An absurd situation has unfolded in the southern Estonian city of Võru, where the city government and the ride-hailing company Bolt have descended into a matter-of-principle dispute. The city says that everyone who does business on its territory must pay a trading fee. Bolt says that charging such a fee is not in accordance with the law and plans to turn to the Chancellor of Justice.

The whole affair began when it emerged that Bolt's scooters might not make it onto the streets of Võru this season, because the city and the company cannot reach an agreement on a service fee. This, in turn, sparked a wave of resentment among local residents and business owners. The city was accused of excessive rigidity.

People may like or dislike Bolt's scooters, but one thing is certain: Bolt does well in Võru. According to the company, tourists in Võru use Bolt scooters in roughly the same proportion as in Pärnu. A strong contribution also comes from U.S. allies based in Võru.

There is, of course, a small catch. The allies' contribution was significant when they were located at the Taara military base on the city's edge. Last year, the allies moved to the Reedo base, eight kilometers away from Võru's city center, which also meant a decrease in rides, since Bolt scooters could not be ridden that far.

Despite this, Võru's restaurants and cafes have drawn an equals sign between Bolt scooters, the allies, and business success. Such a link is easy to make, because when an eatery's frontage is clogged with green vehicles, it means the cash register is ringing.

Nor can one forget that Võru has developed an excellent promenade and beach area, complete with kiosks, a beach club, and attractions. And of course, people like to travel to enjoy all of this precisely on Bolt's green vehicles.

So the news that Bolt scooters might not come to Võru was received with dismay — especially because the fee at the heart of the dispute is pocket change from the perspective of both a company the size of Bolt and the city: €150 per month.

€150 is the fee the city charges everyone who wants to sell their goods or services in a dispersed manner around the city. Whether it's strawberries, a floating adventure course, or surfboard rentals — if a vendor has more than five points of sale, they must pay the city €150 per month.

Yes, not per sales location, but in total. Different rates apply to those with fewer locations or those who offer their goods or services only on certain days of the month.

Võru is not the only city that wants to charge a fee for doing business on its territory. An article in newspaper Õhtuleht reveals that, for example, in Pärnu Bolt pays the city €3,806 for providing its service, in Rakvere the amount is €2,000, and in Narva it is €18.20.

Naturally, Bolt is not happy with this situation. The company says it has sought opinions from several ministries and received feedback suggesting that charging such a fee may not be lawful. To clarify the matter, the company plans to turn to the Chancellor of Justice. In the meantime, it is willing to comply with the conditions set by cities, and it has already made a renewed proposal to reopen the service in Võru.

Most likely, Bolt scooters will return to Võru early the week after next — but only until the Chancellor of Justice's position becomes clear. If it turns out that charging such a fee is indeed contrary to the law, the company will stop paying it, and we will be back at square one.

From a strictly rational calculation, the presence of Bolt's scooter service on city streets should not serve any city's interests. Yes, it may be convenient for some residents, but let's be honest: if we look at our population's health statistics, we should all be walking.

People are understandably lazy. So if they can't grab a scooter, they'll use Bolt's ride service instead — or Bolt's food delivery couriers. You wouldn't believe the kind of business that has taken off in Võru. It's not massive, but there are people here who earn their livelihood thanks to Bolt's taxi or Bolt Food platforms. Thus, paradoxically, one branch of Bolt ends up hindering the functioning of another.

From a local government's perspective, it is undoubtedly more beneficial for people to earn wages through Bolt, pay taxes, and thereby contribute to the municipal budget. In the case of scooters, all the profit goes to the company.

In my view, the question is not whether a rental scooter service is, in the eyes of the law, somehow a different kind of service from selling strawberries or renting out a surfboard. It's a matter of principle. The regional situation is well known to everyone, as is the fact that smaller municipalities have to work twice as hard to ensure all services — in other words, among other things, to maintain all the infrastructure from which Bolt wants only to skim the cream, while considering any quid pro quo unjust.

Taking all this into account, if I were Bolt, I would make investing in peripheral municipalities a point of honor and a success story, instead of sulking over pocket change. And no, this is not yet another issue that the state should start regulating — some things can be thought through independently. Not everything can be calculated purely in terms of profit; sometimes you simply have to be honest: if you take, then give something back as well.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!