2/15/2015  

HAILING  THE  FUTURE:  EQUAL  ACCESS  TO  TAXIS  ACROSS  NEW  YORK’S  NEIGHBORHOODS  Paper  Series:  Regulatory  Reform  for  the  21st-­‐Century  City,  an  Initiative  of  the  Ash  Center  for  Democratic  Governance  and  Innovation    

 

 

 

  1    

 HAILING  THE  FUTURE:  EQUAL  ACCESS  TO  TAXIS  ACROSS  NEW  YORK’S  NEIGHBORHOODS  Paper  Series:  Regulatory  Reform  for  the  21st-­‐Century  City,  an  Initiative  of  the  Ash  Center  for  Democratic  Governance  and  Innovation    

 Abstract    Cities  everywhere  work  to  balance  the  need  for  regulation—to  ensure  public  health  and  protect  quality  of  life—with  the  need  to  promote  economic  growth.  To  achieve  this  balance,  cities  must  periodically  review  their  regulatory  regime—exploring  questions  of  when  to  regulate  and  what  rules  might  best  govern  the  permitting,  licensing,  compliance,  and  monitoring  of  local  business  activity.      Recently,  the  City  of  New  York  tackled  a  major  issue  of  this  type—the  regulation  of  taxi  transportation.  This  case  offers  important  lessons  about  the  approach  and  process  that  New  York  City  employed,  including  the  central  role  that  local  policy  makers  may  take  in  driving  regulatory  reform.  Additionally,  the  New  York  case  demonstrates  the  importance  of  using  data  and  evidence  at  every  step  of  the  reform  process.    Taxi  transportation  is  a  vital  element  in  the  transportation  network  of  New  York  City.  Cabs  and  livery  drivers  knit  together  neighborhoods  across  the  sprawling  metropolis  and  provide  over  1.2  million  rides  to  residents  and  visitors  every  day.  While  the  scale  and  reach  of  the  taxi  system  in  New  York  City  is  impressive,  policy  makers  identified  a  major  gap  in  access  and  service—chiefly,  that  residents  in  the  four  boroughs  surrounding  Manhattan,  often  referred  to  as  the  “outer  boroughs,”  were  experiencing  inconsistent,  limited,  and  variable  transportation  service.  In  response,  New  York  City’s  Taxi  and  Limousine  Commission  (TLC)  broadly  restructured  its  regulatory  regime  and  created  a  new  class  of  taxi  licenses  in  2012  for  “Boro  Taxis,”  or  green  taxis.  Boro  Taxis  launched  in  2013  and  only  pick  up  passengers  in  areas  typically  neglected  by  traditional  taxis—Northern  Manhattan  and  the  outer  boroughs—through  street  hails  and  pre-­‐arranged  service,  thus  expanding  access  to  consistent  and  regulated  transportation  for  residents  across  the  city.  This  case  study  describes  the  significant  regulatory  reform  undertaken  by  the  City  of  New  York  to  improve  the  availability,  safety,  and  access  to  taxi  transportation  across  the  five  boroughs  of  New  York  City.    

 The  Problem    The  majority  of  New  Yorkers  rely  on  public  transportation  or  livery  services—only  22%  of  residents  in  Manhattan  own  a  car  compared  to  the  national  average  of  91%  of  

 

  2    

households  owning  at  least  one  car.  The  taxi  and  livery  system  in  New  York  City  is  the  fourth  largest  transportation  provider  in  the  United  States.  The  system  is  regulated  by  the  New  York  City  Taxi  and  Limousine  Commission  (TLC),  which  oversees  yellow  taxis,  for-­‐hire  vehicles,  commuter  vans,  paratransit  vehicles,  and  certain  limousines.  Despite  the  scale  of  the  taxi  and  livery  network,  the  existing  system  of  yellow  taxis  and  for-­‐hire  vehicles  did  not  adequately  serve  all  of  the  boroughs  of  New  York  City.  Riders  in  Queens,  the  Bronx,  Brooklyn,  Staten  Island,  and  Upper  Manhattan  had  been  left  out  in  the  cold,  too  often  literally.  However,  New  York’s  iconic  yellow  taxis  tended  to  cluster  around  the  midtown  and  lower  Manhattan  central  business  districts,  where  drivers  know  they  can  easily  pick  up  passengers  by  street  hail.  By  contrast,  in  the  outer  boroughs,  yellow  taxi  service  was  scarce  and  residents  primarily  relied  on  illegal  livery  services  with  inconsistent  pricing,  quality,  access,  and  availability.    The  problem  of  inadequate  taxi  service  across  the  five  boroughs  of  New  York  City  prompted  the  City  to  undertake  an  assessment  of  the  existing  regulations  that  governed  taxi  service  to  identify  opportunities  for  reform.        

Understanding  the  Problem    

Faced  with  the  stark  imbalance  between  the  demand  for  taxi  services  outside  of  Manhattan  and  the  inadequate  level  of  service  provided,  the  City  of  New  York  examined  facts  about  the  history  of  taxi  services,  the  status  of  the  existing  livery  service  market,  and  the  demand  for  these  services.    

Service  Delivery  Background    The  lack  in  street  hail  taxi  services  in  the  outer  boroughs,  and  the  clustering  of  yellow  taxi  service  in  the  central  business  district  of  the  city,  is  attributed  to  a  reform  effort  in  the  1980s.  Under  the  Koch  Administration,  yellow  taxis  became  “dual  use”—they  were  allowed  to  pick  up  passengers  by  street  hail  and  also  by  dispatch.  However,  a  new  problem  presented  itself;  there  was  no  way  to  guarantee  service  either  way.  Taxi  drivers  could  discriminate  against  passengers  on  the  street  (e.g.,  handicapped  passengers)  and  rely  on  pre-­‐arranged  dispatch  calls  only,  or  drivers  could  ignore  passengers  requesting  dispatch  service  and  pick  up  passengers  on  the  street.  Eventually,  yellow  taxis  became  “single  use”—they  were  only  allowed  to  pick  up  passengers  by  street  hail.  For  dispatch  service,  the  for-­‐hire  livery  service  was  created  to  respond  to  pre-­‐arranged  pick-­‐ups.  Because  yellow  taxis  were  only  allowed  to  pick  up  passengers  via  street  hail,  yellow  taxis  began  to  cluster  in  Manhattan  and  pre-­‐arranged  services  became  more  popular  in  the  outer  boroughs.  This  created  a  service  gap—yellow  taxis  conducted  street  hails  and  became  ubiquitous  in  Manhattan,  while  residents  of  the  outer  boroughs  primarily  relied  on  dispatch  service.  Over  time,  livery  drivers  illegally  accepted  street  hails,  and  street  hails  of  livery  cars  became  common.          

 

  3    

Empirical  Evidence  and  Use  of  Data    To  examine  the  imbalance  between  Manhattan  and  the  outer  boroughs,  the  TLC  conducted  observational  studies,  analyzed  GPS  data,  and  collected  input  from  citizens  via  311.  In  2006,  the  TLC  commenced  an  observational  study  to  document  the  prevalence  of  illegal  street  hails  of  livery  cars  throughout  the  City  and  to  map  hotspots  where  these  illegal  pick-­‐ups  were  occurring.  The  TLC  also  installed  GPS  in  yellow  taxis  to  record  where  yellow  cabs  were  operating.    The  analysis  of  illegal  street  hails  and  GPS  data  told  a  comprehensive,  empirical  story:  yellow  taxis  conducted  97%  of  their  street  hails  in  the  central  business  district  of  Manhattan  and  at  airports,  as  shown  in  Figure  1.  Yet,  there  was  significant  demand  for  street  hail  service  outside  of  Manhattan  that  was  insufficiently  met  through  illegal  street  hails.      

 Figure  1:  TLC  data  shows  that  97%  of  yellow  taxi  pick-­‐ups  have  historically  occurred  in  central  Manhattan  and  at  the  airports.  (Source:  TLC,  September  2010)  

       

 

  4    

   

Conceptualizing  the  Problem    

Drawing  on  the  data,  TLC  noted  the  following  issues  to  be  addressed  in  a  reform  process:  

 Availability  The  data  collected  by  the  TLC  found  that  97%  of  pick-­‐ups  by  yellow  taxis  occurred  in  the  Manhattan  Core  and  at  airports,  and  only  a  small  percentage  of  pick-­‐ups  occurred  in  the  outer  boroughs.  Because  of  inadequate  service  in  the  outer  boroughs,  residents  were  forced  to  rely  on  pre-­‐arranged  services  or  hail  sometimes  unregulated  and  illegal  cars.    

 Service  Quality    Yellow  taxis  offered  significant  service  advantages  over  livery  cars—passenger  safety  was  highly  regulated,  the  pricing  was  certain  and  fixed  on  every  ride  (the  meter),  and  in  the  Manhattan  core,  taxi  service  was  ubiquitous.  Yellow  taxis  also  accepted  debit/credit  cards,  making  payment  quick  and  easy.  In  addition,  the  TLC  kept  electronic  trip  records  for  every  ride  taken  in  a  yellow  taxi,  allowing  passengers  to  find  lost  items  and  the  TLC  to  investigate  passenger  complaints.  In  contrast,  the  service  quality  offered  by  other  livery  services  varied  widely.  Compared  to  yellow  taxis  where  passengers  knew  there  was  a  consistent  and  standard  rate  for  distance  traveled,  unregulated  livery  services  did  not  adhere  to  a  regulated  rate,  forcing  passengers  to  negotiate  their  price  with  every  ride.  

 Passenger  Safety    For  a  passenger  hailing  a  car  on  the  street,  it  was  not  immediately  apparent  which  cars  were  regulated  and  which  cars  were  not.  Unregulated  cars  may  not  have  met  the  same  passenger  safety  standards  as  yellow  taxis.  Drivers  of  unregulated  cars  did  not  pass  through  the  same  rigorous  background  checks  as  drivers  of  licensed  taxis,  meaning  that  they  could  have  had  criminal  records,  DUI  convictions,  or  traffic  violation  histories.  

 Market  Entry  for  Yellow  Taxis  The  current  yellow  taxi  market  in  New  York  City  was  rigorously  regulated.  There  were  a  limited  number  of  medallions  (approximately  13,000  total)  licensed  to  vehicles.  These  medallions  were,  and  continue  to  be,  prohibitively  expensive;  with  a  value  of  more  than  a  million  dollars,  making  it  very  difficult  for  individuals  to  purchase.  Most  medallions  were  owned  by  large  companies  who  rented  out  vehicles  to  drivers.  Furthermore,  the  reselling  of  medallions  and  the  introduction  of  new  medallions  into  the  market  was  rare.  

   

 

  5    

 

Addressing  the  Problem  Through  Regulatory  Reform    The  Reform  Process,  a  multi-­‐jurisdictional  legislative  approach    An  ambitious  reform  agenda  was  taken  on  by  Mayor  Bloomberg  and  the  TLC,  who  first  announced  the  Boro  Taxi  Program  in  January  2011.  As  part  of  his  third  term  agenda,  Mayor  Bloomberg  set  out  to  stimulate  business  and  economic  activity  to  the  outer  boroughs  and  took  on  this  regulatory  reform  work  in  order  to  increase  taxi  service  citywide.  Further,  several  severe  weather  incidents  affected  public  transportation  in  the  outer  boroughs,  making  the  lack  of  transportation  alternatives  widely  apparent,  and  heightening  public  attention  on  the  issue.  The  political  will  for  regulatory  reform  was  strong.      At  the  beginning  of  the  process,  the  TLC  attempted  to  pass  the  reform  proposal  through  City  Council.  However,  City  Council  would  not  pass  legislation  unless  there  was  consensus  and  support  from  the  yellow  taxi  industry.  From  the  beginning,  there  was  strong  opposition  from  stakeholders  in  the  taxi  and  livery  service  markets.  Both  the  yellow  taxi  industry  and  the  livery  services  opposed  the  introduction  of  new  vehicles  specifically  designed  for  the  outer  boroughs,  fearing  that  their  introduction  would  infringe  upon  their  business.  The  most  common  concern  was  the  potential  impact  of  the  Boro  Taxis  on  the  existing  car  service  infrastructure.    Realizing  that  the  Boro  Taxi  Program  would  not  likely  pass  the  City  Council,  the  TLC  turned  to  the  New  York  State  legislature  to  propel  the  reform  effort.  The  TLC  proposed  a  plan  to  issue  new  Boro  Taxi  licenses,  and  after  some  negotiation  that  included  modifications  to  the  plan,  such  as  the  inclusion  of  additional  licenses  for  wheelchair  accessible  vehicles,  the  plan  was  approved  by  the  legislature.  The  TLC  used  state  regulation  as  a  reform  mechanism:  the  State  Livery  Law  was  signed  by  Governor  Cuomo  in  December  2011,  and  in  turn,  the  TLC  passed  rules  and  guidelines  governing  the  program  in  April  2012.    While  the  Boro  Taxis  were  ultimately  the  adopted  reform,  several  other  options  to  bring  more  consistent  taxi  service  to  the  outer  boroughs  were  considered  and  ultimately  passed  over  due  to  a  lack  of  feasibility  or  support.  These  included  such  measures  as:      

- Extending  yellow  taxi  service;  - Monitoring  and  enforcing  where  yellow  taxis  should  work;  - Monitoring  where  other  livery  services  should  work;  or  - Regulating  currently  unregulated  and  illegal  livery  services.  

         

 

  6    

Involving  Stakeholders    For  the  most  part,  the  TLC  engaged  the  legislative  stakeholders  in  the  City  Council,  State  Legislator  and  Governor’s  office—the  entities  who  would  eventually  have  to  pass  and  sign  the  reform  legislation.  Engagement  between  the  TLC  and  representatives  from  the  yellow  taxi  industry  and  livery  services  was  hotly  contested  throughout  the  reform  process,  especially  by  the  yellow  taxi  industry.      

Yellow  Taxi  Industry      The  yellow  taxi  industry  opposed  the  introduction  of  the  reform  effort.  They  argued  that  medallion  owners  had  invested  large  sums  of  money  in  medallions  with  an  understanding  that  there  would  be  a  limited  number  of  medallions  available  in  the  market.  If  the  TLC  introduced  more  taxis  to  serve  the  outer  boroughs  into  the  market,  the  investment  that  medallion  owners  had  made  would  be  diminished.  They  also  argued  that  there  was  simply  not  enough  demand  for  taxi  service  in  the  outer  boroughs.  In  addition  to  program  design,  the  yellow  taxi  industry  was  very  skeptical  of  the  TLC’s  capacity  to  enforce  compliance  amongst  Boro  Taxis.      Initially,  the  yellow  taxi  industry  proposed  a  solution  whereby  current  medallion  owners  would  own  a  share  of  the  new  Boro  Taxi  medallions.  By  owning  shares  of  medallions  in  both  the  yellow  taxi  and  Boro  Taxi  markets,  medallion  owners  would  be  able  to  support  policies  affecting  both  markets.  The  yellow  taxi  industry  believed  the  TLC  could  have  done  a  better  job  of  inviting  the  yellow  industry  representatives  to  participate  in  the  process  of  thinking  through  the  problem  and  generating  potential  solutions—industry  representatives  believed  there  were  opportunities  for  the  TLC  to  work  with  them  to  ensure  that  yellow  taxis  were  providing  services  to  the  outer  boroughs.      Livery  Services    Representatives  from  the  livery  services  argued  that  allowing  yellow  taxi  medallion  owners  to  automatically  have  a  right  to  Boro  Taxi  medallions  would  prohibit  existing  livery  service  owners  and  drivers  from  having  the  opportunity  to  purchase  Boro  Taxi  medallions.  They  also  argued  that  creating  a  dual  use  Boro  Taxi  would  only  create  the  same  discrimination  problems  that  existed  prior  to  the  yellow  taxis  becoming  single  use  in  the  1980s.    

 

The  Reform  passed  by  New  York  State  and  implemented  by  New  York  City    

After  approximately  24  months  of  stakeholder  engagement,  city  agency,  city  council,  and  state  legislature  engagement,  the  reform  passed  by  the  State  at  the  end  of  2011  allowed  the  introduction  of  18,000  Boro  Taxi  licenses  to  incrementally  enter  the  market  

 

  7    

over  a  course  of  three  years.  The  new  licenses  were  not  attached  to  the  existing  yellow  taxi  medallions.      Just  like  yellow  taxis,  Boro  Taxis  are  required  to  have  a  uniform  color  (bright  green)  and  graphics  on  the  vehicle,  meters,  a  debit/credit  card  reader,  a  roof  light,  a  camera  or  a  partition  for  driver  safety,  and  GPS  tracking.    The  reform  mandated  that  Boro  Taxis  provide  service  within  a  specific  geographic  boundary  by  street  hail  or  dispatch  in  northern  Manhattan,  the  Bronx,  Queens,  Brooklyn,  and  Staten  Island.  Pick-­‐ups  below  110th  Street  on  the  West  Side  or  below  96th  Street  on  the  East  Side,  or  at  LaGuardia  or  JFK  airports  (dispatch  only)  were  prohibited.      In  the  first  year  of  service,  Boro  Taxis  had  to  establish  20  percent  of  the  fleet  (or  1,200  vehicles)  as  accessible  to  wheelchair  users.  The  reform  stated  that  these  users  must  be  able  to  hail  or  call  ahead  for  these  vehicles,  pay  the  same  rate,  and  have  on-­‐demand  access  to  transportation  throughout  the  City.    

Results    

Boro  Taxis  are  in  high  demand  and  ridership  is  high,  especially  in  Northern  Manhattan  and  Queens.  For  the  first  time,  residents  of  the  outer  boroughs  of  New  York  have  access  to  a  fleet  of  licensed  and  regulated  vehicles  that  are  designed  specifically  to  serve  them.  Boro  taxis  are  connecting  residents  across  the  city,  allowing  them  to  more  fully  participate  in  the  city’s  economy,  educational  offerings,  services,  and  entertainments.  Yet  still  more  is  needed  to  fully  include  everyone—in  some  neighborhoods,  there  are  still  not  enough  Boro  Taxis  on  the  road  to  meet  the  demand  of  livery  services.  According  to  GPS  data  collected  by  the  TLC  (see  Figure  2);  Boro  Taxis  have  made  pick-­‐ups  in  the  outer  boroughs,  beginning  to  fill  the  gap  of  service  created  by  the  clustering  of  yellow  taxis  in  the  central  business  district  of  Manhattan.      Availability    In  total,  the  TLC  will  issue  18,000  licenses  for  Boro  Taxis.  By  November  2013,  TLC  had  issued  6,000  green  cab  licenses,  which  are  all  expected  to  be  on  the  road  by  March.    In  addition,  1,200,  or  20  percent  of  the  Boro  Taxis  in  the  first  year  were  accessible  to  wheelchair  users,  providing  service  to  a  diverse  population.    Service  Quality    Boro  Taxis  are  equipped  with  a  meter  and  GPS.  This  has  allowed  passengers  from  the  outer  boroughs  to  use  a  taxi  service  without  having  to  negotiate  a  fare,  as  well  as  given  

 

  8    

to  the  TLC  the  ability  to  monitor  Boro  Taxi  activity.  Boro  Taxis  also  feature  systems  to  accept  credit  and  debit  cards,  further  increasing  the  service  quality.      

 Passenger  Safety    Boro  Taxis  are  painted  a  bright  green  color,  which  differentiates  them  from  the  yellow  taxis  and  other  vehicles  on  the  road.  This  color  indicates  to  passengers  looking  to  hail  a  vehicle  on  the  street  that  the  vehicles  are  regulated.  Like  yellow  taxi  vehicles  and  drivers,  Boro  Taxi  drivers  and  vehicles  are  inspected  by  the  TLC  to  ensure  that  passengers  have  a  safe  journey.    Market  Entry    The  first  licenses  sold  for  $1,500  each  and  the  first  resale  was  marketed  at  $7,000  a  month  later.  Another  6,000  will  be  issued  by  June  2014  and  6,000  more  are  expected  in  2015.  There  is  already  a  waitlist  of  more  than  2,000  individuals  to  apply  for  licenses.  This  pricing  scheme  is  expected  to  raise  one  billion  dollars  for  New  York  City.  Compared  to  the  high  price  of  a  yellow  taxi  medallion,  the  initial  Boro  Taxi  licenses  are  priced  at  a  lower  entry  point,  allowing  drivers  from  livery  services  to  obtain  a  regulated  license  with  the  TLC.    

Figure  2:  According  to  Boro  Taxi  data  collected  from  August  to  November  2013,  green  cabs  have  been  bringing  taxi  service  to  previously  underserved  areas  of  the  

city.  (Source:  TLC,  2013)  

 

  9    

The  TLC  has  found  no  significant  negative  impacts—medallions  for  yellow  taxis  are  still  increasing  steadily  in  price;  the  traditional  dispatch  for  hire  vehicles  remains  strong;  there  has  not  been  a  substantial  increase  in  traffic  congestion  or  accidents;  and  Boro  Taxis  are  integrating  well  with  the  public  transportation  system.    Reactions  to  the  introduction  of  Boro  Taxis  have  been  generally  positive.  Drivers  who  were  able  to  purchase  some  of  the  first  licenses  have  called  it  an  excellent  investment  and  are  already  seeing  increases  in  their  income.  Boro  Taxis  have  introduced  few  truly  “new”  vehicles  to  NYC  streets:  83%  of  the  6,000  Boro  Taxis  in  operation  are  driven  by  individuals  who  previously  operated  a  traditional  for-­‐hire  vehicle.      Critics  of  the  program  remain.  Some  livery  service  drivers  argue  that  because  the  Boro  Taxis  can  pick  up  passengers  by  street  hail  and  by  dispatch  service,  there  is  potential  for  Boro  Taxi  drivers  to  discriminate  against  individuals  looking  for  street  hail  service,  choosing  to  respond  to  a  dispatch  call.  Alternatively,  drivers  might  only  respond  to  street  hail  pick-­‐ups  and  ignore  dispatch  calls,  creating  an  unreliable  service.    Future  Risks  for  New  York  City  to  Consider    There  are  some  potential  risks  for  the  City  of  New  York  to  monitor  as  the  Boro  Taxi  program  is  fully  launched.  One  such  risk  is  that  Boro  Taxi  drivers  tend  to  behave  like  yellow  taxi  drives  and  cluster  around  certain  areas  (particularly  in  western  Queens  and  Brooklyn),  leaving  some  areas  without  consistent  street  hail  options.  This  indicates  that  there  may  be  a  level  of  demand  that  is  not  filled,  even  with  the  addition  of  Boro  Taxis.    

Lack  of  Compliance  and  Enforcement    While  the  TLC  has  increased  the  number  of  enforcement  officers  to  ensure  that  Boro  Taxis  do  not  illegally  pick  up  passengers  within  the  Manhattan  exclusionary  zone,  there  are  methods  by  which  Boro  Taxis  could  continue  to  make  illegal  pick-­‐ups.  There  may  not  be  a  direct  way  to  monitor  whether  these  types  of  pick-­‐ups  occur.      The  inability  to  enforce  where  Boro  Taxis  drive  is  a  major  concern.  Boro  Taxi  drivers  are  permitted  to  pick  up  passengers  from  the  outer-­‐boroughs  and  drive  them  the  exclusionary  zone.  Once  in  the  exclusionary  zone,  however,  Boro  Taxi  drivers  can  turn  off  their  meters,  pick  up  a  passenger,  and  negotiate  a  flat  rate.        Pricing  of  Yellow  Taxi  Medallions    There  is  no  indication  of  how  the  introduction  of  the  Boro  Taxi  program  will  affect  the  pricing  of  yellow  taxis.  In  November  2013,  the  city’s  first  medallion  auction  in  over  five  years,  the  largest  bid  for  a  “mini-­‐fleet”  of  two  medallions  exceeded  $2.5  million,  by  far  the  highest  ever  recorded.  There  is  some  concern  

 

  10    

with  the  easy  access  and  cheap  pricing  to  acquire  Boro  Taxi  medallions  and  the  dual  use  capacity  of  Boro  Taxis  will  shift  the  pool  of  yellow  cab  drivers  to  Boro  taxi  cab  drivers.      Long-­‐Term  Effect  on  Livery  Services    There  could  be  significant  negative  long  term  effects  on  other  livery  services  as  Boro  Taxis  become  more  widely  available.  The  number  of  other  livery  services  who  primarily  operate  by  dispatch  service  in  New  York  City  may  ultimately  decline  as  a  result  of  the  Boro  Taxis.  Specifically,  many  community  and  neighborhood  based  livery  services  may  lose  business  as  their  drivers  convert  to  Boro  Taxi  licenses.      In  addition,  since  Boro  Taxis  have  the  option  of  picking  up  passengers  via  dispatch  or  street  hail,  drivers  may  favor  street  hail  pick-­‐ups  and  ignore  dispatch  calls.  Customers  who  previously  relied  on  the  dispatch  services  of  livery  services  may  find  themselves  with  inadequate  or  unreliable  dispatch  service.  Furthermore,  due  to  the  driver’s  option  of  answering  dispatch  calls  or  primarily  relying  on  street  hails,  there  may  be  tensions  between  livery  base  owners  and  livery  drivers,  who  by  state  law  must  be  affiliated  with  a  livery  base.      Introduction  of  Ridesharing  Companies      Around  the  same  time  that  Boro  Taxis  entered  the  New  York  City  market,  ridesharing  companies,  such  as  Uber,  also  entered  the  market.  As  more  ridesharing  companies  are  introduced  to  cities  around  the  country,  cities  have  grappled  with  understanding  the  appropriate  regulatory  framework  with  which  to  address  these  companies.  In  New  York  City,  ridesharing  companies  took  advantage  of  the  misalignment  between  the  market  supply  of  yellow  taxis  and  the  growing  demand  for  livery  services.  The  TLC  will  need  to  closely  monitor  the  activity  of  these  companies  as  they  become  more  prevalent  in  the  City  and  compete  with  the  traditional  yellow  and  Boro  Taxis.  

                       

 

  11    

ABOUT  THIS  PROJECT    The  Regulatory  Reform  for  the  21st-­‐Century  City  project,  funded  by  the  Smith  Richardson  Foundation,  is  exploring,  identifying,  and  developing  a  best  practice  framework  and  accompanying  resources  for  cities  seeking  to  learn  more  about  regulatory  reform.  This  work  addresses  the  fine  balance  between  public  health  and  safety  and  economic  development  in  regulation  at  the  local  level.  As  part  of  this  project,  this  paper  series  is  a  resource  for  those  US  and  international  cities  looking  to  learn  more  about  regulatory  reform,  as  well  as  those  interested  in  replicating  and  adapting  best  practices  to  streamline  regulatory  development,  licensing  and  permitting,  and  compliance  in  their  own  cities.  

 ABOUT  THE  SERIES  EDITOR  Stephen  Goldsmith  is  the  Daniel  Paul  Professor  of  the  Practice  of  Government  and  the  Director  of  the  Innovations  in  American  Government  Program  at  Harvard's  Kennedy  School  of  Government.  He  currently  directs  Data-­‐Smart  City  Solutions,  a  project  to  highlight  local  government  efforts  to  use  new  technologies  that  connect  breakthroughs  in  the  use  of  big  data  analytics  with  community  input  to  reshape  the  relationship  between  government  and  citizen.  He  previously  served  as  Deputy  Mayor  of  New  York  and  Mayor  of  Indianapolis,  where  he  earned  a  reputation  as  one  of  the  country's  leaders  in  public-­‐private  partnerships,  competition,  and  privatization.  Stephen  was  also  the  chief  domestic  policy  advisor  to  the  George  W.  Bush  campaign  in  2000,  the  Chair  of  the  Corporation  for  National  and  Community  Service,  and  the  district  attorney  for  Marion  County,  Indiana  from  1979  to  1990.  He  has  written  The  Power  of  Social  Innovation;  Governing  by  Network:  the  New  Shape  of  the  Public  Sector;  Putting  Faith  in  Neighborhoods:  Making  Cities  Work  through  Grassroots  Citizenship  and  The  Twenty-­‐First  Century  City:  Resurrecting  Urban  America;  and  The  Responsive  City:  Engaging  Communities  Through  Data-­‐Smart  Governance.