My name is Mark Ballew, and I am the chair of the SFMTA Operations and Customer Service Committee (OCSC). I spoke to Heath Maddox at length at the last committee meeting [1]. No one from the public, Spin, or Bluegogo attended, but it is a public meeting.

I've been following the political battle as published in the SFexaminer for these "station-less" bike share programs to get their permits. I was originally skeptical about why the city is pushing back against these programs, because who doesn't like sharing bikes? It is a physically and environmentally healthy way to get around, not to mention very quick even with the hills in a 7x7 city. Why would the city be so bad about permitting? We have car shares in the public right away, and permitting is no problem. Is the city against these bike sharing hippies?

After talking to Heath, he convenience me that there are some serious regulatory problems with "station-less" systems like Spin.

1. In sample of similar programs around the world, the bicycles are very inexpensive. There is no clear standard for how these bicycles will be maintained in the interest of the public's safety.

2. There is no guarantee that the bikes won't be abandoned in the public right of way, as they do not need to be returned anywhere. These leaves public works to collect bikes that are left on trees, on parking meters, in the bay, on racks, or simply dumped in the middle of the sidewalk.

3. The reason why BABS is so cheap is it attempts to be equitable and non-discriminative. $88/yr is affordable for most users of the system. Will station-less systems, who use public resources, distribute hubs in poorer areas of the city?

Spin's blog leaves a bad taste in that they are bashing BABS, but what is worse is the blog fails to mention that the system is about to more than double in size. New docks and bikes are already on order, according to Heath, and the stations removed from the south bay will be used to expand existing stations in SF and San Jose.

I don't object to station-less bike sharing, I object to these companies not working with our city to create a safe, equitable, and sustainable program starting from day 1. I hope to see fewer puff blogs like this, and more work with public agencies.

[1] https://www.sfmta.com/calendar/meetings/operations-customer-...

> Will station-less systems, who use public resources, distribute hubs in poorer areas of the city?

This is a very very good point. A 'station-less system', in effect will gradually migrate bicycles towards higher-usage areas only, thus reducing access in poorer/lower-usage areas.