Committee advances ordinance to regulate peer‑to‑peer ground rentals at Lambert Airport, 5‑0

The St. Louis Board of Aldermen Transportation & Commerce Committee voted unanimously Wednesday to advance Board Bill 25, a measure to regulate peer‑to‑peer ground transportation operators (such as Turo) at St. Louis Lambert International Airport, sending the committee substitute as amended to the full Board with a due‑pass recommendation.

The committee adopted three whereas‑clause amendments the chair said would clarify the body’s authority and acknowledge the airport’s ongoing review of a comprehensive ground‑transportation ordinance. Chair Cone, who led the discussion, said the amendments are contextual and do not substantively change the operative text of the committee substitute. He argued the city should act now to place citywide standards on businesses that use airport infrastructure. "I think it's prudent that we move forward and put some regulations in place via ordinance," he said.

The airport’s director, Rhonda Ham Neebrook, submitted a five‑page letter read into the record opposing the committee substitute. In the letter, Ham Neebrook said the airport is at a critical stage in negotiations with signatory airlines over a consolidated terminal program and warned the bill could be perceived as "fundamentally alter[ing] the way the airport operates" and as interfering with airline negotiations. She also wrote that the legislation would "lock the airport into a regulatory scheme" after only five months of a 12‑month pilot permit issued to Turo, and asked the board to allow the airport to present a consolidated update to ground‑transportation rules rather than adopt piecemeal changes.

Industry representatives testified in favor of the bill. Don Lefebvre, identifying himself as president of the American Car Rental Association, told the committee the measure is about "basic fairness," saying "the same service equals the same rules" and that legislative language would protect airport concession revenue in a way an administrative permit cannot. "If a vehicle is being rented at the airport, the same safety, insurance, and fee structures should apply regardless of the platform used to book it," Lefebvre said.

Committee members discussed the bill's definitions and fee provisions. One member asked whether the bill's fee language mirrors current contracts; the chair responded that the committee substitute reflects existing contract terms and that the underlying ordinance already contains fee schedules for ground‑transportation operators. Committee members also asked whether codifying specific fees could limit future adjustments; the chair said a comprehensive ordinance update is expected in the next one to two years and that this committee’s action is intended as a limited, complementary step.

The committee recorded a roll‑call vote of five ayes and no nays. The clerk announced that Board Bill 25 committee substitute as amended passed out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation. The bill will next be scheduled for consideration by the full Board of Aldermen.

Clarifying details in the record include that the Turo pilot permit began Sept. 1, 2025, and is a 12‑month permit set to terminate Aug. 31 (the airport director’s letter identifies that pilot timeline). The letter also referenced a contract approved by the airport authority on Aug. 7 and executed by the airport director on Sept. 1, 2025. The committee added three whereas clauses that (1) cite existing ordinance 69,382 (as amended by ordinance 7,122) to assert that the board or airport authority can designate areas at the airport; (2) acknowledge the airport last updated ground‑transportation rules in 2020 and signaled a need for a holistic update within roughly two years; and (3) note the airport recently entered an operational contract that prompted recognition of peer‑to‑peer operations.

The committee’s action is a procedural advancement (a due‑pass recommendation) and does not itself change airport operations. The airport director’s letter requests more time and a consolidated ordinance approach; proponents say ordinance language is needed now to ensure consistent treatment of all ground‑transportation providers. The bill will proceed to the Board of Aldermen for further consideration.