See more of the story

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.


My office has been inundated with calls and emails from constituents who are irate and bewildered by the recent rideshare ordinance passed by my colleagues on the Minneapolis City Council, and the subsequent decision by Lyft and Uber to discontinue services in Minneapolis and the surrounding metro area. I voted against this ordinance along with council members LaTrisha Vetaw and Linea Palmisano.

This ordinance was passed hastily based on anecdotal information as opposed to hard data. That's just bad policy. Pair this with a lack of imagination and an overly simplistic understanding of an extremely complex issue and you get a cascading avalanche of unintended consequences.

Seniors and those living with disabilities have come to rely on rideshare companies for everyday needs and essential services such as health care visits. They deserve the dignity of their independence and this ordinance robs them of it.

I am extremely concerned for the livelihoods of those workers who serve in our night time hospitality and entertainment economy, and all of the workers who support them. These businesses and their ability to provide jobs are dependent on visitors, and if visitors don't feel that they have a safe, reliable and efficient option for transportation they will take their business elsewhere along with those jobs.

The council members who support this ordinance argue that all will be well because other rideshare companies will either come to town or magically materialize overnight. I think this is wishful thinking at best and absolutely no substitute for a plan.

I have a strong track record of support for organized labor and the right to collective bargaining. I believe people deserve a fair wage in exchange for their efforts. However, like my constituents, I fail to see how this ordinance gets us there. Instead of increasing wages for rideshare drivers, this ordinance threatens to put thousands of them out of work completely beginning May 1.

Those in favor of this ordinance will argue that it is Uber and Lyft who are to blame, not the ordinance. Even if that were true, the effect is the same. The fact is that the Minneapolis City Council is not the venue for this negotiation. Uber and Lyft can afford to play brinkmanship at the city level. This fight needs to take place at the state or federal level in order to safeguard the drivers from losing their livelihoods and safeguard the public from losing what has become an essential service.

Hope is good but it is not a strategy, and it is of little comfort to a driver or server wondering whether they will have a job in the coming months. I fear that this ordinance will cause the greatest harm to those of us who can least afford to weather the fallout.

I ask my colleagues on the City Council to consider whether they would risk losing their own paychecks based on the hope that maybe some yet-to-be-identified option may materialize. If they wouldn't risk their own livelihoods, then I ask them how they can justify gambling with yours. I hope you'll join me in asking them that same question.

On April 11, the City Council will reconsider the details of this misguided rideshare ordinance. In the interim, I implore you to reach out to your council member and urge them to consider the risks of this ordinance as if their livelihoods depended on it.

Michael Rainville is a member of the Minneapolis City Council, representing Ward 3.