"If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it."
- Ronald Reagan
SPECIAL REPORT: Abuse of the system
The Montgomery County Council proved yet again why term limits were supported by nearly 80% of their constituents this week, when the dinosaur taxicab company it tried to preserve for the last year using your tax dollars filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Barwood Cab announced the filing yesterday, about 18 months after the Council gave the company several regulatory breaks, and charged Uber users and taxpayers to subsidize changes that would help it compete with Uber and Lyft.
 |
| Fox 5 News |
What did the Montgomery County Council do? They charged their constituents and Uber new taxes and fees to fund the creation of what they claimed would be a hip, new Barwood app - a.k.a. "a centralized dispatch system" - at YOUR expense.
 |
| Montgomery County Council generously using your money to help Barwood Cab "Compete With Companies Like Uber," NBC4 reported |
 |
| NBC4 |
Fact is, the Council was once again caught "fighting the future," trying to drive the very ride-sharing services their constituents now choose over the Stone Age taxicab out of the county.
Who were the lead faces behind Barwood-subsidizing Uber taxes...er..."taxicab reform?" Councilmembers Roger Berliner (who once had the owner of Barwood serve as his County Council campaign treasurer) and - surprise! - Hans Riemer. Once again, Councilmember Riemer has proved every initiative he takes on will end in complete and utter failure.
Ending the County liquor monopoly? I'll give you a few minutes here, to roll around on the floor with laughter. After claiming with great media fanfare that government had no business running the liquor business, Riemer ended up ramming through a proposal that would preserve the dinosaur liquor monopoly at the expense of taxpayers, and restaurant and bar owners. It was such a great proposal that his own Democratic colleagues in Annapolis tore it up and threw it in the trash upon its arrival. Riemer has since endorsed numerous variations on the theme - solutions that preserve government control, while charging new taxes to subsidize that monopoly. Nice.
Food trucks? Riemer's own political operative, who was appointed to a $150,000 County position, was put in charge of "helping food trucks." The changes he and Riemer implemented resulted in 96% of food trucks going out of business, or retreating back into the District. A handful remain, which operate only on private property.
Cybersecurity? Riemer promised in 2010 to make MoCo a "cybersecurity hub" on the east coast. Four years later, it was exposed that the county government was running on Windows 2000, perhaps the most insecure platform in the world. Six years later, a State audit revealed critical cybersecurity weaknesses in Montgomery County Public Schools' computer network. These flaws put private student information a few clicks away for hackers, and gave access to the entire MCPS network, including log-in passwords for personnel. Yikes.
Jobs? Riemer was given a friendly platform by the faux-conservative Washington Examiner in 2012 to announce he was going to do something about the county's "sluggish job growth." Results? Four years later, Riemer's own former chief of staff criticized the county's "stagnant" private-sector economy, which remains moribund. The County continues to experience a net loss in private-sector jobs since 2000, including a loss of 2000 retail jobs, according to the Maryland Association of Retailers. Not one single major corporation has moved its headquarters to Montgomery County in two decades. Ouch.
Hans Riemer made himself the public face of a snow removal law that cost County taxpayers $6 million, for his own publicity purposes and political gain. Then winter hit, and snow remained unshoveled in front of properties owned by wealthy developers, and more embarrassingly, by Montgomery County itself! To cap off the humiliation, Riemer and his council colleagues rode past the snow piles multiple times on a tourist bus tour of the Westbard area, and after seeing the unshoveled sidewalks, still took no action. Best of all, in recent weeks, Riemer has put himself forward in the media again as the "snow guy." Oh, boy, is this winter going to be fun.
Changes ahead for Barwood? They will paint their cabs black (in fact, they've already started doing so), and will use iPads for payment. The former would eliminate the one branding element they've been known for. As for the latter - why would you want to deal with somebody's dirty public iPad, when Uber lets you use your own phone for the entire transaction, including receipt? Talk about the stone age.
After the "success" of using their constituents' money to boost Barwood Cab, what's the next venture for Riemer and the Council? They're going into the banking business!
That's right. The seemingly endless number of banks all around us are no longer enough. Berliner is going to start his own bank - with your money. How generous! Local businesspeople will go to the Bank of The Montgomery County Council and get a loan. They represent a risk that real, private banks won't take on. But that's not a problem at the Council's bank - because it's your money they'll be doling out, not theirs.
You won't even get a lollipop.
The 25 cents surcharge is for buying wheelchair accessible cabs. I thought you were a friend of the disabled Dyer?
ReplyDeleteYou have no idea what you are talking about. Having the additional year of use of a vehicle didn't help the industry one bit, it furthered the gap between Ubar and Barwood, win -Uber and no cost to the taxpayers.
ReplyDeleteThe color issue was an attempt by the taxi companies to make it look like taking a cab was more cool like uber-no cost to taxpayers
the .25 cents charge to uber is in a fund to be used by the taxi industry or individuals to obtain cabs for handicapped people because uber doesn't provide that service. Again, no cost to the tax payers unless the are uber users who pay the 25 cent fee and many do and do nto care about it.
So all in all your assumption that this is costing the taxpayers is ridiculous and a simple reading of the laws will clarify that.
So Mr. Barwood is Berliner's campaign treasurer? That conflict of interest explains a lot. Why should taxpayers subsidize the guy funding his campaign?
ReplyDeleteMr. Barwood thinks repainting his cabs is the solution? My God, is he that clueless?
Does the Council ever use Barwood or Ride On? They seem out of touch in how bad these transport services are.
6:06: Yeah, kind of like how the $90 million tax hike was an "education budget." I've got a bridge to sell you if you fell for that one. And the 25 cents was only the beginning in terms of the taxpayer funds that were put toward propping up Barwood.
ReplyDelete6:07: You fell for the 25 cent spin also? Fake news. I have a news flash for you: in addition to the County taxpayer resources used to create all this new UberWannaBe infrastructure for taxicabs, the Uber users in MoCo who have to pay 25 cents (plus fare increases to cover the new licensing, etc. costs to Uber in this legislation) ARE COUNTY TAXPAYERS.
What no Uber rider has ever said:
ReplyDelete"I'd use Barwood cab if it wasn't for that blue color they paint their cabs with"
Dyer sure is angry about getting scooped. LOL
ReplyDeleteAnother biased report full of lies from the mouth of the heathen Robert Dyer, only to be followed by his traditional backlash at his constituent readers. This guy is beyond a joke and should stick to reporting restaurant opening/closings as that's about the only thing he can get right.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad Robert is giving us the rest of the story that NBC 4 didn't: MoCo subsidizing Barwood, the conflicts of interest, etc.
ReplyDeleteI'd forgotten that MoCo was charging Uber customers to keep Barwood going. That's outrageous.
Dyer, could you please explain your incoherent babbling in the last two paragraphs?
ReplyDelete6:20 AM There is no Mr. Barwood, lmao. I do know for a fact that Berliner had a convicted felon as his campaign treasurer.
ReplyDeleteCan we just let Barwood cab die this time?
ReplyDeleteIf there's a need for a handicap transport service, then let's look into that.
No need to subsidize this entire cab system so folks who choose an alternative are also paying to keep the old guard going.
I never hear positive reviews of Barwood service these days.
"96% of food trucks going out of business"
ReplyDeleteWill Dyer ever provide documentation of this claim?
7:35: Just go out on the street at Veterans Park, Bethesda Row and other former food truck hotspots at lunch today and look around. Good luck finding any.
DeleteUber is a rip off as well. Drivers rarely know the area and rely on dumb GPS directions. No good solutions as far as I see.
ReplyDelete@ 7:35 am - "96 percent" is an oddly precise number for someone like Dyer to use, as he once claimed that "Bethesda Magazine has a budget of a billion dollars".
ReplyDeleteIt suggests that he knows of exactly 24 food trucks that went out of business, and only one that remained.
You really are out of your mind, how you think the county is subsidizing barwood and i hope barwood goes under but you have no idea what you are talking about.
ReplyDeleteThe only accurate thing you report on here is a copy and paste of the police report.
I love Dyer's police blotter. Much more up to date than waiting for The Gazette to publish...back in the day.
Delete7:52: Read the legislation. It's all there.
Delete@ 7:52 am - Except when he reports Military Road NW as being in Montgomery County.
ReplyDelete7:55: Never happened, but Bethesda Magazine reporting on Comet Ping Pong (located in the District, not Bethesda) did happen.
DeleteBarwood is not going out of business
ReplyDeleteBerliner and Leventhal love to play Robin Hood. They put on an act that they're robbing us to help the poor/disabled.
ReplyDeleteCreate a handicap fleet. Why do we need to subsidize Barwood to do that?
Plenty of stories about the Uber 25 cent surcharge. It's fact and Uber riders weren't happy with having to subsidize Barwood.
8:07: And the money was also used to develop an Uber-like app system to dispatch cabs.
DeleteGood report on Barwood (and I agree) but you went off the deep end going after Riemer for food trucks and computers. That's irrelevant -- save it for election season.
ReplyDeleteBarwood is a case of being lazy and failure to innovate. Just about everyone who took Barwood in the days before Uber can relate a story of the cab never showing up at the allotted time; payment options not working, etc. What forced them to attempt to up their game? Competition.
As for disabled transport, isn't that already provided by MetroAccess, or does that require one part of the trip involve a Metro station?
8:10: The fact that each of these things he does ends up imploding is highly relevant, in my opinion. He is not qualified to serve.
DeleteCan we agree that Barwood shouldn't receive another dime of tax payer money unless they get new management?
ReplyDeleteThe current owner believes their main problem is paint color.
Uber drivers are traffic hazards. Their drivers have their eyes on their GPS instead of the road.
ReplyDeleteThere may have been 1-2 food trucks EVER on Betty Row. That is far from being classified a "hotspot" you birdbrained dipshit
ReplyDelete8:53: You must have just moved here. There were dozens of trucks coming into Bethesda every day in 2009-2010.
DeleteDyer, you cited a fairly precise number of "96%". I'm curious as to how you determined that number, given the widespread belief that you're an innumerate birdbrain and that you couldn't actually cite a "fact" even if a gun were pointed at you.
Delete10:36: That's your second threat of violence against me in six hours. The number is quite accurate if you add up the number of trucks operating in MoCo then vs. now. Check the permits.
DeleteFood trucks visited downtown Bethesda all the time a few years ago. That was before MoCo stepped in to regulate them and told them where to go: More office parks (think Rockledge) and less downtown Bethesda.
ReplyDeleteBack to the cab discussion:
Interesting that the Council's biggest taxi cab supporter (Roger Berliner) also happens to have Mr. Barwood as his campaign treasurer. Just a coincidence I'm sure.
Will Mr. Barwood ever listen to his customers?
ReplyDeleteWill Mr. Berliner ever listen to his constituents?
Hate the Uber drivers that just block car, bike, and pedestrian traffic as they look for the person they are picking up or when they are trying to drop someone off. Then if asked to move get huffy. I don't care you drive Uber for slave wages you are in the damn way.
ReplyDelete"Mr. Barwood"
ReplyDeleteLOL
Another hate crime in MoCo, but since its anti-White, I'm guessing the Council and County Exec won't be holding press conferences to show their support against hate, like they did for pro_-White crimes: http://www.mymcpnews.com/2016/12/22/detectives-investigate-hate-based-vandalism-to-sligo-creek-elementary-school/
ReplyDelete2:39: Everything they do is political calculus. Their attempt to create a climate of fear and hate after the election succeeded, and was designed to distract from their abysmal record of failure and misadventure. Likewise, cheap way to rally their troops, demoralized by the success of term limits, at taxpayer expense. Disgusting.
DeletePut that weed down Robby you're hallucinating. There were never DOZENS of food trucks in B-town. You make up the news to suit you, just like the rest of you denizen, alt-right Trumpeters.
ReplyDelete3:25: You're lying. I was here, and these many food trucks were tweeting to me all day about their locations for lunch in downtown Bethesda. All gone now, like your wits, you Robert Byrd-worshipping alt-left dumpster.
DeleteWhich ones are gone? Which ones are the 4% that remain?
DeleteBarwood provides terrible service. I stopped using years ago and will never go back.
ReplyDeleteOk, I was a frequent Bethesda food truck client, so I can give you the real deal. It wasn't quite dozens, but it depends on how you count in.
ReplyDeleteIn downtown Bethesda, there was Sub Bros, the Ethiopian truck (Mesob), Go Fish, the veteran's truck (forgot their name), Linda's luncheonette, Curley's, Balkanik, Strada, LA Taco, Corned Beef King, Great American Hot Dog, and the Jamaican truck.
Those would all park on streets in downtown Bethesda on occasion, like by Veteran's park; on Wisconsin near Tastee, near the Apex building, at ASHP (podiatrists), or at Barnes and Noble.
Most of those are gone. It's a mix of regulations, and that they just didn't do that well financially. I know because one of the trucks launched a crowdfunding campaign and I offered to help them with their business plan. The volume isn't there like it is in DC, just due to lower density of office workers.
Regulations certainly played a part, for example Corned Beef King parked at a pool in Potomac and regularly got run off and it cost him a lot in legal bills.
Now, there is one part of Bethesda where you'll see a dozen food trucks at once. Go to Rockledge Drive (or Rock Spring.. I forgot which but know how to get there.. the buildings in a square formation with a mini lake there) and every Thursday, there's a part where the food trucks all line up and they do well when the weather is good.
As for the trucks still around in downtown Bethesda, you'll see 2-3 at the Farm Women's Market 1-2x a week, and then there's currently one at the former Bethesda Community Store, but the food was pretty average when I tried it last week.
GoFish is still around but not in Bethesda much. Corned Beef King is in Potomac and up the pike across from White Flint (by Hank Dietle's) and they also have a storefront in Olney. The Hot Dog guy opened a store in Rockville/Gburg so truck doesn't get out much. Balkanik seems to be focused more on catering and appears haphazardly, which is a shame because the food is good and he's a really nice guy. Some trucks seem more like weekend hobbies, like Hardy's BBQ and the orange one that shows up at the Bethesda Central Farm market every Sunday.
Here's a listing of food trucks in MoCo. Click "More" to get the full list:
http://www.mocofoodtrucks.com/trucks
In short, regulations did play a part in it, but if those regulations were dropped, it wouldn't magically bring them back again -- it was tough financially to make it work. Part of it is throughput -- you need to make all your money in the 2-3 hours of lunchtime, but your small truck limits how many customers you can process and prepare food for per hour.
7:16: There were also a number of trucks that had started coming in from DC a few days a week, most notably the Red [Something] Lobster Truck. I can remember many of these trucks tweeting that they were being forced to move from their spots by County officials at the height of lunch hour. There isn't much more office density in Friendship Heights DC, yet you'll find some of the trucks that used to come here parked there during lunchtime. There were 2 or 3 trucks alone that just specialized in cupcakes. Once the new regulations were put in place, and they got chased a few times from the high traffic spots, BAM - they vanished.
DeleteNote that Rockledge, like Fishers Lane, is a County approved spot, and the various farm markets are on private property. Trucks are no longer allowed to park at the high traffic areas like Bethesda Row and Veterans Park. What I witnessed was trucks who wanted to be here, but were pushed out by Riemer and his stooge.
The amazing thing is that you don't hear one good word about Barwood, other than from their paid PR firm.
ReplyDeletewow...this thread is evidence that journalists that present both sides of a story take a lot of heat in MoCo (as well as a few personal insults and threats!)
ReplyDeleteNo wonder most in the legacy media keep their head down and simply present the Council's talking points.
7:16PM Thanks for your insight. I'd forgotten about Balkanik.
ReplyDelete"Term limits were supported by nearly 80%"
ReplyDelete68.2% is "nearly 70%" but it is nowhere near "80%", #Innumerate #Birdbrain.
Closer to 80% than 50%. #MiserableTwit
ReplyDeleteWho claimed that it was "closer to 50%?"
ReplyDelete#UnsignedDyet
So how much of this "Barwood-subsidizing" $0.25 per ride tax actually was given to Barwood?
ReplyDeleteAnother bullshit claim.
9:29: The 25 cent tax doesn't include the other County expenditures (a.k.a. taxpayer funds) required to be spent to accomplish the mandates of the bills past. As far as how much has been collected, and how much has gone to taxi companies, only your bosses on the Council can provide us with information on that. Why the secrecy?
DeleteNo, the only "BS claim" is that "bad guys Uber have driven poor Barwood to bankruptcy," a good summation of the spin all other local media outlets put on this story. Never mentioned the taxpayer subsidies even once! That's why people are turning to this site for real news.
I never said anyone claimed anything.
ReplyDeleteJust stated a fact.
Obviously, you do not like facts. Oh well.
Residents overwhelmingly supported term limiting this Council, and for good reason.
ReplyDeleteWho is least popular, the MoCo Council or Barwood cab?
ReplyDeleteI'm going to go off the grid, MalCon, and say only Riemer.
ReplyDeleteDoes Dyer understand what the word "subsidize" actually means? If Barwood were "subsisized", that would mean that they actually receive funding directly from the County. Can he document that this is actually happening?
ReplyDelete5:30: Read the bills, Mr. Dumass.
DeletePost the text, Birdbrain.
ReplyDelete1:29: Just because you're a dumpster-diving hobo doesn't mean you have to be a lazy bum. If you aren't familiar with the bills, why are you challenging what I wrote?
Delete#DodgingDyer
ReplyDelete#DumpsterDivingHobo
DeleteWhile I'm not especially sympathetic to the taxpayers subsidizing Barwood, it is a fiction that Uber and Lyft are "ride sharing" companies. They are taxi companies which require drivers to use their own cars and which book rides via a smart phone app, not a phone.
ReplyDeleteUber, Lyft, Barwood and other taxi companies should be subject to the same regulations, as they are all taxi companies,
7:45: Uber and Lyft are actually quite different. Taxi drivers have to lease or buy a cab; they can't use their own personal vehicle. Uber and Lyft drivers are independent contractors, not employees. You cannot hail an Uber on the street. Only taxis enjoy that ability.
ReplyDeleteTwo clearly different business models don't fit under one set of regulations meant to control monopolistic taxi companies.
All Barwood drivers are independent contractors. I'm surprised you didn't know that. Some even drive cars not owned by the company.
ReplyDeleteWhile street-hails are a significant part of Barwood's business, many or even most of their customers rely on phone-hail. Which, though less efficient than a mobile app, works essentially the same way.
I think we all agree that the medallion system creates monopolies in Montgomery County and many other places such as New York City, and needs to go. However Washington DC does not require medallions, and market entry is essentially unrestricted.
What I and many of your other readers don't understand, is why you think that Uber and Lyft are "completely different buisiness models" and as such should not be subject to ANY regulations that other taxis must observe - in particular, driver background checks, vehicle safety requirements and inspections, and insurance and other liability requirements.
7:54: That's not accurate. Many Barwood drivers lease cars from Barwood:
ReplyDeletehttp://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2015/02/taxi-drivers-duel-with-owners-on-work-conditions-and-uber/
As the article verifies, they are also forced to sign leases for additional equipment. Uber doesn't require such things. You're not "locked in" with Uber as a driver. You can work for another service if you don't like Uber.
Not only are Ubers hailed differently, but the company is providing flexible job opportunities in an uncertain job market.
Wow, your reading comprehension failed before you even finished the first line. I never said that all, or even most, of Barwood drivers drive non-Barwood-owned cabs.
ReplyDeleteAnd you failed to explain why Uber and Lyft should be exempt from driver background checks, safety requirements and inspections, and insurance and other liability requirements. These don't only apply to Barwood - they apply to all taxi services including smaller taxi companies and even independent drivers.
Dyer @ 8:05 am - the last two paragraphs are irrelevant to the issues of driver background checks, vehicle safety, and insurance liability.
ReplyDeleteThey also raise the question of whether you have an undisclosed buisiness relationship with Uber.
8:29: I have no undisclosed business relationship with Uber, but Bethesda Magazine and the County Council do have an undisclosed business relationship with the MoCo taxi industry.
DeleteUber has its own background check system, and the way the app tracks the trip and Uber vehicle, it is actually safer than taxi service.
Uber drivers have carried whatever insurance was required under Maryland law. The attempt to add additional requirements is a bald-faced attempt to financially hobble the insurgent disruptor.
Uber is not a taxi. It doesn't pose the same threat of monopoly as Barwood, and therefore has less regulations on it.
Ultimately, riders can choose another service if they find Uber's security and insurance inadequate. But you are supporting a very unpopular service, Barwood being right up there with Pepco and Comcast in terms of public approval ratings, leaving you very much alone in defending them.
Dyer, you keep resorting to the same lame straw man. Saying that all taxi services should be on a level playing field, is not somehow "supporting Barwood".
ReplyDelete9:45: Yes, it is supporting Barwood, because you are trying to apply Ma Bell regulations to a cellphone-era product. The intent is to saddle a ride-sharing service with the cost of operating a taxicab service, to weigh it down and give the outmoded taxi model some kind of chance to compete. That's an abuse of the system by the County Council.
DeleteSo much for Uber's "background checks".
ReplyDeletehttp://wjla.com/news/crime/police-uber-driver-arrested-after-attempting-to-murder-police-officers
10:01: You actually believe cab drivers don't have equally bad apples among them? Just because the legacy media is in bed with the legacy transportation companies and won't do exposes on criminal cab drivers doesn't make taking a taxi safer than Uber.
DeleteA simple question for Dyer - do you support ending the medallion system for taxicabs in Montgomery County?
ReplyDelete10:38: I think that if the County Council would stop fighting the future and living in the 1960s, that question would probably be moot at this point. Medallion systems are inherently ripe for abuse by politicians and taxi companies, as we have witnessed.
DeleteTo think that one is a supporter of or in bed with "legacy media" just because one is not a fan of Uber is preposterous.
ReplyDeleteAnother indication of why this country is so crass. Stop fighting the future? How about stop dismissing everything from the past. The old is bad, level it and start anew? What about combining ideas?
What you're suggesting is replacing cab companies with part time workers driving their own cars?
Ok, so we agree that medallion systems need to go.
ReplyDeleteBut what about driver background checks, vehicle safety inspections, and insurance/liability requirements? Should they:
1) Be required for all taxicabs?
2) Be abolished for all taxicabs?
3) Apply only to some taxicabs, but not others?
6:56: I don't know anyone in 2016 who thinks taxicabs are better than Uber.
ReplyDelete8:08: I think those requirements have applied to taxicabs because the industry was inherently monopolistic, and associated with corrupt politicians. So, I would say yes for taxicabs, but "no" for ride sharing services like Uber, which have a different business model, and have complied with the rules as written before taxi-funded politicians tried to rewrite them.
False distinction. Uber is a taxicab.
ReplyDelete9:50: No, Uber is a ride-sharing service. You can't hail an Uber driving past on the street by waving it down, for example. The cars are not leased from Uber, etc. Not a taxi.
ReplyDelete"Ride-sharing service" = magic words uttered by taxi companies in an effort to evade regulatory requirements.
ReplyDeleteI'm 6:56AM Who's comment were you reading? WTF? Where did I say taxis were better than Uber?
ReplyDeleteI would have thought you knew more people. The kids at the stores we run have reasons. Just as an example: 27-yo male, used to drive for Uber and now won't take one. Or 25-yo female doesn't take an Uber home alone late at night or early am. I'm not putting 90yo granny in anything but a marked, licensed taxi to go to/from the doctor.
How do you think taxis came to be? Do you think someone woke up one day and thought...there are people who need rides...I'll sell medallions and come up with ludicrous regulations? Maybe it's time to ease those restrictions to be more like the "new" ride-sharing services.
There are good sides and bad sides to gig economy. A bad side is when numerous part-timers take the job of full timers. And once they get their driver-less cars, zero workers.
Equating not liking Uber with being old and obsolete is preposterous.
Dyer is arguing that individually owned taxis should be less regulated than fleets. If anything, it should be the opposite - the budgets of the individual taxicab owners are necessarily much tighter - giving them more incentive to cut corners in terms of maintenance and safety.
ReplyDeleteHaving a company comprised primarily of pary-timers is a great way to guarantee commitment and professionalism.
ReplyDeleteActual, real and humorous sarcasm! Thanks, @1:49 !
ReplyDelete