OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CHERYL L. BROWN 117
WEST DUVAL STREET,
DIRECTOR 4TH FLOOR, CITY
HALL
OFFICE (904) 630-1452
FAX (904) 630-2906
E-MAIL: CLBROWN@coj.net
JOINT RULES/TEU VEHICLES FOR
HIRE SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES
September 26, 2013
10:00 a.m.
City Council Conference Room A
Suite 425, City Hall
117 West Duval Street
Attendance: Council Members Stephen Joost, Richard
Clark
Also: Paige Johnston – Office of General Counsel; Paula Shoup – Legislative Services Division; Paige Johnston – Office of General Counsel
See attached sign-in sheet for additional attendees
Council Member Joost called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. and all attendees identified themselves for the record. Justin Kintz representing Uber (by teleconference) stated that his company can’t be successful in the Jacksonville market without the buy-in and participation of the existing limousine companies to provide their drivers and vehicles. In response to a question from Brad Wright of Checker Yellow Cab about Uber sharing its process for credentialing drivers in the local market, Mr. Kintz said that he is working with his company’s driver operations personnel to answer that question. The answer to that question is crucial to the local companies who want to know if Uber contracts only with companies for drivers of company cars or if it contracts with individual drivers with personal vehicles (or perhaps personal corporations). Michele Riddle said that the 30 minute wait requirement is also a major concern for the local taxi companies and they are very interested in how it will or won’t apply to Uber. Elimination of the 30 minute wait requirement would make limousine companies into direct competitors for taxicabs.
Marty Fiorentino and Justin Kintz stated that Uber only utilizes drivers who hold commercial licenses and commercial insurance to provide their service, so there is no question of their drivers being “legal” and as qualified to carry passengers as any other vehicle for hire drivers. Uber is a software company, not a transportation company, so only uses locally available resources to provide the service. They do double-check the credentials of the drivers to ensure that they are properly licensed and insured for the safety of the passenger.
Council Member Clark questioned the need to change the City’s current ordinances regarding the 30 minute wait time and the minimum 1 hour charge for Uber’s benefit. The company could bring its app to town without changing the rules, so why is it necessary to do it? Mr. Kintz stated that it’s what the consumer wants, which the local companies challenged. Grady Braddock Jr. said that changing the 30 minute wait rule would effectively turn all vehicles for hire into on-demand taxi services, but only the current taxi companies would be subject to taxi regulations, including the obligation to provide ADA accessible service at no additional cost (requires the purchase of special ADA accessible vehicles) and the requirement to serve every caller, including low-income passengers who don’t have cellphones or credit cards. Uber’s model requires both a cellphone and a credit card, so they would not be serving the low income market. Allowing Uber to handle only the high-end calls puts the taxi companies at a competitive disadvantage because they are left handling a high proportion of the less lucrative calls. Joe Mobley representing Uber quoted from the City’s vehicle for hire ordinance which states that the City intends to use the least regulation possible to ensure public health and safety and to otherwise let the free market prevail in service provision.
The group discussed the possibility of a driver signing up to drive for a limousine company, obtaining the proper license and credentials, then quitting the company and handling Uber calls in a personal vehicle without the corporate insurance that Uber believed was in place. Processes will need to be in place at several levels, for the company the driver is quitting, for the City, and for Uber, to communicate a driver’s legal status to one another so that the consumer is not put in danger of riding with an uninsured driver. Uber pointed out that the hypothetical situation being described is no different from what happens today with limousine drivers for the existing companies.
Council Member Clark stated that he is happy to have Uber enter the Jacksonville marketplace but is opposed to changing the long-standing regulatory system for the benefit of one newcomer to the market. The local cab companies expressed concern with Uber rides siphoning off taxi business to the point where taxi drivers can’t make enough fare revenue to pay for their vehicle leases and quit the job altogether, leaving the taxi companies short of driver capacity. Grady Braddock Jr. stated that there is a class action lawsuit currently in litigation filed by Uber drivers against the company for skimming off a portion of the drivers’ tips. Mr. Klintz stated that the “class” is composed of 9 individual drivers out of the tens of thousands who drive for Uber.
Council Member Joost stated that from his perspective, the question of minimum hourly charges versus meters is irrelevant – new technology for charging riders is the wave of the future. He believes that the 30 minute wait time and the prospect of limousines getting into the on-demand taxi business is the crux of the matter. In response to a Ted Carter of the Office of Economic Development about the average wait time of an Uber customer from making a reservation via the app to car arrival, Mr. Klintz did not have an estimate and said the company would need to see if that could be compiled. Brian Sullivan of BTS Limousine stated that his company already has exactly the app that Uber is proposing to bring to the market, but it operates in compliance with the existing regulations, including the 30 minute wait time. The local companies all have similar apps available already that comply with the regulations and don’t require any Code amendments.
In response to a question from Bob Glaeser of Coastal Cab, Jack Shad stated that Uber’s service would fall under the City’s limousine regulatory system and that fares are not regulated by the City. Currently the City requires that the company have a written contract with the driver that specifies the fare; the proposed amendment would remove the requirement that the contract be in writing. Uber has provided Mr. Shad with proposed language to amend the term “written” to include electronic means such as e-mail or electronic phone apps. Ms. Riddle stated that Uber’s model of charging the fare based on a combination of time and distance traveled is exactly like a taxi fare, and is unlike a current limousine fare that is fixed in advance of the transport. It sounds like the Uber phone with its GPS locator and the formula for calculating the fare based on time and distance traveled is the equivalent of a taxi meter as defined in the Code, which should therefore be subject to inspection and certification by the state’s Division of Weights and Measures as taxi meters are. Mr. Klintz stated that Uber stands ready to address any complaints of overcharging by drivers and makes refunds to customers if their review of the route taken by the driver finds there was a shorter and less expensive route. A taxi representative quoted from Uber’s terms and conditions of service which said that Uber bears no liability for the actions of the actual transport provider and that any questions or concerns about the driver or the transport should be directed to the provider company, not to Uber. Mr. Klintz said that despite the language in the terms and conditions of service, his company frequently acts on behalf of the passenger and attempts to resolve issues with the provider company.
There being no further business, the agenda meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m.
Jeff Clements, Council Research Division (904) 630-1404
Posted
9.27.13
6:00
p.m.