Majority of Minneapolis council now open to tweaking Uber/Lyft ordinance. Maybe.

Most Minneapolis City Council members are now open to changing a rideshare ordinance they recently approved that has prompted Uber and Lyft to vow to leave.

It’s unclear whether any changes could satisfy, or be soon enough, to avoid the rideshare giants’ planned exodus May 1. But Uber and Lyft said Thursday there’s a possibility they could stay — if there are changes to their liking.

The revelation that a critical mass of council members are open to changes came Thursday after days of behind-the-scenes discussions, as well as public pressure from a range of voices from the governor to city residents, as it appears increasingly likely the companies intend to make good on their threats.

“Absolutely I’m willing to compromise,” said Council Member Katie Cashman, who supported the ordinance.

At issue is the council’s decision to set minimum pay requirements for rideshare drivers at a level that Uber and Lyft say is too high to make it worthwhile to do business here. Earlier this month, the council approved the minimums, effective May 1. Mayor Jacob Frey, who had proposed lower minimums, vetoed it. The council overrode his veto by a 10-3 vote, and Uber and Lyft announced they would leave. Uber said it would cease service in the entire metro area; Lyft said it would serve everywhere but Minneapolis.

“We’re actually not divided. We’re a supermajority united,” City Council President Elliott Payne said during Thursday’s council meeting, noting that despite drama and acrimony among council members and Frey, all agreed that drivers should be paid more, and the equivalent of minimum wage is a widely supported goal. “The confusion is: How do you calculate that minimum wage?”

Cashman and several other council members who voted for the plan amid the threats from the companies and Frey’s pleadings said they don’t regret how it’s playing out.

City staff are working with the state Department of Labor and Industry to figure out what minimum pay level can ensure that all or nearly all drivers earn at least the equivalent of the city’s $15.57 hourly minimum wage for trips within city limits. Drivers are contractors, not employees, and a state-commissioned study earlier this month concluded that their average pre-tip earnings are below minimum wage.

That study, called the largest-ever of rideshare data, suggested that drivers metrowide could earn an average of minimum wage under minimum requirements well below those set by the council. However, the study as published didn’t separate Minneapolis data from elsewhere in the metro. The city should get its hands on the Minneapolis-specific data the week of April 15, council leaders said Thursday.

If the data suggests a lower regimen of minimum-pay requirements could work, council members could approve those new minimums at their April 25 meeting.

“Despite the fact that the Council has repeatedly rejected offers to collaborate on this important issue,” a statement from Lyft began, “we are encouraged that they are now open to reconsidering their extremely damaging ordinance.”

Lyft and Uber both pegged specific numbers they could accept as minimum pay for drivers: 89 cents per mile and 49 cents per minute. Those figures are taken from the state report, which concluded they would create an average minimum wage equivalency and cover some expenses but not provide a full suite of benefits. The figures are well below what the City Council approved: $1.40 per mile and 51 cents per minute.

Gov. Tim Walz on Thursday said he was encouraged by the news — but only to a point. “I don’t want to rain on this parade, because this is progress in the right direction,” he said, adding later: “I am still deeply concerned and somewhat skeptical that they’ll get there.”

Tensions on the council were on full display Thursday, as a discussion of the issue rapidly descended into some members sniping at each other.

The latest developments started when Council Member Andrea Jenkins introduced a procedural maneuver that could bring about a vote to reconsider the entire ordinance at the council’s April 11 meeting. A simple majority of seven council members could change, or even quash, the entire ordinance.

Jenkins’ maneuver upset some on the council. She was one of the 10 votes to override Frey’s veto, but she never informed the other nine members of her plans. Meanwhile, most if not all of the other nine had been coming up with their plan to potentially tweak the ordinance without telling her or the members who were opposed.

Star Tribune staff writer Liz Sawyer contributed to this story.