A Seattle City Council committee wisely delayed a vote scheduled for Friday on a plan to restrict ridesharing. Instead, members will take more time developing a plan to govern the city’s popular ride services.

There would have been a lot at stake in Friday’s vote. The proposed regulations threaten to force hundreds of drivers and possibly ridesharing in general, which allows people to find a ride by simply tapping an app on a smart phone, out of Seattle. Lyft cars sporting pink mustaches and uberX drivers could disappear from the city’s streets.

“This will effectively shut uberX (the company’s lower-cost service) down,” Brooke Steger, Uber’s general manager in Seattle, wrote on the company’s blog in December. “The proposal issued by the Committee is, without a doubt, the most destructive we have seen across more than sixty markets.”

The plan also threatened Seattle’s global reputation as a tech-friendly city receptive to innovative companies and new ideas.

On Friday, the Committee on Taxi, For-hire, and Limousine Regulations will discuss the proposed regulations that would cap the number of rideshare drivers in Seattle at 300, limit how long they could work and impose other tight restrictions. But, they won’t vote. The panel wants to take more time to consider an idea that has generated heated debates in Seattle and across the country.

“Not that anyone is paying attention to this issue, but just in case you’re interested — we’ll discuss cap vs. no cap on Lyft & UberX cars in tomorrow’s committee, but not call for a vote. More time to get the decision right. Not that anyone’s tracking this,” Sally Clark, chair of the Committee on Taxi, For-hire, and Limousine Regulations, wrote on her Facebook page last night. (Thanks to GeekWire for breaking this news.)

Seattle’s tech community has been keeping a close eye on the proposal. More than 200 people have already signed a petition opposing the plan and encouraging the City Council to move in a different direction. Leaders of the city’s technology and business communities joined them, asking the City Council to reject the plan because it would stifle competition and discourage companies from locating in Seattle.

“Instead of implementing onerous restrictions, the City Council should embrace the broadening landscape of transportation options and support legislation that promotes greater competition, increases transportation choices, and encourages innovative technology companies to locate and thrive here,” The WTIA and the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce wrote in a joint letter to the City Council on Jan. 30th.

The proposal also contains new vehicle inspection and insurance requirements. The WTIA and Chamber support the plan’s safety, insurance and inspections protocols, and efforts to address safety issues evenly across the city’s transportation landscape.

The delay is not a total shock. In recent months, the looming vote generated news coverage, editorials and rallies, including one on the steps of Seattle City Hall Wednesday, in the city and across the country. If approved, these regulations would be “the most restrictive, anti-competitive and anti-Internet measure in the nation,” Michael Beckerman, president of The Internet Association, wrote in a column for the Huffington Post.

It will affect the entire Internet interactive business model that allows individuals to use online platforms to share, rent, buy or borrow goods and services. Entrepreneurs and the Internet industry are watching how Seattle treats these start-ups and will make capital investment decisions accordingly. Telling Internet businesses that Seattle is “closed for business” sends a chilling message throughout the Internet economy. – “Share-Less in Seattle.” 2/12/14. Huffington Post.

Perhaps the committee will take the advice of tech columnist Monica Guzman, who wrote on Thursday that innovation and regulation can be in sync, but it may require a new and balanced approach.

But the solution isn’t to write the new players into the rules of an old game. It’s to anticipate what the game is becoming and write laws that help all the players. Above all, the consumers. – “Enough with the nonsense: Ride-sharing, Tesla and laws that can’t keep up.” 2/12/14. GeekWire.

Seattle is only the latest city where the power of technology to change transportation is running into challenging government oversight. There have been ridesharing disputes in California, Chicago and elsewhere. But, ridesharing continues to gain momentum. Uber, for example, continues to expand around the world.

Stay tuned to hear what happens next at the Seattle City Council’s committee vote and what you can do to support ridesharing, expanded choice in consumer transportation, and a tech-friendly Seattle. In the meantime, you can sign our petition.

 

Further Reading:

 

• “With ride-sharing regulations, Lyft president says Seattle’s leaders will look bad on national stage.” GeekWire. 2/13/14.
• “Seattle floats new ridesharing rules: 300 driver permits; 75 additional taxi licenses.” GeekWire. 2/11/14.”
• “Guest: Proposed city rules for Uber, Lyft kill innovation.” Guest editorial. The Seattle Times.
• “Lyft Seattle Stands Strong.” Lyft Blog. 2/12/14.