Final Jax ‘vehicles for hire’ committee report says taxis are over-regulated

Even in the annals of unproductive Jacksonville City Council committees, the Vehicles for Hire committee held pride of place for its intoxicating blend of overheated lobbyist rhetoric, committee members who seemed to be in the tank for one side or another, and, in the end, a lack of meaningful consensus on workable regulations for Uber, Lyft, and other transportation network companies (TNC).

The Final Report from the Special Committee on Vehicles for Hire, sent to Council President Lori Boyer earlier this week, sums up a frustrating process by contending that TNCs —aka ridesharing services — regulate themselves well, the cab industry is over-regulated, and that the cab industry needs to compete in the marketplace and adapt to new realities.

“After many months of investigation and deliberation,” committee chair Matt Schellenberg writes, “the Committee was not able to come to a consensus regarding best practices/regulations for ‘vehicles for hire’/TNCs. The Committee did acknowledge, however, that taxis are unnecessarily burdened with onerous regulations.”

To that end, Schellenberg put forth recommendations: relaxing taxicab inspection requirements, allowing them to be yearly; requiring annual background checks for cab drivers, which the councilman said cab companies were already doing; and reduction of insurance coverage to be maximized only when the cab is in service, to decrease the cab industry cost burden.

TNCs, writes Schellenberg, “provide convenient, efficient, and cost-effective options for Jacksonville’s citizens” and “well-paying and flexible jobs for drivers, many of which drive as a way to supplement their regular incomes.”

Schellenberg’s “personal conclusion is that the taxi companies are over-regulated, and the TNCs have done a good job at self-regulation and regulation by consumer. For instance, although not required by legislation, Uber and Lyft, two of the largest TNCs, already complete background checks, provide insurance, and require certain vehicle standards.”

With this in mind, Schellenberg advocated a free-market solution to what has become a crisis of regulation.

“The answer to onerous taxi regulations, which are inhibiting their ability to compete with TNCs, is not to legislate onerous regulations for TNCs. While it may benefit the taxi companies, it would not benefit the consumer, who would lose transportation options and pay higher prices for services. While the taxi companies would like the government to step in and quell their competition, this is not the government’s role. The better option would be to reduce regulations on taxi companies and for taxi companies to better adapt and improve their services to meet the changing demands of their target market, accounting for today’s technological advancements,” Schellenberg wrote.

Will this argument carry in the standing committees? That question could be considered as early as next week.