WEST WINDSOR: Council passes resolution urging state to regulate ride-sharing companies

By Lea Kahn, Staff Writer
WEST WINDSOR — In a 4-1 split vote Monday night, Township Council approved a resolution urging state lawmakers to pass legislation that would regulate ride-sharing companies, such as Uber or Lyft.
Township Council President Linda Geevers and Vice President Hemant Marathe, along with council members Peter Mendonez and Alison Miller, voted “yes.” The lone dissenting vote was cast by Councilmember Ayesha Hamilton.
West Windsor taxicab and limousine company representatives approached Township Council in November to express their concerns about Uber, whose drivers have been making arrangements to pick up people at the Princeton Junction Train Station, to the dismay of the licensed taxicab drivers.
The taxicab drivers told Township Council in November that there are potential safety and security issues that passengers may face when they use a smartphone “app” to contact a Uber or Lyft driver.
While commercial taxicab drivers must undergo background checks and pay fees, Uber or Lyft drivers are not subject to the same rules and regulations as taxicab drivers. Proposed state legislation would address those issues.
The proposed state legislation would require so-called transportation network companies, which is the formal term for ride-sharing companies such as Uber or Lyft, to meet the same standards as taxicab and limousine drivers — from purchasing commercial insurance to undergoing criminal background checks.
Transportation network companies would have to ensure there is adequate commercial insurance coverage for the drivers, and they would be required to conduct a background check to ensure the driver is not a registered sex offender. A driver must be at least 21 years old. Their cars would also be subject to safety inspections.
Before casting her vote, Ms. Hamilton said she listened to the taxicab drivers and limousine drivers discuss the potential dangers of using Uber when they approached Township Council last year.
“At the end of the day, when you sit down and look at what the issue is, it’s basically asking the Legislature to protect one business model versus a new business model,” Ms. Hamilton said — traditional taxicab and limousine companies, and ride-sharing companies such as Uber or Lyft.
“I think as a township, we need to stay out of that and let the Legislature do what it is going to do,” Ms. Hamilton said. The council has to be careful in supporting one business model versus another business model, she said — and that’s why she decided to vote against the resolution.
Mr. Mendonez said he has used Uber, but he does not view the resolution as supporting one business model over another. He pointed out that New York City regulates both Uber drivers and taxicab drivers, so they must meet the same requirements.
Ms. Miller, Mr. Marathe and Ms. Geevers agreed that state legislation would level the playing field for taxicab drivers and Uber or Lyft drivers. It is not a matter of supporting one business model over another, Ms. Miller said.
“They still have to compete against each other, and the free market will decide (the winner),” Ms. Miller said, adding that proposed state legislation “says nothing about the cost of a ride or the business model.”
Mr. Marathe said state legislation is preferable, because it would be “unproductive” for each town to set its own standards. “This is something important (because) it affects real people. I am all for setting rules,” he said.
“I see this as a safety issue. You want to know, when you get into a car, that the driver has been vetted by the state,” Ms. Geevers said. There are insurance issues, criminal background issues and safety inspections, she said. 