Seattle’s Tim-Eyman-wannabe Elizabeth Campbell, has filed an initiative that would repeal recently imposed caps on popular Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) like Lyft, Sidecar, and uberX. Initiative 111 (pdf) would also eliminate the $50,000 annual license fee per TNC that was intended to fund enforcement of the remaining regulations, while removing any reference to “the stability of the market for taxi and for hire transportations services” from consideration for subsequent regulatory review. If passed, the initiative would pretty much gut the work of the city council, freeing up the TNCs to operate at will and virtually unrestricted, while leaving the taxi industry capped and heavily regulated. So much for the “level playing field” the TNCs have been clamoring for.
Of course, Campbell is a bit of a self-serving pro-business crackpot with a habit of filing initiatives on spec and then hoping the corporate contributions roll in. She’s already filed a faux $15 minimum wage initiative that would not in fact raise the minimum wage to $15 for most workers, while lavishing tax cuts on business. No contributions thus far. So it’s not clear whether Lyft, Sidecar, and Uber were even aware of this initiative before it was filed, let alone whether they would lend it financial support.
That said, my sense is that a well-crafted initiative lifting the caps on the popular TNCs could very well pass. Everybody loves to hate on the taxis. So it wouldn’t surprise me to see the TNCs fund such an initiative, if not this particular one.
I’ve emailed Campbell and other parties for comment. I’ll update when I know more.
I hope someone keeps an eye on how Ms. Campbell spends those corporate contributions.
She also filed a content-free ethics complaint recently against Sawant for, among other things, having activists meet at city hall, because it’s not supposed to be a public building. Or something. Naturally, that got her on the front page of Seattle Times. It seems like she’s had it in for Kshama for not rallying behind her fake, opportunistic $15/hr initiative.
I strongly suspect Ms. Campbell spends most of her corporate contributions on her personal co-pays for all the meds she’s on. Pity she doesn’t take them as regularly as she should.
@1 Democracy Workshop is her company, it gathers signature at a dollar a pop. You know the rent won’t wait, even her’s.
2
Sawant’s a fucking idiot.
Actually the cab drivers should file an in initiative requiring that TNCs carry commercial insurance instead of running around with invalid personal insurance.
@5…
Amen to THAT!
I would have preferred that they cap the hours worked by each TNC driver. If you’re doing it as a full time job, then you should be a cabbie.
Attack the messenger all you wish, but if it wasn’t her it would’ve been someone else. The council backed an industry that has abused its monopoly by being utterly indifferent to the quality of its product for decades; when the council sided with an unpopular industry against a successful and popular one, they were asking to get their ass handed to them. I don’t like the the elimination of the license fee either, but the council had their chance to do this right and they bowed to a powerful entrenched interest instead.
Have the new services comply with the same regulations, rules and taxes that apply to taxis, since that’s what they act like, and I’m all for them.
Otherwise its too much like hiring illegals instead of Americans because the illegals are cheaper.
You.know cabbie and forhire pay for the city 1000000
@9. That post makes no sense. Try again? This time try to make full sentences?
Whether or not the TNC/Ride Shares are popular or not is not the big issue they are Billion Dollar Companies that operate with a total disregard of City, County, State, and Federal Law. They have been operating without valid provable Insurance. Just because you say you have a million dollar policy does not mean you have one, especially when you refuse to disclose it.
As to the Taxi Industry being indifferent, well this could be true, of course considering the high overhead the cab driver must pay to earn a living. Most of those expenses mandated by government. Oh yes Taxicabs have Commercial Insurance approved by the State.
Those TNC Drivers have less expenses, no real Insurance, i doubt any of them have State Business Licenses let alone pay taxes. So next time you play Roulette ask your TNC Driver what Licenses they have and who is their Insurance Carrier.
@8 Yes, I think that’s a fair analysis… The whole cab industry was in woeful need of modernizing and resisted. The TNC are technically illegal but popular, so now cabs will be forced to change fast, which will be highly disruptive and hurt a lot of cabbies. Unfortunate, but predictable.
@9 same taxes, sure… but same regulations? Depends. Insurance and safety checks, sure… but a lot of them probably dont apply.
@12 Huh? Why do I care if my UBER driver has insurance? If I get into a wreck my own health insurance will pay for my care if his doesn’t. The UBER driver will be personally screwed if they wreck somebody’s property, but not me.
The law just passed by the City Council on TNC regulation cannot be overturned by a referendum or an initiative. That is because for-hire vehicle regulation is an adminstrative power specifically delegated to local jurisdictions by the state under RCW 46.72.001. According to an opinion by the City Attorney:
“Two well-established limits by the courts include (1) the rule that the local government “referendum power extends only to matters legislative in character and not to merely administrative acts.”
What is the difference between legislative and administrative?
According to this Washington State Initiative and Referendum Guide:
“This of course raises the question of what is an administrative action and what is a legislative action. The courts have applied two tests in making this determination. First, actions relating to subjects of a permanent and general character are usually regarded as legislative matters, and actions taken on subjects of a temporary and special character are usually regarded as administrative matters. Second, the power to be exercised is legislative in nature if it prescribes a new policy or plan,whereas it is administrative in its nature if it merely pursues a plan already adopted by the legislative body or some power superior to it.”
For-Hire laws have of course been part of RCW and SMC for decades. The City Council just passed revisions to the existing SMC.