A city subcommittee voted against surge pricing for rideshare companies on Monday but supported a daily log of passengers for drivers.
Surge pricing would allow drivers of companies like Uber and Lyft to raise fares on special event days such as game days in Madison or late night pick-ups. A 45-day window would be used for drivers to enable the rule.
“To be able to say on 45 days, you can charge what you want as long as you post ahead of time, I have a hard time supporting that,” Transit and Parking Commission subcommittee member Ann Kovich said.
The subcommittee unanimously voted against surge pricing at the meeting.
Ald. Scott Resnick, District 8, who had supported surge pricing in his proposal, said he was unable to find a solution to the tug-of-war between safety and equity.
The shorter pickup times made possible by surge prices would increase safety at night, but could raise prices enough that some riders couldn’t afford the services, Resnick said.
“Surge prices might allow more vehicles to get on the road at night, which would be better for safety but not equitable,” Resnick said. “This is one I couldn’t solve.”
The subcommittee unanimously adopted Madison Mayor Paul Soglin’s proposal on daily logging of passengers. Soglin’s wording specified that rideshare and taxicab services cannot transport anyone without logging it, a proposal that Resnick said he agreed with.
The subcommittee also discussed mechanical examinations and decal exposure, but put off any decisions on those items until a future meeting.
Regarding mechanical maintenance, Resnick proposed a 19-point system used by various cities to ensure a uniform examination of every taxicab and rideshare vehicle.
“A 19-point system has been adopted by dozens, if not most, cities where Transportation Network Companies are allowed,” Resnick said. “[My proposal] ensures that there would be a licensed mechanic inspecting vehicles on an annual basis.”
Emphasizing the same policies, Kovich recommended a clear outline of a minimum standard for mechanics, saying she wanted to see how the 19-point inspection compares to what taxicabs are currently doing.
In regard to exterior and interior decal on rideshare vehicles, Resnick outlined the differences between his and Soglin’s proposal, including his reasoning behind preferring an interior decal rather than an exterior one.
“If you are using a [transportation network company] as a customer, you know the exact vehicle you’re waiting for,” Resnick said. “You’re seeing it on the app itself, seeing the rates for that ride and fare. … The core essence of having the exterior decal [is] being accomplished by the app.”
But Kovich recommended what she said was a safer alternative, where the decal is shown on the exterior so that passengers know exactly what they’re getting in to, whether or not the app offers that information.
Soglin proposed a similar exterior decal requirement in his proposal.
“I prefer more full disclosure to people to know what they’re getting into,” Kovich said. “If it’s temporary, there should be a way to put [the decal] on and off. For interior [decals], a person has to be at a certain place. It seems to me it’d be better for everyone to have it be required on the exterior of the vehicle.”
