Transportation Authority Disagrees with Lyft's Request on Confidentiality Designations

Strategic Insights -

The San Francisco County Transportation Authority (Authority) has submitted a response to the California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) Proposed Decision on regulations for passenger carriers, ridesharing, and new online-enabled transportation services. The Authority disagrees with Lyft's request for explicit identification of confidentiality designations in the annual reports for 2021-2024, arguing that the 2020 and 2021 reports already have confidentiality rulings that provide this guidance.

Key Takeaways:

  • The Authority agrees with Lyft's request for explicit identification of confidentiality designations, but disagrees that Census Tract and Census Block may be redacted.
  • The Authority notes a contradiction between Ordering Paragraphs 1, 5, 7, and 9, which allow redaction of Census Tract and Census Block, and text on pages 32-33 of the Proposed Decision suggesting they must be reported.
  • Lyft's claim that the public version of their 2020 Annual Report is available on the CPUC website is false, as a version of their 2021 Annual Report is posted instead, which redacts vast quantities of public information.
  • The Proposed Decision correctly concludes that shielding the annual report data from public disclosure would result in an injustice, weighing the public's interest in disclosure against the Moving Party's trade secret claims.
  • The Authority encourages the Commission to add a similar analysis to the Proposed Decision as further support for the PD's (correct) injustice finding.
  • The Commission should continue to reject Lyft's time stamp and re-identification arguments, as they have been thoroughly addressed in prior comments.
  • Miles traveled do not constitute an invasion of privacy and should not be redacted, as it is not possible to infer a precise destination from an imprecise origin or vice versa.
  • Driver pay should not be redacted, as it aligns with the San Francisco Joint Response on the TNC's 2023 Confidentiality Motions.
  • A two-year lag before publication of annual report data is unjustified, as the public has been deprived of access to TNC Annual Report data for over a decade.

Statistics:

  • 10+ years of delay in accessing TNC Annual Report data
  • 2020 and 2021 Annual Reports already have confidentiality rulings that provide guidance on confidentiality designations
  • 2+ years of discussions on confidentiality and redaction of TNC trip data
  • 2021 Annual Reports continue to redact vast quantities of public information, despite the 2021 Confidentiality Ruling

Sources:

  • BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Order Instituting Rulemaking on Regulations Relating to Passenger Carriers, Ridesharing, and New Online-Enabled Transportation Services. R.12-12-011 (Filed December 20, 2012)
  • REPLY COMMENTS OF THE SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ON THE ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER'S PROPOSED DECISION RESOLVING PENDING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY CLAIMS OF CONFIDENTIALITY REGARDING INFORMATION IN THE ANNUAL REPORTS FOR 2021-2024 AND SETTING THE GUIDELINES FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF FUTURE ANNUAL REPORTS, MODIFYING DECISION 20-03-014, AND CLOSING PROCEEDING
  • LP 12-12-011 REPLY COMMENTS OF THE SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TO THE ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER'S PROPOSED DECISION RESOLVING PENDING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY CLAIMS OF CONFIDENTIALITY REGARDING INFORMATION IN THE ANNUAL REPORTS FOR 2021-2024 AND SETTING THE GUIDELINES FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF FUTURE ANNUAL REPORTS, MODIFYING DECISION 20-03-014, AND CLOSING PROCEEDING