Mayor and Councilmembers:

There was considerable discussion of requirements for TNC drivers at the Council B

Session this week. The outcome of the discussion has resulted in a proposed ordinance

with numerous flaws, that if enacted would force TNCs to abandon service in San

Antonio. The proposed ordinance creates extensive, unnecessary requirements for part-

time drivers, creates barriers to entry for drivers and significantly deviates from the

standards set by every other Texas municipality that has enacted TNC regulations.

Part-Time Uber Partner-Drivers Are Fundamentally Different From Existing Taxi

Operations

To be clear, the majority of Uber partners drive a few hours a week and use their own

vehicles (which are inspected by the state of Texas) to make extra income and provide

for their families. They are veterans, spouses of active duty military, retirees, teachers,

and single parents. Uber creates a marketplace where these people can use their own

car to provide a ride to their neighbors when, where, and how often they want, a strong

contrast to taxi, where multiple full-time drivers drive one car 24 hours / 7 days a week

with high mileage and significant wear and tear with the majority of the profit going to

the taxicab company. Simply put, there is virtually no comparison between taxis and

TNCs that use “smart apps” to connect riders looking for transportation to drivers that

provide transportation.

Transportation Network Companies Have Become Part Of Everyday Life Because

People Recognize The Real World Problems The TNC Business Model Solve

TNCs are a new and unique business model that uses “smart apps” and a driver/rider

rating system to connect riders looking for transportation to drivers that provide

transportation through an on demand, safe and cashless transaction.

Today these apps have become part of everyday life and are being used by people in

over 250 cities worldwide. In the beginning, they were used primarily by millennials like

the ones we are trying to attract to San Antonio. But more and more, they are being

used by people who need affordable and reliable transportation and previously were not

served by taxis.

The availability of affordable on-demand transportation has transformed everyday life

for those who are struggling to make ends meet, the visually impaired, those who don’t

own cars and individuals on fixed incomes. The platform also offers many of these

same people economic opportunities to drive on the Uber platform: The retiree that is

worried about make ends meet on a fixed income and needs a flexible job a few days a

week, the single mom who needs to juggle taking care of her kids with trying to put food

on her table. Uber is that economic freedom.

Even those not on the platform benefit from Uber’s presence in a city. In addition to the

economic opportunity, Uber’s entry into a community has been proven to significantly

reduce DUI rates. One study revealed DUIs reduced by more than 10 percent in

Seattle. Considering Bexar County witnessed 2,303 alcohol-related crashes in 2013, the

city should welcome any partner willing and able to lower this rate. Finally, areas

underserved by traditional taxis and public transportation become better connected to

the city and expand access to individuals living in these underserved areas.

Moreover, TNCs have processes in place to ensure both our drivers and riders are safe.

For example, all drivers are subject to a three-step background check screening, which

includes county, federal, multi-state and sex-offender database checks. These checks

go back seven years, the maximum allowable by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The Proposed City Ordinance Contains Numerous Anti-Competitive Driver

Requirements That Deviate From The Task Force's Recommendations And

Municipal Ordinances Passed In Other Major Texas Cities

The City created a task force charged with devising workable solutions for the regulation

of TNC drivers and the new and innovative TNC industry. The task force worked for

over three months in good faith to reach consensus on many issues. Its

recommendations however were substantially ignored in the proposed ordinance and

other onerous requirements were added, including additional insurance and driver

requirements, which were never discussed at the task force.

Below is a just a partial list of some of the problematic driver requirements, many that

are unique to this ordinance and far outside what other cities have approved in Texas

and beyond:

1. Get a full physical and eye exam before driving, even though an eye exam is

already required for a driver’s license and any driver is already deemed

physically able to drive on Texas roads because they have a valid Driver’s

License

2. Take a pre-scheduled drug test, when the best way to prevent intoxicated drivers

is having a zero-tolerance policy and constant feedback loop via the app that

would enable TNCs to suspend anyone suspected of driving under the influence

until an investigation is complete

3. Be certified that you can read and speak the English language, even though

communication of pickup and destination can be done in-app with turn-by-turn

navigation. (Note: there are a number of deaf and mute drivers on the platform in

other cities. Would they not be allowed on the platform?)

4. Complete a defensive driving course even though it is not required for drivers on

the roads in the state of Texas

5. Have the vehicle subject to expensive, random checks even though they would

also be required to have a third-party inspection by an ASE certified mechanic

On top of going through the TNC’s thorough background check, the driver must also

complete a 10 point fingerprint background check, even though the TNCs complete

certified 3rd party background checks. The driver must also pay around $160 annually

to the City of San Antonio in addition to the ~$150 in cost of all the requirements,

equating to over $300 per driver, just to make themselves available to provide a service

to other members of the San Antonio community.

It is important to stress that these are all unnecessary hoops to go through for someone

simply looking to utilize their car for some part-time work and help their fellow San

Antonians move around the city. Cities like Austin have reviewed the TNCs’ safety and

security protocols and deemed this marketplace safe and secure without the need of

duplicative and/or unnecessary requirements.

The Proposed City Ordinance Sets Insurance Requirements Excessively Beyond

Those Required Of Taxis And Deviates From A Clear Consensus Amongst Other

Texas Cities Like Austin, Dallas and Houston

TNCs currently carry insurance that is protective of public safety and is specifically

designed to cover the risk presented by the rideshare industry and is issued by a

financially strong insurance carrier. Uber’s ridesharing insurance coverage provides

end-to-end insurance coverage for partner drivers at all times during their use of the

Uber smartphone application. This covers the driver's liability (a) while a driver is logged

into the Uber smartphone application and available to receive ride requests; (b) from the

time a driver accepts a trip request through the app; and (c) through the completion of

the prearranged ride, until the passenger reaches his or her final destination and exits

the vehicle.

Uber already voluntarily offers the following insurance protection:

● $1MM in primary automobile liability coverage from the moment a driver accepts

a ride request, is en route to pick up a requesting passenger and at all times a

requesting passenger is in the car. This is more than 10x the amount of liability

coverage taxis are required to carry in San Antonio.

● Liability coverage of $50,000 for bodily injury per person up to $100,000 per

incident when the app is on and a ride has not even been accepted in the event a

driver’s personal policy denies coverage or coverage is otherwise unavailable .

This exceeds the amount of coverage required for all motor vehicles under Texas

law.

To be crystal clear: there is no gap in coverage.

By comparison, taxis are only required to carry $30,000 for bodily injury per person up

to $60,000 per incident (the state minimum). Moreover, they are allowed to self-insure,

which gives them additional financial incentive to deny claims and has created alarming

issues in cities like Dallas.

Uber would support the same insurance requirements currently in place in Houston and

Austin and those recently proposed in Dallas. This is a workable model that creates

consistency across major cities in Texas and represents a compromise approach that

was reached after lengthy study and debate. Balanced approaches like this have

encouraged the insurance industry to develop additional personal lines products for

TNC drivers. Recently, personal lines insurers have filed such product offering in four

states, and we expect many more will follow.

Uber In Good Faith Has Actively Participated In The Dialogue Surrounding The

Creation Of The Proposed Ordinance, Yet The Proposed Ordinance Largely

Ignores The Recommendations Of Both Uber And The TNC Task Force

Uber has been at every meeting and has been working cooperatively on trying to reach

a compromise ordinance. Uber has participated in good faith on similar ordinances

across Texas and was able to reach viable solutions with both the cities of Austin,

Houston and shortly Dallas. Austin and Houston both understood the economic benefits

of more options and, having successfully implemented compromise ordinances that

work for both TNCs and taxis alike. It is likely that Dallas will adopt a similar ordinance

next week, which would leave San Antonio as the only major Texas city that does not

welcome the benefits of ridesharing. This is only to the detriment of San Antonians

looking for additional economic opportunities and safe, affordable on-demand

transportation.

Rather Than Seeking A Viable Solution, The Proposed Ordinance Contains

Numerous Roadblocks That Do Not Enhance Public Safety

The proposed ordinance in San Antonio contains procedural roadblocks that do not

enhance public safety; rather, their sole function would be to eliminate transit options for

its citizens, protecting a taxi system that has not met the needs of San Antonions. Over

7,500 persons have signed an online petition in favor of providing this option to our

citizens.

A vote next week in favor of the proposed regulations will likely result in Uber closing

their operations in San Antonio. The only people to benefit will be those who own the

taxi companies. Many of our local companies have weighed in on this issue, arguing

that new transportation options are important to attract and keep our younger citizens.

Please consider what message this will send to those doing business and seeking to do

business in San Antonio.

Uber is operating across the world with one primary goal in mind—providing a safe,

efficient transportation alternative and economic opportunity for all. It has adopted

industry leading insurance coverages designed for rideshare drivers that far exceeds

those provided by the taxi industry, and its current vehicle inspection and driver

requirements background checks are state-of-the-art and designed for the unique

rideshare industry.

Thank you for your consideration.

Leandre Johns

General Manager, Uber