Category Archives: 2017 issue

4 Reasons to Allow Cities to tax Ride Share in the Lone Star State

Background: HB 100 (TX | 2017) establishing ride share laws does not permit local taxation of ride share

4 Supporting arguments for local taxation of ride share:

  • Texas cities are losing out on millions in tax revenue occuring within their boundaries
  • Other cities are doing it
  • Cities are utilizing the revenue to improve transportation and safety
  • Other states have allowed cities to tax ride share to cover the cost of street maintenance, vehicle traffic, and registering drivers

 

Rivard…

Regulatory TREND. Reclassifying Ride Share Companies as not solely Ride Share

Regulator: California Public Utilities Commission

What did the California Public Utilities Commission do? Reclassified Uber, because of Uber SUV and Uber Black, as partially as a charter party carrier (that’s how California regulates limos and party charters)

How was the company operating in California?  Mostly through a subsidiary, Rasier-CA, which the administrative law fact finder to be  ” “a mere instrumentality” of Uber

Appeals forthcoming? Yes

Rational of the fact finder: The company…

Local TREND. Ride Share Ordinance with a "Need to Operate" Standard. 5 Points from the Local Code to Get Up to Speed Fast.

City: New York City

The ride share ordinance proposal would:

  • A fee for drivers of $2000 per car
  • A fee for transportation network companies of $20,000 per year
  • Ride Share companies could operate in neighborhoods if and only if it is found that the neighborhood “a need for their service in neighborhoods where they plan to operate”
  • City regulators will presume that there is no need for ride share. Companies must prove otherwise.
  • Effectively limits drivers to 1 ride share company

New York…

State Legislative Committee Strips Federal Rail Funds From State. The steps the committee took:

  • The New Hampshire Senate Committee on Transportation
  • Considering HB 2018 (NH 2018), relating to the state 10-year transportation improvement program
  • Removed from the bill provisions for $4 million in federal funding for a detailed analysis of passenger rail expansion and bus service

 

What was the $4 million in federal funding set to cover?

  • a detailed analysis of engineering, environmental, and geotechnical aspects
  • And, a firm financial plan for expanding passenger rail from Boston to…

High Speed Rail Opposition in the Bluebonnet State. Easter Trending.

Texas High Speed Rail opposition points from the week of March 15th 2018,  are trending:

Government Technology | Is a High-Speed Rail Line Right for Texas?

Dallas Morning News | Dallas-to-Houston high-speed rail plan will make Texas’ I-35 corridor a loser, competitor says

4 Point Opposition to Houston to Dallas High Speed Rail. 3 Counterpoints of Support. High Speed v. Higher Speed.

Who is making these statements? SNCF America, Inc  in written comments to Federal Railway Administration…

Local Government Resolution Supporting High Speed Rail in the Bluebonnet State

City: Lewsiville

What action is the city being asked to take: To add support for the high speed rail to its legislative agenda

What entity does the city council point to asking for the high speed rail support?  Dallas Regional Mobility Council  

City of Lewisville City Council Agenda March 19 2018

Community Impact News | City of Lewisville passes resolution in support of high-speed rail project from Dallas to Houston

 

Local Government TREND. +1 County Moves to Block High Speed Rail by Protecting its Roads. 4 levels of protection:

The County: Madison County Texas

The high speed rail project: Texas Central Partners’ Dallas to Houston High Speed Rail

The 4 Levels of Madison County road protection:

  • No county road will be closed
  • No county road will be vacated
  • No county road will be altered
  • No county road will be abandoned  to accommodate the proposed high-speed rail route

Madisonville Meteor | County takes stand on railway

Local TREND. Infrastructure Impact Fees. What? How? Who is paying the fee?

Where: San Francisco Board of Supervisors

What’s an infrastructure impact fee? a fee to to ameliorate the impacts of ride share

What 5 impacts do ride share have on local government?

  • reduced pulic transportation revenue
  • increased traffic congestion
  • increased traffic safety issues from collisions
  • increased traffic safety issues for pedestrian safety
  • increased road wear and tear

What entities are a proposed infrastructure impact fee to be levied against? Ride Share

San Francisco Examiner…

Lege TREND. 5 Reasons Auto Dealers Oppose Direct Sales by manufacturers in the Mountain Laurel State

State: Connecticut

The Connecticut bill: HB 5310 (2018)

How does CT HB 5310 allow for directr sales?

  • Re-define manufacturer
  • Allow for manufacturer sales when:
    • only Electric Vehicles
    • There are no franchise agreements
    • only sells its own cars
    • is duly licensed
    • isn’t owned by another manufacturer
    • doesn’t own another manufacturer

What are 5  opposition arguments from motor vehicle dealers in CT?

  • Aren’t you special? “Tesla wants special treatment”
  • Foreigners. fear that 25 other…

Lege TREND. Bill to Grant Auto Dealers Ability to File Suit Against Direct Sales in 2 Steps.

State: Missouri

The Legislation: MO SB872 (2018) 

Bill Description: Enacts provisions relating to motor vehicle franchises

How does it lay goundwork for autodealers to file suit concerning direct sales?

  • Establishes the dealer franchise sales was enacte to be fair, uniform and without discrimination
  • Allows any dealer/franchise to bring suit in Cole County against any entity that seeks to sell vehicles wihout a franchise agreement

St. Louis Today | Auto dealers renew fight against Tesla in…