LINCOLN—It appears Nebraska legislators may be poised to replicate Colorado legislation to create a new class of transportation to deal with ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft.

Enter, transportation network carriers.

A TNC “uses a digital network to connect riders to drivers for the purpose of providing transportation.”

The TNC law in Colorado requires car-sharing companies, or their drivers, to carry primary commercial insurance coverage for the period when a driver has logged into their Lyft or UberX app but hasn’t been hailed, the Denver Post reported. It also adds other insurance protections.

Thanks to our sponsor

Become an SPN sponsor »
Meet our sponsors »

Although no plans are currently in place, Sen. Heath Mello brought up the concept as a road map many times during his testimony to the Transportation and Telecommunications Committee on Thursday.

The hearing, which spanned more than five hours, was meant to be an educational process for senators.

Supporters, detractors, Lyft drivers, representatives from the ridesharing companies, cab companies and insurance companies all gave their thoughts. There weren’t any “for” or “against” testimony and nothing was decided Thursday.

But several senators in the hearing expressed interest in showing that Nebraska is “open for business” while trying to navigate the choppy waters of continuing to allow Uber and Lyft to operate illegally until a proper solution can be legislated.

A new law couldn’t be made until the 2015 legislative session begins in January, and still would likely take months to pass.

“It’s not a matter of if we embrace it, but when and how we incorporate (ridesharing) into transportation structure… while maintaining safety,” said Sen. Jim Smith.

He later bristled at an Uber lawyer who tried to explain why they came in without following regulations.

“What we’re getting at here is that we want to work with this, but you’re not doing yourself good when you defend the way (Uber) came in here,” he said. “We’re trying to be helpful and work with you, but also want to have (Uber) work the Nebraska way, with integrity, honesty and transparency.”

Cab owners say Uber, Lyft need to play by same rules

Kirby Young, owner of the Lincoln-based Servant Cab, was particularly upset with the way the ridesharing service broke the law by operating without the Public Service Commission’s support.

Young had applied to serve Omaha with cabs two years ago, but the PSC denied his request.

“Here they are trying to get laws changed while continuing to break it… Is this the perception that this state and legislative body wants to set?” Young asked. “Do we want to send the message that we want companies to come in and break the law and we will change it later for them just because they don’t fit?”

“If you have enough money, a $19 billion valuation, you can force your way and will on the people while crushing current business? You shouldn’t even consider changing or modifying a law until they stop and prove they can play by the rules.

Young argued: “You can put lipstick on a pig or put a mustache on a car and it’s still a pig and still transport for hire. Their operation has been a slap in face to the PSC, legislative body and state.”

Sen. Annette Dubas asked several testifiers how the state should handle the illegal nature of the services until a solution can be found. Few had an answer. In Detroit, the city has agreed to a temporary legal blessing.

Ron Hug of Carter Lake’s City Taxi, however, said he doesn’t think legislative changes are needed. Uber and Lyft just need to follow the rules in place.

City Taxi’s service has taken a hit on Friday and Saturday nights, primetime for making money. Hug says revenue from those nights support putting cabs out on the street Sunday through Thursday, where they often serve elderly, poor or people with disabilities who don’t have smartphones.

“We take the 84-year-old vet to the doctors appointment or the single mother to a grocery store,” Hug said. “Uber and Lyft won’t do that. We do that.”

Lyft drivers say it’s nice to make money, meet new people, get drunks off road

During the morning session, Ben Wallace, an Omaha Lyft driver said he supports background checks, insurance requirements and vehicle inspections because “I want to be taken care of just as much as I want my riders to be taken care of.” He cited the recent policy to have $1 million in primary insurance from the company.

He said he became a driver for the money, but also to get drunk drivers off the road.

Now it’s about the “sharing” in ridesharing, he says.

“It’s being part of something bigger than yourself, making it a community people really want to live in,” Wallace said. “That’s the core of what ride-sharing is about—it’s the sharing piece of it.”

One Lyft driver, Vicki Clark, who plays disco and hands out Starbursts to her riders, said she wants more insurance companies open to covering ridesharing drivers.

She said she was rear-ended while driving, a three-car pileup, and while Lyft insurance covered her passenger’s medical cost from whiplash, she was kicked off her own insurance for driving for Lyft, something personal insurance frowns upon.

“The common quote from all the insurance company representatives I’ve spoke to is that it’s so new they don’t know quite how to wrap their heads around it,” Clark said. “They’re kind of slow to evolve.”

Innovation going forward

David Arnold, Straight Shot accelerator managing director and representative of the Omaha Young Professionals group, says he and the Omaha Chamber don’t want to pick winners or losers, but hope to address a regulatory structure that welcomes new innovative business models.

“This is not just for sake of consumers, but also recognizing Nebraska as a desitination where innovation and business can thrive. We hope to attract those smart, innovative people and want them to stay here,” he said.

Committee Chairperson Sen. Annette Dubas asked how Nebraska can address innovative business models and issues going forward to avoid a similar situation.

“I wish I had a silver-bullet answer,” Arnold said. “What we are experiencing is uncertainty. And that doesn’t benefit anyone. When new business models cause uncertainty, those who are tasked with regulation would benefit from moving quickly and having flexibility and reexamining why those regulations were made.”