Was the Seattle council really split over the Pronto! bike-share purchase?
Mar 1, 2016, 5:50 PM | Updated: Mar 3, 2016, 9:38 pm
It won't be hard to find a cheap (or free) bike if Seattle can't fix the bikeshare program. (Joe Mabel/Flickr)
(Joe Mabel/Flickr)
Update
The Seattle City Council committee on sustainability and transportation made a mistake when voting on the issue of purchasing Seattle’s bike share service, Pronto!
When voting on the ordinance that would allow the city to purchase the bike share service, what appeared to have been a split vote on the committee, was actually a 4-2 vote. That means the committee is recommending to the full council that the city purchase Pronto!
The Seattle Bike Blog followed up on the vote and the surrounding confusion. Initially, it appeared as if Councilmembers Tim Burgess, Lisa Herbold and Debora Juarez vote ‘no,’ in opposition to colleagues Kshama Sawant, Rob Johnson and Mike O’Brien.
The bike blog, however, was able to confirm with Councilmembers Johnson and O’Brien, via Twitter, that Juarez actually voted in favor to recommend the ordinance. But when Councilmember O’Brien, who led the committee meeting, counted the votes at 3-3, no one corrected him. The vote was therefore reported by the media as 3-3.
The ordinance that will effectively allow the City of Seattle to purchase Pronto! will now go to the full city council with an official recommendation from the committee. The council as a whole will then ultimately decide whether or not to buy the bike share system.
@seabikeblog @D5Juarez @CyclePronto. I messed up. It was 4-2 out of committee. Regardless it goes to full council where it needs 5 of 9
— Mike O'Brien (@CMMikeOBrien) March 4, 2016
@seabikeblog @BlakeTrask We would have delayed until Mar 14 anyway; 3CMs out next Monday. And Yes it now comes w/a 4-2 do pass rec
— Rob Johnson (@heyrobbyj) March 3, 2016
Original article
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 — 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 — 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 — that a private party would not bear in mind low-income or minority users.
