March 3, 2008
Extra Passenger Fee Added Back to Taxi Fare Rules
You're not going to like the sound of this: the final set of rules governing the switch from the zone system to time and distance taxi meters were published in the in the D.C. Register on Friday, and the additional passenger fee was added back in.
Mayor Fenty originally announced the fees would be done away with at the same time he announced that the initial fare drop would be $3 instead of $4, as well as the abolishment of the rush hour surcharge. The rush hour surcharge has not been resurrected, but cab drivers will be allowed to charge $1.50 per additional passenger under the revised rules.
"These last adjustments to our meter plan will make sure we're ready to go on April 6," Mayor Fenty said in a statement. "We've listened to all stakeholders, and taken the concerns of the riding public and our hardworking taxi drivers into account. Everyone will know exactly what to expect."
It's a little unclear to us whether the additional passenger fee is now set in stone. The Examiner paints the situation as being a done deal, because the plan was written as an emergency rule and published in the Register. The Post describes them as "a proposal" and says that public comment on them is open until Tuesday.
From our perspective, this is very disappointing news. I spent the weekend in Philadelphia visiting some friends, and on three separate occasions, four of us piled into a single cab for a quick ride to another location (it was rather cold). Each time, our total fare was around $5. Assuming we had only traveled one zone, those cab rides in D.C. would have cost us $12 currently, and might cost anywhere from $9 to $13 under the current meter plan. Frankly, I don't think we would have bothered to take the same cab rides had we been in D.C. -- we would have just walked. That the additional passenger fee would go away was one of the most attractive parts of Mayor Fenty's taxi meter proposals, from a consumer perspective.
Photo by akkleis
|
Oh well.
I refuse to use DC cabs now because of the bullsh*t fare system, and I will refuse to use them in the future for the same reason.
The meters are an improvement, but piling on a bunch of bogus "fees" simply undermines any equity gained by going to a time-disatance system.
Hate the extra passenger charge. I was just thinking about this over the weekend -- when I lived in Philly, we would often share cabs from Center City to West Philly, partially because when you have 4 people in a cab, it's not that much more expensive than paying $2 each to take the bus or subway. The extra passenger charge in DC effectively eliminates any cost savings, since the $1.50 charge is more than it costs to take the bus or metro per person.
Of course, when it comes to the correct pricing of transportation, I can see logic in the argument that cabs SHOULD be more expensive than public transit. But I doubt that figured into the decision. The power of the cab lobby here is ridiculous.
This is frustrating. The rush hour surcharge actually makes sense. The additional passenger fee does not.
Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed DCist website, the Mayor would certainly want you to believe that this additional passenger fee is best for all parties involved. And they make a good case. Hell, I almost feel pity myself! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed DCist website, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!
Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: "What does this have to do with this taxi stuff?" Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this taxi stuff! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a commenter fighting a major change in our taxi pricing system and I'm talking about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're sitting back in your chair, deliberating and conjugating the Home Rule Act, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, we must not have the extra passenger fee!
Can't we find a way to let them continue stealing from the government? That would keep the cabbies happy and we could keep the fares low as well.
This is the kind of shit that makes it hard for me to defend the honor of our city against pompous New Yorkers.
Damn it.
The extra passenger fee is nothing more than a rider-based subsidy for the taxicab industry in DC. There's no justification for it. If the taxi driver is taking one person to Destination A, then his or her costs for taking one or two additional passengers to Destination A is exactly the same (except for, perhaps, a miniscule increase in fuel costs).
It's very frustrating that this surcharge got added back in, because of all of the surcharges (rush hour, fuel, snow emergency, extra passenger) this one was the most absurd and unnecessary.
@#%$@%@!!!
Dropping the passenger fee was the best thing they had going.
grrr
Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks?
Same reason short guys wear platforms, veritical stripes, and own tiny little dogs. Besides, those Ewoks are demons in the sack.
Is anyone really suprised that Fenty caved to the taxi lobby? Makes about as much sense as Speed Racer being surprised that Spritle and Chimchim are practically living in the trunk of the Mach 5.
Eh, spring is on the way. Lace up your Nikes everyone!
I lived in Philly for 5 years and miss the cheap cabs, but part of the reason they are so cheap is how compact and quick to traverse much of the city is. Also, if the cabs weren't so cheap maybe they'd feel a little more pressure from voters to clean up their subway and bus problems.
I actually thought the previous fare proposal was too low (and, no, I don't work for the taxi industry -- I have worked with the Taxi Commission in the past, and may well do so again, but I'm not doing so now and this opinion is strictly my own), but, if I were in charge, the first surcharge I would cut would be the extra passenger surcharge.
Extra passenger surcharges aren't that uncommon -- all the other local jurisdictions have them, as do Atlanta, Chicago, and Seattle -- but they're environmentally unfriendly. It would be far smarter to raise the flag fee to, say, $3.50, and get rid of (or at least substantially cut) the extra passenger surcharge. That further encourages people to share a ride, cutting down on congestion and pollution, while penalizing people who are keeping an entire public vehicle and its attendant waste to themselves.
Then again, as someone who almost never shares a cab (I'm a geographical outlier in my circle of friends) the new regulations personally benefit me. That seems to be a general rule of local politics, actually. The city does something stupid and against the public good -- restores extra passenger surcharges, builds a hugely expensive baseball stadium four blocks from my apartment -- but I'm one of the minority who makes out better as a result. I'm not sure whether that makes it easier to take the high road or not.
Unless you can show me that the extra weight from an additional passenger measurably affects the gas mileage of the trip, it would seem the fee is nothing more than a gift to the taxi commission and its drivers.
If, however, the reinstatement of this provision into the rule is something other than a gift, such that there is a bargained for quid pro quo, wouldn't it be fair to also provide a benefit to the passenger? Inasmuch as the commission/ drivers appear to be getting "something for nothing" from the extra passengers, what might be of value to those very extra pasengers? Perhaps additional stops for each passenger within a single trip, or for that matter, simply allowing passengers to get out of the cab at any point between the origin and destination without triggering a separate trip might be a solution. The latter represents nothing more than not being held hostage for the duration of the trip.
cheaps cabs is about the only thing philly has going for it.
To clarify the emergency rulemaking on this subject: the proposed taxi rules are final for either: a) 120 days or b) when final rules are published in the DC Register. So if at the end of 120 days the final rules are not published in the Register, these proposed rules go away.
The notice says that there's an abbreviated public comment period, expiring tomorrow. Afterwards the Taxicab Commission will publish final rules.
So, if you don't like the return of the additional passenger fee, you should make your feelings known ASAP to the Taxicab Commission. They (conveniently) don't take emails, so you'll have to mail it in to: Leon Swain, DC Taxicab Commission, 2041 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, SE, Suite 204, Washington DC 20020.
DC government site announcing re-imposed passenger surcharge:
http://dc.gov/mayor/news/release.asp?id=1225&mon=200802
It notes:
I say, flood their in box!!!!
If you disagree with this proposed fare change-please be sure to email your "public comment" to:
mayor@dc.gov
DCTC@dc.gov
cheaps cabs is about the only thing philly has going for it.
That and Tony Luke's Pork Italian which might be the best sandwich on the planet.
Has this extra passenger fee already been implemented? We had to pay more this weekend because there were three of us. :( It was a rediculous cab fare, too, btw.
Second hillrat. Back before Galileo closed, Roberto Donna used to do a special lunch menu. The roast pork with broccoli rabe and provo sandwich KICKED ASS. No lie, G.I. Worth the cab ride across town.
I can't really disagree with the folks here opposed to the extra passenger fee, yet I can't really get too worked up about it. If I just sat back and thought about the nature of the transportation business, ignoring all the related issues, why wouldn't I expect to pay a little more to be able to transport another human being? It's contentious because this has the feeling of an executive decision and a cave in to special interests, but my guess is that after this is instituted and we all get used to it, it won't negatively impact the demand for cab rides. If cab companies were free to set their own fares, and the natural law of supply and demand came into effect, the cost structure that won out in the end would probably look very similar to this proposal. Keep the flag drop low where it should be, but give the drivers enough incentive to pick up large groups of people so they don't feel so pressured to make the quick turnaround fares that certain groups get left in the dust. I just see this as more of an emotional reaction than something that is completely unreasonable from a business sense.
Has this extra passenger fee already been implemented? We had to pay more this weekend because there were three of us.
Pardon the double negative, but it was never not implemented -- the Mayor's proposal was to get rid of it, but apparently that's no longer the plan.
"why wouldn't I expect to pay a little more to be able to transport another human being?"
Because the cost doesn't increase, that's why. The extra passenger fee is like a "plate charge" that some restaurants insist on charging when you split a dish with someone.
One of the reasons I supported switching over the meters was to get rid of all these ridiculous extra surcharges. Cabdrivers could just make up fees with all those ridiculous surcharges. This is streamlining?!
In NYC, cabs don't charge people extra for more than one passenger. That's why they're hugely popular for bar-hopping on Saturday night. God forbid DC promotes something for the nightlife in this town. I think we should be comparing ourselves to New York, not northern Virginia, where cab service really really really really really sucks.
So I take it you disagree with the extra plate charge too, since many restaurants use it.. But can you honestly quantify the added cost of one more subway rider? If you're traveling in a group of two on the subway why should both of you pay? The answer is because all those fares fit somehow into the operating budget. There's no perfect way to model what the ideal fares would be to maximize use and keep prices down, while still paying the operating costs and salaries of the employees running the system, so experience in the marketplace helps you decide. Right now these are policymakers taking a shot in the dark as to what seems fair. We'll learn soon enough what effect this has on ridership. For restaurants it's a matter of protection against potential customer abuses, and this is the same thing for cab drivers.
I wish I could work up some bile over the extra passenger surcharge, but I just can't. If I'm getting in a cab I'm mentally prepared to spend at least $10 and that's regardless of where I'm going or who I'm with. So long as they aren't charging a whole separate fare if three people get in a cab and one of them jumps out halfway across town to answer a booty call, I'm cool with it.
Very disappointing.
Dcist is right on. The extra passenger charge is total bull.
Perhaps the Mayor could allow the cabs to charge the extra passenger rate with a promise that they actually learn how to drive.
Krisa,
I believe the difference is that an individual's subway or bus fair is not set with the expectation that it will cover the entire cost of operation. Indeed, all fares aggregated don't cover the operating expenses, and local governments have to subsidize those services. Also, each seat you take up in a bus or on the subway represents one less seat available for others, and eventually requires metro to spend more $$ to provide additional rail cars and buses.
Cab fares, on the other hand, are set with the expectation that the fare paid will cover the costs of the ride and earn the driver a profit. Whether this cost is paid by one person or by three, it is paid and the cabdriver's operating costs have not changed.
If the base fares are not enough to cover costs and provide an acceptable return, base fares should rise, or fees that are related to actual costs should be assessed (fuel, luggage handling, waiting for a pickup, etc). It seems strange to require ride-sharers to subsidize the rides of individuals when we as a city advocate so much for increased use of public transportation.
I wrote in against this. The point of the switch to meters was not to keep the fares the same as they are now. Or was it?
Another big negative aspect of this idea is that it encourages cabbies to drive by people who are alone trying to catch a cab and pick up the big groups instead. This is already a problem around peak hours. I usually have to stand with friends while they hail a cab so that the taxi actually stops.
Well, you have one chance to let them know you don't like it. Submit your comments (and maybe even get one other person to do so), or you have no right to complain. POWER TO THE PEOPLE
mayor@dc.gov
DCTC@dc.gov
I have to agree with Guest 33. This will encourage cabbies to pass us loner losers up in favor of the pack of drunk sorority girls half a block further up.
Rat - you are conditioned to $10 minimum cab rides because that's how it's been in DC for as long as any of us can remember. It's so nice to go to other cities and have a cab ride of less than $10.
Sorry old poster but you can email the commission at dctc@dc.gov
They will write you back to say they got the email and add it to the public record. Please write!
I wrote in to the taxicab commission to complain and I hope others will too. The extra passenger fee is bad for the environment and it makes no economic sense. The price should have some relationship with the cost. THe marginal cost of an extra passenger is zero. Charging per trip and per mile make sense. Charging per passenger does not.
Also, introducing this on a Saturday morning and closing the comment period on the following Tuesday is just plain sneaky.
As a lone rider, this will screw me getting a cab out of Adams Morgan. Stupid cabbies won't stop for the sure money, but will spend 20 minutes circling for 5 drunk girls. I guess I will stay away from DC and keep my money in VA.
Interesting point if the current fare structure is assumed to be the correct one. But if, for example hypothetically, the cab drivers are right and the fare drop should be higher, then it would be the single riders who are subsidizing the multi-riders. Neither solution may be ideal, but at least it makes more sense for multiple riders to pay more than single riders. By asking for both a low fare drop and zero additional passenger fees, it may simply be asking too much of the cab drivers. Personaly, I'd rather save on the single ride because that's what I do most often, and my own bias tells me that the most frequent cab riders are most likely singles (especially for business), but other people may be different. Of course I'll be the first one complaining about how cab drivers do (and will continue) to play favorites and ignore the regs no matter what the rules are, so us single departers from Adams Morgan at 3am will still be shit out of luck.
Krisa:
I keep having to compare the new meter charges to DC cabbies to NYC. Our proposed fares are in line with NYC, and it's a crapload more expensive to live in the metro NYC area, plus cabs there have to pay $100,000 plus for the cab medallion, a cost DC cabbies don't have to pay.
Plus of course NYC cabs have to actually be worth more than $75, the average worth of a DC cab, including all the spare change in the back seat cushions (or lack thereof).
I never understood why DC doesn't implement something like the London black cabs. Big clean roomy cabs and drivers who have to pass a local knowledge test and pay a hefty fee. Costs more but you get a much nicer ride and a driver who isn't a total lunatic. You'd figure the disposable income crowd would be willing to pay a premium for a better quality experience. And the tourists eat that s**t up.
There's one reason DC doesn't implement anything like that. DC officials view the cab industry as a make-work program for immigrants and the low-skilled, rather than an integral part of the transportation plan for a major US city.
Fenty got elected because he delivered services to his constituents. Here's a service that improves DC's image with visitors and he can charge a premium for it. It's like getting rid of stupid street vendor licensings and opening it up for a variety of foods that people actually want. That bulgogi vending cart isn't cheap, but damn, people are lining up for that stuff. You'd figure there's a market for getting from one side of town to the other without getting raped or being forced to listen to Eritrean gansta rap.
Increasing the per mile rate is the most reasonable way to pass along the true costs of taxi trips to passengers. I say that as an unbiased rider who just happens to share cabs over short distances. Seriously, though, it's true. Resources are allocated most efficiently if prices reflect scarcity relative to demand. Empty extra passenger seats are in over-supply.
If I was a cabbi