If transit was better we wouldn't need UBER amanda, unfortunately since Trimet turns many routes off or down to once an hour starting as early as 9pm it turns out that something else is needed, and frankly the cab companies customer service is so awful that I'd rather walk 5 miles than try to use them. Thankfully Amanda has once again placed herself on an island, which is why she has become the least effective councilor. Hopefully she will exit soon.

RE: Uber snatching up "most of the market share"...Not true. They have vastly expanded the market, extending the ability to get reliable for-hire rides to people who were previously unable to do so because of the state of the pdx cab industry. Actual rides given by cabs haven't declined in very large numbers, which is the key metric to look at when assessing TNC's effect on the cab industry.

The most telling part of this article:

"If you're going to pick a fight with a $50 billion company, you’re probably smart to look around for some allies. So I’m going to do that."

He who has the gold makes the rules.

I agree that Uber/Lyft may be picking up some slack left by Tri-Met. But Tri-Met runs on payroll taxes, so unless Portlanders want to increase that tax, we should stop complaining.

And something's wrong when all these new residents are willing to pay high rent, but our roads remain crap. Some wealth needs to be redistributed to the infrastructure.

I am not sure it's accurate to characterize Amanda's position as "anit-Uber".

In reading her entire comments, I believe Amanda is more criticizing the final rules and the process by which they were adopted. For an example, Amanda criticized the new rules that will allow Uber and Lyft to not provide adequate insurance coverage and will not require that those companies conduct proper background checks on their drivers.

I am not clear why anyone on the council would oppose those improvements.

I also wonder about the wisdom of voting for the new rules only because Uber has a large bank roll.

It's follow the money. I really thought P-Town was better than that. Once Hales and Novick had there secret meeting (that everyone knew about) the tables turned. It was not mentioned that when they gave Über a trail basis until that point Hales nor Novick would not meet with any of the cab companies. Also it might be noted that the Private for hire board approved more taxis to cover the rapidly expanding market then Novick nixed it. This is why we need city paid elections!
Bert Fox

Uber - 10 paid lobbyists, including a long-time Portland insider who ran Hale and Novick's campaigns, Mark Weiner, currently under investigation by the City Auditor.
Cab Industry - 2 part time, at least one is an active cab driver.

Uber sit down meetings with the Mayor and/or Novick, Saltzman and/or their staff - at least 40 that they are willing to admit to, as required by law.
Cab Industry - 0 (although the day after this info came out in the media Novick called one of the taxi CEO's and said, "Hey! Why don't you drop in for a meeting?")

Uber lobbyist's phone calls accepted by City Hall, the Mayor and/or Novick, Saltzman and/or their staff - 140 officially, but who knows how many more?
Cab Industry - 0

Innovation (sic)Task Force members who were Uber sycophants - all, hand-picked.
Taxi industry representation - 0 (nor where they even allowed to speak at the meetings, meanwhile during breaks the committee members were mostly seen huddled with Uber lobbyists.

Did Hale get a boner when he got a call from former Obama adviser and ultra Uber lobbyist David Plouffe? Did this have anything to do with him going to Paris?

"allowing industry have outsize influence rather than acting in the public good."

As opposed to the status quo, which has been allowing the taxi industry to have outsize influence -- FOR DECADES -- to the detriment of the public good?

"Opponents say TNCs are inherently unsafe."

The only bona fide "opponents" to TNCs are taxi-industry players concerned solely with their own selfish financial interests. Their arguments that TNCs are "inherently unsafe" are specious at best, and despite having conned several councilmembers about it, that doesn't make their arguments valid -- and I *absolutely* think Blogtown should have included this (rather considerable) caveat.

"They make compelling arguments about unfair insurance coverage the companies are required to carry"

Not really. Taxis have full-time commercial insurance for a reason: not only do nearly all taxi drivers work full-time, but their vehicles are usually in service 16+ hours a day. TNC drivers, in contrast, are driving their *own* vehicles, and over 80% over them are doing so for fewer than 20 hours a week (and half of them work fewer than 10 hours). It makes *zero* sense for them to have the same types of insurance.

As for the period known as "app-on mode" (when a driver is actively seeking fares but does not yet have one): this is about as gray an area as it gets in terms of ground transportation. (I say that as a lawyer btw.) Uber and Lyft drivers are not, technically speaking, "working" unless they're either carrying a passenger or en route to pick one up. Further, they formerly had *zero* insurance for drivers during the app-on period. Finally, they compromised: they now offer drivers roughly the same coverage they'd have under their personal insurance policies while not on the clock.

Not only is Fritz being melodramatic in stating that, "This ordinance sets the value on a person's life.. at $50,000 max," she's also wrong. The number of ACTUAL accidents that have taken place when a TNC driver is in app-on mode -- and I'll note here that Uber and Lyft collectively provide over one million rides in the U.S. PER DAY -- is borderline-infinitesmal.

"And they say Uber and Lyft have inadequate and self-serving background check procedures that can allow dangerous people into the system."

Yet again, the taxi industry is both distorting the issue *and* projecting one of their own inadequacies onto TNCs. The traditional fingerprint checks used by the industry have more holes than Donald Trump's campaign platform, and produce an *astounding* number of false positives *and* false negatives -- ones significantly skewed to the detriment of young men of color in particular. The worst part is what they leave *out*: there's no way to determine from a traditional background check, for instance, is whether the person being checked out is even a U.S. citizen or documented immigrant.

And guess what? Commercial insurance generally doesn't cover employees who are working at taxi companies under false pretenses on the employee's part, e.g. providing a fake SSN on an I-9 to cover up being an undocumented immigrant -- a circumstance which is *most* pervasive on the East and West Coasts, as well as Texas.

"Commissioner Steve Novick, responsible for shepherding the rules through to council, announced this morning that he doesn't think the phase one coverage the city's mandating is adequate. Then he said there's not much we can do about it right now, since it's become something of a national standard."

Gee, I wonder why? Is it because Uber "declared war" on EVERY city that refused to go along with it, as Novick subsequently implies? Or is it because City Councils elsewhere recognize a red herring when they see it, and understand that entrenched taxi interests are behind the ENTIRE scheme to make Uber and Lyft appear unsafe? They clearly have no shame about it, either, manipulating Fritz like a marionette over it, knowing that her husband was tragically killed in a vehicular wreck last year.

"Uber - 10 paid lobbyists, including a long-time Portland insider who ran Hale and Novick's campaigns, Mark Weiner, currently under investigation by the City Auditor.
Cab Industry - 2 part time, at least one is an active cab driver."

UNBELIEVABLE level of bullshit. Why pay for milk when you can get it from the cow for free? The taxi industry's tentacles slither through the deepest levels of municipal divisions - how *else* do you think it's gotten away with horrific mistreatment of its drivers for so many decades? From the city's Taxi Driver Labor Report from 2012:

"The calculated average net hourly income of all Portland taxi drivers is $6.22. These low hourly wages are consistent with those found in recent studies in other U.S. cities. Drivers at non-driver owned companies typically work long hours—often 12-14 hours per day, 6-7 days per week—to be able to meet the required company payments, expenses, and provide income for their families. Taxi drivers work as independent contractors. Low wages are not supplemented with health care or retirement benefits, paid vacation or sick leave. Large weekly payments from the driver to the company (the “kitty”) are a major factor in the low net income and long working hours of the professional taxi driver. "

I think it's merely stating the obvious that they (quietly) pulled out all the stops to halt TNCs.

"Uber sit down meetings with the Mayor and/or Novick, Saltzman and/or their staff - at least 40 that they are willing to admit to, as required by law.
Cab Industry - 0 (although the day after this info came out in the media Novick called one of the taxi CEO's and said, "Hey! Why don't you drop in for a meeting?")"

Gee, maybe that's because the taxi CEOs have absolutely nothing of substance to add to the issue? They're against TNCs, period. WE KNOW IT. And you've gotta be *kidding* me if you think no one from the taxi industry met with Fritz, Fish and Hales at the very least, even if the discussions were "off-book." In any event, the council and public certainly heard the taxi side at length: TNCs are "unsafe" and "unfair competition," in their view.

"Uber lobbyist's phone calls accepted by City Hall, the Mayor and/or Novick, Saltzman and/or their staff - 140 officially, but who knows how many more?
Cab Industry - 0"

See above. (And please: the main taxi players are thick as thieves with enough of the council and city staff that they undoubtedly have their private cell and home numbers on speed dial.)

I am *always* astounded when taxi companies play the "victim" after enjoying a 50-year-long government-sanctioned monopoly -- which made its owners very, VERY rich, and allowed them to get away with substandard service AND piss-poor treatment of their own drivers for decade after decade. The "enemy-cum-bully" in this game is obvious, and it's absolutely NOT Uber or Lyft.