Commissioners move to reverse Uber decision

The idea of an outsider politically outmuscling the local taxicab industry would have been laughable only a few years ago. Backed by protectionist laws and pussycat legislators, the cab bosses had the ride racket all to themselves.

But a lot has changed, and now those taxi companies have their hands full with the arrival of tech-savvy, ride-sharing outfits Uber and Lyft. Their officials like to call them transportation network companies (TNC).

For more proof that it's a new day on the street, look no further than today's scheduled Clark County Commission meeting. Commissioners will revisit their legally questionable Nov. 17 decision to require Uber and Lyft drivers to obtain Clark County business licenses.

The cost is only $25 a year, but the ordinance violates the new state law, which prohibits municipalities and counties from adding licensing and fees to ride-hailing companies that aren't required of other businesses.

Whether some commissioners knew or ought to have known that before last month's meeting is the subject of more than a little speculation. After word surfaced in early October that the county, possibly at the request of a few old friends in the cab business, planned to force the new guys to jump through a few regulatory hoops, Uber attorney Donald Campbell penned a letter Oct. 8 to Clark County counsel Mary-Anne Miller.

Campbell cited the August legal interpretation of the Legislative Counsel Bureau's Brenda Erdoes that "a local government may not impose upon a transportation network company, or any driver providing transportation services in affiliation with a transportation network company, a tax, fee, or any other requirement unless it's generally applicable to any other business that operates within the jurisdiction of the local government."

After losing the Nov. 17 vote, Uber recently went into overkill mode with a noisy and somewhat alarmist media blast. County insiders say the dustup could have been avoided if Uber had showed a little better appreciation of commission politics and its singular personalities.

Some commissioners, meanwhile, ought to have done more homework: The county had sound legal representation, and the Cliff's Notes version of the new law was readily available in advance of the meeting.

As much as they might want to, local governments don't have control over the ride-hailing companies. Just in case there was any confusion, Erdoes offered an undeniable clarifying statement on the matter in her Aug. 24 letter to state Sen. Michael Roberson.

She wrote: "Additionally, local governments in Nevada have no inherent authority to regulate transportation network companies. Finally, any attempt by a local government to regulate transportation network companies is preempted by state law."

That seems pretty clear, don't you think?

Today's meeting promises to correct an error and reiterate what seems obvious to just about everyone: There's a popular, and increasingly powerful, new kid on the block.

Trouble is, the challenges aren't over for TNC drivers. And they're just beginning for the cab companies, too.

Although the new companies advertise that their drivers can make a good living, it's no secret plenty of the TNC freelancers also carry full-time jobs with the traditional cab companies. And the cab bosses aren't pleased.

One common concern of TNC drivers is the potential for being exposed to ridicule and even blackballed if their names are discovered by their taxicab employers. Those names would be a lot easier to obtain if TNC drivers end up in a government licensing directory.

The legacy companies aren't idling at the curb. A law set to kick in in 2016 enables companies to lease cabs to drivers and offer them new revenue potential and a better opportunity to compete against the seemingly ever-present Uber soldiers.

Here's some free advice to local cab companies, perhaps worth only what they're paying for it: Set aside any plans about blackballing your drivers for moonlighting, check your calendar, and remind yourselves times and technologies have changed.

— John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday. Contact him at 702 383-0295, or jsmith@reviewjournal.com. Follow him: @jlnevadasmith