3 ms·
According to one of the top comments: > This wasn't about the fingerprint background checks. This bill would've also required drivers to pay a yearly fee of $4
by FussyZeus 10y ago
According to one of the top comments:
> This wasn't about the fingerprint background checks. This bill would've also required drivers to pay a yearly fee of $450/year to the city. It would've required a % fee of each ride to go the city. It would've mandated cars have logos for each service printed onto the side of the car. All these things make it harder to get drivers and increase the cost of ride sharing. This was a play by the Taxi companies to make ride sharing services as expensive and shitty (because of less drivers) as a cab service. Taxis have lost 30% of their business in Austin last 2 years and so they padded the current council's pockets during the 2014 elections to try and save their business. You can see how much they paid the council members by viewing public records. It's disgusting.
Interesting if true, I'm Googling around to see if I can find more information on this.
- gcek9 10y agoI noticed that as well. If that's the case, it makes the reaction by Uber & Lyft seem much more reasonable. At the same time, it makes Uber & Lyft look like they did a poor job educating the public on these parts of the argument. I followed the #Prop1 trend closely last night and there wasn't anything beyond fingerprinting mentioned by locals, news anchors, or even Uber / Lyft.