City Council members on the Transportation Committee voted 4-1 Thursday night to have the full Council decide on changes to the City’s vehicle for hire policy. The contentious recommendations are to create permits for owner-operated taxis and remove the current cap on taxi permits.
The City staff recommendations seek to curb the continued decline in use of taxi services that began when ride share companies such as Uber and Lyft, which have no permit or driver cap, entered the market.
Taxi company representatives said lifting the cap would send the already struggling industry into chaos by flooding the market with additional cabs, while some individual drivers argued that having their own permits would be more affordable for them. If the City allowed owner-operated taxis to get permits, they would no longer have to lease them from the companies. They would, however, be responsible for vehicle maintenance and compliance with other regulations.
Councilman Rey Saldaña (D4) said it wasn’t ideal to bring the issue to a full Council vote, but wanted to see some movement take place on a long-debated subject. Council members agreed that, ideally, taxi companies, drivers, and City staff will find a compromise before the Council vote.
“My job is not to un-disrupt an industry,” said Councilman Manny Pelaez (D8). “We are slowly watching your industry drop dead, and it’s a very slow, sad train crash. It’s ugly, I hate to tell ya.”
There are currently 886 taxi cab permits issued by the City. Deputy City Manager Erik Walsh said the City could start adding more permits and monitoring the industry results.
That data could inform whether the new policy is working, he said.
The policy changes were considered by Council’s Public Safety Committee meeting in September. At the time, the committee voted to send the issue back to staff so that they could present more detailed and comprehensive findings.
Councilman Greg Brockhouse (D6), who cast the dissenting vote, said he would rather see a pilot program to see what would happen if owner-operated permits were added to the market. He called for the full council to be briefed before being asked to vote.
Though she voted in favor of skipping such a session, Councilwoman Ana Sandoval agreed that the presentation on Thursday was not as detailed as she expected.
“I don’t feel like we’ve come very far since the discussion at public safety,” Sandoval said.
Sandoval said the Council’s priority should be to ensure the safety of drivers and riders, not make sure the industry thrives.
It does appear Councilman Pelaez hit the nail on the head. The solution perhaps would be to order a taxi and pay before-hand as happens with Uber/Lyft. I use the ride-sharing companies for that simple reason… knowing before I board the auto what the cost will be… and adding a tip if the driver deserves one.
A lot of effort is going into trying to solve a problem that is going to get worse and eventually disappear within a decade. By 2025, it is likely there will be no need for drivers for taxis, Uber, Lyft, etc., due to the development and deployment of self-driving vehicles. Next in line to lose their jobs will be truck drivers. The city needs, maybe in coordination with the Alamo Colleges District, to be more forward thinking with a plan to provide training to move all these commercial drivers into other careers.
It’s a move in the right direction. The more competition the better. Competition will let consumers decide who serves the public best, rather than politicians and bureaucrats.