Monday, Aug. 10, 2015|5:04 p.m.
CARSON CITY– Nevada legislators provided initial approval Monday to policies for ride-hailing business such as Uber and Lyft, a step that puts the guidelines one obstacle away from being final.
The 12-member Legal Commission voted Monday to greenlight the guidelines, that include added information and certain charges beyond exactly what remains in the costs that lawmakers passed this spring to license the business. Regulatory authorities with the Nevada Transport Authority have actually arranged an adoption hearing for Sept. 11 and might offer final approval to the policies then.
It’s still not clear when ride-hailing business will certainly be on the roadway in Nevada. Sen. Michael Roberson stated lawmakers meant them to be operating by this summer, however state regulators were reluctant to put an exact date on their launching when pushed by legislators.
Companies such as Uber and Lyft must send applications and be approved by state officials within Thirty Days if they fulfill the requirements of the bill. None have done that yet.
Nevada Transportation Authority chief Andrew Mackay stated he anticipates automobiles will certainly be in service at some time in September.
Other issues raised during the hearing:
— Lawmakers asked whether individual Uber or Lyft motorists would have to get business licenses. MacKay said the Secretary of State’s office would make that decision, and individual municipalities could choose whether to add their own licensing processes on top of that.
— Commission members raised questions about the large charges imposed upon ride-hailing companies. The huge firms would have to pay a $300,000 application cost, and would have to pay 1 percent of their gross operating income from Nevada back to the state for management expenses. The money would assist the company hire 8 brand-new workers to deal with the enhanced workload, at an expense of about $700,000 a year.
— Legislators inquired about drug screening of ride-hailing business drivers. MacKay said that legislators considered it this spring, but eventually did not embrace that as part of the law, and stated that adding it in to the regulations would likely violate the law.