The Nevada Taxicab Authority declared victory and pulled out of the battle over taxicab surveillance cameras on Tuesday, accepting voluntary efforts over a mandate.

The decision follows years of wrangling with the Legislature, cab company owners, drivers and civil libertarians over the scope and breadth of such a rule, and promises that all 1,700 valley cabs will have cameras installed by early next year.

"The goal has been safety, not creating a regulation," said Kathryn Werner, the authority's chairwoman. "The goal we sought to accomplish has been met."

The authority's efforts to formally mandate cameras in all cabs have been ongoing since 2004, but have twice been rejected by a legislative commission that demanded modifications, first over privacy rights, then over the scope of the rule.

Werner called the process "tortured."

Cameras had long been sought by cabdrivers, who statistically are more likely to be slain on the job than any other worker, as a crime deterrent and police investigative tool.

But drivers and civil libertarians have been wary about the devices violating privacy rights or being used as a management tool. And, until recently, owners and managers have decried the cost and questioned the effectiveness of cameras.

Roughly 70 percent of valley cabs have various types of video surveillance equipment. Holdout companies are promising to follow suit in no later than three months.

The decision was a disappointment to valley cabdriver union officials, who wanted legal assurances of compliance over unenforceable promises that lack any guarantees.

"I still feel cameras should be mandated," said Ruthie Jones, local vice president of the Industrial Technical Professional Employees union, the valley's largest representative of cabdrivers. "Companies are going to do whatever they choose to do.

"We hope and pray these companies maintain these cameras," Jones said. "If they (the owners) decide to sell it (their companies), whoever takes over doesn't need to comply with anything."

That's a concern some authority members echoed.

"It's voluntary, after many years of putting a gun to your head," authority member Carolyn Sparks told cab company managers. "All the compliance has come up because of the potential of this (mandate) being created.

"Eliminating all (proposed) regulation takes all the teeth of our ability to enforce anything," Sparks said.

But fellow authority member Ed Goldman said his agency can resuscitate the proposal if voluntary efforts backslide.

"There's nothing that prohibits this board in bringing the regulation back at any time," Goldman said.

Brent Bell, president of Whittlesea Bell Transportation, said cameras have benefited good drivers by backing their conduct in conflicts with other drivers or passengers, and allowing the company to catch and weed out drivers who drive recklessly or commit illegal acts while at work.

"Drivers and passengers, they now have a way to document incidents that happen between them," Bell said. "We're rewarding good drivers and getting rid of bad ones."

Since his company began outfitting its cabs with audio and video surveillance in 2005, Bell said he has seen a decrease in taxi wrecks, false crash claims, unreported accidents and fights between drivers and passengers.

"It's so nice to know what really happened and what didn't."