By now, you’ve probably had your fill of the Uber, Lyft, taxi, horse and buggy, river barge, jitney debate in San Antonio. After Thursday’s 7-2 vote on the matter, it’s pretty much done for a while. Whether the TNCs pull out of the city has yet to be determined. San Antonio isn’t like most cities in the nation since we have not only a thriving tourist industry, but is recognized as a convention or business destination. That’s a lot of money to leave on the table. But the real question that has to be asked is why it had to end up like it did?
I don’t blame the TNCs for putting up a stink about the regulations imposed by Chief McManus and the Public Safety Committee, chaired by District 3 Councilwoman Rebecca Viagran. They are some of the most restrictive in the nation. Excessive insurance coverage required by drivers just to turn on the app, background checks that go beyond what other cities have, and several administrative procedures that really don’t make sense in a day and age of electronic filing and automation.
Even after a task force comprised of representatives from most of the stakeholders came up with recommendations, the chief revised several of those before presenting them to council. To top that off, Viagran proposed amendments that not only caught members of council off guard, but even the chief, who had to defer to her when questioned about the amendments. It was probably one of the worst examples of establishing public policy we’ve seen in San Antonio in a while.
It also showed a lack of leadership on our council’s part on many fronts. Two new council members were not really allowed to weigh into the discussion, with one seated hours before the debate abstaining from voting. District 1, the area of the city most affected by these regulations, lost its voice on the matter thanks to the rush to vote. Another newly elected council member, Alan Warrick of District 2, had to appeal from the floor because he wouldn’t be seated until next week.
Instead, outgoing District 2 Councilman Keith Toney had the voice in the debate, even after Toney accepted thousands of dollars in campaign funds from the taxi industry as reported by Express-News columnist Brian Chasnoff. Fortunately for San Antonio, all that taxi money didn’t save Toney in a runoff against Warrick, losing the race in early voting before a single election day vote was counted.
After appeals from several from the floor to delay the vote so the newly elected or appointed members could digest and weigh in on the last minute changes, council was intent on taking up the issue and passing the regulations. Even appeals from District 8 Councilman Ron Nirenberg and District 4 Councilman Rey Saldana didn’t seem to sway the other members. They, along with newly appointed District 1 Councilman Robert Trevino, couldn’t stop the wave of members who felt public safety of riders was so threatened a delay of a couple of months would be dangerous.
In the aftermath of the vote, I saw an article from my hometown of Little Rock about their passage of regulations for TNCs around Thanksgiving. Digging deeper, I discovered the nine-page (mostly definitions and legalese) ordinance outlining the other River City’s way of addressing concerns. Take the time to read Ordinance 20,956 that explains how things like public safety, insurance coverage, and a number of other items would be managed to allow TNCs to operate in the city.
Quite honestly, I wish I would have had this simple, yet comprehensive, ordinance in hand to give to the chief and council Thursday morning. If Little Rock could make it work for the taxis, the TNCs, and the citizens, why couldn’t San Antonio learn from their work? Dallas is another example of a city that made this work for all parties, passing their ordinance the day before San Antonio took up the issue. But apparently, San Antonio is a special city and our citizens are threatened by these companies, even though not a single incident has been reported since they started operating in the city without any regulations.
That really brings me to the point of this blog post. With so much public attention on TNCs across the country, our city and supposedly progressive police chief could have made national headlines, not by passing restrictive regulations that exceed almost all other cities in the country. Instead, our leaders could have taken a step back and looked at relaxing some of the regulations on taxis we currently have today, some that make it hard for independent taxi drivers to operate.
Our city could have made national headlines by showing it wanted to make this work for all parties, especially the independents who are small business owners. I’m sure finding a good middle for taxis and TNCs would have provided a model for other cities to look at and given San Antonio the headlines we love to see, where we show how to work together instead of creating divide between parties.
But maybe that’s too altruistic to think about. After all, today the major taxi companies, especially Yellow Cab, try everything they can to even make it difficult for the independents. Giving them relief through better taxi regulations would create another threat to Yellow’s business. No, John Bouloubasis, the president of Yellow Cab, would prefer to create as much barrier to entry for any business other than Yellow Cab.
Is this an issue that will drive change in San Antonio? Will voters remember this when going to the polls in May, as someone asked in the aftermath? It could, especially if the young segment of the city decides to buck trends and turn out to vote. Honestly though, I think it’s just another footnote in our city’s history, this time not a particularly good one.
