Jay Fidell’s May 23 piece in the Community Voices titled “Don’t Punish Ride-Sharing Innovations That Help Honolulu” reflects either a horrible understanding of the intent and effect of Honolulu City Council Bill 35, or a jaded perspective of the city’s transportation ecosystem.

According to Fidell, “Bill 35 … is the latest step in a campaign by some conventional taxi companies to make it impossible for the (transportation network companies) to do business here.”

To the contrary, I submit that the bill merely introduces four very common sense requirements narrowly drafted to shore up public safety, consumer protection and predictable pricing.

So assuming we’re reading from the same bill, I would ask Fidell this very simple question: Which of the four elements in Bill 35 will “make it impossible for the TNCs to do business (in Honolulu)”?

No. 1 City Database

Uber represents that they have 5,000 drivers. What if within the next six months they triple the number of drivers? What if, God forbid, they’re lying?

After all, Uber is a company that has faced dozens of lawsuits by the public, state and federal governments and its own drivers for various claims of discrimination, fraud, negligence and deceptive trade practices, and Vanity Fair just described Uber as a “company that for years was known for its … cutthroat tactics, which included trampling local laws and regulations, and even sabotaging its rivals.”

Don’t you think the city should maintain its own record of drivers making a living by plying our already congested roads? And how exactly is requiring TNC drivers to register with the city a death knell for Uber’s business?

No. 2 Medical Exam

Uber represents that they comply with all laws. Is the Americans with Disabilities Act no longer a law in Hawaii? By my count, at least a dozen Uber drivers testified during the last council meeting that they work as Uber drivers because they can’t lift.

Really? How will these drivers assist our disabled and elderly community with their collapsible wheel chairs, walkers or their groceries?

My father is 85 years old and hard of hearing. He is also incapable of lifting 50 pounds following his recent back surgery. He also suffers from occasional bouts of vertigo from his heart medication. He is, however, fully capable of driving himself and my mother as he just renewed his Hawaii driver’s license.

But in the humble opinion of this “traditional taxi company” owner, and contrary to what Fidell and Uber say, the good man should not drive others to make a living. And how exactly is barring drivers like my dad from working as a for-hire driver a death knell for Uber’s business?

No. 3 Setting Maximum Fare

Uber claims that it rarely surges and when it does, its surge is only around 140 percent of base rate. A base rate that they can change at any time. They also claim that they are 40 percent cheaper 90 percent of the time. So if Uber is 40 percent cheaper than taxis 90 percent of the time, and they rarely surge over 140 percent of base, do the simple math … they will rarely, if ever, come close to the maximum fare assuming the city sets the maximum equal to the $3.60 a mile set for taxis.

But even if the setting of a maximum fare impacts Uber’s pricing model (which it doesn’t), the bottom line is that public transportation, of which for-hire is an integral part, has always been the great equalizer between the haves and the have-nots. You have the same access and you pay the same rate whether you’re rich or poor. Fidell worries about the drunks at 2 in the morning. What about the plight of the working poor competing with the drunks for transportation to get to their late night or early morning shift?

So how exactly is the setting of maximum rate at a level that will not interfere with their current pricing structure a death knell for Uber’s business?

No. 4 Vehicle Identification

According to Uber, permanent identifiers are unnecessary because their app has created a safe mode of transportation.

Really?

Based on the numerous cases of sexual assault by fake Uber drivers, and hundreds of sexual assault cases by real Uber drivers reported on the mainland, I think I can find a few hundred people that will vehemently disagree.

Oh, but Uber drivers don’t want permanent stickers on the front and back bumpers on their “personal car.”

Hmmm. I demur. I’m actually speechless.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have news for you. The day you decide to make a living with your cute little Mini Cooper or big, bad Ford F-150 truck, your vehicle ceases to be “personal.”

So Jay Fidell, I ask again, What exactly in Bill 35 will make it impossible for the TNCs to do business here?

Thoughts on this or any other story? Write a Letter to the Editor. Send to news@civilbeat.org and put Letter in the subject line. 200 words max. You need to use your name and city and include a contact phone for verification purposes. And you can still comment on stories on our Facebook page.