Seattle council split over decision to purchase bike-share program

Should a public entity such as Seattle buy Pronto! the city’s bike-share system, or should a private company own it?

Private versus public bike share ownership was at the core of a discussion Tuesday during a Seattle City Council Sustainability and Transportation Committee meeting. Officials with the Seattle Department of Transportation favored public ownership, or a public-private partnership, and discouraged fully-private bike shares.

“New York City is the largest of the fully private systems. The reason they can do it is because they have the money for ads and sponsorships,” Nicole Freedman with SDOT told the committee. “And Miami Beach is the other one, but that is not a system we want to model after. Their number one spokesperson is a Playboy playmate &#8212 that’s what you get with a private system.”

Related: Kirkland, Issaquah, Redmond and Bellevue consider starting a bike share like Pronto!

The committee was divided on the issue. The ordinance to purchase Pronto! received a split, 3-3 vote. Because the committee had a split vote, the ordinance will move on to the full council who will decide its fate &#8212 and it won’t move forward with a stamp of approval from the committee. The council will consider it on March 14.

Skepticism over the purchase became apparent at the meeting. Specifically, Council members Lisa Herbold and Tim Burgess were hesitant to move the ordinance forward. Each had submitted their own bills that aimed to prevent the city from fully owning the system, and would involve some level of private involvement. Herbold’s proposal preferred the system be entirely owned and operated by a private party, citing Car2Go as an example.

The main concern for the council committee, however, was that without public involvement in the bike share, there would be no consideration of equity of the system &#8212 that a private party would not bear in mind low-income or minority users.