I don't always support Novick, but I back him on this. They think they can roll us like they did Seattle? We'll see!

Uber is douchey, but the taxi cartel here has been taking advantage of Portlanders for years. It's time for a shakeup. It doesn't seem like it would be hard to craft regulation to solve all of the problems that Novick et al. noted. Require commercial insurance, background checks, etc. of Uber drivers - seems reasonable. But the cap on the number of drivers is nuts. Imagine if the government capped the number of permits to be a hair stylist, or doctor, or nurse, or whatever by law. It would suddenly get very expensive to get their services, and those who lucked into / pulled strings to get a Hair Stylist Permit would be able to give horrible service and still get business. Unsurprisingly, that's exactly what's happened with Portland's taxi industry.

Portland has a tiny number of cabs per thousand residents, and we pay high prices for it. http://daily.sightline.org/2011/08/05/free…

But the service is really the worst thing. I refuse to take a cab to the airport anymore after being stood up twice. I'll take TriMet, which takes twice as long, because I have more faith that they'll actually show up.

This is a fight the city can't afford. Uber has millions. Uber has lawyers prepping the arguments in every state. They have test cases ready to go and drivers trained to read a particular statements to city enforcement investigators. They'll make it a federal restraint of trade case/interstate commerce case with a single ride to Vancouver and the city won't be able to justify their current ordinances.

They'll have databases of names of city employees and cops to avoid stings. They'll have terms of service in their app usage contract that will mean the city will end up paying them in the event of failed city enforcement actions or falsifications of ride agreements. And most importantly, any enforcement action will make Portlanders aware of the bizarre taxi regs and the guild-like structure of the current taxi system. This city government can't manage to have cops hand out business cards without getting sued (and losing), much less regulate a new sharing-economy transportation industry.

In response to Alex Reed's comment above, the link you site indicating that Portland lags behind other cities in per capita taxi service is obsolete and irrelevant. Portland expanded its taxi fleet by 20% in early 2013 after Mayor Adams caved to the influence of the CWA union. (This is where Union Cab came from). And the apples-to-oranges comparison to taxi service in Chicago or San Francisco denies relevant city planning and transportation issues such as urban growth boundaries, population density, mass transit infrastructure, bike lanes, climate and terrain, etc. It's difficult to gauge actual demand for taxi services, but the notion that Portland has fewer taxis than Atlanta or Las Vegas is probably a good thing. It means we've cultivated a smarter, more efficient means of managing mobility.

I drove cab over a twenty year period in Seattle and Portland and served as Portland's taxi driver representative in 2011 and 2012. I left when Mayor Adams glutted the market with new taxis and made it impossible for honest workers to make a living in that industry. The facts are that there are 168 hours in a week and you should be able to get a taxi anywhere in Portland within ten minutes during 150 of those hours. The exceptions occur during peak demand on Friday and Saturday nights and sometimes during rush hour. The relative isolation of the St. John's neighborhood also makes this a slow response area. Unfortunately, the economics of the taxi industry mean that you can't establish a peak-demand fleet and expect it to operate profitably during those other 150 hours. Uber's presence will do nothing to alter this fundamental economic reality. And the fact that they are an out-of-state corporate behemoth assures that they have no interest in respecting the local Portland community.

Nobody, but nobody threatens the violent monopoly of the state!

wtf? Are you guys so incompetent that you need the government to give you permission to get into someone's car? If you don't like it or don't trust your own judgement, don't use Uber. Seems pretty simple to me!

wth? Are you guys so incompetent that you need the government to give you permission to get into someone's car? If you don't like it or don't trust your own judgement, don't use Uber. Seems pretty simple to me!

It's like the hairdresser licenses in california. People on the inside of a business get the government to restrict entry, restricting supply and driving prices up. Anyone who is a consumer of taxis should welcome someone like uber that can bust the state-created monopoly.

Just curious. What do the taxi drivers pay the company for using their taxis.

Good question, ujfoyt. When I last drove for Broadway in 2012 I paid $450 a week for a seven-day, 12-hour day shift. The seven-day lease was the only lease you could get, and my night driver also paid the same amount. So the company was taking in $900 a week. That's just shy of $47,000 per year to lease a used Ford Crown Vic cop cruiser that's typically purchased at auction with 100,000 miles on it for about $3000. Multiply that by a fleet of 128 taxis plus other non-taxi vehicles such as wheelchair vans and it starts to add up rather nicely for the company. Lease rates (a.k.a. "The Kitty") are even higher for lease drivers at Radio, but it varies. The kitty plus fuel can easily exceed $100 a day in operating expenses.

The main reason Broadway can take a $3000 car, paint it and wire it for taxi service, then charge $47,000 a year to lease it is because the city of Portland issues taxi permits to the taxi companies, not the drivers. This gives the companies a monopolized control over the permits and allows them to charge drivers whatever they can get away with. When I served as drivers' rep, I lobbied like hell to get the permits issued to the drivers. If drivers controlled the permits, we'd have had an essential bargaining tool that would force the companies to compete for our patronage. Instead, we had to take what they offered. This study from 2012 showed that Portland taxi drivers made substantially less than minimum wage: http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportati…

to hell with novick- if you don't support uber fine. just come up with a better reason than novicks threats. Deusche bag politicians need more intelligence instead of just threatening people to get them to comply. what is it with these portland creepy socialist politicians?

and who needs uber?- i say bypass them and the politicians. seriously if they had it their way we'd pay and apply for special licenses to drive our mom to the store.

"I don't think we're going against the city's wishes," Steger said. "We hope the city embraces this and listens to their constituents, the people of Portland and drivers partnering with us."

Yeah!! I hope steger does save us from these socialist politicians.

@ #6- finally someone knows what the hell he's talking about. Glad to hear it. As for all you taxi drivers on here- you are not the majority. Sorry, and hale's little pack of rats cannot save you.

So the pimp says to the hooker,go out and turn as many tricks as possible and don't worry if you get busted. I will bail you out and pay for your lawyer.

Red Diamond's professional experience and industry insight just cemented in my mind why Portland needs Uber and Lyft. Novick is writing checks out tax dollars can't cash. I don't accept his full distraction convening task forces to address antiquated taxi regulations and YEARS of neglected updates that would have resulted in better service and experience for all. Get back to your many other neglected duties quick before the recall effort starts.

Portland's taxicab licensing laws have a delightful loophole large enough to drive a late-model Camry through. If Uber tells its drivers that in Portland they may not allow the passenger to select the route that the driver uses to get the passenger to the destination, then the vehicles are not "taxicabs" as defined by the city code, and Uber is not a "taxicab company." The vehicles would not require taxiplates (medallions), and Uber would not require a taxicab company license. The drivers would, however, be violating the law by driving vehicles for hire without the appropriate city license, but the city will grant unlimited numbers of for-hire driver's licenses. It's only the company and medallion permits that the City heavily restricts.
http://isaac.blogs.com/isaac_laquedem/2014…

Here's something I don't really here anyone putting out there. Maybe if Tri-Met restored its late night weekend service to somewhere closer to its former glory, this late night weekend cab shortage might not be such an issue. Oh, right, but that would require their top brass to line their pockets less obscenely. I don't drink, or own a car, but like to go to shows. If a show goes late, I generally end up grabbing a car2go wishing I could still take a bus home. Just sayin', the cab companies, city hall, and Uber aren't the only ones who suck in this situation.