Senate rejects bill to allow ride-sharing in Nevada

CARSON CITY — The Nevada Senate on Wednesday rejected along party lines a bill to allow ride-sharing companies such as Uber to operate in Nevada after Democrats objected to Republicans blocking proposed amendments.

Senate Bill 439 would have established a framework for ride-sharing technology companies to operate legally in Nevada and be regulated by the Public Utilities Commission.

But the bill also contained a 25-cent-per-ride fee to be deposited into the state highway fund. The fee triggered a requirement for a two-thirds majority vote necessary for passage, or 14 votes in the Senate. The Senate vote was 11-10, with all Democrats voting against it.

State Sen. Aaron Ford, D-Las Vegas, the Senate minority leader, proposed two amendments. One would have required the FBI to conduct background checks on Uber drivers. The other sought PUC authority to curb “dynamic” pricing, where fees for rides increase if demand is high.

Senate Republicans rejected those amendments and refused to hold the bill from a vote to allow more talks, and Democrats dug in their heels.

But the bill is not truly dead and could re-emerge. Senate Rule 115 concerning reconsideration of votes states, “A vote may be reconsidered on motion of any member.”

“Over 50,000 Nevadans have demanded the safety, reliability and affordability that ridesharing services like Uber provide,” Uber spokeswoman Eva Behrend said Wednesday. “We urge members of the Senate to stand up for choice, jobs and Nevadans everywhere and reconsider SB439.”

Wednesday’s vote in the upper chamber was more about political puffery but underscored partisan divides.

Republicans, in control of the Senate for the first time since 2007, have rejected attempts by Democrats to amend bills on the Senate floor, much to the irritation of the minority party.

Wednesday was no exception.

State Sen. Kelvin Atkinson, D-Las Vegas, said he wouldn’t vote for the bill if the GOP refused to debate the issue. Other Democrats agreed.

“I think that the amendments that our Democratic leader had were reasonable. I think they should have been passed,” said state Sen. Mark Manendo, D-Las Vegas, before the vote was taken.

State Sen. James Settelmeyer, R-Minden, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor and Energy, urged passage, saying legislators should not be protectors of the “status quo.”

He said legislators have become “prison guards of the past,” protecting the state’s entrenched industries when residents demand new technology.

“People have a thirst for technology,” he said.

Earlier in the day, the Senate approved a companion bill, Senate Bill 440, along party lines. That measure would establish insurance requirements for transportation network companies.

SB440 moves to the Assembly.

Uber, a San Francisco-based ride-hailing company, operated for about a month in the state last year before shutting itself down after losing a court case.

Uber officials have said that they consider it a technology company, not a transportation company, so it should be treated differently than taxi and limousine companies.

But Nevada’s established taxi industry argued Uber was trying to muscle into the Nevada market without complying with strict regulations to ensure customer safety.