Emails, Travis Considine, communications director, Ridesharing Works for Austin, April 27-28, 2016
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:
Here is what we are seeking to verify from your mailer: If Austin voters reject Proposition 1, a “completely new City-run” criminal background check “process will cost millions in processing fees, additional staff, and bureaucracy” with taxpayers getting “the bill.”
9:06 a.m.
April 27, 2016
If Prop. 1 fails, a completely new city-run system will need to be established to handle the background check process for rideshare drivers because the results will now include FBI data, which according to law can only be handled by a governmental entity.
Before the December ordinance, in order to receive a chauffeur's permit, applicants followed this procedure. Basically:
1. Schedule a time to get their fingerprints taken;
2. Go to a location to complete their fingerprint appointment and give their fingerprints;
3. TX DPS uses an applicant’s fingerprints to access ONLY the TX database;
4. Once an applicant’s Criminal History Record Information (CHRI) is prepared, they must pick it up at from TX DPS.
5. An applicant then attaches their CHRI to their chauffeur's permit application.
6. The applicant then delivers their paperwork to the Austin Transportation Department (ATD) in person.
7. ATD reviews an applicant’s paperwork and lets them know if they have completed the requirements properly.
8. ATD reviews the documents further by noting any prior convictions.*
9. If approved by ATD, applicant returns to their office where they take a photo for identification purposes and are issued a permit.
Earlier this month, City Council voted to take over the chauffeur [taxi] permitting process by expanding from state to national background checks as well. Which means the applicant's procedure ends at step 3 and bureaucracy takes over. But does that bureaucratic process exist?
Because background check results now include FBI data (from the national background check), the results of each check can only be handled by a governmental entity. TxDPS relies upon PL 92-544 as the Federal law that prohibits them from sharing FBI results with anyone besides a governmental entity or one allowed by state law. Texas Government Code Chapter 411, Subchapter F ("Criminal History Record Information") describes what entity may receive CHRI. What is the council’s procedure today for the city to properly obtain background check results from DPS to determine whether an individual is disqualified from obtaining a permit?
City Council’s ordinance also states that a, “City approved third-party, is authorized to submit the fingerprints to the [TX Department Public Safety] for a search of the State’s criminal history record.” However, under Texas state law only TxDPS has the authority to approve who is authorized to submit fingerprints – not the city council or the Austin Transportation Department (ATD). Neither the city, nor a third party alone, can perform the checks.
Is ATD prepared to handle a potential influx of tens of thousands of TNC driver applications? Does ATD have the operational capacity to review that many background checks? What is ATD’s system for reviewing these applications to ensure criminals don’t slip through and to protect against fraud?
With regards to who is going to pay for all of this, the city hasn't provided any responsive information to ensure compliance with the ordinance (see attached PIR and below citations). City officials have also suggested they could use the fee to pay for other things. According to the attached August 3, 2015 memo from ATD Director, Robert Spillar, “The collected fees would be used for City transportation infrastructure including upgrading traffic signals, installing pedestrian hybrid beacons, and safety improvements throughout the city. The funds will also be used to ensure TNCs remain compliant with City regulations. It is separate from the airport fees.” How does the city know that the fee will cover the new process and significant infrastructure projects?
Council Member Kitchen has claimed, “The city ordinance does say that the city may assist drivers with compliance, including fingerprints. But it does not commit the city of Austin to pay those costs with taxpayer dollars. Instead, if the city does assist drivers, the idea is the assistance would come from the additional 1% fee paid by TNCs for the Compliant Driver Education Fund.” (KUT, 4/20/16) Even if City Council manages to establish the fund and safety program in time, why is Council Member Kitchen assuming TNC companies won’t participate in the Safety Assurance Program? If “the idea is the assistance would come from the additional 1%” turns out to be a bad idea, how does the city plan to pay? Especially since that fund doesn't even exist yet.
Austin American-Statesman: “Neither that fund nor the safety program exists in any tangible way at this point, Kitchen acknowledged Monday.” “Beyond that, the ordinance also said each company would pay an additional 1 percent of its gross Austin revenue to feed a ‘compliant driver education fund.’ It provided an out, however. If a ride-hailing company participates in a ‘safety assurance program,’ also laid out in the December ordinance, it will not have to pay that additional fee.” (Statesman, 4/18/16)
The bottom line is City Council has no idea how much the new process will cost, no procedural model in place with which to base an estimate, nor any idea how much revenue their proposed fee structure will actually generate. How is the taxpayer not at risk here?
Respectfully,
Travis Considine
Communications Director, Ridesharing Works for Austin
SOURCES:
13-2-527(E)(2) from the ordinance
Upon receipt of the fingerprints and any applicable fee, the City, or City approved third-party, is authorized to submit the fingerprints to the DPS for a search of the State's criminal history record, and the DPS is authorized to forward a set of the fingerprints to the FBI for a national criminal history check. The results of the FBI check will be returned to the DPS, which will disseminate the results of state and national criminal history checks to the City.
The City has said they will pay for the TNC process: “[Council Member Gallo] told drivers concerned about the cost of the fingerprinting that ‘the city has resolved and dealt with that by saying the city will pay for the cost, so it won’t cost you in any more money,’ according to a meeting transcript. Gallo’s staff declined to make her available Tuesday for questions about those remarks.” (Statesman, 4/19/16)
“When it comes to the question of cost, there is still a lot to be determined. But there is nothing set in stone that says the city would pay for the background checks – or that taxpayers would be on the hook for the bill.” (KUT, 4/20/16)
From: Travis Considine
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 3:01 PM
To: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)
Subject: Re: Following up
I can't speak for Goldman, but I am skeptical the fees will cover the costs -- especially since the city hasn't even proposed a budget yet.
From: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 5:34 PM
To: 'Travis Considine'
Subject: RE: Following up
I would like to have more factual backup from our conversation earlier. Goldman made several assertions for which I have none: 50,000 Uber drivers; two city workers currently processing 3,500 chauffeur licenses every two years; Houston having an established regulatory framework that Austin does not. If you’d rather I call him directly, point me there?
Thanks.
g.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:
You have nothing more for us, correct?
Below I am sharing the latest city replies.
g.
From: Dean, Alicia
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 3:56 PM
To: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)
Subject: RE: Following up
Gardner:
Please see the answers to your follow up questions below:
In your reply, you said the department “has staff resources that can be flexed to handle influxes in applications.” Can you elaborate on how many staff are in place and what it means to “flex” for such purposes?
ATD has 8.5 administrative personnel which could assist with processing applications (3.5 positions are within the parking/vehicles-for-hire division) and at least 5 professional staff that could be flexed to review reports.
How much would each background check cost? A Uber spokeswoman, Jaime Moore, tells us the cost is $150. $39.95 is the cost per person.
What is the basis of that cost figure? Staff had discussion with parties involved in fingerprinting process and determined rates. This is what it costs for checks we do for other driver background checks for other vehicles for hire.
Has the City or Austin City Council decided to cover those costs? No
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:
It sounds to me like all agree that the fingerprints go from the person to the vendor to the DPS/FBI/DPS with the results going back to the city. What am I missing?
I’m not sure why you’re citing a single council member on one aspect. Elaborate?
To rehash, you didn’t offer an equation behind RSW’s “millions” conclusion and I haven’t seen a rebuttal, or evidence, countering the city’s reply that it can handle this with existing staff and from fee revenue, not tax dollars. I admit I might have missed something; feel free to say.
g.
From: Travis Considine
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 4:19 PM
To: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)
Subject: Re: More
What are they doing with the FBI data? The city still hasn't explained what they are doing to comply with federal and state law regarding the handling of that information.
"Staff had discussion with parties involved in fingerprinting process and determined rates." Seriously?!
Per your last question: "The city has resolved and dealt with that by saying the city will pay for the cost." -- Gallo (Statesman, 4/19/16)
Look forward to your rating.
Travis
(Considine)
4:24 p.m.
April 28, 2016
Rough Equation (Note, I'm no mathematician and I don't speak on behalf of Uber/Lyft):
As reported in the Statesman: Uber Drivers made $27 million over a year.
We know drivers make between 70-80% of gross bookings, so we can assume Uber had around $35 million(ish) in gross bookings.
1% of $35 million = $350,000
Whereas, if there are anywhere near 50K background checks a year -- and let's use the figure the city gave you at $40/check -- you are looking at $2 million in processing costs alone. That figure doesn't include any other administrative costs or hires. Not to mention the city has proposed using the money from that 1% toward unrelated projects.
More food for thought: 50K background checks a year, 261 working days in a year = processing 191.5 background checks a day. Does the city think 8.5 people can handle that kind of work load?