State's Upcoming Ride Share Vote Could Strip Towns Of Local Control

EAST HAMPTON, NY — With the clock ticking and New York State lawmakers poised to vote on a deal that would give ride sharing services the chance to expand, under state control, some elected officials are seeing red at the idea of local control stripped away.

New York State Assemblyman Fred Thiele said Thursday that while the vote is not likely to take place Friday as planned — the "overall budget package has stalled" — he said the vote could come in the next few days.

According to Thiele, an agreement pitched by New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo and lawmakers regarding ride sharing services such as Uber and Lyft would spotlight insurance issues, and two other more controversial components.

For more than a year, Cuomo has said he’d like to see a New York State-wide regulatory framework for issues such as insurance, taxes, and vehicles.

Local control is the issue that has polarized communities: Under the new legislation, unlike New York City, which has a taxi and limousine commission, the new legislation would give all jurisdiction in regard to ride sharing to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles — meaning that local governments would no longer have the ability to regulate ride sharing as they do other taxis and limousines, Thiele said.

One exception would be if the state decides to entire counties the ability to opt out; for that to impact local towns, ride sharing would need to be prohibited across all of Suffolk County, something Thiele says is "not likely to happen."

Finally, Thiele said, the third component of the new plan is that there will be a four percent fee on every ride, but all funds would go into the state's general fund, with local municipalities not seeing a penny.

"My position was that I wanted ride sharing services such as Uber or Lyft treated like any other taxi or limousine and subject to local control," Thiele said. "Obviously, as a former town supervisor, I'm always a big proponent of local control and I think the circumstances we've seen in Montauk have shown the need for local control."

Thiele said he will not support the proposal. "My intention is to vote 'no,'" he said.

"Get ready for the invasion of Uber drivers"

The news had at least one East End supervisor furious.

"Governor Cuomo just cut a deal with Uber and kicked in the teeth every local community in New York State that is trying to protect the health safety and welfare of its residents," said East Hampton Town Supervisor Larry Cantwell. "Worse yet, he just established a double standard for local businesses. If you're Uber and pay a new Cuomo tax you get to avoid local rules but if you're a cab company, you can't. Get ready for the invasion of Uber drivers, sleeping in their cars, taking up public parking spaces, and congesting our streets and parking lots this summer."

After a proliferation of ride sharing in Montauk and other parts of East Hampton sparked congestion on already crowded roads, in 2015, East Hampton Town adopted laws to require cabs to be operating under a license with an East Hampton address. The Town announced in 2015 that Uber, a mobile app that connects riders with a taxi, private car or ride-share from their mobile phone, had suspended operations in East Hampton immediately.

Several Uber drivers went to court in 2015 facing misdemeanor charges for licensing violations in East Hampton after the town cracked down on the ride-sharing service.

Cantwell said at the time that three solutions could exist. Uber could open a home office in the town so drivers who wanted to work in the town could register their cars with the office address. The drivers could chose to own or lease their cars which would allow them to operate as a separate business for hire, and each would apply for their own business license. Second, Uber could form a partnership with a local company that is already licensed and headquartered in East Hampton. Or, the supervisor said, Uber could recruit East Hampton residents as Uber owners or drivers.

Cantwell also said that the regulations governing cars for hire specifically allow an owner of one or two cars to run the business using his or her home address, as long as it is in the town.

Other East End supervisors weigh in

Not all East End supervisors are opposed to ride sharing.

Southampton Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman said he likes Uber and feels ride sharing is a way to reduce drinking and driving, as well as the number of cars on the road. Riders know their fares upfront and aren't blindsided by a hefty cost, he said.

Putting the brakes on ride sharing services could also mean a drop in tourism, Schneiderman said. "Some visitors are coming from New York and metropolitan areas and are accustomed to Uber. Without it, they may feel less comfortable and may choose to stay in another area."

Ride sharing exists in Southampton Town and Schneiderman said he disagrees with Cantwell on the issue. "I think Uber is a good thing, not a bad thing. I was not happy when Uber decided not to do business in East Hampton. I thought that was a loss of choice for consumers," he said.

He does not think a Suffolk County-wide ban on ride sharing "would be a good move," Schneiderman said. "I think that would be a big mistake."

In Southampton, however, as it currently stands, the town regulates ride sharing and the company pays fees just like taxi companies. Last year, the town took in more than $100,000 from ride shares, he said.

The supervisor believes ride sharing companies should be allowed to function but should pay the same fees as taxi companies. Otherwise, he said, "It's not really fair to taxis."

Even if the town suffers a loss of revenue, the loss of tourism without ride sharing could be an even harder hit, Schneiderman said. And, most important, he said, "We want people not to drive when they drink. They risk their lives and other innocent lives."

Schneiderman, who's owned a family run hotel in Montauk his whole life, said the issue is critical to tourism on the East End. "So much of the new clientele is accustomed to Uber and are looking for Uber. Without the service, these people might choose another destination."

Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell said while he is generally opposed to New York State usurping local control on any issue, as it pertains to Uber and other ride sharing options, "My position on Uber, etc., is that such services would be a good thing for Southold. They would fill a desperate need for local transportation and get some cars off the road that shouldn't be on the road."

Photo courtesy of Flickr/CreativeCommons/johnwatsonphotography