Committee posts substitute for airport rental-vehicle ordinance after split public testimony from Turo and rental companies

The Transportation and Commerce Committee on June 11 considered a committee substitute to Board Bill 25, a proposed change to Chapter 18 of the city code to standardize rules and fees for rental activity at Lambert–St. Louis International Airport, including peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms.

Airport staff told the committee they have concerns about the substitute and asked for additional time to review. Rob Salarano, the airport’s property manager, said the proposed language could have unintended effects on existing concession agreements and off-airport ground-transportation agreements, and said specific provisions (for example, the fee schedule in Section 18.03) might conflict with contractual minimum guarantees and established concession terms.

Why it matters: The substitute touches on who can conduct car rentals at the airport curb, what information operators must provide, and how fees are calculated. That affects airport revenue, airport operations, concession-holder contractual protections (minimum guarantees), and the business model under which peer-to-peer platforms operate.

Public testimony split along industry lines. Representatives of Turo, a peer-to-peer car-sharing platform, urged the committee not to adopt language that would force peer-to-peer services into the same operational model as traditional rental-car companies. Aaron Baraza, Turo’s senior airport partnerships manager, said Turo’s model does not require rental counters, long-term fleet storage or employee infrastructure and that most peer-to-peer exchanges are brief and do not impose the same facility needs as legacy rental companies. James Bangeser, Turo senior counsel, added that more than 150 U.S. airports have negotiated permits with peer-to-peer operators that reflect those operational differences and that recent Missouri legislation recognizes the distinction between car sharing and traditional rental activity.

Legacy rental-car interests and their counsel urged the committee to adopt rules that treat all rental activity equitably when it occurs on airport property. Don Lefebvre of the American Car Rental Association said the substitute “ensures that airports can collect appropriate fees from all entities offering rental services regardless of business model.” Tim O’Connell, representing Enterprise Mobility, told the committee the substitute would reduce the prospect of a single operator obtaining walk-up curb access without the bid or concession processes used for existing rental operators.

Airport staff also raised operational concerns in public comment: the substitute would require collection of detailed vehicle information (vehicle identification numbers, model, color) that staff said the airport does not currently need for fee collection; it might require placards on peer-to-peer cars that staff said could create liability or enable theft; and changes to liquidated-damages or cancellation clauses could conflict with existing agreements. Airport staff asked the committee and the bill sponsor for time to reconcile those points with the city attorney and the airport commission.

Procedure and next steps: The committee adopted the committee substitute into the record but did not take a final vote on the ordinance. The chair said he would solicit formal comments from the airport director and schedule further hearings—likely next week if calendars permit—before the committee acts on a final ordinance.

Public comment list included Turo representatives, rental-industry counsel and American Car Rental Association testimony in support of an even playing field and stronger enforcement of fees and operating standards at airport property.