Comments

1
Man, big props to Rob Johnson for being such a staunch advocate for saving bike share in Seattle. And kudos to the other six councilmembers who voted "Yes" to buy the system and operate it as a public good.

District 1 better watch out: Lisa "Let Private Business Do It" Herbold is not the ideological heir to Nick Licata that she promised to be.
2
Good thing this city isn't having a homelessness crisis or anything. Nah. Let's use millions of tax dollars to subsidize the hobbies of hipster yuppies and tourists.

Jesus. This is thing was an already proven loser in this city. So, golly, let's double down on it!

We will be right back here in under three years. Guaranteed.
4
I'm glad they are at least going to try to serve low income neighborhoods. There is less bus service the further you get from downtown, especially in the far north and south.
5
I look forward to the council's "old and failing is new" proposal to install million dollar self-cleaning toilets in pioneer square and expanding to areas under I-5.
6
When it's owned by the public, can we transform Pronto from an advertising service to a transportation service?
7
@3 I agree and $4 million dollars might've gone some of the way to doing that.
8
They really have to lower their daily fee to capture the occasional rider.
9
@6: I'm pretty sure I saw an ad on the side of a Metro bus last week. I'll double check.
10
If Burgess and Herbold love privately-run city services why don't they marry them? Imagine what they would do if they could have their way with Seattle City Light.
12
I'd be fine with this if they handed the reins over to the Seattle Transit Blog to run it.

It'd be a disaster putting it up and down Rainier Avenue or around Bitter Lake until it properly serves the densest, flattest neighborhoods with the most bike master plan implementations.
13
@1: Man, Stop being such a republican.

14
"Herbold is not the ideological heir to Nick Licata that she promised to be." Oh, c'mon. One vote does not define a city council newcomer.
15
THANK YOU Herbold and Burgess for trying to save this city from colossal waste of public dollars. Rob Johnson must be in bed with Kubly Pronto Motivate Alta et al; he was the cheerleader monkey in committee. This story is far from over. More to come............
16
10 dear, they know better than to sell off the slush fund.
17
@12

The wealthy hilltop neighborhoods already have some pretty good transportation options.
18
@11: Volunteers of America is a church. You want the city to give them a $50K annual subsidy?
20
You can buy a decent bike for less than two hundred dollars. 1.4 million would buy about 7000 bicycles. If the goal is to improve mobility for low income folks, wouldn't it be a lot more sensible to provide 7000 vouchers for low income people to buy their very own bikes rather than subsidize this inherently limited system? @11 is right--subsidizing Pronto is throwing good money after bad.
21
@14: It's not just the vote, it's Herbold's rationale for the vote. She claims that the private sector can implement and operate bike share better than a publicly-owned system, which is provably FALSE, and an argument I'd expect to hear from a conservative or libertarian.
22
Riding a bike in downtown Seattle sucks because it is:
A. Hilly
B. Dangerous as hell.
The casual rider is never going to find riding downtown attractive. I am an avid bike rider and I completely avoid downtown. Pronto is destined to be an eternal money loser. #20 is correct that a serviceable bike can be purchase for a quite modest sum.
23
This program will likely not take a single car off of the road, though it may introduce the occasional tourist into the middle of a busy street.
How does this service help the poor and working class already pushed to the margins of the city?
How will an infusion of money create a demand for this service where we have seen data that there is none?
How much time of our councils agenda has this already taken up?
It's just another subsidy to the new wealthy; icing for a cake yet unbuilt.
24
#20: It's not so easy to compare to vouchers for cheap bikes. First, giving essentially free bikes to people becomes an entitlement and doesn't imply they would be ridden. But also, for a bike to be useful it needs to be in a place where you need it. Many people don't want to ride their bike and lock it up in a garage or on the sidewalk all day. Nor do they want to take it on a bus. The bike share is intended to make bikes available for short trips in places where people need them - spontaneously. Finally, a $200 bike won't hold up very well. If these 7000 people really used their $200 bikes, they would probably end up costing a lot more in maintenance than a somewhat more expensive bike needing less maintenance.
25
While this program may not take a single car off of the road; it will likely put the occasional user/tourist in the middle of the street.
I would love to see any examples of how this program would be of enough benefit to low income, or working class folks already pushed to the margins of the city limits.
There is evidence that there is little to no demand for this program; nor benefit to our most needy citizens.
While I myself love to fantasize of a carless future; this program is the unlikely icing for an as yet unbuilt cake.
Those tasked with the important human services needs of this city, with meager budgets; must see this as a complete insult.
26
Had did Kshama Sawant let herself get fooled into this vote?
27
No edit button.
Slow, un-responsive website:
Thus my redundant and misspelled posts.
My apologies:

But,
The role of city government is to build the infrastructure, not run the businesses; especially one, that by all measures, seems to be a loser.
The entire budget we currently have to improve bike lanes is approximately $5 million.
The City may spend approx. $8 million ($1.4 bailout, $5 million expansion, $1.8 million maintenance) by 2018 on Pronto.
What if instead of acquiring Pronto, it spent $5 million more on bike lanes/road improvements, and made a bike sharing program actually viable.
That would be a much more traditional role for City government, and essential to the success of any program.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.