Austin's 10-Cent Taxi War
- Austin lawmakers debated new regulations for "10-cent taxis" and other passenger-for-hire vehicles, aiming to address competition issues.
- A public hearing featured lawyers representing the 10-cent taxis, who argued the proposed rules were discriminatory, and the Austin Street Railway Company, who supported the changes to curb "unfair competition."
- A proposed amendment to license and bond taxis failed to advance after a narrow vote, meaning immediate changes to taxi regulations were blocked.
- A separate ordinance to define and regulate "jitneys" (early shared-ride services) was introduced and set aside for future consideration.
Full Transcript
374 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL: Austin, Texas. June 11, 1932. The Council was called to order by the Mayor. Roll call showed the following members present: Councilmen Alford, Gillis, Mayor MeFadden, Councilmen Mueller and Steck, 5; absent none. The Mayor stated that the meeting was called for the purpose of considering ordinances regulating transportation, and the following ordinance was then introduced: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AN ORDINAΑΝΟΣ ΕΝTITLED, "AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE OPERA- TION AND USE OF AUTOMOBILES ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CARRYING PASSENGERS FOR HIRE WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, PROVIDING FOR THE LICENSING AND BONDING OF SAME, PRESORIBING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION HEREOF, REPEALING OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY", PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVED MARCH 8, 1932, IX THE CERTAIN PARTICULARS HEREINAFTER STATED. Judge June 0. Harris and Horace Shelton, Attorneys for the 10g taxis, spoke in opposition to the ordinance, claiming that same was discriminatory. Judge Ike D. White, Attorney for the Austin Street Railway Company, spoke in behalf of the ordinance, urging the passage of same in order to eliminate unfair competition on the part of the 10f taxis. Mesers. A. 0. Baldwin, E. R. Pedigo and J. E. MoClain were also heard on the matter. Councilman Mueller then moved that the rule be suspended and the above ordinance be placed on its second reading. Motion was seconded by Councilman Steck and same lost by the following vote: Ayes, Mayor KoFadden, Councilmen Mueller and Steck, 3; nays, Couno11men Alford and Gillis, 2. The Mayor then laid before the Council the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE TO DEFINE THE TERM 'JITNEY', TO LICENSE AND REGULATE THE OPERATION OF JITHEYS ON THE STREETS AND PUBLIC PLACES OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF", IN THE CERTAIN PARTICULARS HEREINAFTER STATED. The above ordinance was read the first time and laid over. The Council then recessed. IV. Maden Approvedr Mayor. 1