TNC Background Check Analysis

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 30 | Comments: 0 | Views: 278
of 80
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Analysis of TNC-driver arrests, and whether a fingerprint-based background check would have prevented any of the alleged crimes committed.

Comments

Content

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Kyle Hoskins
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:44 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Correction to "Making Austin a Safer City.": 1, not 4 cases

This message is from Kyle Hoskins. [
CORRECTION: 1, not 4 cases could possibly have been prevented by fingerprint background checks.
I apologize, but I need to make a correction to my previous email entitled “Making Austin a Safer City.â€
Fingerprint background checks would NOT have prevented 4 of 18 sexual assaults in Lyft/Uber cases in the
United States. They would have prevented 1, not 4. (one case, a DUI 2012 in a misdemeanor fondling in an
Uber)
I did not account for the fact that having a criminal background does not disqualify you from being a taxi, limo,
or Uber driver depending on when it occurred. In some cities the limit is up to 10 years, and in others, only 5. In
two of the cases four cases I described, the convictions were 10+ and 8 years prior which would mean they
would have been eligible to pass a fingerprint background check and become a taxi driver in their city.
The other removed case is an example where the taxi 10 year requirement in Virginia Beach would have
disqualified the offender, whereas Uber's 7 year policy did not. A fingerprint check would not have made a
difference because Uber still would not have cared with their 7 year regulation.
I apologize for falling victim to the media’s “criminal background†claims without first recognizing
the difference between a criminal background and an “eligible†criminal background to still be a limo or
taxi driver.
In other disturbing news closer to home, the taxi driver who committed a sexual assault here in Austin in 2014
would not have qualified to be an Uber driver, but apparently “passed†taxi background checks in 2009
and 2011 within Uber’s 7 year window of the driver’s 2005 assault conviction. (also convicted in 2003)
While this would disqualify them from driving Uber (no felony or misdemeanor cases involving violence within
7 years), apparently not so for taxi:
“A representative with the City of Austin Transportation Department says family violence arrests and
convictions do not cause an individual to fail a background checkâ€
http://kxan.com/2014/02/04/yellow-cab-driver-arrested-for-sexual-assault/
If that is true and is still the case, perhaps that should be part of the solution proposed to make ground
transportation safer.
I can tell you one thing: fingerprint background checks are not the answer. (If you haven't read the original
article I wrote, please refer to that for more possible solutions)

--------------------------------------------Original Email:
1

---------------------------------------------

Making Austin a Safer City
I set out to test a hypothesis of what I believed to be a fair proposition for overall ground transportation safety:
Require fingerprint background checks to drive between Midnight and 4AM.
I tested this theory based on the cases of sexual assault in the United States from Lyft and Uber rides.
According to estimates, 80% of sexual assault cases are not reported due to the trauma and personal nature
involved in these cases, and when they are, they aren’t recorded as to their source; however,
http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/ was created with the sole purpose of logging every case of assault from Lyft
and Uber. These are the cases I drew this data from.
My theory was reasonably correct that these cases were more likely to occur between midnight and 4AM. 9 of
the 18 cases were in these hours.
However, if fingerprint background checks for driving Midnight-4AM could only stop 9 cases, I don’t think
that’s enough.
Even so, I wanted to check how many of those 9 cases and fingerprint background check would prevent. One.
One case.
Out of 18 cases, 4 could have been prevented by fingerprint background check. To me, when thinking about
safety, leaving 14 of 18 cases on the table is too many.
I also examined the arrests related to these cases, and found that crime doesn’t pay as an Uber/Lyft driver
because you get caught. Nearly immediately. In fact, catching perpetrators is so successful when the crime is
committed as an Uber driver, that in one case, they managed to catch a man tied to 5 previous sexual assaults
that he got away with.
How does this compare to taxis? Considering there are substantially more taxi rides (for the time being) across
America, there are naturally more cases of sexual assault. No one has a complete list like they do for Lyft/Uber
drivers, but in an hour, I was able to compile a list of 20+ cases in the United States in 2014-2015. Some points
of interest:
• A couple of the cases were repeat offenders who finally got caught.
• Cases reported generally fell into two categories:
o Driver was arrested or “finally†arrested. (I had to discard several old cases that were finally closed in
2014-2015 because it’s not as easy to track down taxi driver offenders)
o Police went to the media to help find the driver matching a description because they didn’t have the
information available to them as they do in the open and shut Uber/Lyft cases.
In my eyes, the two key points are police needing to go to the media for help to find someone fitting a
description, and drivers who had committed multiple offenses as taxi drivers before being caught.
Those are both frightening to me. How do we fix those? Make taxis more like Uber and Lyft. These are the
more common cases than the 4 cases fingerprints could have prevented in TNC’s.
Fingerprint background checks are not the “gold standard†to avoid and solve crimes as was echoed
during the last Mobility Committee meeting. Knowing the offender, where the offender is, what car to locate the
offender in, knowing the victim, knowing where the victim is, and knowing what time the crime occurs at
2

comprise the modern day gold standard.
Let’s prevent these cases logically using every power we have. Uber introduced a panic button in India,
which is coming soon to Chicago. It allows a passenger to secretly report their up-to-date location to emergency
contacts, a critical response team, and law enforcement. To me, that sounds like the “gold standard†in
prevention and is relatively easy to implement for TNC’s yet difficult for taxis.
If we were to analyze how to make taxis safer for passengers and drivers, the solution would be technology like
Lyft and Uber. Why are we trying to run the solution out of town?
We have the technology solutions to make ground transportation safer, and those solutions don’t require an
unnecessary fingerprint background check that will destroy the positive impacts on traffic and the environment
that Lyft Line/Uber Pool carpooling services provide in the “everyone [that qualifies] with a car should be a
driver†world. Limiting Lyft and Uber to being “better cabs†is narrow-sighted and a mistake.
When Lyft pulls out of Austin and Uber temporarily pulls out, do you think that will make Austin safer?
Thanks,
Kyle
Feel free to contact me at

or 512-739-7623

Street address: 404 RIO GRANDE ST
Council District: 9

3

District 8
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Jason Arnold
Tuesday, November 17, 2015 8:59 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Concerned about KXAN story re: ride sharing services

This message is from Jason Arnold.
I'm concerned about the KXAN TV report from last week about ride sharing services. It stated that there were 7
incidents reported to police involving Uber or Lyft drivers, while during the same period, there were 3 reported
involving taxi drivers. Could someone possibly research and publish these numbers as a percentage of the total
rides sold during that time period? I believe we may find that on a percentage basis, the ride sharing companies
are as safe or even safer than the cab companies.
Thanks,
Jason Arnold
District 5
Street address:
Council District: 5

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Troxclair, Ellen
Wednesday, October 21, 2015 10:50 AM
Searle, Michael
FW: Safety & Background Checks

 
 

Ellen Troxclair

Council Member, District 8
301 W. Willie Nelson Blvd
Austin, Texas 78701
Phone: (512)978-2108
Email: [email protected]

 
From: Edward Kargbo [mailto
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 10:41 AM
Subject: Safety & Background Checks

Dear Honorable Elected Officials of the City of Austin and Staff, 
  
I’m thankful to be a member of the community you lead.  I fortuitously attended the City Council meeting on Thursday 
October 15, 2015 where the council listened to testimony and approved a resolution addressing public safety measures 
related to background check requirements for Transportation Network Companies (TNCs).     (Item 51 October 15, 2015) 
  
I also attended the October 7, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Mobility Committee which allowed public testimony in 
conjunction with a staff briefing and discussion on ground transportation providers, including TNCs. 
  
I appreciate the time and consideration that has been given to these issues by all members of this body.  The Mobility 
Committee has been thorough in their review and I’m glad that this council is taking into consideration all of the current 
and historical information pertaining to these issues in Austin. 
  
Something that stands out to me, because it’s been referenced twice, that I have not had an opportunity to respond to is 
the statement that TNCs have other safety features that make them “better” than cabs.   
  
It is important that I clarify that Yellow Cab doesn’t just implement a background check as the only safety feature 
available.  I’d like you to be aware that Yellow Cab has more safety features built into our system for the safety of both 
the riding passenger and the driver. 
  






All Yellow Cabs have cameras in them for the safety of the rider and the driver 
All Yellow Cabs have discrete panic buttons allowing drivers to make a quiet alert for support  
All Yellow Cabs have GPS equipment attached to the vehicle in various locations that cannot be turned off by the driver, 
as opposed to GPS that is unattached to the moving car.  Trip history can also be reviewed 
All Yellow Cabs allow for payment through the Hail‐A‐Cab app if the passenger chooses (or for people without access to 
smart phones and/or credit cards, cab drivers also take cash) 
All Yellow Cab drivers can receive cashless payments directly to their account, for any non‐cash payments they receive in 
the cab, if they choose 
  
1

Recently in Austin there was a tremendously unfortunate occurrence in which a young lady requested an Uber car and 
thought she was entering her Uber vehicle: ‘The woman told the officer that she was waiting for an Uber driver to take
her to where she was staying during the festival when Al Surky arrived. She said she believed the man was her
requested Uber driver. During the ride, the woman said Al Surky stopped the vehicle, opened the door where she
was sitting and sexually assaulted her. ‘ 
  






All Yellow Cabs are painted and marked for identification, which is important when dealing with passengers that may 
have been drinking and struggle to view “pictures in an app”. 
All Yellow Cab drivers are fingerprint background checked  
All Yellow Cab drivers are required to post a picture of the driver in the cab.  (phone batteries, data limitations, storage 
limitations, etc. don’t always allow for the driver picture to be viewed) 
Yellow Cab has a 24/7 call center/ support center to respond to emergencies, complaints, compliments, lost item 
inquiries, etc. 
The Hail‐A‐Cab app allows passengers to rate the driver and you can call the customer service department or go online 
to file compliments/complaints 
  
Police Chief Acevedo is quoted as stating “We’ve had 18 cases where Uber drivers are involved in inappropriate actions.”
  
The executive director at Safe Place testified last week that they’re currently tending to 4 cases of women being 
mistreated by TNC drivers in the last 3 months. 
  
The facts about the difference between a fingerprint background check and the checks done by 3rd party private 
companies on behalf of the TNCS are: 
  

1. Fingerprints as an identifier is a significantly greater process than a name based check for ensuring the person being 
checked is matched with the records presented. 
2. Texas DPS Deputy Assistant Director Mike Lesko testified before you that private companies do not have access to all 
Federal and State criminal records, thereby at times reviewing records with incomplete information. 
  
Both TNCs operating in Austin conduct fingerprint background checks in New York City and there are no major 
differences in their operations there or in Austin or San Francisco.  Wouldn’t it seem that if TNCs consistently conduct 
background checks as thoroughly as they claim, sending people out to various courthouses, that their background check 
process would take just as long as or longer than the fingerprint process? 
  
I appreciate all the hard work done by Council and staff and I’m not writing to claim that there is a perfect system.  I am 
grateful that the members of the Mobility Committee are recommending a process that raises the bar as it pertains to 
background checks and public safety.  The recommendation would require all of us to put forth our best effort while also 
ensuring that the people tasked with the responsibility of protecting the public implement a process that presents the 
most complete information for review.  Such a process would be consistent for any and all transportation service 
providers and clear to all potential drivers. 
  
The challenge with conducting background checks isn’t to catch those who play by the rules; the challenge is to put forth 
your best effort to catch perpetrators with a demonstrated history of misconduct, people who consistently work to 
cheat the system. 
  
I want to thank you all for moving that process forward.  Please let me know if you have questions. 
  
Be Safe, 
2

  
Edward K. Kargbo  
President  
  
   
(O) 512‐434‐7781 : 
 
Email: 
 
10630 Joseph Clayton Dr. Austin, TX 78753 
www.yellowcabaustin.com 
  
Download the Hail‐A‐Cab app on your mobile phone by: 
Clicking    Apple iOS Icon below     Google Play Icon below 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

3

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Cari Wieland
Thursday, November 12, 2015 5:13 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Keep ride share options in Austin

This message is from Cari Wieland.

]

I strongly and respectfully ask that the city keep and not make restrictions on ride share companies like Uber
and Lyft in Austin. The safety and convenience provided by these services is invaluable. Thank you.
Street address:
Council District: 7

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:

Pitts, Don
Monday, September 28, 2015 10:10 AM
Searle, Michael
FW: Uber Breathelyzer Kiosk Questions With Answers
Screen Shot 2015-08-04 at 12.19.21 AM.png

 

Here is very rough proposal from Uber.
 
thanks for putting this on my radar.   They could be our friend on our drunk driving problem. 
 
Thanks! 

---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Shelley Adams
Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2015
Subject: Uber Breathelyzer Kiosk Questions With Answers
To: Jennifer Houlihan <
>
Hey Jennifer,
Hope all is well. Please see below for the answers to your questions!
1. Kiosk Size
>Please see attached.
2. Will it be staffed?
>Yes, someone from the Uber team will be present with the Kiosk.
3. Is there a sales element?
>There isn't really a "Sales" element at all. We're using this as a promotion/stunt to raise awareness about alternative options to drinking and
driving. If someone blows into the breathalyzer and is over a certain limit, we'll give them a free Uber ride, up to $x.
4. Target date?
>TBD but we would like to start utilizing the kiosk as soon as possible.
5. Target location?
>UT football stadium area, 6th street (in front of J. Blacks Feel Good Kitchen, across the street from Dogwood and Concrete Cowboy),
Rainey Street, Zilker Park (ACL), etc.. Basically anywhere where it is known that heavy drinking exists.
6. Type of data we will be collecting?
> We will run analysis on how many people received a code from the machine, how many people actually took a trip using the code, and the
total cost of the free rides.
7. What happens to the data once it is collected?
> Data will be used to track the success of the pop-up and understand how many people are using the promotion, but will not be sold or used
otherwise.
8. How long is it stored?
> 4 hours on average
9. How is it secured?
>There is a sturdy base that supports the kiosk! It is extremely heavy but well supported.
1

I look forward to talking to you at 3:30! Also, I just realized that I don't have a contact number for you. Please let me know what is the best
number to reach you at.
Thanks,
Shelley

-R

m
m

Shelley Adams
Marketing Manager | Uber Austin
E
| P 404.312.3540 | W uber.com

-Sent by my iPhone because I am out of pocket again

2

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Kenneth Flippin
Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Kitchen proposal on TNC

This message is from Kenneth Flippin. [
I strongly support the proposed rules regarding TNC's made by council member Kitchen. I am a driver for both
lyft and uner
Street address:
Council District: 8

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:

Subject:

David King
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:43 PM
Adler, Steve; Tovo, Kathie; Houston, Ora; Garza, Delia; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio;
Kitchen, Ann; Zimmerman, Don; Pool, Leslie; Troxclair, Ellen; Gallo, Sheri
Sarria, Vanessa; Hethcox, Leslie; Shack, Barbara; Wick, Jim; Cardenas, Nancy; Cortez,
John Michael; Majid, Sly; Rodriguez, Frank; Burton, Brandi; Varghese, Lesley; Prince,
Kazique; Hutchins, Christopher J.; Wilson Beverly; Rodriguez, Genoveva; Williamson,
Laura; Landeros, Alexandra; Nicely, Katherine; Chincanchan, David; Solorzano, Nicholas;
Fisher, Ashley; Dave, Neesha; Lawler, John; Alexander, Shelby; Latham-Jones, Braden;
Tiemann, Donna; Craig, Ken; Anguiano, Dora; Lopez, Jason; Petronis, Joe; Watson,
Gregory; Devine, Nubia; Smith, Amy; Halloran, Katie; Boggs, Annie; Gaudini, Michael;
septhayerj; Searle, Michael; Martinez, Viveca; Brucato, Michelle; Levinski, Bobby;
Harden, Joi; Halley, Shannon; Smith, Taylor; Cannon, Tina; Chase, Suzie; Smith, Melanie
Item 50 - Transportation Network Companies - City Council Meeting, October 15, 2015

Mayor Steve Adler, Mayor Pro Tem Kathie Tovo, and Council Members Ora Houston, Delia Garza, Sabino Renteria, Gregorio
Casar, Ann Kitchen, Don Zimmerman, Leslie Pool, Ellen Troxclair, and Sheri Gallo,
Please support item 50 directing the City Manager to initiate a code amendment for proposed fees for Transportation Network
Companies (TNCs). The proposed fees will help ensure that new TNCs like Uber and Lyft pay their fair share of the City’s
costs to license and regulate TNCs. The proposed fees are fair and equitable for large, medium and small TNCs.
The proposed fees will help bring Austin’s TNC ordinance in line with other cities like Houston, New York, and Chicago that
have strengthened their ordinances to protect consumers and respond to serious crimes.
According to the Austin American-Statesman, there are now 18 tech-based transportation service providers in Austin. Given
that more of these companies are coming, it’s time to address safety and mobility issues facing our community.
Uber and Lyft should provide the same basic consumer protections (insurance, background checks, fingerprints, etc.) that other
TNC's in Austin provide and that they themselves provide in other cities where they operate; otherwise, they should not be
permitted to operate in Austin.
Their responses to questions from members of the Mobility Committee at the public hearing on October 7, 2015, demonstrate
that they are willing to mislead and threaten Council Members to avoid fees and basic safety regulations that apply to other
TNCs in Austin.

Respectfully,
David King
Zilker Neighborhood Resident

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Erin Freeman
Saturday, October 10, 2015 7:20 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Lyft and Uber regulations

This message is from Erin Freeman. [
I've never gone out of my way to send a personal email or letter to any city council member before, but I heard
about the proposed amendment concerning ride companies,so I've got to try and reach you. Please do not push
Lyft out of Austin. Hopefully the only reason you're considering this amendment is to ensure the safety of
Austin riders, which is commendable. However, I believe Lyft already has fairly decent screening policies in
place, including background checks and a customer rating system. These drivers are in a system with profiles.
Everything is tracked. I use Lyft at least 5 times a week. As a woman, I've never felt uncomfortable or unsafe
with a Lyft driver. I have however felt unsafe in many cabs, as well as on the city buses I frequently ride.
Austin's public transportation is not extensive enough for it to be prudent or helpful to the people of Austin to
put strain on these companies. The cab companies are grossly unreliable. I've been late to work mor e times than
I can count. Their incredible unreliability makes them unsafe; I've been stranded places in the middle of the
night, alone, waiting for a cab that never showed up. Not to mention the drivers' actual driving abilities. Austin's
traffic is infamous; Lyft and Uber keep cars off the roads, they encourage carpooling, and have a huge impact
on drunk driving. What will happen during SXSW? Or next ACL? For people who don't drive at all, Lyft and
Uber are vital. You know that passing this amendment will force Lyft and Uber out of Austin. Don't do it. Or if
it still feels like the right thing to do for my safety, please hold off until after you find a way to make the cab
companies reliable and safe. Until ater you've fixed the bus routes so that they actually provide fair coverage
throughout the city. Please be mindful of what this actually means to many, many citizens; of how many you
may be unsafely stranding out in the dark.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:

Subject:

David King
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 11:48 PM
Adler, Steve; Tovo, Kathie; Houston, Ora; Garza, Delia; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio;
Kitchen, Ann; Zimmerman, Don; Pool, Leslie; Troxclair, Ellen; Gallo, Sheri
Sarria, Vanessa; Hethcox, Leslie; Shack, Barbara; Wick, Jim; Cardenas, Nancy; Cortez,
John Michael; Majid, Sly; Rodriguez, Frank; Burton, Brandi; Varghese, Lesley; Prince,
Kazique; Hutchins, Christopher J.; Wilson Beverly; Rodriguez, Genoveva; Williamson,
Laura; Landeros, Alexandra; Nicely, Katherine; Chincanchan, David; Solorzano, Nicholas;
Fisher, Ashley; Dave, Neesha; Lawler, John; Alexander, Shelby; Latham-Jones, Braden;
Tiemann, Donna; Craig, Ken; Anguiano, Dora; Lopez, Jason; Petronis, Joe; Watson,
Gregory; Devine, Nubia; Smith, Amy; Halloran, Katie; Boggs, Annie; Gaudini, Michael;
septhayerj; Searle, Michael; Martinez, Viveca; Brucato, Michelle; Levinski, Bobby;
Harden, Joi; Halley, Shannon; Smith, Taylor; Cannon, Tina; Chase, Suzie; Smith, Melanie
Item 51 - Transportation Network Companies - City Council Meeting, October 15, 2015

Mayor Steve Adler, Mayor Pro Tem Kathie Tovo, and Council Members Ora Houston, Delia Garza, Sabino Renteria, Gregorio
Casar, Ann Kitchen, Don Zimmerman, Leslie Pool, Ellen Troxclair, and Sheri Gallo,
Please support item 51 directing the City Manager to initiate a code amendment for proposed background checks for
Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). The proposed amendment will help ensure that new TNCs like Uber and Lyft
follow the same background check requirements that apply to other TNCs.
The proposed amendment will help bring Austin’s TNC ordinance in line with other cities like Houston, New York, and
Chicago that have strengthened their ordinances to protect consumers and respond to serious crimes.
According to the Austin American-Statesman, there are now 18 tech-based transportation service providers in Austin. Given
that more of these companies are coming, it’s time to address safety and mobility issues facing our community.
Uber and Lyft should provide the same basic consumer protections (insurance, background checks, fingerprints, etc.) that other
TNC's in Austin provide and that they themselves provide in other cities where they operate; otherwise, they should not be
permitted to operate in Austin.
Their responses to questions from members of the Mobility Committee at the public hearing on October 7, 2015, demonstrate
that they are willing to mislead and threaten Council Members to avoid fees and basic safety regulations that apply to other
TNCs in Austin.

Respectfully,
David King
Zilker Neighborhood Resident

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Lisa Hill <[email protected]>
Thursday, November 05, 2015 10:51 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
[email protected]
no fingerprinting

This message is from Lisa Hill . [ [email protected] ]
If Kitchen is going to say young vulnerable women (sexist), she really shouldn't. All ages and all genders take
rides with TNCs. We keep the city safe by getting the drunks off the road. I would say that the drivers are taking
more risk than the passengers. And nobody's requiring a passenger to take any kind of background check.
Please don't make it so that the regulations make the TNCs pull out of Austin.
I'd like to continue my side job as a driver in order to support me and my 6yr old daughter, as a single mother.
Street address:
Council District: 5

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Jed Buie
Wednesday, October 28, 2015 12:16 PM
Searle, Michael
Lyft / TNCs

Hey, man.  I really appreciate your time yesterday.  It was incredibly helpful. 
 
On another note, April with Lyft will be in town on Monday, Nov. 9th in advance of the Mobility Committee meeting on Nov. 
16.  I wanted to see if we could get on your calendar or the Council Member’s for a few minutes that day.   We’d like to 
discuss we are in the process and offer some additional information.  Do you have any time on the 9th? 
 
I’d also like to offer up a briefing with a representative from Sterling, if you are interested.   That’s the company that handles 
our background checks. 
 
Thanks as always, 
 
Jed 
 

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Thomas Stiller
Saturday, November 07, 2015 8:40 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
On Uber regs

This message is from Thomas Stiller. [
Shamefully, I'm not one to pay too much attention to local politics, but after noticing Uber's disgraceful
campaign against Council Member Kitchens and the misrepresentations they've pushed against her proposed
rules, which are minimal and necessary in ensuring driver and customer safety, I can say that I'm passionate
about this issue being pushed forward. Uber's (and the wider "sharing economy") success has been completely
contingent on noncompliance with existing regulatory rules involving everything from labor contracts to
consumer safety. I want the Council to know they have my whole support.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Fees: 
 
As you know, we are deeply concerned about the proposed $450/vehicle fee. About 78% of our drivers drive less than 15 hours
a week, so this is a completely different driver pool than taxis. That is why we encourage cities/counties to adopt a flat fee, as
opposed to a per vehicle fee. I've included a chart with the flat fees required by other states/cities. We are exploring the gross
revenue proposal. We believe that 1% of gross revenue is entirely too high, but we are open to exploring other options. 

 
 
Additional information: 
 
Taxi Impact – We have not seen ATD data.  Our understanding is that there has been no impact on demand for taxis since Lyft 
begin it's pilot in Nov. 2014. In fact, we know that in Colorado TNC operations coincided with a major increase in demand for 
taxis.  
 
Colorado: “According to the PUC’s numbers, taxi rides — both local metered rides and fixed‐fee airport trips — are up 27 
percent and increased an average of 299,103 trips annually since Uber and Lyft came to Denver.” 
 
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/boosters bits/2015/09/uber‐nearly‐catching‐taxis‐in‐colorado‐ridership.html 
 
Drunk Driving Impact ‐ Regarding our impact of TNCs on drunk driving, here is an article stating that TNC operations coincided 
with a reduction in drunk driving: 
"Statistics from APD show from 2011 to 2013, the number of DWI arrests increased each year, then dropped 16 
percent in 2014. DWI‐related crashes fell even more citywide, decreasing by 23 percent last year. 
"It's a pretty strong indicator that impaired driving in general is decreasing in the Austin area, and we hope to keep 
it that way," Walker said. 
2014 is also the year ride‐sharing started in Austin, with services like Uber and Lyft entering the market. Walker said 
he doesn't know how much of an impact it had on drunk driving in Austin, but the more options people have, the 
better." 

http://www.kvue.com/story/news/crime/2015/03/02/apd-dwi-arrests-crashes-decreasing/24277979/
 

2

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Carlos Garcia <
Thursday, October 08, 2015 9:55 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Proposed regulations on TNC

This message is from Carlos Garcia . [
As a passenger and a driver I hope the city of Austin does adopt the proposed changes to TNC regulations.
There is a number of us who are serving other people in the city that would not be able to afford transportation
otherwise. We provide a safe, friendly alternative for the city and our passengers love the convenience we go
thru an extensive background check and are held accountable by our passengers in the service we provide thru
their rating. Immediately based on their experience.
For a number of us in the community of drivers the ability to continue drive for one of this companies is the
difference between making rent that month or not. The ability to finish college and pay the next bill or not.
The vast majority of people driving are holding fill Tim jobs and working towards bettering themselves and
others simply to stay afloat financially until they find an opportunity that will allow them to make a full living
with one job.
In the meantime we are austinites giving rides to other austinites that need them, picking people up that have
been drinking and would otherwise drive because of cost and the fact that we are usually there within 5 minutes.
I urge you to think of this before making your decision. And I hope for the sake of a huge Austin community
that you reject the proposed regulations.
Regards
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

David King
Friday, October 09, 2015 6:57 PM
Troxclair, Ellen
septhayerj; Searle, Michael; Martinez, Viveca; Brucato, Michelle
New Worry for Home Buyers: A Party House Next Door

Hello, Council Member Troxclair,
I thought you might be interested in this story in the New York Times today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/10/your-money/new-worry-for-home-buyers-a-party-house-next-door.html
Thank you,
David King
Zilker Neighborhood Resident
=======================

New York Times
October 9, 2015
YOUR MONEY

New Worry for Home Buyers: A Party House Next Door
OCT. 9, 2015
Photo

1

This home in Austin, Tex., has been the subject of 15 complaints related to groups who have rented it for short
stays. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
Your Money
By RON LIEBER
AUSTIN, Tex. — The houses are often among the nicest on the block, or at least the biggest. They may be
new construction where a smaller structure once stood, or an extensively renovated home with cheery paint in
shades of yellow or blue.
But then the telltale signs appear, including an electronic touch pad on the door that makes it easy for people to
get in without a key. The ads on HomeAway or Airbnb eventually confirm it: A party house has come to the
neighborhood.
Some neighbors have warmed in recent years to travelers dragging suitcases through their residential
neighborhoods, and they are happy that the visitors spread their money around. But when profit-seeking
entrepreneurs furnish homes they do not live in to make them attractive to big groups and then rent out those
houses as much as possible, parties and noise are nearly inevitable.
And so it goes here in Austin, where a group of enraged and occasionally sleepless residents have taken their
complaints to the city. Austin created rules in 2012 that were supposed to keep short-term rentals under control,
but the neighbors argue that many of the rules are unenforceable.
Photo

Each of the three bedrooms in the home includes at least one bunkbed and could sleep
several adults. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
This week, I rented one of the most notorious party houses in Austin and invited some of the neighbors over for
a chat to ask a few questions. Where do the rights of property owners to rent out their homes end, and where
do those of quiet-loving neighbors begin? Do all home shoppers now need to be on the lookout for nearby
problem properties? And if so, what might happen to home values when revelers can bunk up next door on any
given night?
These are not new questions. In resort areas in particular, people have been renting out investment properties for
2

ages. What’s new is how easy it has become for people to make money by listing rooms or homes and
for visitors to save money by staying there. This is particularly true in good-time destinations like Austin,
Nashville, New Orleans and other bigger cities.
When Austin tried to bring some order to the proceedings three years ago, it limited the number of unrelated
people who could stay in one place at one time to six. (It also capped the number of certain listings in
many neighborhoods, albeit with a loophole that has allowed many unregistered properties to hit the market.)
Nevertheless, listings began appearing all over the city advertising beds for 10 or 15 people, or more. Austin has
become a popular bachelor partydestination, and the website Thrillist described one Airbnb listing as “the
perfect place to bed down for a bonkers bachelor party, as it’s a short bike ride from downtown, just the right
blend of weird & huge, and not at all unaccustomed to rowdy entertainment.”
Emmy Jodoin lives next door to that house with her family. “It is loud, and there is live music and karaoke stuff,
and it’s all done outside because of the pool,” she said. “They’re out in front at 4 in the afternoon waiting
for their Uber to come, drunk on the front lawn.”
Homeowners had other complaints about guests, including trash bins overflowing with beer cans, public
urination, catcalling, foul language, racist remarks, companies throwing events and the appearance of
a rainbow-colored painted pony. “Sometimes, when they are outside, they’re playing beer pong just wearing
their underwear,” said Hazel Oldt, age 11, who can see them next door from the third-floor rooftop garden of
her house.
Many of the complaints result when there are well over six people staying at these houses. So how do owners
get away with renting to more people than city rules allow? “Determining how many are occupying versus
just visiting is almost impossible,” Carl Smart, who is the director of Austin’s code department, said, chuckling
as he did so.
Photo

The home, which has strict rules against parties, includes a game foyer on the second-floor landing. CreditIlana
Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
What was so funny? Had some of the guests been coached to say that they were related? “I think so,” he said.
“There is no way for us to disprove or to prove it. We could ask them to, but they don’t have to, so we have to
3

take their word for it.” KVUE, a local television station, tagged along with code enforcement officers who heard
from guests at one house that there were triplets inside and that someone else was related to a fifth guest
by marriage.
The neighbors would prefer that the city simply cap the number of guests at six people — or, better yet, stop
allowing what they describe as rogue hotels to operate in residential neighborhoods. (They have no problem
with people renting out their entire homes occasionally or renting rooms more frequently, while the owners
themselves are in residence.)
At HomeAway, which is based in Austin and also owns Vrbo.com, executives did not want a ban and said that
renting out one’s home on a short-term basis was a fundamental right. Nor do they think that it is a commercial
activity. “It’s a residential use of the property,” said Matt Curtis, who runs the governmental relations efforts for
the company. “It’s no more a business than someone renting it out long-term would be a business.”
Even if no one, in this instance, is doing any actual residing? HomeAway’s contention is that the visitors
coming for the weekend are the residents in this context.
Mr. Curtis questioned how widespread the problem was. Airbnb provided some statistics about its customers,
noting that from Oct. 1, 2014, to Oct. 1 this year, 87 percent of trips to Austin involved four or fewer people and
97 percent involved eight or fewer. The average age of Airbnb guests in Austin is 36. Airbnb offers a hotline for
neighbors having problems with hosts anywhere it operates and is building tools that will try to recognize
parties before they happen, say when someone books a large house and that listing is immediately viewed by
many other site visitors.
Since October 2012, Austin has received 266 complaints about the type of registered properties where the
homeowner is generally not present. Twenty percent of the properties have at least one complaint, with
an average of 2.4 complaints among those. Seventeen percent of the complaints were about over-occupancy.
The house where I stayed has received 15 complaints, and the city has suspended its license once. The walls
have “Dumb and Dumber” and “Anchorman” movie posters, and the three bedrooms are full of bunk beds and
futons. “Our neighbors understand that your group is here to have a good time,” the listing says.
Photo

4

Austin residents gathered recently to discuss the impact of short-term rentals on their neighborhoods and
properties. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
But not too good a time. Each door to the outside has a framed copy of Austin’s noise ordinance nearby, and
Jason Martin, a limited partner with partial ownership in the property, sends an extensive list of house rules
to guests urging them not to disturb the neighbors. “It is extremely professionally run,” he said. “Any word of a
bachelor party or fraternities is an immediate no-go.”

In fact, house parties and “organized social events” are not allowed on the premises, a rule I thought I was not
breaking when I invited the neighbors over. There’s another rule noting that “all persons entering the
premises are counted as chargeable guests.” I should have reread the rules and reviewed my original
communications with Mr. Martin once I decided to hold the gathering in the days after I made the booking.
Those visitors were especially concerned about their property values. For many of them, their homes are their
largest asset. Jessie Neufeld, who bought her home right before the local rules changed in 2012 and now has a
2-year-old child, put it most bluntly. “We did not buy our house to be living next to a hotel,” she said. “Would
you buy a home if you knew a hotel like this was operating next door, if you wanted to set your life up and
raise a family?”
I put the question to two real estate professionals whose names I saw on for-sale signs for homes that were next
to or close to some of the party houses. Were the properties going to sell for less because of the
problem properties nearby, and did they have a duty to disclose these houses to any and all buyers?
Katie Brigmon of Dash Realty did not want to answer many questions about her listing, a house that is very
close to one problem property, and my call to her quickly went dead.
Jeff Grant from Saddle Realty said that he wasn’t aware of the short-term rental several homes down from the
house he’s trying to sell on Hidalgo Street. “But my philosophy has always been disclose, disclose, disclose,”
he said. “I don’t think it affects property value in the least.”
It probably won’t if the buyer simply wants to rent out the home every weekend. But every other home buyer
ought to be searching Airbnb, HomeAway and similar sites for listings that are close to a home that they’re
considering buying.
Ms. Neufeld said she resented the fact that people making a living from renting out homes for the weekend have
put her own home’s value at risk. “They are leveraging our neighborhood for their profit, telling people to come
stay in this beautiful place where you would like to pretend that you live,” she said. “And they are making
people miserable.”

5

Searle, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

David King
Friday, October 09, 2015 6:57 PM
Troxclair, Ellen
septhayerj; Searle, Michael; Martinez, Viveca; Brucato, Michelle
New Worry for Home Buyers: A Party House Next Door

Hello, Council Member Troxclair,
I thought you might be interested in this story in the New York Times today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/10/your-money/new-worry-for-home-buyers-a-party-house-next-door.html
Thank you,
David King
Zilker Neighborhood Resident
=======================

New York Times
October 9, 2015
YOUR MONEY

New Worry for Home Buyers: A Party House Next Door
OCT. 9, 2015
Photo

1

This home in Austin, Tex., has been the subject of 15 complaints related to groups who have rented it for short
stays. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
Your Money
By RON LIEBER
AUSTIN, Tex. — The houses are often among the nicest on the block, or at least the biggest. They may be
new construction where a smaller structure once stood, or an extensively renovated home with cheery paint in
shades of yellow or blue.
But then the telltale signs appear, including an electronic touch pad on the door that makes it easy for people to
get in without a key. The ads on HomeAway or Airbnb eventually confirm it: A party house has come to the
neighborhood.
Some neighbors have warmed in recent years to travelers dragging suitcases through their residential
neighborhoods, and they are happy that the visitors spread their money around. But when profit-seeking
entrepreneurs furnish homes they do not live in to make them attractive to big groups and then rent out those
houses as much as possible, parties and noise are nearly inevitable.
And so it goes here in Austin, where a group of enraged and occasionally sleepless residents have taken their
complaints to the city. Austin created rules in 2012 that were supposed to keep short-term rentals under control,
but the neighbors argue that many of the rules are unenforceable.
Photo

Each of the three bedrooms in the home includes at least one bunkbed and could sleep
several adults. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
This week, I rented one of the most notorious party houses in Austin and invited some of the neighbors over for
a chat to ask a few questions. Where do the rights of property owners to rent out their homes end, and where
do those of quiet-loving neighbors begin? Do all home shoppers now need to be on the lookout for nearby
problem properties? And if so, what might happen to home values when revelers can bunk up next door on any
given night?
These are not new questions. In resort areas in particular, people have been renting out investment properties for
2

ages. What’s new is how easy it has become for people to make money by listing rooms or homes and
for visitors to save money by staying there. This is particularly true in good-time destinations like Austin,
Nashville, New Orleans and other bigger cities.
When Austin tried to bring some order to the proceedings three years ago, it limited the number of unrelated
people who could stay in one place at one time to six. (It also capped the number of certain listings in
many neighborhoods, albeit with a loophole that has allowed many unregistered properties to hit the market.)
Nevertheless, listings began appearing all over the city advertising beds for 10 or 15 people, or more. Austin has
become a popular bachelor partydestination, and the website Thrillist described one Airbnb listing as “the
perfect place to bed down for a bonkers bachelor party, as it’s a short bike ride from downtown, just the right
blend of weird & huge, and not at all unaccustomed to rowdy entertainment.”
Emmy Jodoin lives next door to that house with her family. “It is loud, and there is live music and karaoke stuff,
and it’s all done outside because of the pool,” she said. “They’re out in front at 4 in the afternoon waiting
for their Uber to come, drunk on the front lawn.”
Homeowners had other complaints about guests, including trash bins overflowing with beer cans, public
urination, catcalling, foul language, racist remarks, companies throwing events and the appearance of
a rainbow-colored painted pony. “Sometimes, when they are outside, they’re playing beer pong just wearing
their underwear,” said Hazel Oldt, age 11, who can see them next door from the third-floor rooftop garden of
her house.
Many of the complaints result when there are well over six people staying at these houses. So how do owners
get away with renting to more people than city rules allow? “Determining how many are occupying versus
just visiting is almost impossible,” Carl Smart, who is the director of Austin’s code department, said, chuckling
as he did so.
Photo

The home, which has strict rules against parties, includes a game foyer on the second-floor landing. CreditIlana
Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
What was so funny? Had some of the guests been coached to say that they were related? “I think so,” he said.
“There is no way for us to disprove or to prove it. We could ask them to, but they don’t have to, so we have to
3

take their word for it.” KVUE, a local television station, tagged along with code enforcement officers who heard
from guests at one house that there were triplets inside and that someone else was related to a fifth guest
by marriage.
The neighbors would prefer that the city simply cap the number of guests at six people — or, better yet, stop
allowing what they describe as rogue hotels to operate in residential neighborhoods. (They have no problem
with people renting out their entire homes occasionally or renting rooms more frequently, while the owners
themselves are in residence.)
At HomeAway, which is based in Austin and also owns Vrbo.com, executives did not want a ban and said that
renting out one’s home on a short-term basis was a fundamental right. Nor do they think that it is a commercial
activity. “It’s a residential use of the property,” said Matt Curtis, who runs the governmental relations efforts for
the company. “It’s no more a business than someone renting it out long-term would be a business.”
Even if no one, in this instance, is doing any actual residing? HomeAway’s contention is that the visitors
coming for the weekend are the residents in this context.
Mr. Curtis questioned how widespread the problem was. Airbnb provided some statistics about its customers,
noting that from Oct. 1, 2014, to Oct. 1 this year, 87 percent of trips to Austin involved four or fewer people and
97 percent involved eight or fewer. The average age of Airbnb guests in Austin is 36. Airbnb offers a hotline for
neighbors having problems with hosts anywhere it operates and is building tools that will try to recognize
parties before they happen, say when someone books a large house and that listing is immediately viewed by
many other site visitors.
Since October 2012, Austin has received 266 complaints about the type of registered properties where the
homeowner is generally not present. Twenty percent of the properties have at least one complaint, with
an average of 2.4 complaints among those. Seventeen percent of the complaints were about over-occupancy.
The house where I stayed has received 15 complaints, and the city has suspended its license once. The walls
have “Dumb and Dumber” and “Anchorman” movie posters, and the three bedrooms are full of bunk beds and
futons. “Our neighbors understand that your group is here to have a good time,” the listing says.
Photo

4

Austin residents gathered recently to discuss the impact of short-term rentals on their neighborhoods and
properties. CreditIlana Panich-Linsman for The New York Times
But not too good a time. Each door to the outside has a framed copy of Austin’s noise ordinance nearby, and
Jason Martin, a limited partner with partial ownership in the property, sends an extensive list of house rules
to guests urging them not to disturb the neighbors. “It is extremely professionally run,” he said. “Any word of a
bachelor party or fraternities is an immediate no-go.”

In fact, house parties and “organized social events” are not allowed on the premises, a rule I thought I was not
breaking when I invited the neighbors over. There’s another rule noting that “all persons entering the
premises are counted as chargeable guests.” I should have reread the rules and reviewed my original
communications with Mr. Martin once I decided to hold the gathering in the days after I made the booking.
Those visitors were especially concerned about their property values. For many of them, their homes are their
largest asset. Jessie Neufeld, who bought her home right before the local rules changed in 2012 and now has a
2-year-old child, put it most bluntly. “We did not buy our house to be living next to a hotel,” she said. “Would
you buy a home if you knew a hotel like this was operating next door, if you wanted to set your life up and
raise a family?”
I put the question to two real estate professionals whose names I saw on for-sale signs for homes that were next
to or close to some of the party houses. Were the properties going to sell for less because of the
problem properties nearby, and did they have a duty to disclose these houses to any and all buyers?
Katie Brigmon of Dash Realty did not want to answer many questions about her listing, a house that is very
close to one problem property, and my call to her quickly went dead.
Jeff Grant from Saddle Realty said that he wasn’t aware of the short-term rental several homes down from the
house he’s trying to sell on Hidalgo Street. “But my philosophy has always been disclose, disclose, disclose,”
he said. “I don’t think it affects property value in the least.”
It probably won’t if the buyer simply wants to rent out the home every weekend. But every other home buyer
ought to be searching Airbnb, HomeAway and similar sites for listings that are close to a home that they’re
considering buying.
Ms. Neufeld said she resented the fact that people making a living from renting out homes for the weekend have
put her own home’s value at risk. “They are leveraging our neighborhood for their profit, telling people to come
stay in this beautiful place where you would like to pretend that you live,” she said. “And they are making
people miserable.”

5

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

sharon mcdonald
Tuesday, November 10, 2015 2:41 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Restrictions to Uber & Lyft and other ride sharing options

This message is from Sharon Mcdonald. [
I realize your intentions are well intended; however, it is an extreme reaction to unilaterally force restrictions on
these businesses which in effect would cause hardship to those who use the services and those who make money
by providing the service. I know a large number of individuals who use the services rather than drive after
drinking. The service may have it's faults but it's better than taxis which are just not reliable in terms of
timeliness and honestly I hate getting in a taxi.Don't change the city's agreements with these companies. They
provide a much needed service to the community.
Thank you,
Sharon McDonald
District 5
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Kyle Hoskins <
Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:56 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
[email protected]
Revised TNC Regulation Proposals

This message is from Kyle Hoskins.
- No fee on Lyft Line or Uber Pool carpooling rides. Adding this clause will make you look forward thinking as
well as conscious of the environment and traffic.
- No flat fee. Fee should be structured around value of fair.
- No need for more background checks. (unless you have actual proof of an increase in incidents that would
have been prevented by further background checks)
- Permits? Nope. Why should someone who wants to pick up extra passengers on drives they already make to
improve traffic and environmental impact have to get a permit?
TNC's look a lot like taxi companies right now. In a few years they will look more like actual "ridesharing" with
increased carpooling and positive impacts on traffic and the environment.
Your current proposals will prevent TNC's from reaching their potential and only let them be "improved taxis."
This limitation would not only be a shame, but will make you look terrible when other cities evolve to this
point.
The above proposals make you look "revolutionary" and as "thought leaders" in the proper regulation of TNC's.
Thanks for your time,
Kyle Hoskins
Street address: 404 RIO GRANDE ST
Council District: 9

1

 
Example 1: I April Mims might get printed while pretending to be my sister, Jenny Mims, who has a record and doesn't want to
get detected. I have Jenny's driver's license, and I look like her. I show it to the fingerprint agency as evidence that I am Jenny
Mims, while I, April Mims, get printed. My background check is completed under the guise of Jenny Mims and shows no
results. Now Jenny, the criminal, is approved to drive.  
 
Example 2: I, April Mims am lawfully fingerprinted, and approved to drive. Once I'm approved I share my city permit with my
sister, Jenny Mims, the criminal, so that she can drive. (Note: This is less problematic with a TNC, because passengers can
cross check the identity of the driver via the app before entering a vehicle). 
 
These scenarios are unlikely, but (I would argue) so is the possibility that someone falsifies their identity under a name-based
search just to become a TNC driver. We are more concerned that the FBI fingerprint records are incomplete and that it will be
impossible and costly to move tens of thousands of drivers through a city-run process. 
 
Instead, we propose requiring all BGC providers to be approved by the city and enhancing the current BGC requirements for
name-based searches. This proposed language is attached (criminal check language begins at a(5)) and requires the BGC
process to include: 1) a county-by-county search of all records where applicant has previously lived, 2) a search of the federal
district court records 3) a DOJ sex offender records and 4) an office of foreign assets control records. 
 
Contrast this enhanced language with the current criminal BGC language in the ordinance at Part B7(a). This language is pretty
brief: 
 
(a) A criminal background check is required and must be national in scope and prevent any person who has been
convicted, within the past seven years, of driving under the influence of drugs or edcohol, or who has been convicted
at any time for fraud, sexual offenses, use of a motor vehicle to commit a felony, gun related violations,
resisting/evading arrest, reckless driving, a crime involving property damage, and/or theft, acts of violence, or acts of
terror from driving for a TNC.  
 
Fees: 
 
As you know, we are deeply concerned about the proposed $450/vehicle fee. About 78% of our drivers drive less than 15 hours
a week, so this is a completely different driver pool than taxis. That is why we encourage cities/counties to adopt a flat fee, as
opposed to a per vehicle fee. I've included a chart with the flat fees required by other states/cities. We are exploring the gross
revenue proposal. We believe that 1% of gross revenue is entirely too high, but we are open to exploring other options. 

 
 
Additional information: 
 
Taxi Impact – We have not seen ATD data.  Our understanding is that there has been no impact on demand for taxis since Lyft 
begin it's pilot in Nov. 2014. In fact, we know that in Colorado TNC operations coincided with a major increase in demand for 
taxis.  
 
Colorado: “According to the PUC’s numbers, taxi rides — both local metered rides and fixed‐fee airport trips — are up 27 
percent and increased an average of 299,103 trips annually since Uber and Lyft came to Denver.” 
 
http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/boosters bits/2015/09/uber‐nearly‐catching‐taxis‐in‐colorado‐ridership.html 
 
Drunk Driving Impact ‐ Regarding our impact of TNCs on drunk driving, here is an article stating that TNC operations coincided 
with a reduction in drunk driving: 
"Statistics from APD show from 2011 to 2013, the number of DWI arrests increased each year, then dropped 16 
percent in 2014. DWI‐related crashes fell even more citywide, decreasing by 23 percent last year. 
"It's a pretty strong indicator that impaired driving in general is decreasing in the Austin area, and we hope to keep 
it that way," Walker said. 

2

2014 is also the year ride‐sharing started in Austin, with services like Uber and Lyft entering the market. Walker said 
he doesn't know how much of an impact it had on drunk driving in Austin, but the more options people have, the 
better." 

http://www.kvue.com/story/news/crime/2015/03/02/apd-dwi-arrests-crashes-decreasing/24277979/
 

3

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Patty Reekers
Monday, November 09, 2015 9:37 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Ride services including Uber

This message is from Patty Reekers. [
Please be sure that recommended background checks are put in place + all requirements that are required for
cabs also apply to ride services such as Uber. Equality is needed. Without these requirements issues such as
safety are a real concern. These ride services seem to be very wealthy business and can afford these
requirements ( ads paid by them are all over TV).
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Brucato, Michelle
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Brucato, Michelle
Tuesday, June 23, 2015 2:13 PM
RE: Please give only temporary Taxi franchise extension

Dear Beki,
Firstly, I want to apologize for the late response, we are playing catch-up with our inbox. We appreciate you reaching
out to our office, and will pass this along to our Policy Director. If we could ever be of assistance to you, please do not
hesitate to call our office at 512.978.2108.
Best,
Michelle Brucato
Executive Assistant
Councilmember Troxclair – District 8
From: Beki Halpin [mailto
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 10:37 AM
To: Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; Garza, Delia; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Subject: Please give only temporary Taxi franchise extension

This message is from Beki Halpin. [
With Uber and Lyft competing with taxis, it is time to let the taxi drivers form a cooperative if they want to and
can. Giving only a temporary franchise extension will give the drivers time to take action if they want to.
Thanks!
Street address:
Council District: 8

1

Easy PDF Creator is professional software to create PDF. If you wish to remove this line, buy it now.

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

cory jeter
Thursday, October 15, 2015 11:33 AM
District 8
Rideshare decision

This message is from Cory Jeter
The Honorable Ellen Troxclair,
I will get straight to the point as to not take too much of your time. A vote is coming up in regards to the
ridesharing companies doing business in Austin, TX (Uber and Lyft). To cast a vote to change the way these
companies operate would be a slap in the face to anyone residing in the City of Austin. These companies are
providing employment to citizens of all ages in Austin, Texas. To the young people just starting out in the
business world, to the middle age citizens trying to add to their income in order to catch up on past due bills, on
to the retiree who is needing extra income just to stay afloat.
These companies are also providing significant assistance in decreasing drinking while driving incidents and
violations. See the KVUE story from March 2, 2015: http://www.kvue.com/story/news/crime/2015/03/02/apddwi-arrests-crashes-decreasing/24277979/ In addition to the previous two important factors, UBER and LYFT
are also reducing traffic in the down town area as more and more citizens are choosing the rideshare program,
rather than driving their own vehicle. Cab companies simply cannot handle the demand of these factors and they
have become complacent with their business model to make adjustments. This has been at the expense of the
city and of the citizens and it is now time for UBER and LYFT to bring the City of Austin into the 21st Century.
Thank you for taking time to listen to me and I hope you do what is right for the City of Austin and that is by
allowing UBER and LYFT to continue to operate as is.
Sincerely,
Cory Jeter
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Jim R Casparis
Sunday, October 18, 2015 5:15 PM
District 8
Thanks for supporting TNC's!

This message is from Jim R Casparis.
Councilmember, thanks so much for your support concerning the TNC's fingerprint background checks. FYI I
have sent the following letter to the mayor and your fellow Councilmembers that don't "get it":
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Honorable Mayor Adler and Council members,
My name is Jim Casparis and I am a 57 year old 4th generation Austinite, a former Yellow cab driver for 20
years ( 3/94 - 3/2014), and currently a proud Uber driver for the last 15 months. In January of 2014 a cab driver
named Nelson Egwu was arrested for sexually assaulting a minor in his taxi cab. When I went to renew my
permit in March of 2014, I was called into Ed Kargbo's (president of Yellow cab) office and told because of Mr.
Egwu's arrest it was HIGHLY unlikely that the city would renew my permit to drive a taxicab. Even though I
had never even met Egwu and I had a solid 20 years at driving with yellow cab without a single complaint only compliments on my record. The fact that in January of 2013 I had been placed on deferred adjudication for
a totally unrelated possession offense which was in no way related to my duties or responsibilities as a ground
transportation provider, and took place at my home and I had a letter from my attorney attesting that seemed not
to matter to Mr. Kargbo. He seemed determined to eliminate anyone who has had ANY type of arrest record
whatsoever from his fleet and the director of transportation, Robert Spillar has backed him up on this.
I was nevertheless determined that my career as a cab driver would not be cut short by the reckless actions of
someone who I had never met, and whose background was totally different form mine, in that while I had a few
arrests on my fingerprint background check, none were for any violent offenses, or driving offenses and in fact
had a clean driving record for the previous 3 year period preceding my application to renew my permit with the
city. I had also been allowed to renew my permit the previous 9 times I attempted to with the city as it requires
renewal every 2 years. To boost my case I presented 20 character reference letters to the transportation
department when I went to renew my permit in March of 2014.. Those letters were not only ignored, but my
then still valid permit which was not to expire for another week was yanked from me and I was told by the
department that I was no longer allowed to operate a taxi cab in Austin. I appealed to Carlton Thomas who also
did not read the letters and sided with his staff, and then I appealed to Director Spillar and he would not even
grant me an audience but rather, in a letter to me, quoted a vaguely worded portion of the city code for renewals
of licenses which is left up to MUCH interpretation which states that the licensing authority MAY consider that
an applicant has failed to complete 1/2 of a probated OR ADJUDICATED sentence when considering whether
to renew the permit.
I firmly believe that if Mr. Kargbo was not so hell bent on eradicating all the old (mostly white like myself) cab
drivers from his company and replace them with nothing but drivers that in 90% of the time have only been in
this country for less than 6 years when they start driving a cab, and had instead looked at my exemplary record
as a cab driver and later cab owner, for his company, or listened to any of his staff that all were rooting for me
to win my appeal with the Director, including all the way up to his own vice president of the company, Debbie
Taylor, then he would have put a good word in for me with Director Spillar and I would still be driving a yellow
cab today.
Instead my cab was taken away form me and my career as a ground transportation provider was abruptly ended.
The reason I was given a deferred adjudicated sentence by the State was because of my job as a cab driver and
so that there would not be a conviction on my record and thus my drivers license would not get suspended, and I
could continue to do my job as well as my deferred adjudicated sentence. Being on probation, I am scrutinized
1

much more closely than any regular citizen and am given frequent drug screenings as well as not allowed to
break ANY laws for any reason. Upon completion of the deferred sentence, the charge will never become a
conviction but rather be dismissed and no longer appear on my record. I completed an intensive outpatient
treatment program as well as the States drug and alcohol awareness program ALL WHILE I WAS STILL
DRIVING A TAXI, and in fact continued to drive for 14 months after my deferred sentence was handed down
to me in January of 2013. So y ou can see why I was so devastated when after going through all that and having
a sobriety date of July 1 2012, and with documentation and character reference letters written on my behalf
from concerned citizens I personally know and EVEN one from the District Attorney's office on my behalf, my
career was suddenly and in my opinion without just cause ripped from me. Being on probation, I am required to
have suitable employment, and the city code should not include the word "adjudicated" in it's language for
disqualifying probated individuals, as there is no conviction.
I also am considered disabled by the federal government and receive a disability check of $654 every month
since 1994. Because of my disability I am unable to find other suitable employment that would require me to
punch a time clock because of my sometimes very low stamina and this is why being an independent contractor
driver was such a perfect career for me to pursue. It allows me to take breaks when needed to pace myself and
yet still allowed me to feel good about myself knowing I still have some self worth and I still have something to
contribute to society. Being the very best ground transportation provider this city had was my constant goal.
I gave the appeals process everything I had but finally when it was apparent that I was not going to succeed, I
began to slip into very severe depression and feelings of despair. I had never been a quitter, and still tried to
hold onto some hope that I would be able to drive again.
Then someone told me that Uber had just come to town and why didn't I apply with them? So I did and while I
was not very optimistic at first, after completing their online registration and criminal background checks, their
independent company contractor, following the federal FCRA guidelines, CORRECTLY did not report my
deferred adjudicated sentence to Uber as a conviction and I was accepted to drive with their company. Well you
can imagine my elation when I received word that I was going to be allowed to drive on their platform!
I used my good credit to go out and purchase a brand new 2015 Subaru Forester to drive for Uber with and I am
happy and proud to say that I have been driving for them since July of 2014. I am also proud of my 4.91 out of
5 star average rating among the riders I have provide safe, friendly, and knowledgeable ground transportation
for. I have completed at this writing approx 1,500 trips in the Austin market and have regained my sense of
pride and self worth without a single complaint or accident! I am so very grateful to have been given the
opportunity to do once again what I love as I take great pride in providing the best possible service possible for
my riders. I cannot imagine what my life would have become if Uber had not come to town. I truly believe that
my life has been spared by having the opportunity to be of service again.
This is the only job I have and to be threatened once again with losing it by the city's unnecessary intervening
into Uber’s business practices makes me feel ill and is beginning to keep me up worrying at nights. I have
been to all the public hearings with the mobility commission and there is one point that Ms. Gallo needs to be
corrected on in her assumption that the fingerprint background checks will not adversely hurt minorities or
people who have been arrested just because the faces she sees in the audience of cab drivers are mostly minority
of color.
MS. GALLO, THE REASON THEIR ARE SO MANY MINORITY FACES IN THE CROWD IS THAT
WHEN THEY FIRST START, APPROX. 90 % OF THE NEW CAB DRIVERS IN AUSTIN HAVE BEEN IN
THIS COUNTRY FOR LESS THAN 6 YEARS AND THERFORE ONLY HAVE A 6 YEAR CRIMINAL
HISTORY THAT CAN BE CHECKED BY ANY TYPE OF BACKGROUND CHECK be it fingerprint or
otherwise. Their is absolutely NO WAY to check on their background before they came to this country. Also
just to be absolutely clear about this (and please don't take my word for it, check for yourself that is IF the cab
companies will give you that proprietary information), the cab drivers don't really want a to " level the playing
field" because as I just pointed out, that would be impossible to do since their background begins anew when
they move to the United States - and I am not implying that they are a bunch of criminals - not by a long shot..
just that their is really NO WAY to verify what their past was. No, the cab drivers and companies are pushing
for t his regulation so much because, unlike the majority of the city council. they know that by implementing
those tighter regulations their is a VERY HIGH LIKELYHOOD that rather than change their whole business
2

model, the TNC's will MOST LIKELY JUST MOVE OUT OF THIS MARKET and then the cab companies
can get back to doing their old business as usual .
I DO NOT purport to know what Uber will do and they have certainly not made me privy to their plans, but I do
believe that the majority of the current city council is really somewhat arrogant to think that they can make
these transportation networking companies go backwards in direction by demanding them to comply with a
method that is highly flawed and leads to much more paperwork and bureaucratic red tape than they are, and
historically have been willing to accept the unnecessitated burden for. My personal experience from working
with Uber the last 15 months is that their business model is to operate with the lowest possible overhead and
these requirements would not jive with that model at all - especially when their security measures have been so
successful and are indeed the cutting edge of the way things will almost certainly be done in the not so distant
future.
I had always prided myself in being from Austin, a city that is known globally for their forward thinking, and
innovative ways to tackle the challenges facing our ever growing world in a progressive and technologedly
advanced fashion. I must say, however, that with my personal experience with the Austin Transportation
Department, and now the current backward nature of MOST of the current council, has made me re-think that
assessment.
I realize that the challenges facing you good people are quite daunting, and frankly I would not want to be in
your shoes, but if it is really public safety you are concerned about, why not allow the TNC's to continue
operating in the way they have been with much more current and technologically advanced ways of keeping
everyone safer, with nearly a year and a half worth of successful data that supports their safety claims, and
allow them to continue to come up with innovative ways to help Austin in it's transportation growth issues,
rather than attempting to force them to go backwards and possibly lose ALL the benefits these companies have
been providing thus far! I urge you my fellow Austinites and entrusted leaders, to not allow the fear of the new
things that are evolving around us everyday to cloud your judgment, or be coerced by the established ground
transportation companies into believing that allowing the TNC's to operate and self regulate their safety
standards wil l decrease safety. The data collected thus far suggests otherwise!
I am hopeful my insights will have made an impact and that I will soon no longer have to be losing sleep over
whether I will still have a job come November 16th or not.
Very Truly Yours,
Jim R Casparis
Austin, TX 78747

Street address: Outside Austin, TX
Council District: Outside Austin, TX

3

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Sara LeVine
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 3:09 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
TNC regulations- items #50 and #51

Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council: 
On behalf of our Board, I am writing to once again reinforce our support of TNC’s and to ask that you review the 
resolution items line by line carefully. 
 
We fought hard for the resolution to allow TNC’s to operate legally well over a year ago, and since then, for the first time 
in years, we’ve seen the DWI rates in Austin decrease, despite population increases. We believe this to be a direct effect 
of the entry of Uber and Lyft in the market. Uber’s own data shows that traditionally underserved east Austin 
neighborhoods are using their services frequently, both as passengers and drivers. TNC’s have been a tremendous boon 
to many in the community as they stand now under current regulations. 
 
For the last year and a half, we’ve had a remarkably smooth ride with them, with statistically negligible incidents 
between their drivers, police, passengers, or other vehicles. This tells me that they have sufficient checks and balances in 
place within their own companies and additional background and safety regulations will put an unnecessary burden on 
City employees. 
 
ATX Safer Streets encourages Council and committees to instead address the onerous regulations on other vehicles for 
hire which reduce their ability to compete, rather than focus on increased regulations.  
 
Thank you, 
Sara LeVine 
Executive Director 
ATX Safer Streets 

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Melissa Alvarez
Sunday, October 18, 2015 9:29 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
TNC

This message is from Melissa Alvarez. [
Keep Uber and Lift operating in the Metro Austin area. With all the traffic in Austin, we need all options
available.
Street address: Outside Austin, TX
Council District: Outside Austin, TX

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Brad Ryker
Monday, October 05, 2015 1:52 PM
District 8
TNCs

This message is from Brad Ryker. [
Please regulate TNCs. They have decimated cab business here in Austin. My drivers earned one third to one
half the normally receive during ACL. When there is no event or UT football game in town, cab drivers cannot
earn a living. The biggest problem is the lack of limits placed on the number of vehicles operating as TNCs.
There are less than 900 city certified taxis operating while Uber and Lyft number well over 5000. No one
verifies if their vehicles have adequate commercial insurance. Their vehicles are not inspected for saftey or
appearance. And their rates to the public seem to change with the weather. We cannot compete with these
companies that don't have the same requirements that the city makes us follow. Please, limit the number of TNC
vehicles serving Austin. Require their drivers to submit to the same DPS criminal background checks (with
fingerprints) we do. Verify that each vehicle has adequate commercial insurance and is safe for public use.
Before Ube r and Lyft came nto Austin, my 42 cabs were fully occupied and my drivers were making a decent
living. Now I'm losing drivers, my fleet has shrunk to 24 cabs, and my drivers are working longer hours and are
earning 40% to 60% less.Please help.
Street address:
Council District: 3

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Joseph W Beers <
Sunday, October 18, 2015 10:33 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Transportation Network Companies

This message is from Joseph W Beers.
As a taxi driver in Austin for more than 16 years I would have no problem at all with TNC's if they just meet 5
simple requirements. 1. The primary auto insurance provider on the vehicle being used for livery services must
be notified as weather they like it or not they are a party to the contract. 2. If there is a lien holder on the vehicle
being used, they must consent to the use of the vehicle for commercial purposes as it does not belong to the
driver. 3. TNC's must provide not less than 10% of the vehicles providing transportation services to be ADA
accessible (wheelchair vehicles). 4. All TNC's must be properly marked as commercial vehicles on the front,
rear, left, and right side of the vehicles. If you get hit by a TNC driver you should have the right to know who is
actually responsible. 5. In today's day and age of identity theft it is imperative to conduct a background checks
though a government agency which requires fingerprints.
It is highly unfortunate what the TNC's cut so many corners in being responsible citizens to the public of
Austin. I still to this day have not been able to find an insurance policy for my vehicle that covers TNC service,
short of purchasing a commercial policy. The taxi company's are required to cover their vehicles with
commercial insurance 24 hours a day 365 days a year, even when they are not providing service. Every single
insurance provider I have called for a quote on full coverage told me they will not write a policy when I
mention I will be using my vehicle for livery services with UBER and LYFT. The entire TNC model in Texas is
based on deceiving your personal insurance provider by lying by omission. Any business model that is
predicated on fraud that receives a competitive advantage because of said fraud is immoral and wrong. I
challenge you to call your personal auto company and ask them if your full coverage insurance policy covers
you for TNC services. I am certain they will tell you no.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Alex Pamatat
Monday, October 12, 2015 3:40 PM
District 8
Uber/Lyft Mobility Committee Proposals

This message is from Alex Pamatat. [
Hi Ellen. I'm asking you to oppose adding new regulations to Transportation Network Companies like Uber and
Lyft. Uber/Lyft is one of the best changes that Austin has experienced in the last decade from my memory. I
don't know of anyone that I socialize that drives their own car anymore after having a couple drinks. The reason
is for the moderate and very reasonable costs for these services. It's entirely more convenient than a taxi and
should help to free up roads and available parking in downtown Austin.
My experiences with Uber and their drivers have been 100% positive and their cars are always equipped with
standard safety equipment....and always cleaner than CABs.
While I was for two of the proposed changes, as a whole I'm against the proposal in its entirety. I'm pushing for
no additional restrictions or requirements for Uber/Lyft drivers
Thanks,
Alex
Street address:
Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Brian Hochradel <
Thursday, October 08, 2015 3:33 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Uber/Lyft Regulations

This message is from Brian Hochradel.
I am opposed to your recommendation for proposed fingerprints for uber and Lyft drivers thus causing more
costs for these companies that offer a comparable yet more convenient alternative to taxis. There is already a
public transportation problem in this city and there is no need to add to it. If it's not broke do not fix it. Have
there been a problem with these drivers? Having used this service numerous times I have found all drivers
professional and non threatening. What would this measure accomplish other than the city making more
money? Also at the same time there is a proposal for an all time no refusal for drunk driving. These companies
have taken many drunk drivers off the road and most likely saved lives. I urge the city council to rethink this
proposition and let uber and Lyft continue to provide a much needed and safe transportation option in the city of
Austin. When/if these companies leave the city the blood of innocent motorist from drunk drivers will be on
your hands. For the record I never have or never will work for either of these companies.
Street address:

Austin 78745

Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Brian Hochradel
Thursday, October 08, 2015 3:33 PM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Uber/Lyft Regulations

This message is from Brian Hochradel. [

]

I am opposed to your recommendation for proposed fingerprints for uber and Lyft drivers thus causing more
costs for these companies that offer a comparable yet more convenient alternative to taxis. There is already a
public transportation problem in this city and there is no need to add to it. If it's not broke do not fix it. Have
there been a problem with these drivers? Having used this service numerous times I have found all drivers
professional and non threatening. What would this measure accomplish other than the city making more
money? Also at the same time there is a proposal for an all time no refusal for drunk driving. These companies
have taken many drunk drivers off the road and most likely saved lives. I urge the city council to rethink this
proposition and let uber and Lyft continue to provide a much needed and safe transportation option in the city of
Austin. When/if these companies leave the city the blood of innocent motorist from drunk drivers will be on
your hands. For the record I never have or never will work for either of these companies.
Street address:

Austin 78745

Council District: District not found

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Tim Kelly
Thursday, October 15, 2015 2:18 PM
District 8
[email protected]
UBER/LYFT

This message is from Tim Kelly. [
In short, Please to not constrain the TNC’s any further. Some members on the council obviously do not
understand the service and the security process. Having gone through the on boarding process for UBER and
LYFT- I found the current process acceptable (9-16 days). Further constraints appear to be burdensome and
may/may not bear fruits that are beneficial.
Can we at least have additional time to honestly discern what is happening nationally?. This “solution†in
search of a “problem†is being forced to the surface by the Taxi companies. These companies are
substandard and NO regulations can fix them. I cannot tell you how many of my customers have a negative
view of Taxi’s. It is a failed, outmoded business model (keep that thought to yourself, though).
Street address: Outside Austin, TX
Council District: Outside Austin, TX

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Adam Roche
Friday, November 06, 2015 1:36 PM
District 8
Uber/Ride Share

This message is from Adam Roche. [

]

I don't agree that ride sharing companies like Uber should be changed or regulated any more than they currently
are. I used Uber last weekend as a safe ride for my wife and I from downtown to our home. The service was
great, clean, and as safe as any taxi I've ever taken. Please fight to keep the city council out of businesses it has
no role in regulating.
Street address:

, Austin TX 78739

Council District: 8

1

Martinez, Viveca
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Keith Heath
Tuesday, November 10, 2015 8:32 AM
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Just wanted to Voice my support from Leander, Texas

This message is from Keith Heath. [
I'm the last person that wants to see more regulation in government. Having said that I think that you all are
doing a great job handling this UBER issue. There is no reason why these drivers cant have a stricter back
ground check. "Heaven forbid we prevent another sexual assault on a women". I just wanted to let you know
that I fully support what your doing and keep up the great work. DON'T BACK DOWN!!
Keith Heath
Street address: Outside Austin, TX
Council District: Outside Austin, TX

1

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Kyle Hoskins
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Correction to "Making Austin a Safer City.": 1, not 4 cases
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:43:49 PM

This message is from Kyle Hoskins. [
CORRECTION: 1, not 4 cases could possibly have been prevented by fingerprint background
checks.
I apologize, but I need to make a correction to my previous email entitled “Making Austin
a Safer City.†Fingerprint background checks would NOT have prevented 4 of 18 sexual
assaults in Lyft/Uber cases in the United States. They would have prevented 1, not 4. (one
case, a DUI 2012 in a misdemeanor fondling in an Uber)
I did not account for the fact that having a criminal background does not disqualify you from
being a taxi, limo, or Uber driver depending on when it occurred. In some cities the limit is up
to 10 years, and in others, only 5. In two of the cases four cases I described, the convictions
were 10+ and 8 years prior which would mean they would have been eligible to pass a
fingerprint background check and become a taxi driver in their city.
The other removed case is an example where the taxi 10 year requirement in Virginia Beach
would have disqualified the offender, whereas Uber's 7 year policy did not. A fingerprint
check would not have made a difference because Uber still would not have cared with their 7
year regulation.
I apologize for falling victim to the media’s “criminal background†claims without
first recognizing the difference between a criminal background and an “eligibleâ€
criminal background to still be a limo or taxi driver.
In other disturbing news closer to home, the taxi driver who committed a sexual assault here in
Austin in 2014 would not have qualified to be an Uber driver, but apparently “passedâ€
taxi background checks in 2009 and 2011 within Uber’s 7 year window of the driver’s
2005 assault conviction. (also convicted in 2003)
While this would disqualify them from driving Uber (no felony or misdemeanor cases
involving violence within 7 years), apparently not so for taxi:
“A representative with the City of Austin Transportation Department says family violence
arrests and convictions do not cause an individual to fail a background checkâ€
http://kxan.com/2014/02/04/yellow-cab-driver-arrested-for-sexual-assault/
If that is true and is still the case, perhaps that should be part of the solution proposed to make
ground transportation safer.
I can tell you one thing: fingerprint background checks are not the answer. (If you haven't read
the original article I wrote, please refer to that for more possible solutions)
--------------------------------------------Original Email:

--------------------------------------------Making Austin a Safer City
I set out to test a hypothesis of what I believed to be a fair proposition for overall ground
transportation safety:
Require fingerprint background checks to drive between Midnight and 4AM.
I tested this theory based on the cases of sexual assault in the United States from Lyft and
Uber rides. According to estimates, 80% of sexual assault cases are not reported due to the
trauma and personal nature involved in these cases, and when they are, they aren’t
recorded as to their source; however, http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/ was created with the
sole purpose of logging every case of assault from Lyft and Uber. These are the cases I drew
this data from.
My theory was reasonably correct that these cases were more likely to occur between midnight
and 4AM. 9 of the 18 cases were in these hours.
However, if fingerprint background checks for driving Midnight-4AM could only stop 9 cases,
I don’t think that’s enough.
Even so, I wanted to check how many of those 9 cases and fingerprint background check
would prevent. One. One case.
Out of 18 cases, 4 could have been prevented by fingerprint background check. To me, when
thinking about safety, leaving 14 of 18 cases on the table is too many.
I also examined the arrests related to these cases, and found that crime doesn’t pay as an
Uber/Lyft driver because you get caught. Nearly immediately. In fact, catching perpetrators is
so successful when the crime is committed as an Uber driver, that in one case, they managed
to catch a man tied to 5 previous sexual assaults that he got away with.
How does this compare to taxis? Considering there are substantially more taxi rides (for the
time being) across America, there are naturally more cases of sexual assault. No one has a
complete list like they do for Lyft/Uber drivers, but in an hour, I was able to compile a list of
20+ cases in the United States in 2014-2015. Some points of interest:
• A couple of the cases were repeat offenders who finally got caught.
• Cases reported generally fell into two categories:
o Driver was arrested or “finally†arrested. (I had to discard several old cases that were
finally closed in 2014-2015 because it’s not as easy to track down taxi driver offenders)
o Police went to the media to help find the driver matching a description because they didnâ
€™t have the information available to them as they do in the open and shut Uber/Lyft cases.
In my eyes, the two key points are police needing to go to the media for help to find someone
fitting a description, and drivers who had committed multiple offenses as taxi drivers before
being caught.
Those are both frightening to me. How do we fix those? Make taxis more like Uber and Lyft.
These are the more common cases than the 4 cases fingerprints could have prevented in TNCâ

€™s.
Fingerprint background checks are not the “gold standard†to avoid and solve crimes as
was echoed during the last Mobility Committee meeting. Knowing the offender, where the
offender is, what car to locate the offender in, knowing the victim, knowing where the victim
is, and knowing what time the crime occurs at comprise the modern day gold standard.
Let’s prevent these cases logically using every power we have. Uber introduced a panic
button in India, which is coming soon to Chicago. It allows a passenger to secretly report their
up-to-date location to emergency contacts, a critical response team, and law enforcement. To
me, that sounds like the “gold standard†in prevention and is relatively easy to
implement for TNC’s yet difficult for taxis.
If we were to analyze how to make taxis safer for passengers and drivers, the solution would
be technology like Lyft and Uber. Why are we trying to run the solution out of town?
We have the technology solutions to make ground transportation safer, and those solutions
don’t require an unnecessary fingerprint background check that will destroy the positive
impacts on traffic and the environment that Lyft Line/Uber Pool carpooling services provide
in the “everyone [that qualifies] with a car should be a driver†world. Limiting Lyft and
Uber to being “better cabs†is narrow-sighted and a mistake.
When Lyft pulls out of Austin and Uber temporarily pulls out, do you think that will make
Austin safer?
Thanks,
Kyle
Feel free to contact me at

Street address: 404 RIO GRANDE ST
Council District: 9

or 512-739-7623

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Kyle Hoskins
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Correction to "Making Austin a Safer City.": 1, not 4 cases
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:43:49 PM

This message is from Kyle Hoskins. [
CORRECTION: 1, not 4 cases could possibly have been prevented by fingerprint background
checks.
I apologize, but I need to make a correction to my previous email entitled “Making Austin
a Safer City.†Fingerprint background checks would NOT have prevented 4 of 18 sexual
assaults in Lyft/Uber cases in the United States. They would have prevented 1, not 4. (one
case, a DUI 2012 in a misdemeanor fondling in an Uber)
I did not account for the fact that having a criminal background does not disqualify you from
being a taxi, limo, or Uber driver depending on when it occurred. In some cities the limit is up
to 10 years, and in others, only 5. In two of the cases four cases I described, the convictions
were 10+ and 8 years prior which would mean they would have been eligible to pass a
fingerprint background check and become a taxi driver in their city.
The other removed case is an example where the taxi 10 year requirement in Virginia Beach
would have disqualified the offender, whereas Uber's 7 year policy did not. A fingerprint
check would not have made a difference because Uber still would not have cared with their 7
year regulation.
I apologize for falling victim to the media’s “criminal background†claims without
first recognizing the difference between a criminal background and an “eligibleâ€
criminal background to still be a limo or taxi driver.
In other disturbing news closer to home, the taxi driver who committed a sexual assault here in
Austin in 2014 would not have qualified to be an Uber driver, but apparently “passedâ€
taxi background checks in 2009 and 2011 within Uber’s 7 year window of the driver’s
2005 assault conviction. (also convicted in 2003)
While this would disqualify them from driving Uber (no felony or misdemeanor cases
involving violence within 7 years), apparently not so for taxi:
“A representative with the City of Austin Transportation Department says family violence
arrests and convictions do not cause an individual to fail a background checkâ€
http://kxan.com/2014/02/04/yellow-cab-driver-arrested-for-sexual-assault/
If that is true and is still the case, perhaps that should be part of the solution proposed to make
ground transportation safer.
I can tell you one thing: fingerprint background checks are not the answer. (If you haven't read
the original article I wrote, please refer to that for more possible solutions)
--------------------------------------------Original Email:

--------------------------------------------Making Austin a Safer City
I set out to test a hypothesis of what I believed to be a fair proposition for overall ground
transportation safety:
Require fingerprint background checks to drive between Midnight and 4AM.
I tested this theory based on the cases of sexual assault in the United States from Lyft and
Uber rides. According to estimates, 80% of sexual assault cases are not reported due to the
trauma and personal nature involved in these cases, and when they are, they aren’t
recorded as to their source; however, http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/ was created with the
sole purpose of logging every case of assault from Lyft and Uber. These are the cases I drew
this data from.
My theory was reasonably correct that these cases were more likely to occur between midnight
and 4AM. 9 of the 18 cases were in these hours.
However, if fingerprint background checks for driving Midnight-4AM could only stop 9 cases,
I don’t think that’s enough.
Even so, I wanted to check how many of those 9 cases and fingerprint background check
would prevent. One. One case.
Out of 18 cases, 4 could have been prevented by fingerprint background check. To me, when
thinking about safety, leaving 14 of 18 cases on the table is too many.
I also examined the arrests related to these cases, and found that crime doesn’t pay as an
Uber/Lyft driver because you get caught. Nearly immediately. In fact, catching perpetrators is
so successful when the crime is committed as an Uber driver, that in one case, they managed
to catch a man tied to 5 previous sexual assaults that he got away with.
How does this compare to taxis? Considering there are substantially more taxi rides (for the
time being) across America, there are naturally more cases of sexual assault. No one has a
complete list like they do for Lyft/Uber drivers, but in an hour, I was able to compile a list of
20+ cases in the United States in 2014-2015. Some points of interest:
• A couple of the cases were repeat offenders who finally got caught.
• Cases reported generally fell into two categories:
o Driver was arrested or “finally†arrested. (I had to discard several old cases that were
finally closed in 2014-2015 because it’s not as easy to track down taxi driver offenders)
o Police went to the media to help find the driver matching a description because they didnâ
€™t have the information available to them as they do in the open and shut Uber/Lyft cases.
In my eyes, the two key points are police needing to go to the media for help to find someone
fitting a description, and drivers who had committed multiple offenses as taxi drivers before
being caught.
Those are both frightening to me. How do we fix those? Make taxis more like Uber and Lyft.
These are the more common cases than the 4 cases fingerprints could have prevented in TNCâ

€™s.
Fingerprint background checks are not the “gold standard†to avoid and solve crimes as
was echoed during the last Mobility Committee meeting. Knowing the offender, where the
offender is, what car to locate the offender in, knowing the victim, knowing where the victim
is, and knowing what time the crime occurs at comprise the modern day gold standard.
Let’s prevent these cases logically using every power we have. Uber introduced a panic
button in India, which is coming soon to Chicago. It allows a passenger to secretly report their
up-to-date location to emergency contacts, a critical response team, and law enforcement. To
me, that sounds like the “gold standard†in prevention and is relatively easy to
implement for TNC’s yet difficult for taxis.
If we were to analyze how to make taxis safer for passengers and drivers, the solution would
be technology like Lyft and Uber. Why are we trying to run the solution out of town?
We have the technology solutions to make ground transportation safer, and those solutions
don’t require an unnecessary fingerprint background check that will destroy the positive
impacts on traffic and the environment that Lyft Line/Uber Pool carpooling services provide
in the “everyone [that qualifies] with a car should be a driver†world. Limiting Lyft and
Uber to being “better cabs†is narrow-sighted and a mistake.
When Lyft pulls out of Austin and Uber temporarily pulls out, do you think that will make
Austin safer?
Thanks,
Kyle
Feel free to contact me at

Street address: 404 RIO GRANDE ST
Council District: 9

or 512-739-7623

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:

Ted Hatfield Jr.
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Please vote NO to the proposed uber restrictions.
Thursday, November 12, 2015 4:29:15 AM

This message is from Ted Hatfield Jr.. [

]

I am writing the members of the city council to urge them to consider carefully the fingerprint
background requirements proposed by Councilwoman Ann Kitchen. Austin is in the middle
of a long growth period and is undergoing many changes. One of these changes is
densification of our urban areas. To enable this type of growth we will need to both build
more hi-density homes, apartments and condos but we will also need to increase our public
transportation options. Uber and Lyft's ride sharing option can easily scale both up and down
in a way that other public transportation options can not. Please don't implement regulations
that would force this option away from our city. A better option in my opinion would be to
allow the service to run for a while and require the ride sharing companies to provide better
and more accurate data to the city so that the council can make a more informed choice when
contemplating regulations of this new industry.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Bcc:
Subject:
Date:

Van Arnam, Catherine on behalf of District 8
Troxclair, Ellen
RE: Proposed regulations on TNC
Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:21:00 AM

Good Morning Mr. Garcia,
 
Just writing to follow up with you on your email about Lyft, Uber, and similar services. We’re quite
grateful for your time and thank you for writing in. Your perspective as a driver and passenger is
much appreciated. We definitely hear what you are saying regarding the economic impact of further
regulations on Austinites’ ability to continue to afford living in the city. This issue is something that
we are actively working on here.
 
Please to call or write again with any further thoughts.
 
Regards,
Catherine Van Arnam, District Coordinator, Council Member Troxclair – District 8
 
From: Carlos Garcia [mailto:
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 9:55 AM
To: Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman,
Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Cc:
Subject: Proposed regulations on TNC

This message is from Carlos Garcia . [
As a passenger and a driver I hope the city of Austin does adopt the proposed changes to TNC
regulations.
There is a number of us who are serving other people in the city that would not be able to
afford transportation otherwise. We provide a safe, friendly alternative for the city and our
passengers love the convenience we go thru an extensive background check and are held
accountable by our passengers in the service we provide thru their rating. Immediately based
on their experience.
For a number of us in the community of drivers the ability to continue drive for one of this
companies is the difference between making rent that month or not. The ability to finish
college and pay the next bill or not.
The vast majority of people driving are holding fill Tim jobs and working towards bettering
themselves and others simply to stay afloat financially until they find an opportunity that will
allow them to make a full living with one job.
In the meantime we are austinites giving rides to other austinites that need them, picking
people up that have been drinking and would otherwise drive because of cost and the fact that
we are usually there within 5 minutes.
I urge you to think of this before making your decision. And I hope for the sake of a huge

Austin community that you reject the proposed regulations.
Regards
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Carlo Garcia
District 8
Re: Proposed regulations on TNC
Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:32:02 AM

Thanks so much for your response and time 
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 8, 2015, at 10:21 AM, District 8 <[email protected]> wrote:
Good Morning Mr. Garcia,
 
Just writing to follow up with you on your email about Lyft, Uber, and similar services.
We’re quite grateful for your time and thank you for writing in. Your perspective as a
driver and passenger is much appreciated. We definitely hear what you are saying
regarding the economic impact of further regulations on Austinites’ ability to continue
to afford living in the city. This issue is something that we are actively working on here.
 
Please to call or write again with any further thoughts.
 
Regards,
Catherine Van Arnam, District Coordinator, Council Member Troxclair – District 8
 
From: Carlos Garcia [mailto
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 9:55 AM
To: Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Cc:
Subject: Proposed regulations on TNC

 
This message is from Carlos Garcia . [
As a passenger and a driver I hope the city of Austin does adopt the proposed
changes to TNC regulations.
There is a number of us who are serving other people in the city that would not be
able to afford transportation otherwise. We provide a safe, friendly alternative for
the city and our passengers love the convenience we go thru an extensive
background check and are held accountable by our passengers in the service we
provide thru their rating. Immediately based on their experience.
For a number of us in the community of drivers the ability to continue drive for
one of this companies is the difference between making rent that month or not.
The ability to finish college and pay the next bill or not.
The vast majority of people driving are holding fill Tim jobs and working towards
bettering themselves and others simply to stay afloat financially until they find an
opportunity that will allow them to make a full living with one job.

In the meantime we are austinites giving rides to other austinites that need them,
picking people up that have been drinking and would otherwise drive because of
cost and the fact that we are usually there within 5 minutes.
I urge you to think of this before making your decision. And I hope for the sake of
a huge Austin community that you reject the proposed regulations.
Regards
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Van Arnam, Catherine on behalf of District 8
"Carlo Garcia"
RE: Proposed regulations on TNC
Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:36:00 AM

You’re quite welcome!
Best,
Catherine
 
 
From: Carlo Garcia [mailto
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:32 AM
To: District 8
Subject: Re: Proposed regulations on TNC

Thanks so much for your response and time
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 8, 2015, at 10:21 AM, District 8 <[email protected]> wrote:
Good Morning Mr. Garcia,
 
Just writing to follow up with you on your email about Lyft, Uber, and similar services.
We’re quite grateful for your time and thank you for writing in. Your perspective as a
driver and passenger is much appreciated. We definitely hear what you are saying
regarding the economic impact of further regulations on Austinites’ ability to continue
to afford living in the city. This issue is something that we are actively working on here.
 
Please to call or write again with any further thoughts.
 
Regards,
Catherine Van Arnam, District Coordinator, Council Member Troxclair – District 8
 
From: Carlos Garcia [mailto
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 9:55 AM
To: Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5;
Zimmerman, Don; District 7; District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Cc:
Subject: Proposed regulations on TNC

This message is from Carlos Garcia .
As a passenger and a driver I hope the city of Austin does adopt the proposed
changes to TNC regulations.
There is a number of us who are serving other people in the city that would not be
able to afford transportation otherwise. We provide a safe, friendly alternative for
the city and our passengers love the convenience we go thru an extensive
background check and are held accountable by our passengers in the service we

provide thru their rating. Immediately based on their experience.
For a number of us in the community of drivers the ability to continue drive for
one of this companies is the difference between making rent that month or not.
The ability to finish college and pay the next bill or not.
The vast majority of people driving are holding fill Tim jobs and working towards
bettering themselves and others simply to stay afloat financially until they find an
opportunity that will allow them to make a full living with one job.
In the meantime we are austinites giving rides to other austinites that need them,
picking people up that have been drinking and would otherwise drive because of
cost and the fact that we are usually there within 5 minutes.
I urge you to think of this before making your decision. And I hope for the sake of
a huge Austin community that you reject the proposed regulations.
Regards
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Brucato, Michelle on behalf of District 8
RE: Uber/Lyft Mobility Committee Proposals
Tuesday, October 13, 2015 12:18:00 PM

Alex,
 
Thank you for reaching out to our office regarding TNCs.  We will certainly keep your comments in
mind as we move along the policy process.  This item comes before the Council on Thursday, so I
encourage you to tune in (channel 6).
 
Have a wonderful rest of your day, and please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or
comments.
 
Best,
 

 
Michelle Brucato

Executive Assistant
Office of Austin City Council Member Ellen Troxclair, District 8
(512) 978-2108
[email protected]

 
 
 

From: Alex Pamatat [mailto:
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 3:40 PM
To: District 8
Subject: Uber/Lyft Mobility Committee Proposals

This message is from Alex Pamatat. [
Hi Ellen. I'm asking you to oppose adding new regulations to Transportation Network
Companies like Uber and Lyft. Uber/Lyft is one of the best changes that Austin has
experienced in the last decade from my memory. I don't know of anyone that I socialize that
drives their own car anymore after having a couple drinks. The reason is for the moderate and
very reasonable costs for these services. It's entirely more convenient than a taxi and should
help to free up roads and available parking in downtown Austin.
My experiences with Uber and their drivers have been 100% positive and their cars are always
equipped with standard safety equipment....and always cleaner than CABs.
While I was for two of the proposed changes, as a whole I'm against the proposal in its
entirety. I'm pushing for no additional restrictions or requirements for Uber/Lyft drivers
Thanks,
Alex
Street address:

Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:

Rebecca Knight
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Regarding Measures to Enforce $1 per ride tax and Chauffeur Licencing, etc
Tuesday, September 08, 2015 10:35:23 PM

This message is from Rebecca Knight. [
I enjoy using Lyft and also being a part of Austin's traffic solution, often times providing a
safe and sober ride for those who would be in a dangerous position otherwise.
The measures that city council is proposing will create a financial burden and likely will send
TNC companies Lyft and Uber away from Austin. That will benefit no one. Trying to do the
old-fashioned printed photo document permit is a waste of paper especially since ALL drivers
and passengers are already given this info on their phones and can screen shot them to keep if
necessary- it shows my face, name, car, plate number, even tells them a little about where I
am from and what I like. Lyft will also remind them who they rode with when they receive a
receipt via email afterwards. We receive ratings similar to how eBay had buyers police sellers
by ratings and comments. This system is in place for most eCommerce and TNCs are
foremost Electronic! Any further fingerprinting or photo on display in car is redundant and a
waste of time and resources. I am fine with making sure that sex offenders are not allowed to
participate as TNC drivers, however, I think most of what the cit y is proposing is based on
cab drivers who are being territorial and not able to see what edge they have over us and what
edge we have really already does "level the playing field."
I am interested to see what insurance concepts the city puts forth, yet as a driver I have no
desire to obtain a Chauffeurs Licence, nor do I wish to designate my privately owned vehicle
as a commercial vehicle. This is not what ridesharing is about. It is about regular people who
own cars taking the time to give rides to others. If Austin does not allow the TNC companies
to do their good work, people will just resort to Craigslist or shout-outs on Twitter to obtain
very RANDOM drivers who they will have no protection or tracking in place with.
Thank you for taking time to read this, I am happy to give more detail if you have any
questions.
Rebecca Knight
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:

Kyle Hoskins
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Revised TNC Regulation Proposals
Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:56:05 PM

This message is from Kyle Hoskins. [
- No fee on Lyft Line or Uber Pool carpooling rides. Adding this clause will make you look
forward thinking as well as conscious of the environment and traffic.
- No flat fee. Fee should be structured around value of fair.
- No need for more background checks. (unless you have actual proof of an increase in
incidents that would have been prevented by further background checks)
- Permits? Nope. Why should someone who wants to pick up extra passengers on drives they
already make to improve traffic and environmental impact have to get a permit?
TNC's look a lot like taxi companies right now. In a few years they will look more like actual
"ridesharing" with increased carpooling and positive impacts on traffic and the environment.
Your current proposals will prevent TNC's from reaching their potential and only let them be
"improved taxis." This limitation would not only be a shame, but will make you look terrible
when other cities evolve to this point.
The above proposals make you look "revolutionary" and as "thought leaders" in the proper
regulation of TNC's.
Thanks for your time,
Kyle Hoskins
Street address: 404 RIO GRANDE ST
Council District: 9

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Sara LeVine
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
TNC regulations- items #50 and #51
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 3:09:43 PM

Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council:
On behalf of our Board, I am writing to once again reinforce our support of TNC’s and to ask that you
review the resolution items line by line carefully.
 
We fought hard for the resolution to allow TNC’s to operate legally well over a year ago, and since
then, for the first time in years, we’ve seen the DWI rates in Austin decrease, despite population
increases. We believe this to be a direct effect of the entry of Uber and Lyft in the market. Uber’s
own data shows that traditionally underserved east Austin neighborhoods are using their services
frequently, both as passengers and drivers. TNC’s have been a tremendous boon to many in the
community as they stand now under current regulations.
 
For the last year and a half, we’ve had a remarkably smooth ride with them, with statistically
negligible incidents between their drivers, police, passengers, or other vehicles. This tells me that
they have sufficient checks and balances in place within their own companies and additional
background and safety regulations will put an unnecessary burden on City employees.
 
ATX Safer Streets encourages Council and committees to instead address the onerous regulations on
other vehicles for hire which reduce their ability to compete, rather than focus on increased
regulations.
 
Thank you,
Sara LeVine
Executive Director
ATX Safer Streets

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Sara LeVine
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
TNC regulations- items #50 and #51
Wednesday, October 14, 2015 3:09:43 PM

Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council:
On behalf of our Board, I am writing to once again reinforce our support of TNC’s and to ask that you
review the resolution items line by line carefully.
 
We fought hard for the resolution to allow TNC’s to operate legally well over a year ago, and since
then, for the first time in years, we’ve seen the DWI rates in Austin decrease, despite population
increases. We believe this to be a direct effect of the entry of Uber and Lyft in the market. Uber’s
own data shows that traditionally underserved east Austin neighborhoods are using their services
frequently, both as passengers and drivers. TNC’s have been a tremendous boon to many in the
community as they stand now under current regulations.
 
For the last year and a half, we’ve had a remarkably smooth ride with them, with statistically
negligible incidents between their drivers, police, passengers, or other vehicles. This tells me that
they have sufficient checks and balances in place within their own companies and additional
background and safety regulations will put an unnecessary burden on City employees.
 
ATX Safer Streets encourages Council and committees to instead address the onerous regulations on
other vehicles for hire which reduce their ability to compete, rather than focus on increased
regulations.
 
Thank you,
Sara LeVine
Executive Director
ATX Safer Streets

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Jonathan Marmon
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
TNC Regulations
Monday, September 07, 2015 5:35:46 PM

This message is from Jonathan Marmon. [

]

I recently started driving for both Uber and Lyft to earn some extra money to help with the
bills. The money has helped me with my student loan payments and has helped me get caught
up financially. I am staying as a driver because I see what impact I can have on my
community. I am a sober driver for those who want to have fun. I am an inexpensive option
for someone to travel home. I am an elderly man's ride to his doctors appointments and
physical therapy that would cost him double in a normal taxi cab. Please do not take this away
from me by imposing more fees. You will be taking money directly out of my pocket and I
don't really see the benefit of it.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Brad Ryker
District 8
TNCs
Monday, October 05, 2015 1:52:09 PM

This message is from Brad Ryker. [
Please regulate TNCs. They have decimated cab business here in Austin. My drivers earned
one third to one half the normally receive during ACL. When there is no event or UT football
game in town, cab drivers cannot earn a living. The biggest problem is the lack of limits
placed on the number of vehicles operating as TNCs. There are less than 900 city certified
taxis operating while Uber and Lyft number well over 5000. No one verifies if their vehicles
have adequate commercial insurance. Their vehicles are not inspected for saftey or
appearance. And their rates to the public seem to change with the weather. We cannot
compete with these companies that don't have the same requirements that the city makes us
follow. Please, limit the number of TNC vehicles serving Austin. Require their drivers to
submit to the same DPS criminal background checks (with fingerprints) we do. Verify that
each vehicle has adequate commercial insurance and is safe for public use. Before Ube r and
Lyft came nto Austin, my 42 cabs were fully occupied and my drivers were making a decent
living. Now I'm losing drivers, my fleet has shrunk to 24 cabs, and my drivers are working
longer hours and are earning 40% to 60% less.Please help.
Street address:
Council District: 3

From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

barry woltag
Adler, Steve; Houston, Ora; District 2; Renteria, Sabino; Casar, Gregorio; District 5; Zimmerman, Don; District 7;
District 8; Tovo, Kathie; District10
Uber/Lyft
Sunday, October 11, 2015 4:11:00 PM

This message is from Barry Woltag.
RE: https://get.uber.com/cl/?utm_source=yahoo_ads&utm_campaign=Yahoo_1_-99_USNational_D_all_ACQ_dCPM_en_SUL&utm_medium=PartnerCar
It's this easy to go into business in Austin, Texas!
I have two State licenses which require fingerprinting, RE Broker & Pharmacist. Require this
TNC's to add fingerprinting to background checks, please.
Street address:
Council District: District not found

austin, Texas 78758

From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:

Tim Kelly
District 8
UBER/LYFT
Thursday, October 15, 2015 2:18:14 PM

This message is from Tim Kelly. [
In short, Please to not constrain the TNC’s any further. Some members on the council
obviously do not understand the service and the security process. Having gone through the on
boarding process for UBER and LYFT- I found the current process acceptable (9-16 days).
Further constraints appear to be burdensome and may/may not bear fruits that are beneficial.
Can we at least have additional time to honestly discern what is happening nationally?. This â
€œsolution†in search of a “problem†is being forced to the surface by the Taxi
companies. These companies are substandard and NO regulations can fix them. I cannot tell
you how many of my customers have a negative view of Taxi’s. It is a failed, outmoded
business model (keep that thought to yourself, though).
Street address: Outside Austin, TX
Council District: Outside Austin, TX

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close