Transcript
Automatically generated transcript. It may contain errors and includes testimony in languages other than English that is not individually marked up for assistive technology.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Good afternoon.
It is 3:01 on Tuesday, June 9th.
I am calling to order today's meeting of the City Life Committee.
Wendy, could you please call the roll?
Unidentified speaker
Thank you.
Candace Avalos
Ryan?
Dan Ryan
Here.
Unidentified speaker
Morillo?
Angelita Morillo
Here.
Unidentified speaker
Zimmerman?
Eric Zimmerman
Here.
Unidentified speaker
Avalos?
Candace Avalos
Present.
Unidentified speaker
Pirtle-Guiney?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Here.
And Christopher, could you please read our statement of conduct?
Christopher
Welcome to the meeting of the City Life Committee.
To testify before this committee in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the committee agenda at www.portland.gov/council/agenda/city-life-committee or by calling 311.
Information on engaging with the committee can be found at this link.
Registration for virtual testimony closes 1 hour prior to the meeting.
In-person testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard.
If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the chair states otherwise.
Your microphone will be muted when your time is over.
The chair preserves order.
Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others' testimony or committee deliberations will not be allowed.
If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given.
Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting.
Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.
Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.
Your testimony should address the matter being considered.
When testifying, state your name for the record.
If you're a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent.
Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you very much.
Colleagues, we have 2 items on the agenda today.
Our regular session for public communication and then one ordinance which is being brought forward by myself, Councilor Novick, Councilor Dunphy, and Councilor Murillo.
Wendy, could you please call our first agenda item?
Unidentified speaker
Item number 1, public input on City Life Committee topics 2026-191.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you.
And could you call up our testifiers, please?
Unidentified speaker
We have one person that signed up, Marshall McFarland.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Welcome, Mr. McFarland.
Thanks for being here today.
Unidentified speaker
Usually not so nervous.
This time I am.
Good afternoon, councilors.
Thank you, Councilor Smith.
Thank you, Mayor.
Council members, I am Ghalib Ben Imhotep L. Before this council on June 3rd, I affirmed a harsh truth, that our city's financial body remains frozen in theocracy.
We're fumbling over a deflated budget while our public infrastructures face a near billion-dollar maintenance backlog and our bureaus absorb million-dollar budget cuts in their manpower.
For this, Councilor Smith.
The public suffers.
I exist at ground zero.
I see with my eyes and feel with my hands the Portlands that numbers can't qualify.
While the finger of blame is not a solution-oriented tool, the responsibility of solution remains solely on us as a community.
I do firmly believe that the most essential tools for solution Thank you.
Are accountability, transparency, and diligence tools at everyone's disposal.
So let's refine and replace our tools.
Instead of using tax to burden our businesses and residents, why not create resources that promote Portland's natural assets, physical— I'm sorry, athletic identity and cultural spaces through robust public-private partnerships and unified automated accounting architectures that completely eliminate administrative error and leakage.
It will be these resources, partnerships, and architectures that provide critical buoyancy as Portland navigates these treacherous currents of the economy.
I'm not offering just basic financial projections.
The data in the proposals, they speak for themselves.
They're very basic.
What I'm offering is absolute commitment.
I'm offering my passion to promote a better Portland.
As a show of good faith, the 3 documents that I submitted to the clerk of the, uh, committee's review, they're yours.
Do with them as you please.
It's my hope that that absolute commitment grows to communal proportions.
Portland would benefit In perpetuity.
I am prepared to personally invest my time, my drive, and myself to shepherd every single one of those initiatives from the conceptual stage to actual physical execution.
Committee members, we can redirect the economic momentum of the theocracy that has Portland spiraling.
It is in our control.
It is in our power.
It is our community.
It's our responsibility.
Those documents are at your mercy.
My energy and devotion are at your disposal.
Let's use our ability as stewards of the most sacred public trust to progress, implement viable solutions, and bring tangible, undeniable benefit to the community of Portland physically and financially.
Thank you.
Thank you, and I love you all unconditionally.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you very much for being here today and for encouraging us to do that work.
Dan Ryan
Thank you.
Unidentified speaker
That concludes testimony.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you.
Wendy, could you please read the second item on our agenda?
Unidentified speaker
Item number 2, amend vehicles and traffic code to clarify applicability of ride fees and establish a driver's resource for Transportation Network Company Drivers, amend Code Section 16.40.030 and 16.40.240, document number 2026-192.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you very much, colleagues.
This is a code change and ordinance being brought to you today by Councilor Novick, Councilor Dunphy, Councilor Murillo, and myself.
I will kick us off with some opening remarks and then turn it over to my co-sponsors.
And Councilor Novick, if you want to come up to the table, I think we'll turn to you second.
So colleagues, today Portland relies heavily on rideshare as a core part of our transportation system.
But as this committee heard just a few weeks ago, the people who make that system work, the drivers, are increasingly being left behind.
Drivers face unpredictable wages, unexpected deactivation, and no access to benefits like healthcare, paid leave, or job protection.
The model that they work under relies on state laws which classify drivers as independent contractors.
That allows TNCs to offload many of the real costs of their business onto workers and onto their city.
And it leaves drivers without the means to organize, learn from their peers, or often find support.
When a driver is deactivated, they face financial and housing instability.
The model before us is not only hard on drivers, it creates instability in a transportation system that Portlanders rely on, and it creates costs in the public sector.
So what is our solution?
The ordinance before us today establishes a Driver Resource Center, sometimes referred to as a DRC.
Thank you.
Which is a centralized, independent place for rideshare drivers to access employment-related resources.
It's a place where drivers can go when they are deactivated for help navigating the system, a place they can go when they face wage issues to understand what their recourse is, a place where they can navigate access to benefits and protections.
In the past, Portland has contracted for an ombudsman to do some of this work.
It is not outside the scope of our city's work or authority to provide this resource.
However, the role in the past was underutilized in part because it was an ombudsperson that did not have experience working with drivers and was— and a program that was not put together with— in partnership with drivers.
They weren't able to offer the services that drivers most needed.
In other words, to do this right, we need to make sure that we have a contractor that is an entity with experience serving drivers, who understands the challenges they actually face, and the resources that might actually be needed.
But how do we pay for that?
As our code is written today, Portland charges ride fees on trips that originate within our city.
But there are some jurisdictions that charge fees on all rides, whether they originate this ordinance clarifies the applicability of fees which already exist and allows us to capture revenue from rides that currently originate outside of the City of Portland but end in our city.
This isn't a new concept.
In fact, the mayor and PBOT have previously explored this approach to raise revenue, and it has been on the table as recently as the development of the most recent budget.
Thank you.
Last year, when council increased the government fees on rides from $0.65 to $2 a ride, none of that revenue was directed towards supporting the workers in this industry.
We can clarify that that fee should be applied to all rides, those originating in and ending in our city, use the additional funds that are raised to fund A driver resource center without increasing the fee level and ensure that we have a system that works better.
As long as TNCs operate on an independent contract model, drivers and public entities will be left with the social and economic costs created by an unstable workplace.
But we can ensure that drivers get the support that they need to be successful.
That is what the driver resource center is designed to do.
I want to note a few things.
There is work being done at the state level on rideshare regulation that was brought up in a previous meeting.
That work is being championed by Senator Jama, who I understand just last week convened the first meeting of his work group on similar topic.
Our office is in close communication with Senator Jama's team, and they have assured us that the work on creating a driver resource center supplements and complements rather than conflicts with the important work that's being done in Salem.
Senator Jama has submitted a letter of support for our work and the ordinance before us today.
That item is posted online with a number of other resources for our conversation.
I want to sincerely thank him for his support and for all the work that he's doing in Salem.
I will also note that the conversation about origination and ending fees is not unique to Portland.
This happens in other jurisdictions, including other cities, and we have done work with our agency, with PBOT, to ensure that as they implement rules to— as they enact rules to implement this ordinance, they will ensure that we are coordinating closely with surrounding cities that use the same fee model that we use so that there is not a double charge.
Portland needs a functioning rideshare network.
Getting that functioning network requires sustainable jobs for the people who do the work.
A driver resource center quite simply will stabilize rideshare work— the rideshare workforce, and by extension, our transportation system.
This proposal before us standardizes our fee structure, raises revenue without raising the fee rates that are charged supports drivers and allows any excess revenue that is raised to support the underlying work of PBOT.
It strengthens our transportation system, supports workers who are struggling, and makes better use of tools that we already have available to us.
I would urge the committee to pass this.
I'll also note that I will be introducing a technical amendment later in our conversation.
But before we start talking about amendments, I'd like to turn the floor over to my co-sponsor, Councilor Novick.
Steve Novick
Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee.
Um, I don't have too much to add to what the chair just said, um, but I will say that over the past numerous months, uh, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney and I have heard from drivers about the exceedingly poor compensation that they get, that in fact they wind up making less than minimum wage, like around $12 an hour.
We've also heard repeatedly about the arbitrary application of deactivation, where people are deactivated.
They have no idea why.
They're faced with an extremely difficult to navigate appeals system within either of the companies.
And many of these immigrants are— many of these drivers are immigrants.
English is not their first language.
So one of the things that the resource center would do would help provide translation services, would help access legal services.
Um, which are desperately needed.
And I— as the chair said, TNC drivers hold our transportation system together every day, and I'm proud to be working on this legislation with Chair Pirtle-Guiney, and I trust that our colleagues will see the wisdom of it.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
Colleagues, I'll turn to Councilor Morillo for any remarks you'd like to give, and Councilor Dunphy, if you'd like to thank you, Chair.
Angelita Morillo
Yeah, thank you so much to all of the drivers union folks that are here today to support this.
We're really grateful for your presence.
You have shown up to every constituent coffee, every community event to advocate for your rights, and your council is responding to that advocacy.
So thank you for showing us the way in doing the right thing.
I am someone who, relies on the bus.
I rely on my bike, and I rely on your services to get to places.
And especially since becoming a city councilor, it's been much harder to take the bus, sometimes an hour to get between meetings, when you barely have 15 minutes to get a snack, let alone to travel that amount of time.
So I think my colleagues have covered all of the technical aspects of this very well.
I don't have more to add to that.
I just wanted to say that every time I've gotten in a Lyft or an Uber or any of those things to get somewhere, I've talked to the drivers about what is needed, and this is something that has continuously come up.
The fact that these companies are being extremely arbitrary with what services are provided, why they're being cut out of certain things, why they're being penalized, no communication, very intense language barriers, especially for the immigrant community.
And so to me, this is just completely— this is the only thing that makes sense to do for Portlanders that are serving our community in this way.
So I'm very excited to support this.
Thank you, Councilors Pirtle-Guiney and Novick, for leading on this.
Thank you, Councilor Dunphy, for sponsoring.
And I'm really excited that our City Council is going to be pushing forward some legislation to make everyone's lives a little bit easier.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Council.
Council President Dunphy, go right ahead.
Jamie Dunphy
Thank you, Chair Pirtle-Guiney, colleagues, members of the City Life Committee.
For the record, my name is Jamie Dunphy.
I am Portland City Councilor from District 1 and the Portland City Council President.
You know, I'm proud to be co-sponsoring this, and thank you, Councilors Pirtle-Guiney and Novick, for the hard work that you've been doing in driving this, literally.
The idea of a driver's resource center is a no-brainer to me.
The relationship between employer and employee is always a vital one that we need to have, and this relationship— contractor and contractee, I understand there's some nuance there, but regardless, these TNCs are largely faceless corporations that are hard to get ahold of thank you.
And don't leave our folks here working in our community with much to be able to defend themselves and to be able to move forward with their careers.
This makes a lot of sense in every regard.
The folks who transport us in Portland and around Portland deserve a fair relationship with their employer and an orderly and reasonable process to try and resolve problems on the job at some point.
It's concerning to me that we have to take this step, that this is the kind of thing that this new form of company can try and do.
We're not creating a resource center for any other major employer in Portland, but that is the reality that we are seeing with these TNCs and these out-of-state technology-based companies.
As someone on the east side of Portland, I can tell you that the arbitrary jurisdictional boundaries do not matter to our neighbors.
That the difference between 162nd and 165th being Portland or Gresham does not matter.
And it is folks getting to work, getting to home, getting to places they worship and play.
We can ignore that and use those resources to be able to actually provide meaningful change for the people who are doing the hard work, making sure that we do get home safe.
So thank you to my colleagues for bringing this.
I urge your support.
Thank you.
And thank you to the Drivers Union for being just an unstoppable force.
Let's get this done and keep working.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Council President.
Colleagues, we have 2 panels of invited testimony.
We'll start with representatives from the Drivers Union, and then an invitation was extended to both Uber and Lyft to participate today.
Uber chose to submit written testimony instead, which is posted online with the rest of our written testimony, but I believe we'll have a representative from Lyft here after the driver panel.
So I'd like to invite up Joe Jackson and Nathaniel Hudson Hartman.
Thank you both for being here.
Unidentified speaker
Thank you, Chair Pirtle-Guiney, and thank you, members of the City Life Committee.
Do we just need our name?
Oh, sorry.
I'm Joe Jackson, for the record.
Um, I represent drivers throughout the state of Oregon, um, most of whom drive here in our great city of Portland.
And I'm going to work on getting this presentation up while my colleague introduces himself.
Hi, great to be back in front of all your beautiful faces again.
For the record, I'm Nathaniel Hudson Hartman.
I use he/him pronouns.
Angelita Morillo
Yes.
Unidentified speaker
I've been a rideshare driver for— actually, today, today is my, my 9-year anniversary.
All right.
But I'm also honored to represent our essential transportation providers as an organizer with Drivers Union Oregon.
Happy 6/9 Day, everybody.
And by the way, thank you for scheduling this meeting right before rush hour.
This is gonna make getting rides from downtown really easy.
So thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
All right, here to help though.
You'll have to thank the council president for scheduling the committee at this time.
Dan Ryan
Wherever you're at.
Unidentified speaker
Um, all right, let's get to it.
We are talking Portland TNC Driver Resource Center.
Uh, next slide.
Joe's going to be my wonderful slide operator for today.
Thank you, Joe, appreciate you.
Um, and just for some background, um, PBOT's TNC Ombuds Program long ago identified this need for driver support.
And for those who aren't familiar, the TNC Ombuds Program was established by the City of Portland back before the pandemic.
And the goal was to have a place where drivers can go and submit complaints against the TNCs, get them resolved.
Unfortunately, that program has been out of commission for some time now, but even when it was, In operation, while well-intended, Ombuds was just under-resourced.
And drivers reported that they weren't able to get in-language support or consistently get positive outcomes for these types of complaints, especially when it comes to, you know, money owed or deactivations, which we'll dive deeper into in a moment.
And this need was really recognized by its own observations and recommendations, including a couple here.
TNC processes for driver review suspension and deactivation are not transparent and lack procedural safeguards and due process for drivers, and also recommended exploring implementing a model similar to Seattle's Driver Dispute Resolution Center.
This was back in 2020; we're talking about six years ago.
Next slide, please.
So it is no secret rideshare drivers we got a lot of issues.
We are a very unique and displaced workforce.
Comprised largely of folks of color, immigrants, refugees, English language learners, and low-income workers.
And as, you know, Council President hit the nail right on the head, Uber and Lyft, these large out-of-state companies are just dominating the workplace with algorithms, controlling our income through apps and powerful algorithms.
And just to kind of you know, zoom out of the scope of this, and shout out to our friends at PBOT for getting us these updated numbers.
I just want to kind of put a little asterisk here.
The rideshare numbers are not separated, so we're kind of doing our best based on that data.
But roughly an average of 2 million private-for-hire rides are happening per quarter, and almost 15,000 active drivers are currently in the Rose City.
So it's a very large, very displaced workforce.
Next slide, please.
So I just want to give a kind of high-level overview of some of their issues and then dive a little deeper and just highlight just the diversity, just a rich and diverse workforce that we have that speak, you know, just a multitude of languages, unfair deactivations, regulatory compliance, and issues with wage theft and underpayment.
And at the bottom here of note, no physical workplace.
You know, our work is by definition mobile, so we have no HR, no local support.
In fact, both Uber and Lyft used to have physical locations in the city, but even despite that, when drivers were owed money or had their accounts deactivated, we'd go there and they'd say, we can't help you, you got to go contact support.
And neither of these physical locations are in operation anymore.
They're, you know, both closed permanently.
Next slide, please.
Thank you.
So access, language, and cultural competency.
This is rideshare drivers.
We might be the most diverse workforce you've ever seen, but unfortunately the TNC customer support is mainly through AI-assisted chatbots in English only.
This is so incredibly frustrating, as I'm sure you can imagine.
Our distributed workforce is very difficult to reach.
I mean, we're all over the place.
You know, you're lucky if you find an Uber and Lyft sticker in a parking lot somewhere, and you know, just having those kind of on-the-street conversations, you know, when we're majority immigrants speaking upwards of 20 to 30, 25 to 30 different languages.
Next slide, please.
Which brings us to one of the most awful parts of being a rideshare driver, the risk of having your account unfairly deactivated, which just means being fired by the app.
And this happens— Next slide, please.
For a multitude of reasons or for no reason at all, things as arbitrary as an app glitch or a background check that is taking too long, or in many cases, as we find in our organizing work, due to a racially motivated complaint.
And you're going to hear some testimony from some of our drivers today later about, you know, how frustrating this can be, but you end up getting sent to AI chatbot purgatory.
Where you are literally texting, and I know you have heard a lot about this before in our testimony, but I can't say this enough, texting in English, leaving you wondering whether or not you're even talking to a real person.
It is one of the most dehumanizing experiences, and both Joe and I have been through this.
I mean, our English is pretty good, and even we were beating our head against the wall trying to get our jobs back.
But like, my notebook right here is full of over 60 names of Portland drivers who I'm meeting with trying to get their jobs back, and I'm literally running out of room.
And we're noticing a disturbing trend with the names of some of these folks.
It's not Steve, it's not Dan, it's not Eric.
It's Hamidullah, it's Abdullahi, it's Ali.
One driver who I'm helping right now legally changed their name to embrace their own true identity, and they were deactivated by Uber and accused of falsifying documents due to a discrepancy on their background check because of the name change.
Sorry, this is just— it's one of the most terrible parts of our experience.
Next, uh, slide please.
This one, I— it's a little controversial.
I might get into some hot water for saying this, but Portland has some really complex and difficult to understand regulatory policies when it comes to DNC drivers.
It's just a fact, and it's— we understand why, but our drivers don't.
And, you know, an example of this is the driver permit that everyone has to have.
These things used to get mailed to us, but now they get stuck in the bottom of somebody's inbox.
And if you're a driver in the airport lot on your way to pick up somebody from the terminal, and somebody with a badge who you don't know comes and stops you and says, hold up, if you're an immigrant driver, especially in 2026, that can be really scary.
You know, so just kind of, there's an opportunity for education and, you know, just raising awareness that, you know, really has just kind of been lacking.
And, you know, the wage theft and underpayment, despite the fact that, as we know, rideshare drivers don't have compensation standards, we still face wage theft and underpayment.
And you're gonna hear about this, you know, through testimony.
But, you know, we're seeing drivers, it happens every day.
You are fighting with that same AI chatbot to get either a few bucks that you're owed or a few hundred bucks that you're owed.
And, you know, drivers are just, again, beating their head against a wall and just have nowhere to go, um, you know, to get assistance with that, especially if they, you know, struggle with English.
So what's the solution?
A driver resource center to address unfair deactivations and other TNC actions with legal support for drivers assistance, trainings, and outreach for helping to comply with those local regulations and company requirements, accessing benefits, and culturally competent and in-language support and resources for our very diverse driver community.
And again, this was modeled, this was, I would love to take credit for this, but this was all PBOT's idea.
But it was really, this idea is really modeled after Washington's Driver Resource Center, and they have been busy as you can see.
Over 2,100 drivers, wrongfully deactivated drivers, have gotten their jobs back.
And over $12 million have been put back into drivers' pockets after lost wages from TNC unfair deactivations and through enforcement actions with workers' rights laws that exist.
Over 6,000 drivers have signed up for Washington's Paid Family Medical Leave program.
Through outreach.
Steve Novick
I know, right?
Unidentified speaker
Through outreach by, you know, the Washington Driver Resource Center.
And they had over— well over 7,000 intakes from drivers coming and needing assistance last year.
So I just want to like point this out just to highlight not only the success of this model that is also actually in operation, uh, in the state of Colorado as well and counting, um, but just highlight the, the need.
You know, if you build it, they will come.
And so what works in a driver resource center and what isn't?
This is so important.
It is a physical office space.
You know, drivers just— we're all over the place and we need a place where we can come to.
And this provides an opportunity to just walk in or make an appointment and, you know, work around your schedule to get help that you need for drivers that, you know, may be in crisis.
Um, you know, Joe and I have been operating our mobile driver resource centers and, you know, it— there's a, there's a power in being able to go and meet drivers in our natural habitat, but it is just not suiting the needs of our community.
Intake specialists and representatives that speak multiple languages with interpretation and, you know, helping facilitate with that interpretation.
Culturally competent staff that have experience as TNC drivers.
And I can't stress this enough, we know it, gig work is weird.
It is weird.
Like, there's no way around it.
It's hard to understand unless you've done the work, right?
So who better to serve those drivers than those that have actually been behind the wheel and that can help drivers navigate the complex and, you know, very frustrating systems that the TNCs put up, but also, you know, drivers that they feel safe with, right?
That they feel comfortable with and free of influence by the TNCs.
I can't stress that enough.
Thank you.
Free or low-cost legal support that addresses deactivations, pay issues, and workers' rights violations is just so crucial.
And just a couple more things here.
Knowledgeable staff that can troubleshoot the apps.
I mean, these things are like— I mean, we talked about it in our last time here.
Those terms of service updates that you suddenly get and you're like, what the heck does this mean?
Oh, but I have to figure this out before I can go and, you know, go online and start working.
You know, the layers of the regulatory compliance, educating folks on the benefits that are available to them, and just connecting drivers, even folks with immigration resources.
You know, we've done— I know that we have done, like, you know, events where we've had some other nonprofits and folks can come and get diapers and laundry soap and you know, questions about knowing your rights when you're stopped by someone and they ask about your immigration status.
You know, like this, it's a really holistic and really just goes beyond deactivations and, you know, helping folks, you know, get paid, you know, fairly.
And then training on safety and best practices, you know, just filling in some of those gaps in the worker training, safety, you know, a lot of those, you know, a lot of those things that were just, that were just not provided.
And so the last couple of slides, we've— we thought it was important to, you know, I'm not going to read all this out, but we thought it was important to, you know, highlight some more of those successes of the Washington TNC Driver Resource Center with some testimonials from some drivers who have been wrongfully deactivated and in many cases been able to, you know, secure lost wages for that time that they were off the road.
So, you know, feel free to check those out.
And, you know, last thing I just wanted to say, you know, like what a difference a year makes.
Like I'm kind of tingling right now because, you know, we were here in this spot a year ago, you know, asking for a driver resource center and that craziness with all the budget cycle.
And we're just, you know, it was a very uncharted time.
And so we're just really thankful to be here and for the opportunity to, you know, keep this, like bring this conversation forth and you know, just educate, you know, you folks that may not have done gig work before, you know, on what we're going through.
And, you know, just so, so honored to have this see the light of day.
So thank you for your support.
And, you know, obviously happy to answer any questions that you have.
Joe, anything to add, or did I cover it?
Yeah, no, I, I would love to just echo what Nathaniel said.
Amazing about what a year can do.
It was actually almost just about 1 year ago today that when Councilor Pirtle-Guiney was president, I had signed up on the wrong agenda item to try and testify.
And so navigating the system in Portland and being able to be where we are now is just incredible with all of your support.
So I just wanna thank you all very much.
Way to go, Joe.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you both for being here.
Before we move on, are there any technical questions for either of our guests from the drivers union?
Okay, Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
When we say drivers union, is it actually a union?
Steve Novick
Oh yeah.
Eric Zimmerman
Recognized, like you have rep— like it's a part of the, like, employee, um, the board recognized by the state?
Unidentified speaker
I want to understand if we're using that word yeah, we've been recognized by a lot of state lawmakers in the hallways, Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
Recognized by your beautiful hair is one thing, but I mean, are you like the employee relations board?
Unidentified speaker
Like, here's the thing, that's what I'm trying to understand.
There are many, many—.
Eric Zimmerman
It's not a gotcha question.
Steve Novick
No, no, no, no, no.
Eric Zimmerman
I'm just trying to understand what you—.
Unidentified speaker
There are, there are many, there are many, many forms, many different types of unions.
As we know, there are labor unions, there are tenants unions, there are staff unions.
Unions existed a long time before there were labor rights, and they will exist We are a group, we are a merry band of rideshare drivers uniting for fairness in rideshare for a common cause.
That is our union.
Eric Zimmerman
Okay, does anybody know the answer?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
So, Councilor, right now federal law does not allow independent contractors to form a union under the NLRB.
And as private sector workers, these workers would have to form a union under the NLRB.
Okay.
So the traditional formation of a union that you're thinking about isn't I think the group that we have before us that calls themselves the Drivers Union operates in that space of solidarity to help folks stand up for their rights at work.
Unidentified speaker
And it wasn't a gotcha answer either, I swear.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Okay, thank you both so much for being here.
Dan Ryan
Thank you.
Unidentified speaker
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Colleagues, Meadow Johnson is joining us online to represent Lyft.
Meadow, are you available?
Perfect.
Unidentified speaker
Hello.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you for being here with us today.
Meadow Johnson
Can you hear me okay?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
We can.
Eric Zimmerman
Great.
Meadow Johnson
Chair Pirtle-Guiney and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to share our perspective on the proposed ordinance establishing a driver's resource center within Portland's private-for-hire transportation program.
Thank you, Councilor Smith.
Next we have Lyft.
My name is Meadow Johnson, and I am here on behalf of Lyft.
Lyft is committed to the success and well-being of drivers who use our platform.
We recognize that navigating deactivation processes, regulatory requirements, and language barriers can present real challenges, particularly for drivers from immigrant and historically underserved communities.
Lyft does have questions about implementation that we hope this hearing will address before the council moves to a vote.
Specifically, we would welcome clarity on how the center will coordinate with TNC companies in practice, what governance structures will ensure the Driver Resource Center operator's independence and impartiality, and how the proposed expansion of ride fee applicability trips terminating within the city would be administered, particularly given that Portland's fee burden on TNCs is already among the highest in the nation.
Many of the goals underlying the Driver Resource Center, such as language access, deactivation transparency, and earnings support could be addressed more durably and at a greater scale through statewide legislation.
We want to thank the drivers union for the thorough conversation they've initiated at the state and strongly encourage the authors of this proposal to work in close coordination with Senator— Senate Majority Leader Jama's office to pursue a statewide framework.
Oregon remains the only state in the country without a statewide TNC framework, and that gap creates real daily costs for drivers and riders.
A statewide framework is the most effective vehicle for expanding driver earnings, standardizing protections, and ensuring consistent access to services across Oregon.
Lyft is committed to working constructively with the city, the council, and the legislature to achieve outcomes that genuinely serve Portland's drivers and riders.
We hope the council will take the time needed to address these outstanding questions before proceeding to a vote.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you very much, Meadow.
Colleagues, does anybody have technical questions for Meadow before we move on to the next item on the agenda?
Councilor Zimmerman, is your hand still up?
Eric Zimmerman
Okay.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Meadow, thank you very much.
If there are no technical questions, we will move on to public testimony.
I believe we have about half a dozen people signed up to testify.
Wendy, could you please call up our first panel?
Unidentified speaker
Yes, there are 6 people signed up to testify, and I'll call I'm going to call, uh, Julie Gonzalez up, and then we have Sam Araya online.
Samuel Araya, if you, if you could hear me, go ahead and unmute.
And Angela, if you could accept the panelist promotion.
Sameer Kanal
Julie.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Oh great, good afternoon.
Sameer Kanal
Good afternoon, committee members.
My name is Samir Kanal and, uh, I live in District 3, Portland, Oregon.
Uh, I was a rideshare driver over 10 years before Uber and Lyft wrongfully deactivated me because of my error on my background check.
They haven't made it easy for me.
I don't get to speak to a real person.
They make it to text me to English, which is not my first language.
Now I'm struggling to find work and pay my bills.
Even before I got deactivated, there was many times I was underpaid.
It was Almost impossible to contact someone.
You get bounced around, they close the chats on you, and they don't even understand what you're trying to tell them.
Like many drivers, I need help to communicate with the companies and help translate, but every time I need assistance, I have to drive across town to coffee shop where there is a music It's so loud, or to the library where you have to be very quiet.
It's hard to get interpretation when you are worried about the sounds around you and, uh, when you don't have as much as privacy.
But I hear that drivers in Colorado and Washington can go to the place and then get support if they have— if they are owed money or Thank you.
If they are deactivated by Uber and Lyft to get their job back, why can't Portland drivers have our own driver resource center?
Thank you, Councilors Pirtle-Guiney, Novick, Morello, and others for supporting our local rideshare drivers.
I hope that when I get my jobs back, I'll have the place to go and get help Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
Unidentified speaker
Angela, go ahead and unmute, begin your testimony.
Eric Zimmerman
Okay.
Hello, councilors, and thank you for taking the time to hear us.
At the end of last year, I was offered a 2-hour, 45-minute drive.
I took it even though I knew it would be one of the only rides I would be able to do on a Friday night.
It was up to Seattle like I had hoped, and the Washington pay rates are a good deal higher, so it would be worth it.
Once I dropped the rider off, I was told the pay for the ride was pending.
I was disappointed in this, but Uber does do it on some longer rides due to— they want to make sure they get paid before they pay us.
7 Days later, after Christmas, Thanks.
I was paid $49 for this ride.
They paid me for the time at the Portland rates and paid nothing for the mileage.
I contacted support immediately after I got paid, and they told me I had waited too long after the ride to dispute it.
I asked for a supervisor.
They ended the chat.
I went around, around like this for days and finally contacted our drivers union representatives locally, Nathaniel, and got the information to contact the Washington Drivers Resource Center.
It took a few more days, but I finally got the correct amount for the ride, which was Yes.
Around $350.
So it was a huge difference.
The $49 didn't even cover the gas to do this ride.
And we definitely need a resource center here.
It would have saved me from jumping through a whole lot of hoops.
And thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you very much.
Unidentified speaker
Last call for Julie Gonzalez.
The next 3, I'll call 3 of you and can come up and please state your name for the record before you begin your testimony.
Ram Damala, Diga Shamedi, Ahmed Alshamani.
Eric Zimmerman
Yes.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Welcome.
Thank you for being here this afternoon.
Eric Zimmerman
Thank you.
Candace Avalos
Good afternoon.
Eric Zimmerman
My name is Ram Damala.
Sameer Kanal
I'm rideshare Uber and Lyft driver.
But I don't have good English.
Eric Zimmerman
Uh, now permanently my Uber and Lyft deactivate.
Sameer Kanal
Somebody complain.
I watch the video like they say complain.
I driver, I know how to drive.
Eric Zimmerman
I completely— I careful.
I'm not watch the video, only complain.
It's a long time ago.
Sameer Kanal
Now no open my ID.
Thank you.
This way.
Thank you.
I don't have good English this way.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
That's okay.
I think we—.
Thank you.
We know what the concerns are there, and we really appreciate you being here to share them with us.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Unidentified speaker
That concludes testimony.
Candace Avalos
Okay.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Colleagues, there is, um, an amendment posted that I'd like to flag before we move into discussion.
Um, it is labeled Pirtle-Guiney-Novick 1, I believe.
Uh, this is a, a pretty straightforward and technical amendment.
It does not change the structure or the intent of the Driver Resource Center ordinance, but it clarifies a few pieces of implementation and adds some preferences for the contracting to ensure that our state— that our, our city bureaus have the direction that they need, uh, given the lessons learned from the period when we had an ombudsperson doing this work.
In full, the amendment does 3 things.
It adds a reference to culturally competent representation to the list of tasks for the contractor to ensure they can carry out.
It adds interpretation services and not just translation services.
This was an oversight.
We do actually need to have both words listed there, translation and interpretation, as allowable uses of the funds.
And it lays out a preference for a contract operator, including an operator with experience with driver advocacy.
And a demonstrated commitment to workers' rights, and allowing for an operator with a nonprofit status.
Again, lessons learned from the recommendations from when we had an ombudsperson doing this work.
I hope these are seen as relatively minor and basic changes.
The intent is to ensure that the program works as, as intended from day one.
So I will move us into discussion.
Angelita Morillo
Second.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Sounds good.
Candace Avalos
Thank you.
Um, thank you so much to all of you for being here and for all of your relentless advocacy.
I really admire this because this is what I'm hoping this new form of government can create, is space for communities like yours thank you.
So really grateful for all of your advocacy.
Um, you know, TNC drivers, they play an essential role in Portland's transportation system.
They help connect people to work and medical appointments, transit services, and for many drivers, this work is an important source of income.
And in District 1, I hear regularly from immigrant community members who drive for Uber and Lyft and other platforms, and for for many, this work provides flexibility and economic opportunity, but as we have been discussing, it also comes with these unique challenges, and I'm grateful for you all to elevate those to our awareness.
What stands out to me about the proposal is that it recognizes a reality that exists across much of our modern economy, frankly, that workers are increasingly expected to navigate large, complex systems on their own, often with very little support when something goes wrong, especially Councilmember Smith.
Angelita Morillo
Thank you, Mayor.
Candace Avalos
I appreciate the work that the city is doing to address the impact of the pandemic on our economy, especially in the gig economy and with all of these kind of tech, tech type of jobs.
When a driver is deactivated and loses access to their account, or they encounter a language barrier, or they're struggling to understand a regulatory requirement, these things really compound, and the consequences can be immediate, right?
Because your income is directly tied to your ability to access a platform.
So I appreciate that this ordinance is focused on creating infrastructure that helps people navigate those challenges.
Challenges before they become a crisis.
I also think it's important that we're talking about accountability and transparency.
To me, the success of this resource center won't simply be measured by whether it exists.
It will be measured by whether drivers trust it, can access it, and are able to achieve better outcomes because of it.
And ultimately, this proposal recognizes that transportation systems aren't just made up of vehicles and apps and infrastructure.
They're made up of all of you people.
And if we rely on drivers to help keep our city moving, then we should make sure that you all have what you need, that you're resourced with information and support so that you can be successful.
So again, thank you for that.
I have a couple of overarching questions to pose.
So first, I wanted to talk about procurement and who gets the contract.
And, you know, seeing the additional amendment adds some more clarity to that, but ultimately I think one of the most important decisions here is going to be who actually operates the driver's resource center.
And beyond the requirements in the ordinance and the now amendment that we'll discuss, what do we think procurement is going to look like, that the procurement process, and how will drivers themselves be involved in evaluating whether an organization is trusted and capable of serving this workforce?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
I'd actually like to I'd like to invite representatives from PBOT up to the table, if you're willing.
As a standard procurement process for a contractor to deliver these services, that will be carried out by our bureau.
And rather than speculate on what they might do, I'd like to let them speak to how their standard processes work.
Angelita Morillo
Welcome.
Unidentified speaker
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Chair and committee members, I'm Millicent Williams, Director of the Portland Bureau of Transportation.
Thank you for the question.
Um, uh, we appreciate the opportunity to, um, support the driver community in this way and recognize the importance of providing a clear, transparent process by which a vendor or a contractor would be identified.
So we will move through the procurement process in the way that we We'll develop an RFP that has a series of expectations that any provider would be able to address satisfactorily.
We will then score the applications, and depending on the score of the application, that would end up being the person that we would select through the committee that does the selection process.
We would not do it in isolation.
We would do that in coordination and collaboration with the Office of Procurement.
Thank you.
Following their basic procurement rules.
One of the things that I will mention is that as we are moving into the space of core realignment, we'll continue to work very closely with the Office of Procurement to ensure that the things that the bureau is putting forward are prioritized as they previously had been.
This process will take series of months, probably between 4 to 6 months, to move through the entire process.
And then once implemented, once the award is given, then we'll engage the drivers so that they can begin to access the services.
Candace Avalos
You mentioned a committee.
What committee?
Unidentified speaker
Selection committee.
It's, it's a number of folks that are identified to review the applications.
It's not— we just don't drop it into a box excuse me, and pull one out.
There are reviews that are done by internal staff as well as staff from the Office of Contracting and Procurement.
Candace Avalos
I guess that's why I'm asking, because my question is around how are all of these advocates going to be involved in the process of procurement, right?
I know the standard procurement process, and what I heard was the standard, but I didn't hear where these driver union representatives and the community that's going to benefit if I may, for the record, Jacob Sherman, PBOT's Mobility Innovations Manager.
Unidentified speaker
Councilor Avalos, we've yet to have a conversation with Procurement Services on this and how we might go about structuring it.
But speaking from previous procurements that I've been a part of, there is sometimes an opportunity to create kind of a technical panel of folks who are providing advice.
We do have to be very careful about who those individuals are and making sure they have no vested interests in, in the outcome.
So I think we'd want to be very thoughtful about who we might be selecting to provide advice or guidance as we're moving into the procurement process.
Candace Avalos
Okay, I hear that.
But I guess I would encourage that there be some kind of technical assistance.
Okay.
Group of folks that could include some of the folks in the room.
Obviously understand that, you know, you don't want to predetermine outcomes and conflicts of interest and all that, but I just think this is too important to miss out these voices, and I don't want this to just be a standard procurement process.
I want to make sure that the communities that are advocating for this are meaningfully involved.
So we can keep talking about what that looks like.
My next question is My question is around geographic accessibility.
So the materials emphasize the importance of physical office space and in-person support.
So how are we thinking about accessibility for drivers who live throughout the region, including East Portland, Gresham, other communities where drivers might reside?
What would meaningful access look like beyond just a downtown office?
Unidentified speaker
Again, that's a— thanks, Councilor Avalos.
That's a great question.
We're very early in this process.
We know that PBOT actually serves as the de facto regulator of so we know that when a driver is doing work here in Portland, they need to be permitted through Portland, even if they might be coming up from Salem, for example.
So I think we need to be thoughtful about what that might look like in terms of geographic accessibility, where we might want a vendor to have an office or other offices kind of located.
I think this is also a piece of the conversation where, as we work more with all of your agencies, the city agencies, the county agencies, your staff.
The conversation with Senator Jama's office is going to be, uh, could be important as well, recognizing they're thinking about a statewide framework and we're already providing regional services more or less.
So that's just some early thinking on this.
Director Williams, I don't know if you'd add anything.
Um, you, you've covered it well, uh, Jacob.
Thank you very much, Councilor.
Um, yeah, I recognize the challenge that I've heard and that you've expressed in terms of accessibility of a person, first of all, and a place.
And so we will take that into consideration as we work to reestablish the Driver Resource Center so that it does serve well.
That is our commitment.
I cannot define what it would actually look like right now, but know that we will make sure that as we work to develop this space and this opportunity for engagement, that we're doing so with a lens focused on how we serve the most people with the highest level of care.
Candace Avalos
Thank you.
So looking at Washington's Driver Resource Center, it seems like they've produced some pretty impressive outcomes around, like, reactivations and recovered compensation.
So one part of my question is just, you know, if we establish a center here, what outcomes should we expect, uh, and how are we measuring success?
And the second part of that is, you know, this ordinance is being driven in part by concerns about deactivations.
So I'm curious, what data does the city receive regarding driver deactivations, and what additional information would help us better understand the scale and causes of those deactivations moving forward?
And is there a way that we can get more of that data?
Where does it live?
And is, is there something we should do to try to get more of that in our hands?
Unidentified speaker
Uber and Lyft certainly have some of that information.
That's not the kind of information that's shared with us on a regular basis.
Could start a conversation about what changes could look like to the data sharing agreements that, that guide that.
That we'd have to look at it more closely.
Could require additional code changes.
Eric Zimmerman
Though.
Unidentified speaker
So, you know, I think that is a piece of— could be a piece of the puzzle.
I think to the first part of your question, Councilor Avalos, around outcomes and measuring success, these are conversations we've started this week in the Bureau as we know this is probably moving forward to start thinking about what some of those performance measures might be.
So at this time, don't have a good answer to that.
I do think we can look to folks in Washington State and how they've defined some of those performance measures.
We certainly have contacts up in Washington that we've talked to on and off over the years, and we'll probably be reaching out to some of them for their insights and advice as we develop what a procurement could look like.
Councilor, I'd also like to mention that I think it would be incumbent upon us to be proactive versus always reactive.
And how might we work with drivers to ensure that there is a full understanding of the rules, the expectations, the working agreements So that they don't find themselves, uh, in a space where they've inadvertently, uh, found themselves to be deactivated.
There, there are things that I know that we can do.
Some of those are very simple errors sometimes.
Uh, we've all seen a digit off or a letter off or someone misinterpreting what one wrote based on their understanding of, um, a language.
So, uh, I believe that the resource center has an opportunity to be a partner versus just a place to go for customer service in the after.
It's really the partnership from the beginning.
So as has been demonstrated and I think expressed many times, we frequently share information with the body that you see behind us.
We talk regularly, we engage often, we all have the bracelets.
And so the relationship is not a strained one.
It's one that we know that we can seek to strengthen, though.
Candace Avalos
Okay, hold on, I want a bracelet now.
I saw, I saw you flashing that.
Yeah, I want to be part of the cool blue team.
Um, thank you, and I can appreciate that, yes, this is early, but, you know, uh, thanks for your answers.
Understood that there's more discussion to be had, but of course I'm flagging the areas that would be important to me, at least in how you do those discussions.
Lastly, um, you know, right now we're talking a lot about this as like a focus on appeals and language access and regulatory navigation, but do you— and maybe this is for you all but also for the sponsors of the ordinance— do you see this as primarily a service center, or is this part of a broader strategy to improve conditions and economic stability for drivers in Portland's transportation system?
Just want to get a sense of like looking ahead.
Unidentified speaker
Well, from PBOT's perspective, Councilor, I kind of addressed it in the previous response.
I don't want this to just be a place that we go to, or that people come to solve the most egregious of problems, but rather they see this as a true resource center, a place that provides for them a level of comfort and care as they navigate what can be a challenging system.
I think it will also provide for us the opportunity to ensure that as we engage with Lyft and Uber and any other of the Rideshare operators, uh, should there be any others.
Um, and I know that there are not, but, uh, in, in the event that someone, um, invents one, uh, we want to make sure that, uh, we're also having that conversation in as much as we can without, um, erring on the side of advocacy, as much as it's, wait a minute, I think you might be misunderstanding something.
Let's have the conversation about what the ask is versus what the interpretation of what the ask is.
So I see us as more than just a place to come bring your app and the paper that says that something was misaligned, and really a place that provides wraparound services.
Candace Avalos
I appreciate that, and I think wraparound service is good.
And also, I would love for this to be a place that we can turn to as legislators to talk about some of those code changes that might need to come in the future.
And just in general, this is a big— this is one part of a broader concern we have around the types of jobs that are available to Portlanders and how that is contributing to their economic stability.
And I just hear a lot from East Portlanders who have these kinds of gig economy type of jobs.
And I hope that we can have this be a beginning of that broader discussion and use this as a place to gather the stakeholders who are going to be coming to you with direct concerns.
So I just don't want us to miss that opportunity to connect those dots between helping with a direct concern and then seeing that, being able to communicate that back to council in some way so that we can act on the broader policy changes that need to happen to protect Portlanders.
Unidentified speaker
Absolutely.
Candace Avalos
Thank you so much.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
And, you know, there's always a balance with processes like this.
We want the rulemaking process to be able to happen in an effective way at the Bureau, so we can't list everything in the ordinance, but we want to list some of those basic things.
I hope as you all move forward with the rulemaking process, you're taking with you some of the intent that you've heard from Councilor Avalos.
I would also note that we heard some questions earlier, and unfortunately, Meadow Jackson with Lyft isn't on the line anymore, but we heard some questions earlier that I think you were in the room for about how the Driver Resource Center will coordinate with the TNCs and what independence there might look like.
And I think all of the concerns and the questions that we have heard are things that could be a part of an RFP process that you receive answers on from the different Contract applicants so that you can see the whole suite of options for how this might work.
Unidentified speaker
Sounds good.
Yes, thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Ryan, go right ahead.
Dan Ryan
Thank you, Chair Pirtle-Guiney, and thank you, sponsors.
I just want to acknowledge the people in blue and how you've been here quite a few times and you always show up In a way that's relatable, your issues relatable in general.
And also you've done it with a lot of patience and kindness, so I appreciate that.
I remain a little bit confused still, so this is coming from curiosity.
We're very constrained right now with capacity.
We're laying off employees.
So anytime we're building something new, I just want to always get to the bottom of the mechanics of that.
And it's great to have PBOT up here.
It could be that the people that presented earlier would come up as well.
And again, I apologize.
I probably have the least amount of knowledge up here, and I'm okay with that.
But it's still a little embarrassing because I appreciate how this came about.
So we're building something, and it starts with— I know you've talked about this already, but—.
Candace Avalos
I'm sorry.
Dan Ryan
This has been built in the state of Washington.
It's been built in the state of California, and it hasn't been built yet in the state of Oregon.
When this was being built in the other 2 states to the north and south of us, did it start in, say, a municipality, local government?
And who am I asking this question to?
Great.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
If you want to go ahead and reintroduce yourself for the record, that would be great.
Unidentified speaker
Joe Jackson, for the record.
Yeah, um, I, I just wanted to flag really quickly that the other Driver Resource Center that was mentioned is in the state of Colorado, um, and the Driver Resource Center in Washington did start out at the city level in Seattle, as, as I am recalling.
Nathaniel, please correct me if I have that information.
Yeah, so, uh, back in, uh, 2020, there was an ordinance called the Fair Share Ordinance.
Steve Novick
Can you hear me okay?
Dan Ryan
Do you know this?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
That's okay.
Unidentified speaker
I was like, I don't think I'm loud enough.
All right, check 1, 2.
Uh, oh, for the record again, my name is Nathaniel Hudson Hartman.
Uh, great to be back again.
Uh, yeah, so in the city— yeah, City of Seattle in the year 2020, There is an ordinance passed by Seattle City Council called the Fair Share Ordinance, and that established, among other things, a minimum compensation standard for drivers, highest in the nation.
Shout out to the city of Seattle and our drivers up there, as well as the funding for a driver resource center via a per-trip contribution on every ride.
And as well— sorry, I'm also leaving out deactivation appeals rights.
Steve Novick
So.
Candace Avalos
Thank you.
Unidentified speaker
That was a really nice package that was passed that really benefited drivers in a meaningful way.
Yeah, so this all started in Seattle.
Dan Ryan
When did it become a statewide program?
Unidentified speaker
In 2023, House Bill 2076 was passed, but that just kind of expanded the deactivation appeals rights and also like a minimum compensation standard framework statewide.
Dan Ryan
As well as the mechanics of the building then transferred from the City of Seattle to— the state of Washington in Olympia?
Unidentified speaker
I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?
Dan Ryan
That the mechanics then of this transition from the City of Seattle to the state of Washington?
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, so that per ride—.
Dan Ryan
I guess I say this to PBOT too, if you've probably been doing this research too with City of Seattle and WDOT.
Unidentified speaker
So the per—.
So Councilor Ryan, yes, the per trip funding mechanism, yes, transfer to the state.
Okay.
And that also occurred, Councilor Ryan, as part of that bill was a negotiation that resulted in statewide preemption and essentially froze the City of Seattle's regulations kind of in time.
So those ride fees, for example, have never been increased or changed ever since then.
And that was just a part of the overall kind of negotiation for moving the Driver Resource Center from being a local offering to a state offering.
Dan Ryan
And did your budget of $1.5 million come from studying what happened in Seattle and in the state of Washington for this resource center?
Unidentified speaker
I believe the driver's resource center in the state of Washington probably has a larger budget and would maybe look to Joe or Nathaniel to answer that.
Because again, it's funded through a small percentage of every trip Yeah.
For us, we've done some rough calculations based on limited data to come up with a conservative estimate that the code change that's being proposed here would generate, we estimate, about $1.5 million.
And so those new resources could then be spent on this without having any kind of budget impacts on the Bureau.
Dan Ryan
And that includes capacity and staff time?
I mean, that's part of the budget impact.
Unidentified speaker
The staff and the capacity would need to be funded through the resources that would be raised with what's included, yes.
Dan Ryan
And so this is an estimate, the $1.5 million?
Unidentified speaker
That's correct.
Dan Ryan
Okay.
All right.
One second.
Do I have anything else?
So anyway, you've made your case so clearly.
I get the problem.
I'm trying to be excited about what we're doing here as a solution.
Like, is this really aspirin to the headache that you have over all the issues that you brought up?
They seemed multiple.
So I think that's where I'm not struggling.
I'm just trying to get excited about what this will actually do.
And I don't know if I'm totally convinced, but I'm leaning towards trust.
Sameer Kanal
Yeah.
Dan Ryan
But I just, I think you've laid out so many problems over the last year when I listened to you.
And the actual solution here is interesting, but I'm not totally all the way there that this, like what will be next after this?
And so that's maybe why I wish I understood the evolution in the state of Washington and the evolution in the state of California on how this started and what we can learn from them.
Unidentified speaker
Well, we're trying to learn from what happened in California, and that's not what we want to happen in Oregon.
Dan Ryan
That's helpful to hear.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, in California— and so in California, Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash spent over $250 million lobbying for a piece of legislation called Proposition 22, That among other things creates a fake minimum wage and allows—.
Dan Ryan
People behind you are going like this, so.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, it's really bad.
Yeah, so I guess I just want to understand how to be helpful and just explaining, like, is— and I don't know if this is—.
Dan Ryan
Your case study is the state of Washington then?
Candace Avalos
Yeah.
Dan Ryan
Okay.
Unidentified speaker
Well, I think we can look to the success of the Driver Resource Center and the need That has been really nationwide.
Deactivations are a nation— no, they're a global epidemic.
Drivers are losing their jobs after investing tens of thousands of dollars in vehicles without any just cause protections, without— with just being able to wake up one day and having their jobs taken away and then suddenly having to figure out, well, what am I going to do now?
Eric Zimmerman
Thank you.
Unidentified speaker
And for a lot of folks, it's not just a side hustle.
Like, this is their job.
For our low-income and our immigrant, like, drivers that love this job— I mean, we all love, we all love what we do.
This is, this is like the second best.
This is the second best job I've ever had.
The best job I've ever had?
Rideshare driver.
Not even close.
Being of service to your community.
And, you know, like Councilor Avalos said, thank you so much for recognizing this.
Candace Avalos
Yes.
Unidentified speaker
We are part of this essential transportation network, right?
This inclusive mobility, trying to keep this city moving, but we've been left behind.
And so like the— yes, thank you.
Just having a place to go and having someone to help you and having a safe place to do it.
If you're an immigrant driver, which I know you're not, and I appreciate your curiosity, People just don't understand it.
But if you are an immigrant driver and you are—.
Dan Ryan
It's under job description.
Candace Avalos
Right.
Unidentified speaker
If you were on const— if you were in, you know, under constant threat of being taken away and then you had your job taken away, I have literally been into— drivers have literally invited me to their house because they are terrified that they're gonna get scooped up and so, you know, just having a place where folks like that can— like, that is who I think of.
This list of over 65 people and counting that are out there struggling, that have nowhere to go, that just feel completely helpless, and that have invested so much in the job that they love and don't want to lose.
That is why we need to drive a resource center.
Councilor Ryan, if I may, um, I think part of the reason you've heard so many different questions or concerns raised by the drivers is also based on the fact that our code has not changed significantly in almost 8 years or so.
So there's been a number of issues through our Private for Hire Advisory Committee, our TNC Driver Advisory Committee, the sounding board meetings that we've been having where we've heard issues that have been surfaced.
And we haven't had a great opportunity to move forward with making those code changes.
So that I think is some of the reason that you've heard a lot of things.
I think in talking with Chair Pirtle-Guiney's staff as well as others, it sounds like there is a desire to kind of take things one step at a time and get some wind in the sails and move things forward.
Meanwhile, within the organization, we're working on a broader strategy right now to kind of look at code and how we might modernize it because it is really convoluted and out of date.
It's over 125 pages long, which makes it very difficult for a rideshare driver, let alone the TNCs, to understand.
So that's, I think, one piece that I wanted to clarify.
I think the other piece I just wanted to add, and Director Williams, I don't know if you want to say anything on this, is just recognizing that there aren't a lot of great models out there and that that is because, as I believe Lyft mentioned in their comments, you know, we are the only state that does not have any form of statewide preemption.
The TNCs have been very successful at getting local control taken away from jurisdictions in the other 49 states around the United States.
So the kind of progressive policy moves that you all are considering are the kinds of things that local governments can't do in many other places.
And so, you know, we have to look to kind of limited case studies to see what could be done.
And I think that's where looking at what the City of Seattle has done, it has proven pretty effective.
Dan Ryan
I really appreciated Councilor Avalos's questions in general, but especially the ones around what does success look like, and then what metrics will we measure to know we're on the right track.
And I think for me, I couldn't— I would like to hear a crisper answer to that.
Unidentified speaker
We would love to be able to provide a more crisp response as well.
I recognize if we're looking at the information that was shared in the presentation about the numbers of drivers who were reactivated, the numbers of millions of dollars that were put into or back into their pockets, that to me is a metric.
Um, today I don't know what the full universe of drivers in the Portland market are, uh, that have been deactivated.
So to be able to state a percentage of reactivation within X number of months, X number of years, X number of reasons, um, is hard for me to state.
I, I would love to be able to provide a more precise answer for, uh, what success looks like, but, uh, would need a little bit more time to be able to develop those metrics.
And happy to come back to the committee to share that.
Dan Ryan
Thanks.
I think that, you know, getting to the $1.5 million is, is obviously been stated several times, but what does that do?
What— how will all of, all of your life be better because that goal was achieved?
And that's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Sure.
Unidentified speaker
It is, again, the reactivation.
It is the opportunities to help to navigate If wages have been lost, how to regain those wages.
This is not a question about the take rate.
It is simply about one's ability to work legally as a rideshare operator in the city of Portland or in the region.
So that is what those resources would go to help to provide for people.
I don't know that that's one person, a team of people.
We're still determining what that might look like, and it may not be $1.5 million.
I think the 1.5 is an estimate based on a full universe, but in terms of the numbers of people that we would know that we would work with on a weekly or daily basis, that is not something that I have information on right now.
Perhaps Nathaniel has a little bit more, but I know he has at least 60 that would be helped by the resource center.
That's a place for us to start, but I recognize that there's likely many more, and so we would need to do the work to find out who those drivers are, work very closely with Uber and Lyft to identify who those drivers are, because some of them will not come forward, uh, without, um, uh, uh, without, uh, fear of some other consequence.
So we have some work to do, uh, in the ways that we introduce the work, uh, to ensure that we're getting to the points where we need to be.
Dan Ryan
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
And I'll note, Councilor, that this may be another item that is appropriate to put in an RFQ for PBOT to ask applicants for the contract to identify what success metrics would be and what standard of success they might hold themselves to, and for PBOT to lay out a few specific criteria that they would want applicants to identify metrics around, including number of reinstatements.
Dan Ryan
I appreciate that, Chair.
Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, because I think that's what people are asking for more and more from us is better accountability and transparency about what we're doing with the money that we're collecting.
We've proven over the last 10 years locally that we're good at collecting money, but we sometimes aren't— we fail to be clear about what success looks like and what are we measuring.
And then how can we humble— how can we be humble when we don't meet those goals and how are we going to rework it?
So I think that's and I think that's the type of trust that we need to build anytime, even though this is a much smaller amount than some of the stories I have in my head.
I just wanted to make sure I put my voice into that.
So I'm all in philosophically.
I just want to make sure that we get it right in terms of the building.
Angelita Morillo
Yeah.
Unidentified speaker
And I appreciate that Chair Pirtle-Guiney introduced some potential ways to get to the measurements that would be satisfactory as it relates to your inquiries.
We would need to work very closely with the crafters of this in order to ensure that we, while putting the RFP out, are meeting those objectives as well.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
Thank you.
Okay.
We're using the term deactivation a lot.
I want to make sure I understand Is that the equivalent of getting fired?
Unidentified speaker
Yes, by the app.
Eric Zimmerman
And it sounds like a lot of people get deactivated and then they're able to come back.
Does that mean they found out what the issue was and then rectified it?
Unidentified speaker
Or—.
Eric Zimmerman
I'm trying to get a sense of what this truly means from a usability standpoint.
I don't care.
Yeah, sure, whoever's got experience.
Come on up though.
You gotta talk in the mic and tell us who you are.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
If our leaders from the drivers union wanna bring up a member to help answer, I think that's perfectly fine.
Candace Avalos
All right, I'm Rob Nesbitt.
Unidentified speaker
Hi, Rob.
Candace Avalos
I testified last week.
Eric Zimmerman
I remember you.
Candace Avalos
Weeks ago.
Anyway, I was deactivated based on fraudulent activity.
Eric Zimmerman
I remember you shared that, yeah.
Candace Avalos
Yeah, I, all right.
So I tried to ask them why I was— had fraudulent activity.
And every time I sent a message to Lyft in their headquarters, and that's like 10 times, all I heard was, we're, we're sending it upstairs to security.
And that's like the cyber cloud, and you never hear from anything again.
So I never really got an answer to why I was deactivated.
Thank you.
And after so many attempts to try to resolve it, I just gave up and said, I'll just do Uber.
And I was a 5-star driver.
Eric Zimmerman
I remember your story.
Candace Avalos
With 5,500 rides.
Okay.
So what's happening is these people who are deactivated, one, don't know why they're deactivated and they have no recourse.
So right now I have Uber and I don't know if it's called a handicap, I have drop foot.
I can't work at Home Depot.
Uber is my— that's my main job right now.
And if Uber was to say tomorrow, you know, you're deactivated, I'm out of luck.
Dan Ryan
Okay.
Eric Zimmerman
Thanks, Robert.
Candace Avalos
And this happens, and as I said, people don't know why they're deactivated and they have no recourse.
Unidentified speaker
Councilor Zimmerman, if I may.
You know, drivers could be deactivated for a variety of reasons.
Those reasons could be Uber or Lyft determining that they're not meeting our requirements as a city.
So for example, we have a requirement for drivers to not have more than 2 traffic violations on their driving record in a 2-year period of time.
And if for some reason that were to occur, you know, they could find out about it and deactivate someone.
Eric Zimmerman
Got it.
Unidentified speaker
I'm unclear on how good of a communication that is, and we will sometimes get those calls from drivers and have to kind of explain that.
Drivers can also be deactivated for failing to meet the terms of services through the apps.
And it's been a while since I've looked at them.
This gentleman's talking about cybersecurity issues.
You know, we also have heard stories of people having complaints filed against them for driving and find themselves—.
Eric Zimmerman
There's where I'd like to go next, actually.
So I remember a time when I could not rate a driver 5 stars and it would go through.
But now if I choose to do that, I have to go through some long multi-screen thing and say why.
Maybe I don't want to, but we've gotten to the point where we say you can't rate somebody less than 5 stars unless you give a lot of reasons why.
And so you kind of go through and you have punch sections, but really it never really meets up to the thing.
So there's some— they've obviously taken a— they have this goal to kind of, in my opinion, inflate everybody's ratings, right?
Because if you can't do a 4 unless you give a whole bunch of reasons, that seems strange to me.
But that's just the app we've got.
I don't really care.
But in a world where— and I have certainly had some bad experiences, and Yes.
Bad enough experiences, I hope they got fired.
In the—.
I want to make sure I'm, I'm trying to understand the connection here because, I mean, you're looking at the Washington slide you all shared, 2,148 drivers back to work after unfair deactivations.
I guess what I'm trying to struggle with here is what is the government's role in telling another Yes.
—Who they must, can, or should employ.
And I say that because you all have laid out some really— to all the councilors' points, I am seeing the problem, but what I'm really struggling with is the connective tissue to the government's role here, because you're not asking us to create a resource center for Landscapers or for janitorial services or for other drivers who are not part of the rideshare environment.
And so I'm trying to understand that connective tissue here in terms of the role because I don't— I am not saying that people are being treated fairly and that therefore we have no issue here.
We do.
What I'm trying to understand is I don't know what an unfair deactivation means because I don't know whose definition of fair we're talking about.
And I see your hand in the back.
Thank you.
And I'm trying to get a sense for 2, or a couple of things.
One, can riders still expect to be able to make a complaint on an unfair situation and that that person gets dealt with in a way that doesn't come back to get the rider in some strange way?
But also, I would like to get an idea for you in terms, from you in terms of what you mean by unfair activation.
And I am, I'm getting there.
I'm just really trying to like, I'm gonna do some curiosity questions here so we can like, let's flesh this out.
Yes, if you wanna go ahead.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, so I just wanna kind of answer as an example of an unfair deactivation.
I'm representing a driver who came to me and said that he had an interaction with a rider prior to his deactivation where the rider said, I'm going to report you to Lyft so that I can make sure that there are no longer any Teslas coming to pick me up and take me to work.
Yeah, that seems unfair.
Yeah, you know, it's, it's a complaint motivated entirely by the type of vehicle that he drives.
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah, which is probably politically oriented, and we all know it.
Yeah, that's a great example.
Yeah, I'm gonna, I'm gonna hold off on the audience members.
You guys have some members up here who are gonna answer, so by all means.
Unidentified speaker
If I may, I, I would encourage you to reframe, uh, and I appreciate the question.
I would encourage you to reframe, uh, this a little bit, uh, from we're telling someone they can't do something to empowering like local essential workers to have the support that they need to navigate that process.
Because right now, like, the reality is, is like, if you were to wake up— if you were to wake up tomorrow and your job got taken away without a clear explanation why, how would you feel?
Yeah.
Would you think that was fair?
Candace Avalos
You have no recourse.
That's the bottom line.
Unidentified speaker
We have no recourse.
And there's a— and there's a chance—.
Eric Zimmerman
Listen, listen, hold on, Nathaniel.
Let everybody okay.
I get that it is a bad situation for it to happen.
No one has to convince me of that.
What I'm trying to understand here and be very clear about is, does the government have a role for this one industry?
Because I'll tell you, I certainly get notices, letters, complaints from employees of all types of industries who have been not treated well by their employer.
Mm-hmm.
Who would like a way of recourse, who would like reinstating to their role and to their job.
And so to single out a single industry is a lift for me in my, what is the role in government here?
And so I am giving you an opportunity to share that in a way why you think that as the driver's representation here, why you think that that role because what is laid out in this ordinance makes a lot of sense to me, right?
Being— get a letter that says, here are the reasons why, Eric, we deactivated you.
Sounds fair.
Sounds good.
Should I not extend that to every industry in the city of Portland?
Every time you fire an employee, you have to give them a reason why.
Is that the question here?
So that's— nobody has to convince me on like, it's not going great.
I got that.
I really do.
And I have a family member who's gone through and tried to get certified by the city, et cetera.
So keep, please, Nathan, keep the mic open.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
I'd like to let our leaders from the drivers union answer this.
And then I think that Councilor Murillo and I might have some responses as well.
Eric Zimmerman
I'll do some questions to the sponsors as well.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, I think it's absolutely the city's responsibility because I've seen other cities take up the mantle and decide that they were going to make it their responsibility.
So yes, I do think it is.
Eric Zimmerman
Okay, um, from a— from a— the, the stats that you gave on the Washington resource, those are all like really good outcomes.
I think what my councilor says was really good outcomes.
I'll tell you, from a rider's perspective, I, as a person who goes to Seattle somewhat often, I'll tell you, like, it's been a bad experience up there, right?
They're— they're— the rides are so cost prohibitive at this point, I actually am choosing different places to So I can avoid taking rides.
And that's a big concern given the other presentation we had.
And the next thing that I know that Councilor Perugini is bringing, I'm thinking about that a lot as well as in terms of the future of this.
But I think the notice that I'm looking at with this resource center is like for Uber and Lyft and others back in the day when you were kind of the on-the-cheap option as a corporate entity, you were pretty much on the cheap compared to taxis.
That's why a lot of us who I think first downloaded the app, got very attracted to it.
There's nothing cheap about the service anymore.
It's quite expensive, which comes with— I think all of us basically took it on faith that we were getting in the car of a stranger in 2015, and we weren't really sure what that was all about, but it was a hell of a lot cheaper and way more accessible than a taxi.
And so a lot of us swallowed that pill and we went with it, and it's turned into, I think, I think that many people make safer choices now.
I'm talking about drinking and driving.
I think they make a lot of safer choices now.
And that is really, I'll just tell you outright, is what I'm most trying to preserve is that we don't return to a situation where taxis are the only available thing because taxis frankly didn't show up for us in a way that we needed them to.
And I think that's largely why this service expanded its, its, uh, Access across the country.
But now that you— and I'm talking corporate here, if they— I know they've signed off— but now that they are an expensive service, I do think they should expect a hell of a lot more in terms of levels of regulation.
Because if you're going to be expensive and you're a regular service and it's harder to get a ride and it's more expensive to get a ride, there's going to be a role here for the city.
So I, I'm accepting that.
Thank you.
Thank you for that.
In terms of some of the thought process here about the resource center, you mentioned like legal representation.
Are rideshare companies required to hire anybody who applies for, I guess, a contract?
I was going to say a permit, but a contract.
Are they required to hire you?
Meadow Johnson
Yes.
Dan Ryan
No.
Eric Zimmerman
No.
Okay.
Do— are you aware if we ever did anything like this with— with— actually, this is more of the sponsors.
Did we ever do anything like this with taxi companies at all, like a resource center?
I— and I just don't know the answer.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
There was not something that looked exactly like this.
There is a longstanding, um, pretty hefty regulation and an advisory committee within PBOT for the taxi industry, but there was never a recommendation to create a resource center in the way that the Ombudsperson Program did recommend for TNCs.
Eric Zimmerman
Okay.
And then what this is really doing is establishing a fee for rides that are being dropped off in Portland.
That's the new thing versus rides just that are being initiated in Portland?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
There is a patchwork across the country about whether fees are just for rides initiated or fees for rides initiated and ending.
And what this would do is clarify that ours is for rides initiating and ending.
It's been implemented as just initiated in the past.
So it would extend the fee to those that end.
We were trying to look for a funding source that didn't increase the cost of that, that $2 fee.
Eric Zimmerman
So this is a— this is just the same $2?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
It's the same $2.
It's not an increase.
Eric Zimmerman
And that's where the $1.5 million estimated for program cost is coming from, is it's, it's the— it's that new estimate.
So it's not that if I— since I live in the City of Portland and I Uber to and from my house to a place in the City of Portland, it's still just the one $2 fee?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Correct.
Eric Zimmerman
But for if I'm coming from my parents' house or not in Portland back to my house, Then I still have the $2 fee.
Largely not a significant change if you ask me.
It seems—.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
That's correct.
And I do want to note that there were some questions about other cities that have fees.
And I believe, and Director, tell me if this is incorrect, that where cities have the same fee structure that we have, there will be negotiations through the implementation process to ensure that there is not a duplication.
Did I state that accurately?
Yes.
Okay.
Steve Novick
I don't think you should.
Eric Zimmerman
I think you should just grab the 2 anyway, but okay, um, because I think that will work itself out to the point where we get none.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Well, I, I think you've heard some, some intent from one of our councilors there.
Eric Zimmerman
So, um, okay, this is helpful.
Um, God, I had another thought process.
Oh, I, I just want to I guess I want to caution us a little bit in terms of what expectations, um, are around the 2, the 2 items of— there's been a lot of— it sounds, it sounds like, and I— and we're all learning, but I'm, I'm learning— it sounds like deactivation is a major hurdle to continued service for a lot of drivers.
I'm, I'm hearing that thank you.
And what constitutes unfair or wrongful, I think, is something that I'm— in the establishment of a driver's resource center, I don't— what I'm reading here, and I've read very closely, it doesn't look like we are establishing what is rightful or wrong.
However, in some of the discussion, particularly with Councilor Avalos, the way that the answers were going, it was making me a little nervous that the city now was maybe going to explore code and ordinances to bring forward about what constitutes a right or a wrong thing, which puts us into the category of telling employers what— and I get it if it has to do with our standards, which are 2 tickets or an unsafe car, like that makes sense.
Not meeting their level of customer service or driver expectation is something that I want to be very cautious about that.
And so that was making me a little bit nervous, but that's not what is here.
Candace Avalos
Right.
Eric Zimmerman
But some of those answers back and forth was leaning— it seemed like it leaned that direction.
The other part I want to be mindful of here—.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
I see the director—.
Unidentified speaker
It's fine.
I'm just agreeing with what the councilor is saying, that we have a set of expectations that if a person did come through the Driver Resource Center, there are certain things that we would be checking for.
And if in fact we found that there was a discrepancy with the things that we hold as a standard, We would go work with that driver and the TNC company to rectify that.
Some of the other things that you're talking about, opinion polls and other things, cleanliness of a vehicle and someone being rated poorly because of that, that is not something that we would negotiate around.
Eric Zimmerman
Okay.
The other part too is on background checks.
And we were given one example, and that was an unfortunate example of you know, using a name, maybe a different given name.
Let me put it this way.
I would rather us err on the side of having to prove than not, because background checks and getting into a car are a thing that we are understanding are occurring.
And if your background check— I don't know any— I've been through so many background checks, I don't even know what to do with them.
I've had a top secret security clearance for many, many, many, many, many years.
If the name you put forward is not the name that finds its way to your documents, you're going to get revoked.
And that is going to bump up against cultural hurdles, wrinkles in our system.
And having a way to work through that sounds very positive.
I think that's going to be a great part of the resource center.
But it doesn't mean we get rid of background checks, and it doesn't mean that we stop pushing people out.
Dan Ryan
Agreed.
Unidentified speaker
Councilor, we would not recommend I believe, again, as has been stated, there are a number of reasons why, and you've even articulated them even in explanation just now, that whether it's a cultural difference, a common name versus a given name, that we find discrepancies.
And the hope would be that with the resource center, we could explain to the person.
It will be important.
I think it's important.
For you to use this name and not the other name, uh, if in fact, uh, your, your, your, your, your nickname, if in fact, uh, you're working toward getting this, uh, status.
Eric Zimmerman
True.
Unidentified speaker
Uh, so th— those are the types of things.
And again, as I talk about the wraparound services that we would be able to provide through this resource center, is those are the types of things that we would explain why it's important that for this document, this is what you, um, uh, put.
What you call yourself, you know, that's a different— a horse of a different color.
Okay.
Um, but the background check is incredibly important.
Candace Avalos
Yes.
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah, thank you for, for that.
Um, okay, I, I'm good for now, um, Madam Chair.
Thanks.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
And I want to note that there was some conversation there about what the city does, and what we're passing would lead to a procurement for services from a contractor who would not set our city policy, would not set Uber and Lyft's policy, but rather would help drivers to navigate the policies within both the city and Uber and Lyft and advocate for their— help those drivers advocate for their needs when conditions changed.
Colleagues, I would like to move Novick-Pirtle-Guiney 1, which makes those technical clarifications that that I enumerated before.
This is filed online.
It is a redlined version of the original so that you can see the additions, which include the addition of interpretation services, enumerating the type of services that would be offered as including culturally competent information and outreach services, and then laying out a few preferences for the RFP process to give some direction to the Bureau in their work.
And I would love to have a second on that.
Angelita Morillo
Second.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor Murillo.
Colleagues, is there any discussion on Novick Pirtle-Guiney 1?
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Okay, Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
I think that the majority of those changes are fine.
The last paragraph for me is what will keep me from being a yes on this.
I think you're limiting who can potentially and so I kind of find it unnecessary in the larger paragraph there.
It has to be a nonprofit, it has to be this, it has to be that.
So I wish it was more broad.
I don't know who's gonna provide this, and I think it would be good to have a broad sense of applications come in for this that could, I think, do good work who are not necessarily nonprofits.
Thank you.
May not meet the qualifications that you're laying forward in this.
That's all.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
I'll note that this is listed as a preference.
It is not supposed to be limiting in who can apply or who can be chosen, but rather to provide some direction in the scoring that PBOT does to the types of entities who have been successful in providing resources like this in other places.
Eric Zimmerman
That makes sense, except that your 2 is, are organized as a nonprofit organization.
And so you could have people who don't qualify but are very good at your next 2 paragraphs.
And I think that that's a limiting clause here in terms of preference.
But I hear you.
Good argument.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Ryan, are you in the queue for discussion on the amendment?
Dan Ryan
I don't think so, but I think it's a big picture question that would be helpful.
So can I just ask this question before I forget?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Let's have you put the question out there and we'll figure out if we can make it germane to the amendment.
Dan Ryan
Well, all right.
Anyway, here's my question.
How many people currently work in PBOT that focus on this specific area?
Unidentified speaker
On driver resource or on the regulatory framework for Uber and Lyft?
Dan Ryan
The regular— what?
Unidentified speaker
The regulatory framework for Uber and Lyft.
Dan Ryan
Yeah.
Unidentified speaker
Uh, I don't know exactly.
It's about a half dozen.
Uh, we have several, uh, to include Jacob, who leads in a, uh, high-level policy area, uh, and then several regulatory specialists.
So I'll need to get back to you with the number, but it is less than 12.
But roughly half a dozen.
Dan Ryan
And that was added after it was passed by the council in whatever that year that was?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Correct.
Dan Ryan
Okay.
And so passing this, would we have to add more FTE to PBOT?
Unidentified speaker
Potentially, but it is not intended to add more FTE, especially if we were to go through a contractor to do the work.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Okay.
Councilor—.
Dan Ryan
That was a maybe.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor, I would note that one of the reasons that the ordinance is written as a dollar amount not to exceed $1.5 million annually is to ensure that if PBOT needs to come to us and say we actually need to have a person overseeing this contract, we can provide for those funds without needing to raise additional dollars or pull that out of other funding sources.
Those are conversations that we could have through the implementation process.
Unidentified speaker
And that would be a de minimis percentage of a person's time if they were a contract manager.
I would imagine Jacob manages 10 different contracts, but he spends the majority of his time doing other things.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
But there does have to be an allocation of the hour colleagues, seeing no other discussion in the queue, uh, Wendy, can you please call the roll on Novick-Pirtle-Guiney 1, which I actually think I misnamed, and I think it's listed as Pirtle-Guiney-Novick 1.
Apologies.
Unidentified speaker
No worries.
To the amendment, Ryan?
Dan Ryan
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Morillo?
Angelita Morillo
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Zimmerman?
Eric Zimmerman
No.
Jamie Dunphy
Avalos?
Candace Avalos
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Pirtle-Guiney?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
With 4 ayes and 1 nay, the amendment is adopted.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you.
And colleagues, is there any other discussion to the underlying?
Councilor Murillo, I think your hand had been up and I didn't see it when I called for us to move the amendment.
I apologize.
Angelita Morillo
Yeah, I think a lot of the questions that have come up, I think, are largely around our different philosophies around what government should and shouldn't do.
And I don't personally believe that we can allow Uber or Lyft or other agencies to regulate themselves.
To me, that is sort of like asking the fox to guard the henhouse, and that is why I think that that city council needs to step in in this industry that is largely unregulated.
I would say that the vast majority of things that are being described here are not about the city intervening in individual arbitration for people at all.
It's about setting metrics and standards that industry has to follow.
And I believe that that's part of the role of government.
And, you know, there are gonna be different philosophies around that and what's the scope of that work.
If you look at countries like in Europe, it is very common for there to be more reasoning and rationale given for why you lay someone off, much more strict regulations for people's rights within the workplace.
That is not really necessarily our culture here in the US, but I think that it could be.
And I think that saying that we can't make positive changes for one industry unless we do it for all of it, is sort of an unfair standard, 'cause that's not really possible for us to do with each piece of legislation.
So much of our work is doing good things bit by bit, and to me, that is part of doing this good work.
And so I think it's really important for us to set these standards.
The other issues that I've really heard, I think, from drivers is not that no one should ever be fired or no one can ever make a mistake.
The issue is that is that people are being laid off or fired, not even by a human person that is talking to them and explaining to them why.
They're not getting any feedback.
They're not being told an improvement plan for their work.
They're being overnight left stranded in an economic desert where they are not being given the opportunity to understand why.
And it is not even a person doing it.
It's an application.
And often because of a mistake or because of a language barrier.
So those are the types of things that I hope that this corrects, and that's why I will be supporting it.
I also wanted to address, I think, something that Councilor Avalos brought up a lot earlier was about the data gathering and metrics that the city would be doing.
I think that's something that will happen within the rulemaking that will happen in conjunction with the Data Privacy Office that we established as well.
Those are exactly the types of questions that will be answered when we're negotiating with other industries and agencies that do data gathering on people.
So appreciate your efforts.
And because of that, obviously as a co-sponsor, I will be voting yes.
Thanks.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor.
Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
Thanks.
I'm gonna propose an amendment to paragraph 2 and paragraph— excuse me, paragraph C, paragraph 2.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Is this within the 16.40240 section?
There are 2 sections of code.
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah.
Okay.
This is in the— it must be clearly communicated to a driver when the terms of services have been violated and the driver's access to the platform has been deactivated.
And then you have listed 1 through 6.
I'm saying that so if everybody can catch up.
Candace Avalos
Say it one more time, I'm scrolling.
Where are we?
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah, so on Exhibit A, there is paragraph C and then blue paragraph 2, that's kind of the bulk of the new change here.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor, this is on page 10 of the PDF if that's helpful.
Eric Zimmerman
I'm going to propose an amendment that we add 7, which is— I'm reading my own chicken scratch here, you guys, I'm sorry— may not include any customer identifying information to the driver being notified or the city.
The reason I'm adding that is that while I believe now it's not happening, I also want to caution that as Lyft and Uber have to become more accountable for who they deactivate— some, it sounds like some very erroneously, because if you can get 2,100 people reinstated in one state It means there were some weird ones.
I am worried that they will, or that there could be potential for oversharing in terms of what's coming from the customer base in a way that could be very harmful for people giving reports or being kind of a way of maybe either peer pressuring or causing problems of that deactivation.
We protect customers if they, if they have to make a complaint, that it not come back to them at any time in the future.
And so as the city is going to gather data, as our resource center is going to work on, on helping people who've been deactivated, I think having a protective line in there that we don't ever get to say it was because Eric filed this report on December 7th or because Angelita filed this report on, on a different day.
I think that that's a very important thing to protect against.
And I think if we add that, that stops it from ever even growing, uh, any footing in this new data collection.
But I think the rest of it will be, will be good here.
And I'd be curious what— well, I'll propose it and then we can see if anybody has thoughts on it.
Candace Avalos
Could you repeat it one more time?
Eric Zimmerman
May not include— so it'd be number 7, and I'll just say it says a lot of what it will be: anticipated end date, effective date, Statement describing the reason for any action necessary for the driver to remedy, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Number 7 would say, may not include any customer identifying information to the driver being notified or the city.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor, we have been asked at the request of our professional staff to make sure that amendments are reduced to writing.
So what I'd like to do, because I'd like to make sure that we can discuss that, and we do have about 10 more minutes left in committee, is ask that you send that in writing to the clerk and our council operations staff so that they can get it out to everybody at the dais.
While you do that, we do have somebody who was not available for testimony previously, and we could take their testimony and then come back and have discussion on this.
Does that sound possible?
Eric Zimmerman
Yeah.
Okay.
But it's already been captured by the clerk.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Do we have it in writing?
Okay, then maybe we don't need to reduce it to writing.
We'll hold on to any further testimony then.
And if you could, Christopher, send that out to all of the committee members so everybody can see it, I would appreciate it.
And it sounds like the clerk has it as well.
Thank you.
Thanks.
Okay, Councilor—.
Eric Zimmerman
It hasn't been seconded, but I would appreciate a second.
Dan Ryan
Second.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
We have a second.
Councilor Murillo, are you in the queue for a debate?
Angelita Morillo
Yeah, I don't think I'm like opposed to it or anything.
I think I'm curious as to why we would include this now instead of having that be part of the rulemaking process with the Data Privacy Office, because they can establish, they're gonna be experts that are gonna establish those safeguards in ways that we probably don't understand since we are not experts in that.
Just out of curiosity.
Eric Zimmerman
You know, I think, um, you can probably achieve it in both ways.
I think that in an ordinance that is going to say the company must do all these things when it comes to a deactivation notification, setting the basics for how we want to protect Portlanders' information in that, for me it seemed like it was related.
But I would anticipate that how you achieve number 7 would come up in the rulemaking and what constitutes customer information.
And it's like the complaint itself or the time the complaint came in.
Those are the types of things like that metadata that I think the privacy officer can work with.
But I think establishing the goal or the flag allows the data privacy office and other rulemaking to meet the intent of number 7.
But if we don't put that there, I don't know that it would happen organically without this direction.
Angelita Morillo
And so for clarity, your amendment just stops customer data from being like stored or held at the city level?
Eric Zimmerman
So I can envision a place where it says like, Nathaniel, we have deactivated you because we got a report.
And let's say they just say a drive you had on a Friday.
Or a drive you had on Friday afternoon.
Or they could say because rider Zimmerman complained against you on Friday afternoon.
Those are all things that I want to control against so that you can know it's because of a complaint, but not when the complaint came in or which rider gave you that complaint, because I think that that is actually erroneous to the conversation.
And that's about— that's what I'm trying to get at in terms of that customer data.
And since— and the reason I included the city is because I do think we'll probably get an idea for how many deactivations are we going through as a community, how are we seeing— we're going to be collecting data.
If we are collecting data, here's the other way in which this could harm a Portlander, is if we collect the data or Lyft or Uber gives us the data and it has those types of complaints when they came in for Okay.
Having the city never get that specific of information, just the fact that it occurred, I think is better.
And so that would be the intent here.
Unidentified speaker
Okay.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Avalos?
Candace Avalos
I hear the intent.
What I'm trying to think through is, would that— I'm just, as I'm hearing the different kinds of scenarios of why people get deactivated, and they range from a technicality or something that seems, you know, targeted, like the person who they yes.
And so I think part of why I don't know what to do with this is because I'm not really sure then, like, how this kind of information would be used in that scenario.
Like, if, if it was that scenario that you described and we implemented this, would there be no way for you as the driver to have any kind of information about the why?
Like, I I don't— I agree that we want to protect customers' ability to make a complaint in general, but I'm concerned, does this create a barrier for then the recourse that we're trying to create with this program for people to say, well, if I don't know that it was because somebody is discriminating against me because of my Tesla, then how do I like recourse that?
So I think that's what I'm trying to say.
Eric Zimmerman
I think that's why I'm using the word Customer identifying information, because in the world of privacy, PII, personal identifying information, those are, those are things that can identify the, the person.
And if that's the case, then the nature of the complaint is not identifiable, right?
Whether you said it or I said it or Dan said it, for instance, it's that driver went too fast or wrong way or etc.
I don't like his car, but not that.
A woman on this day made this complaint against you.
I think that gets into identifiable information, or you could just simply say the customer.
And so that's why I put that word, because I think the nature of the complaint is important.
Because I think, I, I think back to like my first job.
I'm sure my boss got complaints about me at some point, but as bosses, you decide whether or not you're going to action that and how they took that and if you're actually going to do anything with it.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah.
Eric Zimmerman
But also having a conversation with an employee and be like, hey, we got this notice about you.
But you know, you can address the notice about you without addressing where it came in from, I think, in the majority of time, particularly if you start— if the— if we are sensing that they're coming in for some of the— I think I'll editorialize— the bad reasons that we've heard, some really, you know, terrible reasons that people have said.
That is— that still gives them all the reason to be like, this is not A justifiable complaint, or it's not something we're going to worry about.
But even if somebody gives a really bad complaint, I don't know that that should come back on that customer, that Portlander.
They have every right to like push the little stars or not stars, but saying that it's this person or that person who made it, um, would be something I think we would want to prevent against.
So it's just not customer identifiable.
It still allows the substance to exist.
Candace Avalos
I hear that.
Um, I think what I'm working through in my head is just like, sure, agree that, you know, like a boss to an employee can give general feedback and not be identifiable.
And I think there's also scenarios where like, as the employee, I'd be like, but you can't tell me anything else?
Like, there's a lot of people that I, you know, Had a ride with, and the context might matter enough to like make my case.
So I think that's why I'm grappling with this.
I get the intent.
I don't want the unintended consequence to be then that we're creating more barriers for recourse, because that's the whole point of this like office.
So I don't, I don't feel super strongly.
I can, I think, as long as We don't feel like this will create an ability or an inability for somebody to be able to share or to get the right kind of feedback that they need to make the change or to plead their case.
Do you have a comment on that?
I'll recognize you if you'd like to respond.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, just if it's helpful, Councilor Zimmerman, when a driver's deactivated, there's absolutely no personal information that gets shared with the driver.
In fact, post-ride, like if you're a driver, you can't even go back into your trip history and see the name of a rider.
Okay.
Or—.
Eric Zimmerman
I'm trying to preserve that.
Dan Ryan
Yeah.
Candace Avalos
Okay, that's fair.
Unidentified speaker
And the companies have been very— and they're of course not here to speak for themselves, but I mean, one of the justifications we hear for deactivations a lot, you know, with the lack of information that they share with us is them trying to protect the rider's privacy.
So that's one thing I would say.
Candace Avalos
Well, that's helpful then.
Unidentified speaker
They've been very consistent.
Candace Avalos
That— if that's already practiced, then maybe this won't affect that.
So thank you.
Unidentified speaker
Sure, they would attest to that if they were here.
Candace Avalos
Yeah, sounds good.
All right, thank you.
Unidentified speaker
If possible, I would love to clarify that that story about the driver who drives the Tesla, um, all he had was the speculation based on the experience that he had with a passenger around the time frame that he was deactivated.
There was no actual messaging okay, that's helpful.
Candace Avalos
Thank you all.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor Avalos.
Councilor Zimmerman, um, the way this would read with your amendment would be notifications must be sent to the driver in writing in either electronic mail or post and must include, with a list of what must be included, and then something that says may not include.
And I'm wondering if for the sake of clean code, You would be open to having a new B, notification sent to the driver may not include, and then moving the current B to C.
Eric Zimmerman
I'm fine with that if it's as a standalone paragraph.
I think it's actually a scribner's change and wouldn't require—.
Unidentified speaker
Yeah, that's fine to me.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
It is a scribner's change.
I think that if you are open to that—.
Eric Zimmerman
Make 7B, make B C. Got it.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Make 7B, make B C. I believe that the clerk and Christopher have that language in front of them.
I'm wondering if we can get it to folks to look at and see if you would be willing to move the amendment in that form for the sake of clean code.
Candace Avalos
Yeah, so—.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
And we are at 5:02.
I'm hoping we can get a vote on this amendment before we close.
Eric Zimmerman
Dan, since you seconded for me, I'm gonna move an amendment I would like to amend to add paragraph B, may not include any customer identifying information to the driver being notified or the city.
And by adding that number or that letter B, it makes our current B numbers, uh, makes it C. Would you second that?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Yes.
Unidentified speaker
Second.
Eric Zimmerman
Can we drop the other one?
Great.
Thank you.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Seeing no one else in the queue for discussion, Wendy, can we take a very quick vote on this Councilmember Ryan?
Dan Ryan
Aye.
Angelita Morillo
Councilor Elana Pirtle-Guiney?
No.
Unidentified speaker
Councilor Mitch Green?
Mitch Green
Aye.
Councilor Daniel Taylor?
Meadow Johnson
Aye.
Sameer Kanal
Councilor Samir Khan?
Eric Zimmerman
Aye.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Danny Torres?
Candace Avalos
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Councilor Councilman Sandoval?
Aye.
Councilor Danny Sandoval?
Aye.
Councilor Samir Khan?
Aye.
Councilor Mendoza?
Aye.
Councilor Dan Riedel?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Aye.
Councilor Mitchell?
Aye.
Councilor Wilson?
Keith Wilson
Aye.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Castellanos?
Aye.
Councilor Herbold?
Aye.
Councilor Garcia?
Aye.
Councilor Loretta Smith?
Loretta Smith
Aye.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Smith?
Loretta Smith
Aye.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Smith?
Loretta Smith
Aye.
Eric Zimmerman
Clerk Rebecca Dobert Are you recognizing me?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
I'm recognizing you, Councilor Zimmerman.
Eric Zimmerman
So just from a discussion standpoint, I think that this is challenging, not because there's not a need.
I really, I see the need.
What I think is challenging is to do a thing for one industry, and I'm really wrestling with that.
So I think as we go forward and as we do this, I hope it makes a better situation for our drivers for our riders that it makes the industry healthier.
And I say that while there is a threat on the horizon that was testing our routes last week and the week before.
And so I'm very concerned about our future of this because I'll tell you, I like a city that has rideshare and options in it as readily available as they are.
And some of the cities that we cited as success models, I'll tell you, are some of the harder cities and places that I choose not to engage in that service anymore.
And so I'm going to take this vote as a yes, but I'm very cautious about it.
And I'm looking to everybody for how do we describe to the next group who isn't regulated by the city how to Regulate improvements in their workplace areas where they're being harmed.
And I just, I think that's a great struggle for us because there are a lot of industries who are not sitting here because they're not in our code.
So I'll take a— I'll be supportive of this today.
And I think that the tidal wave is coming at us, and I'm worried what that looks like in just a few years because there's a city down the coast that I don't love how it looks, but I think they're coming for us.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilor.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Councilor Ryan, final word?
Dan Ryan
Yeah, I, I will go ahead and support this because of the need and the great work done by the lobby that's been coming to us for over a year.
I will be reaching out to PBOT between now and the final vote, and I have more questions just about the operational functionality of this.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Absolutely.
Dan Ryan
And so if I change my vote, it's because I'm not clear we have that down.
Thanks.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Colleagues, I'll hold my final words in the name of time.
It sounds like folks are ready to move toward a vote.
Wendy, could you please call the roll?
Call the roll and then we'll get everyone out of here.
Unidentified speaker
Madam Chair, could we get a motion and a second, please?
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Uh, I apologize.
Um, is there a motion to—.
Angelita Morillo
So moved.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor Murillo.
Candace Avalos
Second.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you, Councilor Avalos.
Wendy, could you please call the roll?
Unidentified speaker
Ryan?
Dan Ryan
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Murillo?
Angelita Morillo
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Zimmerman?
Eric Zimmerman
Aye.
Dan Ryan
Avalos?
Candace Avalos
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
Smith?
Loretta Smith
Aye.
Unidentified speaker
With 5 ayes, the, uh, ordinance as amended is, uh, moved to the full council with a recommendation that it be passed.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney
Thank you.
And with that, I will close today's meeting.
We're doing a quick photo.
Are we doing that outside or.