void and unenforceable as to one of the entities the Authority regulates (Germantown Cab Co). In relation to that decision, it directed that Germantown's fees and costs associated solely with the invalidated regulations be placed in escrow pending Supreme Court review. See Germantown Cab Co. v. Phila. Parking Auth., 993 A.2d 933, 943 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010). See also Order Vacating Automatic Supersedeas, No. 1252 C.D. (July 2, 2010) (Germantown Decisions).

 Recently, the Authority received petitions from the following companies: Executive Transport Company t/d/b/a Luxury Sedan Service; Arink, Inc.; Raink, Inc.; Bennett Cab Company, t/d/b/a Rosemont Cab Company; McQ's Enterprises, Inc., t/d/b/a Yellow Cab Company; Bucks County Service, Inc., Germantown Cab Company, Quaker City Cab, Inc.; Dee Dee Cab Company, t/d/b/a Penn Del Cab, Sawink, Inc., MCT Transportation, and Concord Limo.

 The relief sought by these petitioners includes: (1) a refund of all fees (including all of the annual per vehicle assessments, all vehicle assessments, all vehicle inspection fees, and all driver certification fees), all fines im- posed as a consequence of enforcement of the Authority's regulations, all assessments, and towing and storage charges assessed since June 2005; (2) a stay of further enforcement of the Authority's regulations including regulations pertaining to radio dispatch companies; (3) an order directing enforcement of the regulations of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission; and (4) a request for certification of a class action.

 The Authority will address each of these petitions in individual proceedings to be presided over by Hearing Officer Alfred Marroletti, however this Notice establishes some common rules, procedures and parameters which will govern all of these proceedings. Procedural rules contained in 1 Pa. Code Chapter 35 will govern these proceedings. Pleadings and other documents shall be filed with the Taxicab and Limousine Division's (TLD) Court Administrator. The TLD will be provided the opportunity to participate in each of these proceedings as prosecutorial staff. In the event TLD decides to participate in one or more proceeding, it shall submit a notice of intervention in each proceeding within 5 days of the date of issuance of this Notice. Further, the answer period established by 1 Pa. Code § 35.35 shall be extended and TLD and any other intervening party shall submit an answer to the petition within 20 days from the date of publication of this Notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Subsequent to the expiration of this answer period, a joint prehearing conference will be held by the Hearing Officer at which the procedures established by this Notice may be discussed and clarified by the Hearing Officer. At the prehearing conference, the Hearing Officer will also establish a hearing schedule to govern each individual proceeding. Following the prehearing conference, each individual petition proceeding will be administered separately. In each proceeding, factual issues will be presented through either oral or written testimony and will be subject to cross examination if there is more than one party in the proceeding. Legal argument will be presented through oral argument and/or briefs.

 The Authority requests that the Parties develop a robust record. Of particular importance, each party should address whether the Commonwealth Court's Germantown Decisions have legal application to the proceedings. Each party should also address whether the Authority's Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2011 or any previous Fee Schedules relevant to the relief requested are effective and binding on the Authority and the parties. If the view is advanced that the Fee Schedule(s) is binding, each party should address how the Fee Schedule(s) should be applied to the petitioner and the precise amount of any fees, fines and assessments that would result from the party's analysis. Furthermore, the parties should also address whether the invoice billing the annual per vehicle assessments or other relevant invoices are appealable adjudications. In addition, the parties should address whether any claims for refunds or other relief pertaining to any fees, fines, costs or assessments resulting from Authority adjudications which were not appealed by the party are waived. Finally, if a party seeks refund of a fine for a violation of Authority regulations, the party should address whether the prosecuted activity for each affected fine is violative of either Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission regulations or the Authority's enabling statute.

 This list of issues is not meant to be exhaustive and the parties are expected to present any and all evidence that they believe supports their claims. Furthermore, the hearing office is authorized to supplement this list as may be necessary. The resolution of this proceeding will be based on the evidentiary record developed in this process and the statutes governing the PPA including 53 Pa.C.S. §§ 550l—55l7, and 53 Pa.C.S. §§ 570l—5745.

 In addressing these fundamental legal issues, there will be no need for the parties to address the Authority's regulations. In consideration of the Commonwealth Court's Germantown Decisions, the Authority will not consider the content or application of its regulations in resolving these and other related issues.

 As the procedural regulations in 1 Pa. Code do not permit certification of a class action and the Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply to proceedings before the Authority, the request for certification of a class action shall be denied. Participating parties must present testimony and evidence to support their individual claims and cannot rely on the testimony or evidence of other parties. Although this Notice is being issued within each individual petition proceeding, the Authority will also publish this Notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin to assure that all industry members and other interested parties are aware of these proceedings and the manner in which they will be administered by the Authority.

VINCENT J. FENERTY, Jr., 
Executive Director

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 10-2177. Filed for public inspection November 12, 2010, 9:00 a.m.]