a report from Vice Mayor Jan Devereux, Chair of the Transportation & Public Utilities Committee, for a public hearing held on May 22, 2018 to follow up on Policy Order #7 of March 5, 2018 on the future of dock-less bikes in Cambridge

ATTACHMENT A City of Cambridge 0-7 Amended Order IN CITY COUNCIL March 5, 2018 COUNCILLOR KELLEY COUNCILLOR SIDDIQUI WHEREAS: Sixteen communities in the Boston metropolitan area have expressed interest in a regional bike share program, facilitated by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) and set to launch in Spring 2018; and WHEREAS: There are many issues with a dock-less bike system, as expressed by similar programs. throughout the world, such as vandalism, damage, theft, destruction of public property, and improper abandonment, among others; and WHEREAS: The MAPC has confirmed it is moving forward with the program, set to launch in Newton, with an expected 200 bicycles on the streets by Summer 2018 (https://www.mapc.org/news/mapc-announces-16-community-effort-to-bring-bike- share-system-to-bostons-inner-suburbs-in-2018/); and WHEREAS: In the past, the City has turned down the opportunity to participate in this project with the MAPC and neighboring communities, citing the problematic issues and its contractual agreement with the current docked bikeshare system, Hubway; now therefore be it ORDERED: That the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee be and hereby is requested to schedule a public hearing on the future of dock-less bikes in Cambridge. In City Council March 5, 2018. Adopted as amended by the affirmative vote of nine members. Attest:- Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk A true copy; ATTEST:- Danna P. Xape Donna P. Lopez, City Clerk

City of Cambrioge 0-7 ORIGINAL ORDER IN CITY COUNCIL March 5, 2018 COUNCILLOR KELLEY COUNCILLOR SIDDIQUI WHEREAS: Sixteen communities in the Boston metropolitan area have expressed interest in a regional bike share program, facilitated by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) and set to launch in Spring 2018; and WHEREAS: There are many issues with a dock-less bike system, as expressed by similar programs throughout the world, such as vandalism, damage, theft, destruction of public property, and improper abandonment, among others; and WHEREAS: The MAPC has confirmed it is moving forward with the program, set to launch in Newton, with an expected 200 bicycles on the streets by Summer 2018 (https://www.mapc.org/news/mapc-announces-16-community-effort-to-bring-bike- share-system-to-bostons-inner-suburbs-in-2018/); and WHEREAS: In the past, the City has turned down the opportunity to participate in this project with the MAPC and neighboring communities, citing the problematic issues and its contractual agreement with the current docked bikeshare system, Hubway; now therefore be it ORDERED: That the City Manager be and hereby is requested to report back to the City Council on the City's plans for incorporating dock-less bikes into its urban mobility opportunities, to include licensing, contractual and liability issues; and that said report be transmitted to the Transportation and Public Utilities Committee for a public hearing on the issue of a dock-less bikeshare system.

ATrACHMENT B TRANSPORTATION & PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE MEETING ~AGENDA~ Tuesday, May 22, 2018 Sullivan Chamber 2:00 PM CALL OF THE MEETING The Transportation and Public Utilities Committee will conduct a public hearing to follow-up on Policy Order #66 of March 5, 2018 shttps://cambridgema.iam2.com/Citizens/Detail LegiFile aspx?ID=6556> on the future of dock-less bikes in Cambridge. UPDATES FROM CITY STAFF AND METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COUNCIL (MAPC) City Manager's Office, Community Development Department, Metropolitan Area Planning Council PUBLIC COMMENT DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT Page 1 City of Cambridge

BLUEbikes. Bike Share in Cambridge ATTACHMENT C

ШТАРО ВОК 1 OTHER ADDRESS HIS COULD BE YOUR Hubway launched in 2011. Public transportation owned by Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline

ONE 10,000 can be anywhere in the public realm As public transportation owned by the City, operations on private property rent bicycles on a short-term basis for use within the city or region. Public Bicycle-Sharing defined in Zoning allows a program administered and/or approved by the City of Cambridge whose function is to provide the general public with opportunities to Hubway/Blue Bikes Regulatory Framework Public Bicycle-Sharing Service. A system operated under the auspices of

term sustainability permit another entity to operate a Bike Share System Hubway becomes Blue Bikes in 2018 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts • New title sponsor model ensures operating costs are covered As part of this contract, the City agreed that it will not license, authorize or 5-year term, with potential for two two-year renewals ensures long- • Through public RFP process, Motivate was selected as the operator;

started 2016 2011 2014 2013 2017 2015 2012 YEAR 2018 (YTD) 7,042 9,714 15,158 14,096 13,248 3,203 12,673 14,577 ANNUAL MEMBERS 88,779 68,752 88,644 99,322 95,299 30,655 102,445 (24-HR & 72-HR) CASUAL PASSES TRIPS 374,726 142,289 913,109 1,192,805 TOTAL 533,874 1,139,310 1,273,453 1,339,584 MILES 133,761 556,893 2,193,957 2,819,824 1,026,069 2,523,014 2,909,451 TRAVELED 5,751,723 BURNED 124,812,140 44,120,967 94,340,151 121,252,432 23,946,399 108,489,602 Riders have taken more than 6 million trips since we got (LBS) 90,957 697,727 378,687 1,970,718 1,917,480 1,491,891 1,715,650 CALORIES CO2 OFFSET

life" Jess Z., 34, Boston Laurie K., 27, Medford Jenna D., 25, Brookline Anthony N., 45, Brookline of transportation in Boston!" and healthier thanks to Hubway." about bike share around the city easier and more enjoyable" Tve started bike commuting, and am happier "My Hubway membership changed how I saw Boston and drastically improved my quality of "Hubway is an amazing service. It makes transit "I've found Hubway to be the most reliable mode Convenient Riders are loyal and passionate Saves Money Saves Time Culture Bike-Friendly Control Green Exercise Affordable Fun!

Bikes $19°5 in bike share By 2019, there will be: 3,000+ Stations 300+ Riders 200,000 destination) + Shorter walks eligible program + Added reliability + All neighborhoods + More options (origin and + Affordable to all - income- Trips / Year 2.5M+ + More available bikes and docks Major expansion underway; the largest-ever investment

Examples: Somerville Dorchester • Brookline Hills parts of Cambridge new neighborhoods Blue Bikes will reach • Assembly Square, East Somerville, areas, we'll expand into new areas. • Alewife; North Cambridge, Western • Roslindale, Mattapan, and Southern In addition to infill in existing service Winter Hill, Spring Hill and Foss Park in MASSACRUBETTS BLUEbikes.

Siting work underway The Port/Harvard Street Near Tobin School/VSUS Mt. Auburn/near Star Market Alewife Triangle (Cpark Drive) in Cambridge 2018 West Cambridge Youth Center • Kendall Square/Broadway/Ames • Alewife Quadrangle (Fawcett St) East Cambridge/First Street area Blue Bikes expansion MASSACRUSETTS BLUEbikes.

Squares East Cambridge Mass Ave/Walden St in Cambridge Additional high desire locations • River Street, near Mem Drive Walden Street/Raymond Park Blue Bikes expansion • Mass Ave near Albany/Landsdowne • Mass Ave between Central and Harvard MASSACRUSETTS BLUEbikes.

New private bike share companies

privacy Affordability Equity of Access Data and personal The Value of Public Bike Share all abilities, all except as required to provided to 3id parties. personal data is sold or operate the system (eg, At $5/month for income- is readily accessible to all. elible members and $8.25 Commitment to ensuring Personal data is protected that bike share is available and unavailable to anyone credit cards to sign up); no neighborhoods, all income and accessible to people of levels. Free classes to users. for regular members, system BLUEbikes. community. area. No support for or control over data. resources to rebalance primary business model; Some companies rely on share companies Unpermitted bike with round-trip commute be left anywhere in metro individual bikes that could people/neighborhoods; no there is no public oversight selling personal data as the trips, $40/month, $480/year Some models are costly. For example, at $1/ride, for those that bikes are available to all No commitment to ensuring 12

Safety and partnership maintenance Reliability and Bike availability The Value of Public Bike Share engagement. and community rebalances bikes meet service level Unionized field staff agreements w/ cities best practices in data agreements w/ Cities inspected regularly per safety standards and are committed to employing sharing, equity programs, continuously, using data to Sturdy bikes that meet high Blue Bikes communities are BLUEbikes. in metro area sharing standards end up, question of Outstanding questions in the public right of way share companies populations of customers Unpermitted bike are frequently broken and no track record of running in other cities, where bikes big systems to serve varied Major questions have been about business models and that could be left anywhere abandoned on streets or left No control over where bikes resources to rebalance bikes well or complying with data- raised during pilot programs 13

way. Benefit: Blue Bikes' station-based system ensures predictability and management of the public right of

BLUEbIkes. prioritizes low maintenance components. The Blue Bike is rated to over 10k trips and Other Kickstand Lights Saddle Brakes Weight Seat clamp Grips Basket maintained to to the highest standards. Benefit: Blue Bikes' robust bike is manufactured and oi customets sufveyed expressing dissatistaction improvement. See above for survey results. We take a data-driven approach to product

to make sure bikes are available. Bike trains sustainably rebalance the system stations, and software tools. * Beacon S1 ALLSTON Harvard Squa School Harvard Business AVIS SQUARE Car@ridge Boston nstitute or PROSPECT HILL Massachusett Somerville @ rebalancing more efficient. expansion, enhancing rebalancing operations, more Benefit: Blue Bikes is ensuring access for all through Data analysis is used to make EAST SQUARE ASSEMBLY Memoral Shei o TD Garde Bost

• МАРС RFP Process • Two vendors selected for 15 municipalities participating (Spin and Lime) • Other companies do not currently have permission to operate Vendors required to abide by regulations of other communities (see next slide) • Communications have been sent clarifying that they may not operate in the 4 communities New bike share companies in greater Boston area 17

with other bike share operators. SPIN and LIME Boston, Cambridge, Somerville and Brookline. MAPC Vendor Requirements - municipalities and need to be retrieved in a timely manner. • Vendors have been asked to ensure that their bikes not be operated in the 4 communities • The vendors ... are required to comply with all bike share rules, regulations, and laws in effect in • Such cooperation includes resolving any and all business issues such as bikes that are parked in these • It is the responsibility of the Vendors to interact with the municipalities that have existing public contracts

park their dockless bikes. rentable via the same app. • Dockless bikes will park at virtual • Motivate will begin operating the the public ROW, where riders can this year. Both types of bikes will be add 1500 dockless bikes alongside it docked-based Nice Ride system and stations, signified with markings and signage on sidewalks or other parts of Another model of dockless bike share in Minneapolis 19

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENT J From: Kelley, Craig Thursday, May 3, 2018 11:37 PM Sent: To: Devereux, Jan; Lopez, Donna Gutierrez, Mark Cc: Article on Dockless bikes and Cybersecurity Subject: Donna: Could you please make sure this article, pasted below, is submitted to part of the record for Jan's committee meeting on dockless bikes? Thanks a lot. rale https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/02/are-dockless-bikes-a-cybersecurity-threat/552206/ Are Dockless Bikes a Cybersecurity Threat? - CityLab www.citylab.com The new mobility mode is generating a lot of rider data. It's fair to ask where it's likely to end up.

CITYLAB www.citylab.com Thank you for printing content from www.citylab.com. If you enjoy this piece, then please check back soon for our latest in urban-centric journalism. And we're off. // Ofo/Madison McVeigh/CityLab Are Dockless Bikes a Cybersecurity Threat® LAURA BLISS FEB 15, 2018

The new mobility mode is generating a lot of rider data. It's fair to ask where it's likely to end up. On a blue-sky day in Washington, D.C., dockless bikes are the ticket to ride. Key in your credit card digits into any one of five dockless bikesharing apps, locate a candy-colored two-wheeler nearly anywhere in town, and unlock it with a QR-code scan. For just a buck or two an hour, you can cruise to your heart's content. Meanwhile, your personal data is also taking a little trip. From unlocking to relocking, your name, payment information, geographic location and route are getting beamed, via smartphone and a chip on the bike, to company servers. Where? It depends on which company you're riding with. If your bike comes courtesy of the Beijing-based companies Ofo or Mobike- the two dominant dockless players, now muscling their way into the U.S. — there's a chance your data could eventually land in China, where the line between state and private sector is notoriously blurry. Some cybersecurity and data privacy experts think that could be a compromising position. One concern: Personal and mobility data could conceivably be valuable from a counterintelligence standpoint. If a dockless bike-sharing app generated enough comprehensive GPS location data, based on that data, you could look to see where I am and where I'm going," said Anthony Ferrante, a former White House cybersecurity advisor and current head of cybersecurity at FTI Consulting. Examined alongside other account information, "you could also find out who my friends and family are." Whether you should worry about snagging a ride on a China-based bikeshare company's cycle is definitely debatable. But Brooks Rainwater, director of the National League of Cities' Center for City Solutions, thinks that issue should at least be raised. "The way these bikes are set up, you're creating a wholesale understanding of how people are moving through cities," he said. "When it comes to the question of how you treat companies from China, versus companies from the U.S., I do think there are fundamentally some national security concerns."

*** Shared bicycles, untethered of stationary docks and available for pick-up and drop- off anywhere, seem like manna from Jane Jacobs heaven. An alternative for short trips city dwellers might otherwise make by car could relieve traffic congestion and put more dollars in commuter pockets. For their "revolutionary" and "transformative" potential, dockless bikes have drawn comparisons to the advent of ride-hailing and even the internet itself. "Bikes plus smartphones...might just be enough to usher in a new golden age for cities," Felix Salmon recently wrote at Wired. In China, where the dockless model was pioneered in 2014, the shared bikes now number a staggering 16 million, according to a recent study. There, super-dense urban populations and a laissez-faire approach to new companies competing in city streets have allowed dockless bikes to take off (and in some cases, pile up). "There's always a trade-off between privacy, security, and utility. The question is how to find the balance." Dockless bikesharing, much like ride-hailing, is built on data-sharing platforms. The business model is to collect user data, retain it for company purposes, and sometimes share it with third parties; the apps that these firms issue are essentially "data-gathering machines," as Josh Cohen recently wrote in CityLab. Especially when yoked to other types of consumer information, such as spending habits, credit histories, and addresses, rider data could be a valuable commodity to private companies. Dockless bike-sharing doesn't seem to be profitable yet, but the potential is a big part of the draw for investors.

Ofo, which claims to operate more than 10 million bikes in 250 cities around the world, has raised $1.3 billion to date, with the Chinese online retail giant Alibaba as its primary backer. Mobike has raised about $1 billion, led by Chinese online messaging and gaming powerhouse Tencent. It says its orange-rimmed two- wheelers are rolling in 200 cities worldwide, including Washington, D.C.; Ofo operates in D.C., Seattle, Dallas, Los Angeles, Boston, and at least 15 other cities. The question is: What's happening to their data? 20K 20 IN BIKES CITIES SEATTLE BOSTON AREA • Maiden Rovare WORCESTER® Chelsea DC AREA DENVER AREA • Washington DC Stiver Spring Takomo Park DURHAM LOS ANGELES AREA Grittinh Pork CHARLOTTE Bellflower DALLAS AREA SCOTTSDALE Dallas Aurora Contennial SOUTH MIAMI Piano Greenwood Village Arlington Map of Ofo's operations in U.S. cities. (Ofo) Ofo and Mobike both reserve the right to store and process U.S. customer information outside the U.S., according to their privacy policies. (So does LimeBike, a dockless bikeshare company based in San Mateo, California which recently expanded into Europe.) Mobike's privacy policy reads:

By signing up, accessing and/or using the Services, you expressly consent to our transmission, processing and storage of your information in locations outside the United States or your country or region of residence. Ofo's states: Your personal information will... be processed by staff operating outside the United States who work for us or for one of our suppliers. These staff may be engaged in the fulfilment of your request, the processing of your payment details and the provision of support services. While we will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your data is treated securely and in accordance with this Privacy Policy, you acknowledge that the laws, regulations, and standards of the country in which your information is stored or processed may be different from those of your own country. Some cybersecurity and data privacy experts say that this should be raising eyebrows. In China, companies commonly share consumer data with the government. As the Wall Street Journal reported in a November 2017 investigation, Chinese companies — including Baidu, Tencent, and Alibaba, which have data on the identities, consumer habits, and communications of hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens - talk openly about working with government authorities on "law enforcement and security issues." As has been widely reported, China is building out far-reaching digital surveillance systems, capable of drawing in and analyzing terabytes of data.

American companies operating in China, like Apple, must also make their data available for the government's perusal. Although officials are supposed to supply reasons for proprietary data requests, no independent judiciary exists to review or approve them. Nor are there formal processes for companies to appeal these demands, the Journal found. Some U.S. companies that have attempted to operate in China, such as Google and Uber, have found the costs and compromises of the government's stringent data- sharing and censorship requirements too great to stay in the market. In the U.S., companies often resist such requests by the government. A company like Apple can rely on the justice system to spurn, for example, the FBl's request to gain access to an iPhone belonging to the San Bernardino shooter. Currently, the Supreme Court is weighing whether police departments should be able to track suspects through phone activity. "By and large, the U.S. has warrants and restraints on what [private information] the government has access to," said Samir Jain, the former senior director of cybersecurity policy for the National Security Council and a current partner at the international law firm, Jones Day. "In China, there is much less control." "The Chinese are trying to take our data. So why would we want to let them buy it?" To be clear, there is no evidence to date of dockless bikesharing companies opening up customer data to any government, with the exception of Mobike sharing data with Chinese city officials to help guide transportation planning. Responding via email, a Mobike representative said, "Mobike does not share or disclose any personal data to any third party without the users' consent or in any way that is non-compliant with local data protection laws. Mobike prioritizes user privacy, and any data collected is anonymized before sharing with local, U.S. cities."

Via email, Ofo representatives in the U.S. told CityLab, "We take consumer privacy extremely seriously and protecting the privacy of our users is [a] top priority. All of our US data is stored on servers located in the United States." The company also explained that it has never shared any of its data with the Chinese government or any other foreign entity, nor has it ever received any request for data. And if it did, the company said it would push back. Despite this assurance, Jain and others believe that the strong precedent and legal bases for the Chinese government's access to consumer data should be cause for concern as dockless bikes roll across the U.S. -especially given China's demonstrated interest in gathering intelligence on U.S. citizens. Reached for comment on whether Ofo or Mobike's data privacy policies were of concern, a District Department of Transportation representative told CityLab, "You certainly raise some interesting questions, questions that are probably better suited for the vendors and their customers. Thanks for bringing the matter to our attention." The Seattle Department of Transportation had this to say: "How the individual companies share their users' personal information is not dictated in the SDOT permit and is subject to agreement between the users and the companies. As we move to consider the next phase in the bike share program, we will consider data sharing requirements more broadly." Representatives in Dallas did not respond to requests for comment. ÷** If all this sounds like unnecessary fear-stoking, you've got company. David Levinson, who studies transportation networks and technology at the University of Sydney, dismissed the notion of bikeshare security panic as pure jingoism. "From the people who failed to prevent 9/11, led us into the Iraq War, and have foisted airport security theater on the American public, we have the latest 'Yellow Peril' from China.... dockless bikesharing," he wrote via email.

Investments by foreign companies in the U.S. are generally a welcome thing. Derek Scissors, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute focused on U.S. economic relations with China, closely follows foreign business activities that get blocked by the U.S. government due to national security risks. He doubts dockless bike-sharing companies pose any such a threat. "Just because it's big data that can give you a sense of transportation patterns -I don't find that impressive," said Scissors. Still, he allowed, coming off the 2015 OPM data theft, in which Chinese government hackers breached the personal data of four million U.S. federal workers, there may be a larger problem. "The Chinese are trying to take our data," he said. "So why would we want to let them buy it?" Dockless bikes from Mobike and Ofo mingle with other cycles in D.C.; the two Chinese startups are competing with several other U.S.-based firms. (David Dudley/Cityl ab)

While innovation has often flowed from Silicon Valley to the rest of the world -take the iPhone, Uber, even the Internet itself-dockless bikesharing is one example of how that flow is reversing, and it may be the start of a wave. Didi Chuxing, China's leading ride-hailing company, is expanding into Mexico this year and has set up an RaD center in Mountain View, California. Which information is sensitive, and how should it be protected? As zeros and ones become ever more ingrained into daily life, there may be no simple answers. But that doesn't mean consumers, companies, and governments shouldn't try to figure them out. That imperative may be stronger when foreign companies known to tango with state governments are in play. Christopher Tong, a former graduate researcher at UC Berkeley who studied the global expansion of bike-sharing, recently wrote a Medium post about data privacy concerns related to dockless bikes and other new mobility services. Unlike China, which tightly restricts how and where consumer data is stored and used, "there has not been a discussion of forcing companies to keep the data within the U.S.," he said in an interview. Dockless bikesharing companies, he insists, could be required to store domestic transaction data on servers within the United States. Local and state authorities could also attach more legal requirements to data collected by private companies, as the E.U. has. Andrew Burt, the chief privacy officer at the data science software company Immuta and a visiting fellow at Yale Law School's Information Society Project, said that companies could also use privacy-enhancing techniques to protect the identities of individuals, as Apple is doing These sorts of interventions might make all that dockless bike data a little less valuable to companies and their investors. "There's always a trade-off between privacy, security, and utility," Burt said. "The question is how to find the balance."

After all, even innocuous-seeming data can reveal more than consumers, or even companies, expect. Just look at the case of Strava, the popular fitness tracking app and "social network for athletes." Last month, an Australian university student discovered (and tweeted) that the company's "Global Heatmap" inadvertently exposed locations, layouts, and even personnel of overseas military bases and spy outposts around the world by charting the routes of millions of jogs, walks, and bike rides. All of that data had come from fitness fans (including soldiers) who'd "opted in" to the app's user agreement— which Strava pointed out, as it came under considerable fire from Congress and the U.S. military. Recommended What A New State People Mean Preemption Battlefield: When They Call Dockless Dockless Bikesharing JOSH COHEN Bikeshare FEB 13, 2018 a 'Nuisance' KRISTON CAPPS JAN 19, 2018 To be sure, the U.S. government has its own long history of surveilling private citizens. Private data exposures are hardly limited to Chinese-based companies —just look at homegrown debacles like the vast Equifax breach, Uber's past year, or any of the other big 2017 hacks involving retailers, voting data, and email passwords. True digital "privacy" may be akin to magical thinking in the 21st century. "Data is and will be stored and accessed by our 'friends' and our 'rivals," said Levinson. "The NSA will track the metadata on your phone call in any case, even if the Chinese don't get a fractional sample of some bike-share users."

In other words, most of us consumers have ceded our data privacy long ago. We happily continue to, with each new text message, app download, credit-card swipe, and "smart home" appliance. When it comes to national security concerns, bike- related data misuse probably represents a minor threat, far behind climate change, the resurgent risk of nuclear annihilation, or even the rising number of car crash fatalities. By bringing cheap, accessible car-free commuting to scale, dockless bikes offer a means of addressing at least one of those issues - albeit at some cost to riders' privacy, illusory as it may have always been. Ultimately, entrusting our personal data to a server somewhere behind the borders of a frenemy superpower is the kind of thing we do these days; it's a reflection of the choices and compromises consumers have been willing to make in the pursuit of convenience. Let's just hope we haven't chosen poorly. CityLab is committed to telling the story of the world's cities: how they work, the challenges they face, and the solutions they need. Citylab.com © 2018 The Atlantic Monthly Group

Lopez, Donna ATTACHMENT E From: Ken Halpern <[email removed]> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 3:37 PM Lopez, Donna To: Letter of public comment for May 22 Transportation Meeting Subject: Dear Ms. Lopez, Please include the following letter as a public comment for the upcoming May 22 Transportation and Public Utilities meeting on dockless bicycles. Thanks so much for your help! Cheers, Ken Halpern To Whom it May Concern, I'd like to offer a cautionary note on the proposal to allow dockless bicycles in Cambridge. One need look no further than San Diego to see the consequences of hasty adoption. After a recent visit, I personally can attest to the nuisance posed by dockless bikes. That city's once-lovely Embarcadero and streets were littered with ugly bicycles and miniscooters, and there was traffic chaos on the sidewalks. I almost was struck by several dockless bicycles and scooters during my stay. Cambridge is beautiful and walkable. We are one of the few such cities in America. A great number of pedestrians, many eiderly, make use of the sidewalks. I personally enjoy long walks throughout the city, and never grow tired of its vibrancy and charm. It would be tragic for us to suffer San Diego's fate. Pedestrian safety is an issue which tends to get short shrift amidst the general focus on bicyclist safety. When walking, my major concern is bicycles and other non-pedestrian traffic (such as electric miniscooters). Cars need only be minded at crossings, but bicycles and scooters require constant vigilance. That hardly makes for a safe and relaxing experience. At present, it is pleasant and safe to walk on most of the sidewalks in Cambridge. High-speed sidewalk traffic tends to concentrate on a few busy routes, such as Memorial Drive. If San Diego is any indication, that will change with the introduction of dockless bicycles (and the dockless electric miniscooters which may follow). High-speed sidewalk traffic will spread throughout the city, making it a dangerous and unpleasant place for pedestrians. Reckless and inconsiderate behavior is not the exclusive purview of any particular type of vehicle. But the typical user of a dockless bicycle is not an experienced and conscientious bicycling enthusiast. Nor has the typical user of a dockless electric miniscooter invested many hours understanding its nuances. Most just want to get from point A to point Bor have some fun zipping around a bit. That is not a recipe for safety. Car traffic reduction is a noble goal, and there are more effective means of accomplishing it in Cambridge. Much of the traffic is not over short distances intra-city. It involves commuters and deliveries, and dockless bicycles would have little impact. 1

Make no mistake: the firms pushing dockless bicycles are not saints or benefactors. They are startups, backed by venture capital and seeking the same thing all startups seek -- money and success. There is nothing wrong with that, but we would be foolish to imagine that their first concern is the well-being of Cambridge. If history is any indication, they will operate on the Uber/Airbnb philosophy: do what you want and let others sort out the mess. If you do choose to allow dockless bicycles, I strongly suggest a careful roll-out with heavy safeguards. In particular, I propose the following four measures: 1. The city must maintain careful control over the size, speed, and locations of the roll-out. Lime Bike inundated San Diego with thousands of bicycles. Terrible for the city, great for Lime Bike's branding. The city should retain full control, including the ability to reduce numbers, limit placement, or disallow them altogether. The number of devices permitted should be limited by statute and only increased (if at all) after a period of public review. Licensing should be restricted to one or two companies. 2. A vigorously-enforced law to protect pedestrians. A good approach would be to require that all bicycles and other sidewalk vehicles yield to pedestrians and keep to a pedestrian pace (say 4 mph). If an operator wishes to go faster, they can use the bicycle lane or road. They have that choice, but a pedestrian does not. Heavy fines should be imposed on violators. As both a bicyclist and a pedestrian, I feel this is a fair solution. 3. The companies must be accountable for the actions of their customers. They are making money by promoting certain behaviors, and explicitly should be liable for any harm or inconvenience that results. Also, devices left abandoned for more than a short period should be confiscated. 4. The companies should be required to train and test customers before allowing use of their equipment. Customers should learn how to safely coexist with pedestrians, not just cars. They also should learn the relevant laws and regulations. San Diego made a mistake and now is paying a heavy price. It is my hope that Cambridge will not repeat it, and the City Council will protect our city and the people who walk here. Thanks you for your time and consideration. Warm Regards, Dr. Kenneth Halpern