But it wasn't just the numbers. It was the effectiveness of the speakers coupled with the open minded attitude of the members of the Supervisor's Neighborhood Services & Safety Committee that left me feeling upbeat.
Supervisor's Eric Mar (photo - who called the meeting), David Campos and Norman Yee took in the hearing with Supervisor John Avalos joining them later. The Supervisors exhibited open minds, asked good questions and showed a willingness to learn. This was a refreshing contrast for those of us who took part in the CPUC Hearings on Ridesharing last year where most questions clearly had been decided before we walked into the room.Many people think that the Supervisors have little or no power to effect the CPUC ruling but that was not the impression that I got from the hearing.
Have to driver tonight. Details next post.
California regulators warned four app-based ride companies on Thursday that they haven’t provided some information required to receive state operating permits. The companies in turn said they are working to comply. The move came a day after several San Francisco supervisors blasted the regulators for not cracking down more on the transportation networking companies, or TNCs.
ReplyDeletehttp://blog.seattlepi.com/techchron/2014/03/07/california-to-lyft-uber-sidecar-wingz-get-your-act-together/
Here's the video well worth watching
ReplyDeletehttp://sanfrancisco.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=164&clip_id=19516
just saw the video of the hearing on 3/6/14 at city hall. don't know if the city supervisors present at the hearing read this blog. borrowing a phrase from woodstein (watergate days) instead of "follow the money" - follow the insurance.
ReplyDeletewhile the city sups evangelize and with very caring stances talk about regulate this, people safety first, safety this, safety that...the undisputable fact is that right now the tnc's do not have insurance that covers the passengers or pedestrians. as shown by uber's blatant refusal to even talk about the killing of a 6 year old girl.
in this blog there is a link when the insurance companies went to sacramento and went on record saying that the policies used by the tnc's are void if they engage in "for hire" business. maybe ed can re pos it. but, the puc ignore that letter and approved the tncs. meanwhile, the SF city sups were busy talking about safety this, safety that.
why don't you caring city sups issue a cease-and-desist order RIGHT NOW until these tnc's get insurance ? what is the hold up ? silicon valley too chummy with city hall ? mayor ed lee the darling of google (major investor in uber) do they contribute to city sups re elections campaigns ? what is the hold up ?
taxis can compete. but not when the fix is in.
I am not a lawyer but what about CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act? CEQA requires Environmental Impact Reports on all sorts of things. The CPUC is approving an entirely new industry that exchanges hybrid taxi cabs for hummers with pink mustaches, and has tripled the number of "taxis" without assessing the potential environmental impacts?
ReplyDeleteThe city's bike plan was stalled for years because of not following CEQA. This seems much more obvious.
The CPUC is a public agency with the power to request or deny a permit for an activity that has a reasonably forseeable direct or indirect effect on the environment.
ReplyDeleteI think the CPUC is cleary in violation of CEQA. The gypsy cabs should not be allowed to operate pending an Environmental Impact Report.
http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/more/faq.html#who
"A public agency must comply with CEQA when it undertakes an activity defined by CEQA as a "project." A project is an activity undertaken by a public agency or a private activity which must receive some discretionary approval (meaning that the agency has the authority to deny the requested permit or approval) from a government agency which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the environment."