OCEANSIDE: Taxicab company sues city, again

Attorney claims damages exceed $1 million

By CRAIG TENBROECK - Staff Writer | Thursday, July 24, 2008 5:52 PM PDT

OCEANSIDE ---- A taxicab company has sued the city for the second time in three years, alleging that Oceanside's refusal to grant it a permit for testing fuel additives at its maintenance yard has cost the company money.

The City Council denied the company's permit application in 2005. After months of litigation, an appeals court determined that the council's review was procedurally flawed, and it ordered the trial court to overturn the city's decision.

Now, the company, Samber Inc, wants the city to pay damages.

Samber, which does business as Coach Cab, filed a new lawsuit Wednesday in Superior Court, seeking an unspecified amount.

"I think I'm going to be able to prove in excess of $1 million in damages," said John Howard, the company's attorney, in a telephone interview Thursday.

Assistant City Attorney Barbara Hamilton declined to comment Thursday, stating that she had not seen the lawsuit. She referred further questions to City Attorney John Mullen, who was out of the office.

At the heart of the dispute is Samber's taxicab servicing facility south of the Oceanside Municipal Airport.

Several years ago, Samber contracted with Chevron to build and operate a facility for testing fuel additives ---- essentially an above-ground fuel tank ---- on that site.

The city's Planning Commission approved the required permit. But Councilman Jack Feller asked the City Council to review the decision. The council voted 4-1, with Councilman Rocky Chavez opposed, to deny the project.

During the council meeting, Feller accused Samber of violating the terms of its business license. Residents raised questions about potential health hazards from toxic substances in fuel additives.

Samber sued in late 2005, requesting that the court overturn the council's decision. The trial court sided with the city, but Samber won on appeal.

The court found that Feller improperly requested the review, so the Planning Commission's approval of the permit should stand.

(Howard said Samber is still waiting for Oceanside to comply with the court's order and issue the permit.)

The latest lawsuit is an effort to recoup money the company lost because of the city's "bad judgment," Howard said.

Contact staff writer Craig TenBroeck at (760) 901-4062 or ctenbroeck@nctimes.com.

Previous

Advertisement

19 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

dumbfounded wrote on Jul 24, 2008 7:58 PM:Way to go Jack! Think you you?

Here we go again wrote on Jul 24, 2008 8:20 PM:Wood, Esther, Feller and Mackin/Kern voted against the guidance of professional staff and the citizens pay. They same will happen with the Marina Towers.

Jacks million mistake wrote on Jul 24, 2008 11:06 PM:Jack didn't know how to get a planning commission item to the council? Wow! That's a huge, unacceptable mistake! And now the city has to allow this gas company to locate right next to the river using experimental chemical additives -- near sources of ground/drinking water. Feller should resign from the council, before he costs the taxpayers any more money!

Feller soley at fault wrote on Jul 24, 2008 11:10 PM:I don't know why "Here we go again" is blaming everyone else on the council when it states clearly that it was Feller's mistake. Maybe someone (the city manager?) should have told Feller how to do his job correctly, but it certainly isn't anyone else's fault, according to the judge. It looks to be just a spin to try to make Chavez look "good." Sorry, can't make silk out of that pig's ear.

Larry wrote on Jul 25, 2008 12:39 AM:So, we still have only one responsible council person on the Oceanside Council? The other four created a loss of millions for the City on the Marina Towers sale and here, chump change for attorneys for the taxicab company -- just a million bucks. The City needs to annually budget for the excesses and the losses of our "gang of four".

yo yo wrote on Jul 25, 2008 5:45 AM:I don't know about Mackin's vote on this, but Mackin and Chavez were the two no votes on the Marina Towers - lawsuits go back and forth. Let's see what happens.

Johny On The Spot wrote on Jul 25, 2008 6:47 AM:When are we going to stop electing these people? All they do is cost the city millions year after year in lawsuits and court costs for their actions.
They are amateur politicians trying to play with the big boys.
Oceanside loses every time it has to pay out on these lawsuits.

Fellers Fault wrote on Jul 25, 2008 9:57 AM:Yes good idea let's blame this on Feller, not that the whole Planning Staff and the City Attorney had an opportunity to chime in at any time, but let's blame the City Manager. Or could it be that the current owner of the local cab company had secured his votes to kill this proposal from a competitor? Just look at the recent Council discussion on the Orange County cab company coming to town, Wood, Sanchez led the charge to keep them out of town eventually loosing the argument. Do we really wonder why it is necessary to have only one Cab Company in Oceanside? Wake up folks it really is about the money flowing to campaigns.

City Manager wrote on Jul 25, 2008 11:18 AM:Who WAS the city manager? Is it possible that Feller is NOT to blame and instead its the city manager's mistake. Was that the same city manager who allowed tons of dirt to be DUMPED onto a neighborhood from a possible contamination site and the same city manager that allowed a baker to sign reports as a city manager? Could it be that Feller and that city manager are BOTH to blame for subjecting the city to this humiliation?

Osider wrote on Jul 25, 2008 12:32 PM:Can you say wannabee politicians run our city?

The Blame Game wrote on Jul 25, 2008 1:17 PM:The Council overtuned the Planning Commission approval on a 4 to 1 vote, on what bad advise? Oceanside has known about this problem since 2005 and chose to do nothing. Once again folks, wake up, it is all about camaign donations. Follow the money.

OCEANSIDER wrote on Jul 25, 2008 2:15 PM:It wasn't just Feller, although he brought it up, it was FOUR of the Council members who voted wrongly. They didn't know that Feller was procedurally incorrect. Where was the City Attorney and the City Manager and Esther Sanchez for that matter. She's an attorney, why didn't she spot that what was being done was procedurally wrong?

YUKON wrote on Jul 25, 2008 2:48 PM:It seems to me that the City could do this all over again, but this time get it right. The court ruled on what WAS DONE, not WHAT CAN BE DONE. City Attorney Mullen should advise the Council as to the proper procedure that will pass muster legally. I think the disapproval can still be done. It should be reconsidered by the Planning Commission, let them rule on it, then let it be appealed to the Council, who can then take the PROPER action. The legal problem was that Feller brought the matter to the Council when it was not being appealed, that's a no no. Anybody can request the Planning Commission to reconsider and if they deny the request, then that can be APPEALED to the Council. That would get it back on track.

Are You Kidding Me wrote on Jul 25, 2008 5:00 PM:What a side show, the North County Times needed to look just a little deeper. City Council deferred to a local Cab Company not in taking on out of town Coach Cab, but CHEVERON OIL COMPANY. This was who proposed the fueling station, and they do not take kindly to petty local politicians. So if you are looking for a procedural technicality to place blame for a major political blunder, you are challenging some very deep and unforgiving pockets. Cut your losses, you were advised by staff at the time of this decision not to chase this issue.

Yuh wrote on Jul 25, 2008 5:33 PM:Feller screwed it up because he didn't call up the item correctly, not because the majority voted NO to a polluting activity. The council was RIGHT to deny the permit for gas tanks and pumps. The cab company wasn't even before the council, so they're just smelling blood. Feller maybe should have known he goofed up, but saying that the rest of the council, city manager, and city attorney should have been on notice that Feller didn't know what he was doing is going too far. The public was AGAINST this request for gas tanks and pumps at the river. The majority (a rare moment) sided with the public and not deep-pocket Chevron.

Dah wrote on Jul 25, 2008 8:55 PM:What a Pollyanna, the Council knew exactly what they were doing. This was not about the environment or public safety, this was hardball politics that all understood to give Yellow Cab a continued monopoly in Oceanside. The Council bet the farm and lost. It is time to stop making excuses that even the bloggers can not believe.

Duh wrote on Jul 25, 2008 10:06 PM:Do these bloggers seriously think Mackin is still on the council...good lord what planet are they from! Put the blame on Feller and remember that in November. Get him off the council.

Yuh This Smells wrote on Jul 26, 2008 8:40 AM:The Fueling station was in an industrial area with no homes around and the fuel tank design met all federal and state safety requrements. No one believed this Sanchez inspired environmental safety banter then, and we do buy it now. Perhaps the court belives the City Council had no real basis to overturn the Planning Commission approval of this project, except to keep competing Cab Companies out of Oceanside.

Dude wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:27 PM:The City should have to pay big $$ just so that we can expose just how stupid the council members really are. Everybody knows that Feller is not a genius, but what about the three others that voted with him? Plus we have a city manager with no leadership qualities. What did you expect?

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

Submit Comment[-]

(optional)
   

Advertisement

Videos