San Francisco has no idea what to do about ‘goofball’ e-scooters, email records show

By Sahsa Lekach : mashable – excerpt

San Francisco has been scooter-less for months…

A public records request of scooter-related emails from the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, or SFMTA, from March through late July, shows that the city’s scooter triage was in full throttle within weeks of the battery-powered vehicles hitting city streets.

One transit planner emailed over this Jalopnik article (“I Tried San Francisco’s Electric Scooter Share And It Was A Nightmare”), saying, “Having not tried it yet myself, I found this one illuminating, if not unsurprising.” Another transit official made his thoughts clear with a quip about efforts to “further regulate this emerging goofball mode.”… (more)

How much time and taxpayer money is SFMTA spending to bring this new controversial business to fruition? We already heard that the there is an uptick in injuries that has triggered a new pilot project or study to determine the health effects of these toys on the streets and sidewalks. When does the public get to vote on how our money is being spent to “promote disruption” in our city? How many staff hours are we paying for to run an “enterprise entity”? IS the SFMTA making a profit on any of this after all the expenses are accounted for?

RELATED:

Scooter Safety: UCSF Doctors to Track New Injuries

By Vicky Stein : ucsf – excerpt

As motor-assisted scooters, bikes, and mopeds become a familiar sight across San Francisco, researchers at UC San Francisco want to know how these devices are affecting injuries in the city.

Anecdotally, researchers say they have seen an increase in both minor and major injuries as technology sends pedestrians on one, two, three or four wheels into the street, accelerating to speeds of 15 to 30 miles per hour… (more)

Advertisements

Is the Uber and Lyft Business Model in Jeopardy?

By Glenn Rogers : westsideobserver – excerpt

On April 30, 2018 the California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal’s judgment, changing existing law determining how an independent contractor can be identified. The case, Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, may completely redefine what is and what is not an independent contractor.

Dynamex, which is a same day pick-up and delivery company, treated all their workers as employees before 2004. However, as a cost saving measure, they changed the status of their workers to independent contractors after that date. In January 2005, Charles Lee — the sole named plaintiff in the original complaint entered into a written independent contractor agreement with Dynamex to provide delivery services. He filed this class action as the sole class representative challenging the legitimacy of Dynamex’s relationship with its independent contractor drivers… (more)

Now that Uber and Lyft have outcompeted taxis, their next goal is to outcompete with mass transit, which is suffering a diminished ridership from Uber and Lyft daily.”

 

There are so many articles on the Uber Lyfts that ignore the threats coming from so many more whose names may flash be in a brief moment as they glide past you in the havoc of traffic. Some will run on two wheels some of four and some may even try for three, but they all have one thing in common, their primary business plan is to take your slice of the traffic lane pie away. When you find yourself left with little wiggle room you may remember this warning. If you already feel cramped and in the mood too so something about it, your first move should be a call to your supervisor’s office to complain, or a trip down to City Hall to file an appeal under Ordinance 180089, or, a CEQA appeal, whichever fills your needs.

What Happens When a Company That Sells Car Trips Gets Into the Bike Trip Business?

By Ben Fried : streetsblog – excerpt

Lyft has acquired the nation’s largest bike-share company, setting up a situation where its bike trip sales will cannibalize its car trip sales.

Lyft, Uber’s smaller but gigantic-in-its-own-right competitor in the ride-hailing business, has acquired Motivate, the company that runs several of the largest bike-share systems in America. The price isn’t public yet, but unconfirmed earlier reports pegged it at $250 million. The new entity is called “Lyft Bikes.”

Lyft gets Motivate’s “current engineering, technology, marketing, communications, legal and supply chain capabilities as well as some human resources and finance functions,” according to a spokesperson. Lyft says the terms of contracts with local governments, including agreements with New York, Chicago, San Francisco and other large cities granting varying degrees of exclusivity, will not be affected…

This is a matter of dispute, that may be cause for legal action.

The optimist sees huge potential in the nation’s largest bike-share operator getting an infusion of capital…

The acquisition by Lyft could change this dynamicMotivate has yet to show what it can do with the dockless and electric-assist bicycles it’s been developing

The announcement yesterday renews Motivate’s relevance, with Lyft explicitly mentioning “dockless and pedal-assist electric bikes” as the type of “innovation” it intends to expedite…

The pessimistic take on the deal is that Lyft’s core businessselling car trips in cities — will put a ceiling on what it will do as a bike-share company. ..

I doubt that Lyft will enthusiastically try to convert its car trips to bike trips without some sort of prompt from policy makers. Bike-share is a very low-margin business. … (more)

As the author points out, there are many directions the company may take, and, since the future of bike stations is uncertain there is no reason to expand the most controversial bike-share programs that infuriates the public.

As one of the North Beach patrons asked when the Central Subway was being presented as an extendable program, “How can you aim a tunnel when you don’t know where it is going to end up?” We need to stop installing bike stations and see what the market does.

This matter will be addressed Tuesday at the SFCTA Meeting. around 10 AM in Room 250 at City Hall.  You may want to comment on Item 9 on the agenda – Adopt the Emerging Mobility Evaluation Report – ACTION*  resolutionenclosure  Including TNCs, on-demand, shared, ride-hails, autonomous vehicles, robots and drones – all those vehicles that are cluttering up the road that used to be full of our private vehicles. How many millions or billions of taxpayers dollars have gone into this failed system that was going to rid the city of cars?

Keep your letters going to the Board of Supervisors on this matter. We need to keep public funds out of the hands of these corporations that have informed us that they intend to take over our streets. Supervisor Cohen needs to hear from you as she is still supporting the Ford GoBikes, that are now the Lyft bikes. We also need to send a message to Supervisor Kim on that matter. NO MORE TAXPAYER FUNDS FOR CORPORATIONS. If they want to help low-income people they can do so with their own money.

RELATED:
Uber Poised to Make Investment in Lime Scooter-Rental Business

STOP THE CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF OUR STREETS.
Buy an electric scooter for #129 at Best Buy or a Moped for less than $400.

Lyft Nears Acquisition of Motivate, U.S. Bike-Share Leader

By Amir Efrati and Cory Weinberg : theinformation – excerpt

Lyft has agreed to buy Motivate, which runs some of the biggest U.S. bike-share programs, according to two people briefed about the deal. The acquisition, which is likely to be worth $250 million or more, will quickly insert Lyft into the small but fast-growing U.S. bike-sharing market.

The two companies have agreed on the terms of the deal, although it hasn’t been finalized, one of these people said. If a deal is consummated, it would put Lyft ahead of ride-sharing rival Uber, which acquired another bike-share service called Jump in April for around $200 million…(more)

That is what we really need on our streets. A takeover by Lyft and Uber. No doubt Conway has his fingers in this pie and will grease the wheels of the PUC and anyone else who needs convincing that Lyft and Uber are going to make them rich, or whatever motivates the sell-out to tech.

We called it the corporatization of our streets, and that is what it looks like. Lyft and Uber are the new Airbnb menace. There is no point in new entrepreneurs coming to set up shop in SF and because if there is am app that has not been crated to extract money out of our streets, these geniuses will invent it.

I suspect we will see a lot more street actions and disrupted traffic as soon as people figure it out. The only play voters have, is to oppose Regional Measure 3 and all the tax and bond proposals to pay for their roads. Don’t give them any more money. The 11 billion dollar budget is enuf. (Hope that is a typo and the real figure is still 10 billion.)

When you vote for Mayor and Governor think about who is most likely to support the public instead of corporations.

Protesters toss scooters into street to block tech buses in SF

By Sarah Ravani : sfgate – excerpt

Protesters in the Mission District blocked tech buses from leaving San Francisco on Thursday morning, tossing scooters into the street to waylay the commuters.

The activists, blocking buses at the intersection of 24th and Valencia streets, set off smoke bombs and carried signs that read “Techsploitation Is Toxic,” and “Sweep Tech Not Tents,” in reference to the city’s recent efforts to clear homeless encampments(more)

They couldn’t have picked a better foil to protest tech. Those scooter things are like mosquitoes. You just want to swat them away. Too many and too annoying. They should be a minimum radius for wheels allowed on the streets. Have you heard the one about the two scooters on the Bay Bridge?

2 people with motorized scooters on Bay Bridge cause traffic jam.

If you watch the video you can see that the “riders” ran into an obstruction. Of course they have no helmets. Toys do not belong on the roads. They should be off-road vehicles only. If you agree, tell the SFMTA Board and the Board of Supervisors.
(Contacts here)

More Scooter Scoops:

Activists block tech bus commute, say e-scooters treated better than homeless

By Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez : sfexaminer – excerpt

Tenants-rights activists blocked at least nine tech buses Thursday morning in San Francisco’s Mission District with a scooter blockade, claiming “shared” scooters are treated better than The City’s homeless.

Nearly 60 protesters piled a dozen of the controversial e-scooters in front of a Google bus at Valencia and 24th streets, placed an orange smoke grenade atop the pile and lit it. Plumes of orange clouds puffed above the protesters, who were wearing hazmat suits, as they cried out “One, we are the people! Two, a little bit louder! Three, we want Google off our streets.”…

It’s absurd scooters have more rights than the homeless do,” said Chirag Bhakta, 30, a San Francisco native from the Tenderloin who participated in the protest. He said while the scooter companies were treated politely in city hearings that were expedited by officials respectful of monied interests, homeless denizens were simply wiped away.

The homeless, he said, “deserve the same consideration in City Hall.”…

Protesters decried “techsploitation” of San Franciscans, and held aloft signs that said “your disruption is our displacement” as they blocked traffic…(more)

Equal time and respect for humans. If corporations can get a pilot program approved by the SFMTA, citizens should receive the same option to design a pilot program to test our theories on the street. Where is the data behind the scooter pilot project that proves it does anything other than provide entertainment for some people while annoying others?. Does entertainment belong on our streets or in the parks and off-street playgrounds? We know there is a problem with loud annoying noises. How about annoying toys?

Legislation reduces risk of e-scooters

By Christopher B. Dolan : sfexaminer – excerpt

Long story short, if you see a scooter blocking the sidewalk or you are injured by a scooter, moving or parked, you have rights. You should report any injury to the SFMTA and obtain the advice and counsel of a good trial lawyer to help you hold the drive and company responsible… (more)

S.F. Will Be Scooter-Free While City Chooses Permit Holders

By Ida Mojadad : sfweekly – excerpt

Sidewalks will be largely free of scooters in June, while SFMTA demands tech companies abide with a new permit program.

Starting June 4, San Francisco will go nearly a month without seeing scooters on its sidewalks, city officials announced Thursday.

Any shared electric scooters found on the sidewalks after June 4 will be confiscated and used as evidence, City Attorney Dennis Herrera says Thursday. In turn, the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency is accepting permit applications for a 12-month pilot program and hope to issue the permits by the end of June… (more)

 

Scooters, e-Bikes and jet packs: Mobility tech’s big moment.

by Elizabeth C. Creely : nextdoor – excerpt

Scooters, e-Bikes and jet packs: Mobility tech’s big moment. Can a man who helped create gridlock and traffic congestion in the Bay Area really solve our traffic woes?…

Fair is foul and foul is fair, say the witches in Macbeth, warning that what seems to be appealing will seem less so as the plot grinds to an end. This is how I feel about the scooter situation and the onset of for-profit mobility companies who are perpetual launch mode in this city, arriving daily with mobility vehicles tucked under their arms. “The next idea that comes along, I’m not even going to try to speculate what it is,” said Jeff Hobson, deputy director of planning at the SFCTA who spoke of “dockless jet packs” as a real possibility. The hyper activity of the mobility industry is no joke. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if I saw someone land in the middle of Mission street with a jet pack strapped on their back…

It’s so much easier to disrupt if the public doesn’t know you’re up to.

DDND: Disruption depends on non-disclosure…

Do what thou wilt is the whole of their law. Travis understood how to position the scooters as a cavalry that’s arriving—just in time!—to decongest this city, because Travis oversaw the catastrophic growth of Uber, which was so rapid as to resemble dumping, as the Vice President of Global Driver Growth at Uber from 2014 to 2016. Before that, he was the COO of Lyft… (more)

YIMBY-backed Breed intervened to remove bikeshare station on her own block

By : sfexaminer – excerpt

Photos of competing shared bike companies that are cluttering our streets with too many rental options be fore the latest invasion of the electric toys that are cluttering our sidewalks. photo by zrants.

Mayoral candidate London Breed, the sole endorsee of the Yes in My Backyard group, seems to have gone full NIMBY.

The Board of Supervisors president used her influence to request the removal a Ford GoBike bikeshare station — yes, in her own backyard. (OK, technically, the station is on Haight and Pierce streets, around the corner from Breed’s apartment.)

That’s quite a turn for Breed, as much hay has been made of the split between YIMBY newcomers who wish to see housing built and longtime neighbors allegedly claiming “Not in my backyard!” to slap back new housing and transportation, particularly against state Sen. Scott Wiener’s Senate Bill 827… (more)

Maybe bike station removals should be London Breed’s theme. Instead of promising a chicken in every pot, she can offer a fast path to bike station removal on your block if she is elected Mayor. That is almost as good as Angela Alioto’s promise to remove the Department Heads. Of course the easiest course of action is to stop installing the stations now.

Uber’s partnership with Jump could put the future of station-less bikes in San Francisco at risk

By n : recode – excerpt

Uber users will be able to book a Jump bike from the Uber app.

Dockless bike-sharing company Jump just became the first U.S.-based company to work with a ride-hail app. Soon, San Franciscans will be able to locate the nearest Jump bike straight from the Uber app making it easier to plan out the first and last mile of trips.

However, the splashy announcement could put pressure on a pilot program that is stretched thin by design. Jump, which received its permit to operate an 18-month pilot in San Francisco in January, can only provide 250 of its station-less bikes in the city.

Opening up those 250 bikes to Uber users in the city, in addition to the customers separately using the Jump app, would exacerbate demand in a city with more than 850,000 residents. The partnership might undercut the viability of this new form of bike-sharing…

Additionally, Jump is the only dockless bike provider that has been granted a permit by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority and can only operate e-bikes — a stipulation that came out of a settlement with incumbent stationary bike-share service Ford GoBike. The network, which is run and operated by New York-based company Motivate, is sponsored by Ford…

Through the pilot, the SFMTA intends to evaluate the efficacy and merits of starting a dock-less bike-sharing program. However, competing companies LimeBike and Ofo as well as some city supervisors including Malia Cohen of San Francisco’s 10th district and Ahsha Safai of the 11th district have questioned whether this pilot could in fact hurt the industry…

The SFMTA asked these companies to provide real-time location information for all of the bikes in their fleet.

However, LimeBike contends they did meet that requirement but also expressed their concerns with this process of data-sharing.

The LimeBike application reads:…“Most importantly, we believe this exposes the citizens of San Francisco (and the City & County of San Francisco) to unnecessary risks. With current technology, someone with the right skills can identify a person with as little as four location data points, even with the data otherwise anonymized, so sharing that data openly will pose significant privacy and security concerns.”

For now, the companies have been effectively banned from operating in San Francisco for the duration of this pilot, straining a relationship that will be integral to the proliferation of station-less bike-sharing in the city… (move)

Pressure by local citizens to change the course at SFMTA may effect unpopular pilot projects and exclusive deals the department is cutting with their favorite partners. What are the deal makers, getting out of these partnerhsips? How heavily invested are City Hall authorities invested in the new technologies that are disrupting our city? How healthy are these public/private partnerships as we question our ability to live private lives free from over-brearing government interference?

San Francisco is not for sale. You read the entire article that describe the corporate structures and public/private agreements SFMTA has involved San Francisco in. Some city officials’ are concerned. We assume there will be some ethics complaints filed soon regarding this matter.

SFMTA Delays Traffic Diversion Plans For 8th Avenue ‘Neighborway’

by Lauren Alpert : hoodline – excerpt

On Wednesday evening, Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer and SFMTA hosted a community meeting to discuss a traffic-calming plan that would divert traffic away from 8th Avenue.

While the plan originated with SFMTA initiatives and gathered feedback from neighbors, some residents have expressed concerns about traffic being shunted to adjoining streets.

Officials from the transportation agency say the proposed 8th Avenue “neighborway” would create a “safe, pleasant north-south route” for pedestrians and cyclists, noting that the street “carries 2 to 3 times the amount of vehicle traffic when compared to parallel routes.”… (more)

Good news. This is strike two for neighbors since the Supervisors threatened with a Charter Amendment and Ordinance to reign them in. So far the only consistent problems are coming from SFPark’s Corporate dealings. In spite of massive efforts by environmental groups supporting neighborhoods, the corporate mobsters are gaining public ground (literally).