March 14, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Aspen Daily News "State PUC bills Sullivan for investigation travel costs"

Hmmmm....so, how does this work?  Taxpayers pay for state PUC...and PUC is acting solely on a complaint by a private company (High Mountain Taxi) that obviously has a vendetta against Phil and yet gets all their legal fees and costs paid for by the state......and the taxpayers are pretty darn upset with the PUC for the entire debacle?

If Phil pays the 'fine', do the taxpayers get a refund on any of this mess and High Mountain Taxi finally steps up to pitch in to cover the state's costs?  Seems fair considering if Phil doesn't pay this 'fine' he's going to be in contempt again and headed back to jail.

So, how about you?

Still boycotting High Mountain Taxi in Aspen, Colorado?  Good for you. Buzz has it that so are most area residents.  Wonder how long it will take HIGH MOUNTAIN TAXI in ASPEN, COLORADO to launch another vendetta against Phil because they're so upset over their continued loss of business? 

Chad Abraham:
"If the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) gets its way, rouge cabbie Phil Sullivan will have to cough up $1,107.79 to pay for the hotel stays and other travel expenses of investigators and attorneys that came to Aspen to shut him down.

Meanwhile, the PUC is investigating whether a nonprofit organization recently formed by the Woody Creek man complies with statutory requirements that would exempt the corporation from state oversight. The tactic was conceived of by Sullivan’s attorney as a way to allow him to legally continue giving people free rides around town while accepting donations.

A six-year battle between the public utilities commission (PUC) and Phil Sullivan has resulted in two jail terms totaling about two weeks for the 76-year-old. He was found to have violated a district judge’s court order prohibiting him from giving rides around Aspen for tips.

On Monday, Judge Gail Nichols of Pitkin County District Court approved the PUC’s motion to bill Sullivan for the agency’s travel costs in pursuing the case. The expenses, which are related to the state’s most recent investigation of Sullivan last summer, amounted to $1,107.79...."  (Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

why won't big govt leave the 76 year old alone?
who are these undercover a##holes from denver?

we are all Phil Sullivan.

Don't tread on us.

Anonymous said...

Reply to Sandbox Nanny 3-14-12

“State PUC bills Sullivan for investigation travel costs”

So how does this work Nanny? Why stop with the piddly costs racked up by the PUC? Why not go back to all the hours put in by the State legislature in forming DORA and the PUC, and all the hours wasted drafting the CRS and CCR. Darn rules and regulations. The unfortunate thing is that these lawmakers actually had the forethought to exempt he type of free service that Phil Sullivan claims to be providing. Paraphrasing from the statutes: “It’s
O.K. to give friends and acquaintances rides.” No reason to set up a non-profit… unless his real agenda is to increase the bottom line. Sounds like a business to me.


What is going on here Nanny? Phil Sullivan said at one of his hearings that he “Hates the PUC” and has no respect for them. Fair enough. Maybe he’s the one with the vendetta. For many years he and his partners were the ones who owned the local Aspen taxi company and came down hard on anyone who tried doing what he is doing now.
And how big of a corporate monster do you think High Mountain Taxi is? Well I’ll tell ya. They often run two cabs during the “off” seasons. Yup. Two cabs. 24/7. Providing service when “their ‘free taxi’ guy goes away on vacation.
And as for the perpetrators of your so-called “vendetta”… Sorry to disappoint you but its not a vendetta. It’s just a bunch of working guys trying to earn a living, wondering how Phil Sullivan has managed to pull off the best scam that Colorado has seen in a while.
Nanny, if you ever need two examples of biased, yellow
Journalism you need to go no further than Aspens local papers covering this story. Check out the wording of The Aspen Times online poll about his being jailed for giving free rides (no) vs. his being jailed for not obeying the law (yes). Apples and Oranges.
Oh, by the way, the rides aren’t free. Never were, and never will be.
Common sense and a little knowledge of free market forces tell us that it just never happens.

There are no free rides
There’s always a catch
In Aspen the catch is, that the free ride always goes to the highest bidder.

I’m just one of those working guys. Maybe a bit “shy and reclusive”. Thank you for the opportunity to allow me to raise my voice. Maybe some others in Aspen will step up and bring the truth on this matter to light.

Anonymous

SandBoxBlogs said...

Your welcome, anonymous.

I hear you. Hopefully, you will have read all of my commentary on the saga of High Mountain vs. Phil. SandBox has posted all the articles from the beginning. We periodically archive to hard copy or simply delete old posts for various reasons; most of the time due to space limitations and the slowing down of the blog loading. Since we started the daily news aggregate line-up a couple of years ago, SandBox is approaching the 10,000 posts mark.

If you haven't kept up with the tracking of High Mt. and Phil done here on the blog, then you are not aware of my full opinion on the story.

Here it is:

I think High Mountain Taxi had the right to raise initial concerns. Involving the PUC (which by the way is one of the most protracted regulatory agencies in the state. A fact I think if there was full disclosure from HMT's end, they would agree) was the right thing to do. Previous posting commentary of mine actually stood on HMT's "side" and stood against the extremes Aspenites were going to while they tried to turn the whole thing into an "us vs. them".

From there, it was a question of watching how the situation played out. Sure enough, it didn't take long for HMT to step up (or down onto that lower road) and give them what they wanted. A good 'ol fashioned brawl.

So, now (from my perspective) it became a tracking of the facts.

Does a snowball hurling, foot chasing HMT vs. them 'incident' make for good news?

Or is the 'better news' HMT poking the PUC enough to get them to use taxpayer dollars to fund an 'undercover guy' to come up and stay in Aspen trying to catch Phil?

Phil has shown up in court, always cooperated and has served his time under court order. There isn't anything anywhere to show otherwise. Apples to apples, so to speak.

The first round of this situation was appropriate. Following that through and making the point in court was appropriate. Following that through again (even though the 'undercover guy' thing was way, way over the top, especially so now that taxpayers get double dipped for the cost until Phil pays up) when Phil didn't get the non-profit set up in time and broke law again, was appropriate.

To carry it further is ludicrous.

To have taxpayers covering the bill for the new screening into whether a non-profit is legit is unwarranted.

Now the facts point to it sure quacking like a vendetta and walks like one. And I personally find that a real shame because the first two rounds of HMT were justified and warranted.

I suggest embracing the coverage and the competition of Phil. You betcha.

Especially since the local newspaper covered the story recently about the 'other guy' in town who has now started a 'free cab' by putting signs on his vehicle.

How about a new PR campaign from HMT that shows all the things that you offer in service? All the things that somebody like Phil and now this 'other guy' can't and don't?

After all, Judge Nichols has accepted Phil's right to set up his non-profit. And she is sort of the boss of it all, don't you think?

Would you like to know who I would choose if I need a cab in Aspen or between all parts in-between?

Why, High Mountain Taxi, of course. They are, after all, the one with the ready service of more cabs on the road. I might change my mind and have a friend pick me up instead, though. If I have to keep paying out tax dollars for the PUC to be more protracted than they already are.

just sayin.

Thanks for writing in and the compliment on being given the ability to speak up freely.

FCE said...

There you go, Nanny!

Note to Self:
Watch the soon to be PR war between High Mountain Taxi and Free Rides for People Who Need Them!

Anonymous, there are endless possibles on the marketing thing. Like...say...hawkers. You know! Those stand on the corner hawking their wares kind of promoters. Dress everyone up at High Mountain in uniforms with spit and polish and clean cabs. Court riders as the ONLY PUC regulated small business cabbie. Talk up your Made in America and Stand for the Free Rights of all small business people in the nation. Be Legit. Support a starving (But Legit and Made in America) small business owner.

What does Phil have anyway? His 'Ride Phil' t-shirts?

Our Nanny is right. It's time for High Mountain to embrace the change, let go and let live.