HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinding of Fact - RST Taxi,LLC. FranchiseSanctions
BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL
CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA
___________________________________
In Re: The Franchise of RST Taxi, LLC FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
AND ORDER.
___________________________________
On February 20, 2019, the City of Rochester Common Council conducted a public hearing,
following notice to RST Taxi, LLC (RST). The hearing was for the purpose of determining
whether RST Taxi, LLC should be sanctioned. The hearing occurred pursuant to R.C.O. §
95A.32.
At the hearing, no representative from RST Taxi, LLC spoke.
After considering all of the testimony and evidence submitted to the Council in this matter,
the Council arrives at the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. RST Taxi LLC was granted a franchise on October 19, 2015, and has been licensed
to operate within the City of Rochester since July of 2016. At the time the franchise was granted,
the business was required to operate a minimum of 15 cars. In 2017 the requirement was lowered
to 10 cars. At no time has RST Taxi met either minimum requirement.
2. In the fall of 2018, the ownership of the LLC was transferred from Sardar Khan to
Qudratullah Khan and the license file was updated to reflect this ownership change.
1
3. RST Taxi, LLC fails to meet several requirements, including the lowered
minimum number of cars. In 2018, RST provided information about and received licenses for
only four cars. Mr. Khan was notified in October of 2018 he would need to operate a minimum
of 10 cars in order to be in compliance with the ordinance, and would not be able to operate
out of the airport until he did so, and further would not be able to renew his licenses going
forward without being in compliance with the ordinance. He was not told at that time he could
not operate at all, but rather that he was expected to bring the business into compliance prior
to further renewals.
4. Between October and January, both the City Clerk and the Deputy City Clerk
met face to face with Mr. Khan multiple times, as well as exchanged multiple phone calls and
email messages about the license requirements. Well into January, the Clerk’s Office
continued working with Mr. Khan to try to bring him into compliance.
5. An RST Taxi and driver were involved in an accident in December of 2018. As a
result of that accident, a number of additional potential issues were discovered about the
business. Drivers without a City taxicab driver’s license were being allowed to operate RST
cabs. The driver involved in the accident was cited by RPD for not having a city license. The
police reports of that incident also outlined issues with obtaining insurance information from
RST, which ultimately had to be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office to be provided to the
other driver, and raised concerns about whether RST meets the requirements in the ordinance
for a central dispatch location, as calls by the other driver involved in the accident to the
business phone number were answered directly by the taxi driver who was involved. In
response to questions about this, Mr. Khan has stated that the driver was also employed as a
2
dispatcher and had gone in to work dispatch after he finished driving. However, all of RST’s
application materials indicate they have no employees, and are exempt from state worker’s
compensation requirements.
5. The Council finds RST’s operation unreasonably annoys and endangers the
safety of the public by using unlicensed drivers, not having a central dispatch, and not
operating the minimum number of taxi cabs.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. R.C.O. § 95A.32 allows for the Council to sanction a franchise for violation of
applicable statute, rule or ordinances and if the franchise operates or maintains in a way that
unreasonably annoys, endangers or injures the safety or health of the public.
2. The Council concludes RST violated state law and city ordinance as well as
unreasonably annoyed and endangered the public by not using licensed drivers, failing to maintain
the minimum number of taxi cabs and not having a central dispatch center.
3
ORDER
The Common Council of the City of Rochester does hereby REVOKE the franchise granted
to RST pursuant to R.C.O. § 95A32 subd.4.
Dated at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of _____________, 2019
________________________________
Randy Staver
President of the Rochester City Council
Approved at Rochester, Minnesota this _____ day of _______________, 2019.
______________________________
Kim Norton
Mayor of the City of Rochester
4