Aug. 05--The Los Angeles City Council slammed the brakes Wednesday on a process that could allow Uber and Lyft to pick up passengers alongside taxis at Los Angeles International Airport, citing concerns about public safety and equity for passengers.
The City Council voted 11-2 to assert jurisdiction over a permit process approved last month by the Board of Airport Commissioners. Some council members were concerned that not enough attention was paid to ensuring that drivers for such app services as Uber and Lyft undergo the same background checks as permitted taxi operators.
On Wednesday, The Times reported that four Uber drivers who had been ticketed for minor infractions at LAX over the last 18 months had serious criminal backgrounds that would have disqualified them from getting a taxi permit.
"I could not care less if the vehicle picking up passengers has a checkered paint job or a pink mustache or numbers on the back," Councilman Paul Krekorian said during the meeting. "I don't care. But it's our responsibility to make sure that person is safe and is treated with dignity."
Councilman Paul Koretz, who has been a vocal critic of transportation network companies, said Uber and Lyft will eventually end up operating legally at LAX.
"The real question is: Are we going to do any kind of regulation?" Koretz said. "And are we going to review this set of contracts, or are we just going to take a pass?"
Councilmembers Mike Bonin and David Ryu voted against the motion to assert jurisdiction, and Gil Cedillo and Joe Buscaino were absent.
Elected officials now have 20 days to discuss the regulations in a council committee. Then they will have the option to approve the permit process or send it back to airport officials for further changes.
Consumers, airport employees and Mayor Eric Garcetti "have all made it clear that it's time for ridesharing to come to LAX," Lyft spokeswoman Chelsea Wilson said in a prepared statement. "We urge the council to move quickly and make options like Lyft available for Los Angeles travelers."
During a half-hour public comment period, business leaders and drivers for Uber and Lyft urged the council to let the permit process stand, saying thousands of Southern Californians and travelers depend on Uber and Lyft to get from LAX to their destinations.
Drivers for Uber, in aqua shirts, and drivers for Lyft, in hot-pink shirts, told the council that having extra income and more flexible hours made their lives easier, and that picking up at LAX would be a key source of revenue for them.
"I have asked every passenger I've taken to, or picked up from, various locations outside the airport the same question: 'Do you want this?'" said Andrea Slater, an Uber driver, during the council's public comment period. "They have unanimously stated, 'Yes.'"
Lobbyists for the ride-sharing apps and the taxi industry have spent considerable time trying to persuade politicians that each one's business model is best for the city, and that's come at a cost. Since 2013, seven taxi companies have spent $588,000 to lobby elected officials in Los Angeles City Hall. Uber and Lyft spent $392,000 during that same time.
"In general, I think most campaign contributions and expenditures on lobbying are business judgments and the idea is that you spend money because you want to influence those who are making decisions that affect you, and that's not necessarily evil," said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School.
"Influence can also be a synonym for educate but I think that it kind of strains common sense to say campaign and lobbying money isn't about trying to obtain favorable decisions," she said.
MORE
Uber driver wounded in crossfire of possible gang-related shooting
After years of scandal, L.A. County jails get federal oversight and sweeping reforms
Meet L.A.'s newest mountain lion kittens
UPDATES
1:30 p.m.: This article has been updated with information about campaign contributions.
12:32 p.m.: This article has been updated throughout.
12:15 p.m.: This article has been updated with more information about the council's decision.
This article was originally published at 11:58 a.m.
